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

Uncle Buck speaks....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

    I'll throw in my .02 as to what I feel. I feel when Stephenson started getting his trip doubs is when this team started not playing together. To me, it looked like Lance started getting too big for "the team". He's now playing for Lance and a big contract. Personally, I don't feel he cares where that contract comes from either.

    I see him feeling he's the #1 player on this team, and he doesn't want to share his elevated status now. He's "the player" where he wants the recognition as such, and isn't interested in sharing with PG. This causes problems with the other players especially 2 time Allstar Paul George. PG has always been a sloppy careless passer, but he tries to force passes to others even more now. He seems to be of the mindset he should be the leader, and it's his position to take "the shot" even when he doesn't have a good shot. PG has gone away from playing team ball to the tune at times of playing hero ball.

    I feel these 2 players with their mindset and their play are effecting the play and chemistry of the other players. This isn't the "great big family" this team was earlier in the year. Other players aren't happy with the situation, so combining all this creates the poor play since the allstar break.

    I'm also not so sure bringing in Turner hasn't caused some jealousy with Stephenson and George having to share with another player. JMOAA

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

      I know I'm sort of the Pollyanna of the board.

      But the reality is, team's go through ups and downs. We go through this "The world is ending" every season..actually..around this time. And EVERY season, this team comes out of it. Peaks and valley's happen. That's the nature of a team.

      If..and I do mean..IF there is an actual irreversible problem. I blame Larry Bird. He screwed with the team that had great chemistry. And quite possibly made it clear to the players over how much loyalty the Pacers are actually going to show to them... People here wanted Granger gone, wanted a new toy. Danny wasn't a toy to the players. He was, at the very least, an important personality to the team..and sure looks like he could have helped on the court too.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
        This could be rather simple: PG is chucking with no consequences from the coach. After a while, Lance says, "Heck, I'll do the same."
        To be fair, this issue IMO goes back to Lance missing the ASG. He totally changed his game, he hasn't been bad per say for him individually, but I do think it affected the MOJO of the whole team. Lance has been facilitating less and less, Paul has been too, but we relied on Lance's facilitation quite a bit more.

        That being said, PG being named a starter and getting the 3rd most votes and all the things that come with that, well that hasn't been great for him either. Both of them are 23 so I think they will both grow out of it, but it may very well torpedo this season.

        I am a little more concerned with Roy who is what, 27? He should be helping these guys work through these issues at this point, not jumping into the mental soup next to them by throwing one of them under the bus while building up the other one.
        Last edited by Trader Joe; 03-25-2014, 10:35 AM.


        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

          This is from the daily dime. The whole artiucle is good, but IMO this is what has changed with this team.

          If someone stuck a gun to my head and said tell me what caused the problems we now see. IMO this is the biggest reason for the problems. The part I highlighted is what I see on the court. You can say well it is Lance's teammates fault, well maybe it is, but we are where we are, and this is what is happening. Can it be corrected internally? Or do certain players need to go.


          http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/p...lenging-pacers

          It's also not hard to miss how annoyed some Pacers are with Lance Stephenson, the young sparkplug guard who was a huge key to their early season. Stephenson has four triple-doubles this season but at times he's been too focused on getting those stats, robbing rebounds from teammates and generating some frustration. Other times he flat-out hogs the ball. And while this happens with many players on every team, the tolerance for the younger and rougher Stephenson is much less than for the veterans elsewhere on the roster. On Monday, Stephenson had no assists and four turnovers in 30 minutes in the loss. When he drops his head and ignores open teammates, heads shake and shoulders slump visibly. After averaging nearly six assists a game in the season's first three months, Stephenson is averaging only three assists over the last two months.
          Last edited by Unclebuck; 03-25-2014, 10:41 AM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

            Originally posted by Sookie View Post
            If..and I do mean..IF there is an actual irreversible problem. I blame Larry Bird. He screwed with the team that had great chemistry. And quite possibly made it clear to the players over how much loyalty the Pacers are actually going to show to them... People here wanted Granger gone, wanted a new toy. Danny wasn't a toy to the players. He was, at the very least, an important personality to the team..and sure looks like he could have helped on the court too.

            Who does this franchise need to show loyalty to? The Roy Hibbert who was ready to bolt for Portland until we bent over to pay him an obscene amount? Yeah, he has a lot of clout when it comes to "loyalty". The PG who we're paying to be our Kevin Durant? The George Hill who we are overpaying? The David West who will be making 12.6 million as a 35 year old? The Lance Stephenson who likely will be paid handsomely by the Pacers this summer?

            These guys have ZERO room to question this organization's loyalty. Their pal got traded this year, a season that was going to be his last here no matter what. I get that they miss his presence, but we did go to Game 7 of the ECF's without him last year. Sure he was still on the bench and in the locker room, but the fact remains that we figured out how to thrive without him on the court. I get that the guys miss their friend, but the problems with this team are waaaaay beyond that. PG's "I'm the new LBJ" ego was starting to get out of control long before DG was traded. It's just unfortunately reached a boiling point right now.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

              Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
              Everyone already knows that the problem is. Vogel turned this team over to the 23 year old wings who want the ball in their hands on every possession. One is trying to cement his superstar status. The other is trying to blow up for his next contract. Both of them are putting their own needs ahead of the team. So the ball sticks every other possession. I seen David West last night against the Bulls just stand in place after giving a good ballscreen for PG, who came off the screen and just dribbled at the 3pt line. Didn't try to make a decisive move off the screen. Just started pounding it. West just stood there and starred at him until he took the shot. I couldn't tell if West was just day-dreaming or if he was purposely not giving him space to operate, or if West thought PG should come back and take advantage of another pick. Either way he did not want PG taking that shot there.

              George Hill has seen his role on the team completely vanish this year so that Lance can have another handful of shots, and run plays for himself. Alot of you are saying that's Hill's fault for not playing better, but they are taking the ball out of his hands and making him the guy who stands in the corner.

              Hibbert had a slump and the 2 wings decided that he is no longer important on offense. So now he looks disengaged, soft. They dont' feed him the ball after he makes a great defensive play. Hibbert now makes sure he shoots a hook or something when the feed him in the post because he knows his shot opportunities are limited. It used to be that Hibbert would have no problem working the post, draw a double team and kick it out to the 3pt line for an easy shot.

              I just don't think West, Hibbert or Hill like playing with PG or Lance right now. Vogel has talked about how these guys have had to sacrifice this year, well thats great when the team is winning. But when they have been treading water for 2 months, guys take notice and they start to think why the **** he taking those shots for...resentment is a slow creep that that can build a large swell.

              THis team was not built on relying on PG or Lance to carry the team night in and night out. It was built on 5 talented guys playing together and having each others back.
              You're dead on with this. I've brought up several times that our offense has turned into the Paul and Lance show. I would say that Vogel has lost the team but in truth it seems like he's just handed it over to Paul and Lance. Vogel needs to take control and start coaching instead of making excuses. This team is not playing even close to it's potential and I put a lot of that on the coach. It's not like he doesn't know what to do, he just isn't doing it. The formula for successes is there and we've seen it only a few months ago. It's not rocket science, just go back and look at some tape from earlier in the season and tell the guys this is how we're going to play again and make it happen. Play from the inside out and share the ball and if PG or Lance start ignoring the man in the paint or jacking up 3's you sit them down. We don't need one player taking more then 20 shots or 2 players taking 35+ shots but that's what we've turned into. I was encouraged by the prior Bulls game in the way we played and shared the ball. The players looked like they were having fun and on the verge of getting their swagger back. Vogel is capable of getting the team to play like that all the time, I just don't think he's trying.
              Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                In Lance's defense, his skills may not fit with this team. He may be too good for his role.

                But when the best passer on the team slowly forces a bigger role, it's going to have a chain reaction.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                  For the record, I still think Lance and Paul will grow out of this. They are both still so young. 23 is still very young, remember Roy Hibbert at 23? The guy could barely get out of his own way mentally and physically. We often forget how young these guys are, especially PG, since we have been seeing him now play huge minutes for us for four years already. I think Lance and Paul can play together, but you may have to change other core pieces of the team to better facilitate it. If our point guard is basically only going to be a 3 point shooter, which is what we've reduced G. Hill too, then we do need to consider dumping his salary there. He is too talented for what we are using him as and spot up shooter is not even best his offensive asset.

                  Having two guys that need post touches in Roy and West may also not be the best strategy. A more athletic player who can run with Lance and Paul might be a better option going forward. It will be interesting to see.

                  West said it best though, "We look like ****"


                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                    Maybe move Lance to the bench. He can be the star there, if you can sell it as not a demotion. Too bad Danny's not here, you could just move him into that spot and the chemistry would be there. Try Evan Turner there maybe, but he's struggling big time, imo. How about putting a shooter Vet like Rasual Butler in the starting line up? He'd be a nice fit both mind and court wise. I hate to cater to these guys and the unresolved issues, but at this point you need to make this work for the playoff run.

                    I think Larry would probably want to sit PG, Lance, and Roy for a couple of games, but when your Legend you have more leeway to do those things and not kill a season.

                    This makes the offseason much more a predicament.

                    Great job as always UB.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                      Originally posted by Speed View Post
                      Maybe move Lance to the bench. He can be the star there, if you can sell it as not a demotion. Too bad Danny's not here, you could just move him into that spot and the chemistry would be there. Try Evan Turner there maybe, but he's struggling big time, imo. How about putting a shooter Vet like Rasual Butler in the starting line up? He'd be a nice fit both mind and court wise. I hate to cater to these guys and the unresolved issues, but at this point you need to make this work for the playoff run.

                      Great job as always UB.
                      That would be an extreme move but if it were 15 games earlier I think it would be a good idea. With 11 games to go I think it's too late to try that.
                      Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                        Originally posted by billrusselmuscle View Post
                        In Lance's defense, his skills may not fit with this team. He may be too good for his role.

                        But when the best passer on the team slowly forces a bigger role, it's going to have a chain reaction.
                        Sorry, but the "best passer" needs to make sure his passes arrive rather than focusing on making them pretty.

                        I don't disagree Lance has the skill. I distrust that he has the sense.
                        BillS

                        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                          Originally posted by BillS View Post
                          Sorry, but the "best passer" needs to make sure his passes arrive rather than focusing on making them pretty.

                          I don't disagree Lance has the skill. I distrust that he has the sense.
                          Absolutely. That kind of plays into what I'm saying about Lance slowly trying to expand his role and attention.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            Having two guys that need post touches in Roy and West may also not be the best strategy. A more athletic player who can run with Lance and Paul might be a better option going forward. It will be interesting to see.
                            It's a strategy that got them to game 7 of the ECF. Why would anyone want to turn away from that type of offense, and dive head first into an offense that has looked like utter crap for the past month and a half?
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                              Who does this franchise need to show loyalty to? The Roy Hibbert who was ready to bolt for Portland until we bent over to pay him an obscene amount? Yeah, he has a lot of clout when it comes to "loyalty". The PG who we're paying to be our Kevin Durant? The George Hill who we are overpaying? The David West who will be making 12.6 million as a 35 year old? The Lance Stephenson who likely will be paid handsomely by the Pacers this summer?

                              These guys have ZERO room to question this organization's loyalty. Their pal got traded this year, a season that was going to be his last here no matter what. I get that they miss his presence, but we did go to Game 7 of the ECF's without him last year. Sure he was still on the bench and in the locker room, but the fact remains that we figured out how to thrive without him on the court. I get that the guys miss their friend, but the problems with this team are waaaaay beyond that. PG's "I'm the new LBJ" ego was starting to get out of control long before DG was traded. It's just unfortunately reached a boiling point right now.
                              Danny Granger gave up his prime years on a crap team (with Jim O'brien..I mean seriously..) because of the promise Larry Bird made to him. That they were going to build a great team around him.

                              When the time came, we traded him because it benefited the organization.

                              You can play the "it's business" card. And as a Pacer's fan, not a players fan, it's completely understandable. And the decision was a logical one on Larry's part. Doesn't make it right.

                              But that's not how the guys are going to see it. What was Roy's comment "I don't want to talk about it.."

                              Our young guys are going to play inconsistently, no matter how good they are. The vets are going to get annoyed with them, because vets get annoyed at young guys making mistakes. I think that's a normal part of the growth of the team. And I'm not even saying trading Danny is the issue. I'm just saying, that if there is a larger issue that isn't simply a valley in a long season..it's not PG or Lance having a big head. It's not Vogel suddenly being unable to coach. It's what happened to Danny. Do not mess with the chemistry on a championship level team. Period.
                              Last edited by Sookie; 03-25-2014, 11:23 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Uncle Buck speaks....

                                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                                It's a strategy that got them to game 7 of the ECF. Why would anyone want to turn away from that type of offense, and dive head first into an offense that has looked like utter crap for the past month and a half?
                                I'm not saying it's what we should do at all. Just saying that I think that is the real decision here is the core identity of the team offensively has changed pretty dramatically and Roy and West do not fit into it.

                                Like I said I really think this team needs a good fight. I think they are scared to ruin the perception of their chemistry, but sometimes a fight is good. I think back on when Wade and Spo got into it in the second round against us on the bench. Everyone reacted to it like Miami was melting down, but then Wade came alive in a big way and murdered us the rest of the series. Sometimes you have to fight a little, right now we are holding in our frustrations.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X