Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

    Sorry but watching that game made me throw up in my mouth a little.

    I wanted to come on here and complain about how Nelson makes me nauseated and how that watching his version of basketball (ie. smallball) made me ill.

    Then I saw this.

    WARRIORS COACH DON NELSON:
    "We didn’t expect to play with such a small lineup. But with Murphy (Troy) out, they went small and then we had to. Their small team played better than ours. We expected them to run the floor and it was a pretty good battle.”

    In other words Nelson was playing down to match us. Shoot me now.

    Look I don't want to be Debbie Downer here, that's Grace's job, but the fact that we had to eek out a win tonight just does not sit well with me at all. No offense to the G.S. fans out there but this is one of the worst teams I have ever seen. Vancouver and the Clippers have had some real stinkfest teams over the years but this G.S. team that was on the floor tonight was wretched. However not to be outdone in wretchedness it was all we could do to pull away with a win.

    It took a superheroic effort from Danny in the 4 to make us pull this out. It took Graham hitting shots like the other 23 in the 4th for us to win.

    I understand a win is a win is a win and I am gratefull for any win at this point but.....

    I guess it could also have a lot to do with the fact that the entire game just made me ill and it was very very very hard to watch for me. I like at least the pretense of defense and I much prefer the big man game to what this was.

    Also I provide this quote for your enjoyment.

    PACERS COACH JIM O'BRIEN:

    "Overall it was a good team effort. I love run and shoot games. I think that’s the way the game is meant to be played."

    Did I mention that I hated the way this game was played?

    Anyway a coupld of things of note.

    The Digest was well represented on the overhead jumbotron tonight.

    Our own Duke Dynamite won the chase bank card give away. He cheated.

    Then our own Roaming Gnome was there sitting in his second row seat (I take it another perk of knowing your ticket rep) (same as mine btw who hasn't given me a thing) flashing his big smile during the game for all to see with an extreme closeup.

    For those of you who were worried about attendance to some of the lesser teams games, well you are justified. This was a throwback to last year where you litterally could count peopl in sections in the balcony and they were all but giving away tickets to the lower bowl.

    I guess I should talk about the game...

    I really don't want to honestly as I am trying to block it from my memory.

    Danny Granger was as good as his stats look on paper for those of you who didn't see the game. The odd thing is that I don't think Danny really exerted himself till the end of the game. Which makes me wonder how many points he could have had if he went at it like that in the 2nd & 3rd?

    His points were of course outstanding, however it is everything else he does that just continues to impress me. I think he may be the most rounded player we have ever had on our team that I can remember. There is really nothing he can't do.

    Quis had a very good game till the time he went to the locker room. Very aggressive in the passing lanes and bailed out butts out several times on broken plays. He was hitting the boards pretty good as well.

    Brandon was better than his stats. looked. Defensively he missed a few spots but overall he was very active and had several deflections. His shooting I believe will come and I am still very very high on him.

    Jeff fought the good fight and I felt sorry for him having to carry the load like he had to do.

    Jack.....Call me crazy but for some reason I just want my point guard to have more than 2 assists in 38 min. He was way way way to concerned with getting his own shot up tonight for my taste.

    Rasho... Thank God he can hit an open shot. I have no idea what has happened to him over the past few weeks as he looks old and stiff all of a sudden out there.

    Graham... Ugh... Yes his shots at the end were big and very timely but the guy played 31 min. and stunk in quarters 2 & 3, but I guess he was there when it counted so I can't complain to much.

    Travis....Poor Deiner. Is he ever going to be healthy this year? That airball three was purely and simply because he could not elevate off of his foot. Still faster than most guards out there though and did a decent job in a very limited time frame.

    JOB..... He is just d@mned lucky we won this game. Frankly about the mid way point of the 4th quarter we were behind and IMO we were losing because we were lacking energy and all I could wonder was why in the name of God are we only playing basically 6 people when we could have brought in McBob or Baston for a few min. and give poor Jeff a brake.

    Ugly Ugly game that we should not have struggled this hard to win.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

    Largely sharing your sentiment while looking for bright spots there seemed to be flashes of defense intermittently and in the 4th. I too was looking for McRoberts or Baston to see some time this evening given the pace. Fairly spastic over all, but pretty much what I expected. I enjoy watching the Warriors since they seem to have kind of a retard luck in the same way that people have adrenaline strength and give teams a run for thier money. It is fun to watch and requires neither a great deal of attention at the time nor results in much of an after-taste.

    Regardless, better than that dejected look I saw after the last loss. Just a missed opportunity to practice defense.
    ! Free Rick Sanchez !

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

      Originally posted by Peck View Post
      "Overall it was a good team effort. I love run and shoot games. I think that’s the way the game is meant to be played."
      this is why i don't like JOB and don't want him coaching us at least next year. you can beat horrible teams like thunder,warriors,wizards or wolwes with this type of basketball but when it comes to a little better teams like bucks you lose big time.

      a win is a win but when you blow out a lead to warriors and manage to win by some extra performances from one or two players YOU HAVE TO ADMIT YOU ARE NOT GOOD.

      i know there are a lot of JOB lovers on this forum but the basketball he's making this team play is worthless and if we want to be better we need someone that doesn't only tell this team to run and shoot the ball whenever they see the rim. one last thing i know it's early but i hope we don't end up getting a small guy from the upcoming draft. that would kill us entirely.
      Last edited by xtacy; 12-18-2008, 06:09 AM.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

        If you wanted to see scoring, this was the game to watch with 2 coaches who like to score 30-40 points a qtr w/o a smidge of DEFENSE. There was a reason Dick Harter was brought in as an ast. coach, and obviously that reason wasn't put to use last night. To be honest, this game could have gone either way depending on who had the best run at the end of the game. Fortunately for the Pacers and JO'B, it was the Pacers. That comment from JO'B, as far as I'm concerned, about this is the way BB should be played was a sales job to deflect from the lack of "D" played in this game. If the Pacers had lost this game, that statement would never had been made. In one of the last games the Pacers lost, he made the comment to Stacey P. about the Pacers lack of "D". The Pacers win his type of game, and no mention about the lack of "D"? Sorry, but he just reminds me of a used car salesman who will say whatever to make a sale/appease the fans.

        The season is now 30% over and that game, other than a win, accomplished what for the future of this team? It didn't emphasize and teach "D" for the future. Did it teach structure by playing helterskelter? With this seasons pace the Pacers are a 30 win team. Can Bird and JO'B really afford this type of a step backwards in their 2nd year of a 3 year contract? For Bird and JO'B's sake, they had best hope the Simons have plenty of PATIENCE, or they are just laying the groundwork for their successors. JMOAA

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

          I'm trying to figure out how an 8-16 team missing two starters is supposed to have an easy win against anybody.

          Of course, the Nelson thing is a little silly, because he actually played a bigger line up than he had in three of the last four games, with Bellinelli replacing the absent BJ Watson. About the only thing he could've

          I'm not pleased with the tendency of the weakside defenders to drop down into the lane. We constantly get burned on ball reversal, and I thought our offense was sloppy. I also think that was a product of both Golden State's tempo, the fact that we were missing two starters, and we were playing a group that isn't even listed among the top 10 5-man units for the Pacers this season (meaning they've played together less than 24 total minutes...probably far less).

          At this point, you take the win and move on.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

            I loved last night's game. What I'm trying to figure out is how teams that can barely crack 80 points in 4 quarters are entertaining. I'd rather set fire to my face and put it out with a shovel than watch that.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

              I did not cheat! LOL

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

                I don't mind the track meet, shootout style. I also like half-court, grind-it-out, defensive games. I like to get a variety.

                The reason I thought that game was tought to watch was a combination. As noted, both teams were missing several key guys so there were a lot of guys out there unfamiliar with each other and unfamiliar with seeing lots of minutes. Moreso for us, but even with Nellie's wild rotation tendencies, also GS.

                The second, and more importantly, is that it just seemed like there was not a lot of emotion or intensity on either side until late in the game. Almost as if watching a pick up game (flow and style) after everybody's played four or five already. Flat would be a good term to describe it.

                Of course, I can't complain if it means a win for us. GS is not good, but we had limited player availability and pulled it out so I'll be content and look at the positives: DG, Quis until injured, Rush except FG %, Jack, Graham's timely baskets, Fosters timely rebound, etc.
                I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                -Emiliano Zapata

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

                  Peck, you are mixing and matching so many different things that is is difficult for me to disect it all.

                  There is a difference between going small, and playing no defense. There is a difference between playing small ball and playing a selfish brand of basketball like Nelson's teams always do. There is a difference between playing small ball and playing run and gun. There is a difference between playing small ball and playing like a Don Nelson team. There is a huge difference.

                  I find Nelson's teams offensive to my basketball sensibilities. And yet for the most part I am a huge proponent of playing small. Although my thing is to have 5 quick players on the court at all times. If the quick players are Garnett, Dwight Howard, Amare or even Jeff Foster then I am thrilled. See my thing isn't small - my thing is quick big guys, I have always loved them and always will. Sheed and Ben Wallace back in '04, '05 is what made the Pistons defense impossible to deal with. They were quick athletic big guys who could defend anyone and anywhere on the court.

                  But Roy, Rasho and Troy are very slow - and that is why I don't like them. Peck you talk about Dale Davis a lot, I was a huge fan of his and for the time he played he was very active and quick, peck you rave about Paul Milsap and I like him also, but probably for a different reason - I like him because he is aggressive, quick, active, can jump. You like him because he is a big bruiser - I don't see Wes Unseld, I see a very agile and quick player.

                  I know I have gotten off topic slightly but I thought I needed to bring this up
                  Last edited by Unclebuck; 12-18-2008, 09:03 AM.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

                    OK, having said that I do agree with you Peck, I hated the game, I don't like run and gun, and you know I hate seeing defense played like that. Remember I loved the 72-70 pacers vs Nuggets game from the '04 season. ( I used to love watching the heat vs Knicks, the pacers vs the Knicks where scroing a basket or even getting a decent shot was quite an accomplishment) I like physical tough hard nosed defense - in fact I love watching the current Celtics play defense. But playing physical defense has nothing to do with being big and slow - McKey back in the day was a very physical defender and he wasn't a big brute.

                    Yeah Diener's three was ugly, but he ran the break so well, much better than Ford or Jack. Deiner also runs the halfcourt offense like it is supposed to be run, he moves the ball
                    Last edited by Unclebuck; 12-18-2008, 09:04 AM.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

                      The Jarrett Jack low assist questioning came up in the game thread. I agree I'd rather see him with more, but his overall performance was key to our success. In addition to his timely offense/shooting, he's one of the few guys who displayed consistent energy.

                      He had some bad passes and like 4 total TOs (not too shabby in 37 min. of that pace/style of game) and his usual handfull of ill-advised drives/shots. However, his positives outweighed the negatives. Also, he had a couple dishes to trailers on the break and/or penetration that the receivers failed to finish.

                      While I also would ideally like a higher assist total, we also have to be realistic about the type of player Jack is. He's at about 3 APG this season and a little under 4 APG for his career. He's never been an ultra-creative-passing PG. He's a solid player who can QB the team when needed, decent shooter, good penetrator, physical, decent defender, will board for a PG, can get to the line where he shoots a high %, and can provide minutes at the 2.

                      Add to that the fact the OB appears to be emphasizing to him to push the ball and drive the ball to the rim. I think he's got the 100% green light to the extent that OB's willing to accept some of the mistakes if he really commits to constantly pushing the tempo and attacking the rim. Obviously, he doesn't always finish the drives, but he does draw a lot of fouls and the penetration does open up offensive board opportunities.

                      So ultimately I believe it's a question of what he is as a player and what he's being encouraged to do by our coaching staff. No he's not among the upper tier of NBA PGs. Then again, he's not even a starting PG. Currently, as our 1st G off the bench, I am quite content with him.
                      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                      -Emiliano Zapata

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

                        We won and we are in no position to complain about winning with our record and injuries.

                        Here is to Friday and three in a row

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

                          Originally posted by Peck
                          Then our own Roaming Gnome was there sitting in his second row seat (I take it another perk of knowing your ticket rep) (same as mine btw who hasn't given me a thing) flashing his big smile during the game for all to see with an extreme closeup
                          Nope, I have to give the credit to Naptown Seth. He just had knee surgery and was unable to use that wonderful seat last night. Thank you for the ticket!

                          Outside of the highlights everyone touched on tonight, the most entertaining point for me was during a free throw attempt. A heckler in the crowd asking Jackson, "Where are we going after the game, Rio?" Jack didn't look over, but he heard it because he got a really wide grin going and leaned over and said something to Jeff Foster. I know it doesn't sound like much, but it was in the moment and pretty funny.
                          ...Still "flying casual"
                          @roaminggnome74

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

                            Peck, I don't understand why you don't like Jack, he reminds me a lot like Woody. You can never fault for one second their effort. Yes they both make some very questionable decisions. Neither really have any point guard skills. Both are good defenders. I see almost the same player, but Jack is slightly better and is a better shooter. What is the deal

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Odd thoughts about the Golden State game...

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              Peck, I don't understand why you don't like Jack, he reminds me a lot like Woody. You can never fault for one second their effort. Yes they both make some very questionable decisions. Neither really have any point guard skills. Both are good defenders. I see almost the same player, but Jack is slightly better and is a better shooter. What is the deal
                              I agree wholeheartedly with this assessment...well, I think he's more than "slightly" better of a shooter than Workman.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X