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

Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

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

  • Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

    Ok this is really going to be a question that the easy and right answer to is the word "both" however for this discussion let's take that word, any variation of that word or any other word or combonation of words that mean the same thing out of the equation.

    You have to pick one or the other here.

    For your point guard do you think his primary job is to initiate the offense or the defense.

    For reasons beyond his control I am forcing Uncle Buck to say "offense"

    Everybody else gets to choose their own reasons.

    Now here is the hard part, you then have to explain why.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  • #2
    Re: Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

    A PG's job is to run the offense, period. Very few players are skilled enough to run an NBA offense without being a traditional PG.

    It is possible for a PG to quarterback the defense, but that's a vocal responsibility moreso than physical. Any player on the floor can do that. It isn't a job unique to the point guard.

    Actually, since PGs are very limited to how much of the defense they can monitor while keeping an eye on the other team's PG, I'd say PGs are ill-equipped to initiate a defense, as opposed to a center, who has a much better view of what the other team is trying to do at any given point, and is able to adjust much faster and make quick decisions.
    Last edited by Kstat; 06-08-2007, 03:52 AM.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
      A PG's job is to run the offense, period. Very few players are skilled enough to run an NBA offense without being a traditional PG.

      It is possible for a PG to quarterback the defense, but that's a vocal responsibility moreso than physical. Any player on the floor can do that. It isn't a job unique to the point guard.
      Somewhere Uncle Buck just had a cold chill pass over his body and he broke out into a sweat. The funny thing is he doesn't even know why yet.


      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

        Mark Jackson...... enough said.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

          PG should run the offense - usually.

          In fact, the person who should run the defense should be one of the big men deeper under the basket. Just like the PG on offense he has the better view of what's developing, what kind of sets the offense is in, etc. Oakley did most of that for the Knicks (of course the coaches really do most of it).

          Defense is different anyway since for the most part it's reactive and just about everything should be something you're practiced - do you hedge the ballhandler? go over or under the P&R screen? switch or fight through?
          The poster formerly known as Rimfire

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            Somewhere Uncle Buck just had a cold chill pass over his body and he broke out into a sweat. The funny thing is he doesn't even know why yet.

            I might shock you a little bit with my answer.


            let me quote the question first.

            For your point guard do you think his primary job is to initiate the offense or the defense.

            For reasons beyond his control I am forcing Uncle Buck to say "offense"
            Even if you were letting me answer offense or defense, my answer would be offense anyway. With a couple of exceptions. If you have a McGrady, Lebron James, Kobe, Wade (combo of Marquis Daniels and Mike Dunleavy) then you really don't need a point guard who has to be really good at initiating the offense. Ok, I'm joking a little bit about Dun and Daniels - but I think it is possible the offense might run through those two guys next season)

            One thing I know more than anything else. Is in order to be a decent team in the NBA you need a guard or guard like small forward who can create offense at will - when the shock clock is running down, when the defense is dug in and in tough playoff games. This player doesn't have to be a point guard, he doesn't have to be a shooting guard, nor does he have to be a small forward - but it has to come from one of those 3 positions. You cannot initiate your offense through a post-up player - I think that is rather obvious.

            OK, let me get back to the question at hand. I've always said that the most important defender on the floor is the point guard, and I firmly believe that because if your point guard gets beaten off the dribble the whole defense gets broken down, you get into foul trouble, you give up offensive rebounds, you give up wide open 3 point shots - it turns into a disaster.

            So my answer is if you have a shooting guard or small forward to run your offense then no the point guard doesn't have to initiate the offense - but it probably makes it easier if the point guard could do it.

            See, I always have to make things difficult.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

              A pont guard's job is to run the offense. If he does that extremely well, nobody pays attention to his defense. Obviously, the coaches must devise team defensive scheme to make up for any defensive limitations and the teammates must execute the help strategies.

              Now I'm assuming that you are not in the lucky position of having a uber-talented non-PG who can initiate the offense (LeBron, Kobe, McGrady, Wade, etc.)

              If your point guard is only average at running an offense and pretty good on defense, you look to find a decent backup to go to when the offense stagnates, but you are not desperate.

              If your point guard is only average at running an offense and awful on defense, then there is a problem and you need excellent other defenders and a good team defensive scheme to minimize the damage and as a net result you are at a competative disadvantage as a team, and if you want to you can analyze a compenent of that as losing the overall battle at the PG position.

              Tinsley might be, on a good day, even a little bit better than average in running an offense. (I am being generous and sunshiny). But to call his defense awful is an understatement, since he absolutely gets beat like a rented mule on defense. That's why we have a problem at he starting point guard position.
              Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 06-08-2007, 11:02 AM.
              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                Even if you were letting me answer offense or defense, my answer would be offense anyway. With a couple of exceptions. If you have a McGrady, Lebron James, Kobe, Wade (combo of Marquis Daniels and Mike Dunleavy) then you really don't need a point guard who has to be really good at initiating the offense. Ok, I'm joking a little bit about Dun and Daniels - but I think it is possible the offense might run through those two guys next season)

                One thing I know more than anything else. Is in order to be a decent team in the NBA you need a guard or guard like small forward who can create offense at will - when the shock clock is running down, when the defense is dug in and in tough playoff games. This player doesn't have to be a point guard, he doesn't have to be a shooting guard, nor does he have to be a small forward - but it has to come from one of those 3 positions. You cannot initiate your offense through a post-up player - I think that is rather obvious.

                OK, let me get back to the question at hand. I've always said that the most important defender on the floor is the point guard, and I firmly believe that because if your point guard gets beaten off the dribble the whole defense gets broken down, you get into foul trouble, you give up offensive rebounds, you give up wide open 3 point shots - it turns into a disaster.

                So my answer is if you have a shooting guard or small forward to run your offense then no the point guard doesn't have to initiate the offense - but it probably makes it easier if the point guard could do it.
                I think we would do very well coaching together. Your philosophies almost always coincide with mine.

                As for answering Peck's question from my perspective, as 'Buck indicates, you ALWAYS need someone capable of keeping the opposing PG in check. That means that you are causing him to take a few extra seconds off the shot clock in setting up his offense and initiating his plays. It is an absolute must that you prevent dribble penetration by the opposing PG. In a perfect world, your defense of the opposing PG would take the opposing team out of their comfort zone by forcing the PG to make lateral passes to the SG or SF, forcing them to initiate the offense.

                As for offense, I agree with 'Buck that we are starting to see SGs initiate offense. We have now seen such specialization at the SF position that we are beginning to use the term "point forward".

                So now, let's apply the above to the Pacers. Because choosing between one or the other really gets down to the personnel that you have available. We have Dun Jr and Daniels capable of initiating offense, so I believe that the PG position is less important to us offensively.

                At the other end of the floor, our starting PG plays matador defense. He gets a few steals by gambling, but not enough to make up for all the dribble penetration that we experience. He is not quick enough to double an another player and still get back to prevent the opposing PG from shooting the 3.

                Consequently, for the Pacers anyway, a defensive-minded PG that is capable of taking care of the ball but who couldn't initiate offense on his best day would be a much better alternative at PG than what we currently have... as long as he is paired up with at least one of Dun Jr or Daniels.

                And, that's exactly whey I believe we traded the wrong PG last summer. AJ did a decent job taking care of the ball, could initiate the offense by making the simple pass, and except for the quickest of PGs in the league, did a pretty decent job of stopping dribble penetration. The fact that he can at least be considered an average or better perimeter shooter was icing on the cake.

                So unless I have a PG whose initiation and distribution skills are exceptional, I'll take a defensive-oriented PG every time, as long as I have one or two other players capable of initiating the offense and making entry passes.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

                  Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                  I think we would do very well coaching together. Your philosophies almost always coincide with mine.

                  As for answering Peck's question from my perspective, as 'Buck indicates, you ALWAYS need someone capable of keeping the opposing PG in check. That means that you are causing him to take a few extra seconds off the shot clock in setting up his offense and initiating his plays. It is an absolute must that you prevent dribble penetration by the opposing PG. In a perfect world, your defense of the opposing PG would take the opposing team out of their comfort zone by forcing the PG to make lateral passes to the SG or SF, forcing them to initiate the offense.

                  As for offense, I agree with 'Buck that we are starting to see SGs initiate offense. We have now seen such specialization at the SF position that we are beginning to use the term "point forward".

                  So now, let's apply the above to the Pacers. Because choosing between one or the other really gets down to the personnel that you have available. We have Dun Jr and Daniels capable of initiating offense, so I believe that the PG position is less important to us offensively.

                  At the other end of the floor, our starting PG plays matador defense. He gets a few steals by gambling, but not enough to make up for all the dribble penetration that we experience. He is not quick enough to double an another player and still get back to prevent the opposing PG from shooting the 3.

                  Consequently, for the Pacers anyway, a defensive-minded PG that is capable of taking care of the ball but who couldn't initiate offense on his best day would be a much better alternative at PG than what we currently have... as long as he is paired up with at least one of Dun Jr or Daniels.

                  And, that's exactly whey I believe we traded the wrong PG last summer. AJ did a decent job taking care of the ball, could initiate the offense by making the simple pass, and except for the quickest of PGs in the league, did a pretty decent job of stopping dribble penetration. The fact that he can at least be considered an average or better perimeter shooter was icing on the cake.

                  So unless I have a PG whose initiation and distribution skills are exceptional, I'll take a defensive-oriented PG every time, as long as I have one or two other players capable of initiating the offense and making entry passes.


                  Thanks, that is the nicest compliment anyone has ever given me - in this forum.


                  As for your other comments, I agree 100%

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

                    I'll choose offense for the fact that your ultimate goal is to put the ball in the hoop.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      Wade (combo of Marquis Daniels and Mike Dunleavy)
                      Funniest thing I've read on here in weeks. Good one, UB.

                      And good post in general too.

                      I actually found the question kind of silly. (No offense intended, Peck. I appreciate the attempt to get discussion rolling).

                      The point guard's job is to initiate the offense. As I've said elswhere on the forums, conventional wisdom is sometimes right, and this is one of those times.

                      I challenge anyone here to name a top-tier defensive player that needs a PG calling D to be effective. I don't think that's possible. But there are great offensive players out there that depend on the PG to call a play or get them the ball at just the right time. Enough said.
                      Last edited by Los Angeles; 06-08-2007, 11:03 AM.
                      “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                      “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

                        I love questions like these. Here is my thinking on my answer, which is "defense".

                        As a coach its easier to figure out ways to play strategically without a true "point guard" than it is a true "point guard defender". Without a premier decision making point guard to call your plays and run your team offensively, you can coach around that with a few different solutions. Some of those are:

                        1. You can utilize a "point forward" type of concept, where the same player generally recieves the first pass in any play and starts all sets from the wing area. Paul Pressey of the 1980's Milwaukee Bucks was the first guy I remember to be used quite this way, but there have been others. Larry Bird was somewhat used this way too at times.

                        2. As a coach if you dont have a great "floor general" to be your coach on the floor you can just call most of your sets yourself, rather than relying on your point guard to have that decision making power.

                        3. You can play a true "2 guard front", so your backcourt can share responsibilities offesnively, and arent forced to make decisions on where to "take the action". Ive been pushing for the Pacers to do this since we acquired Marquis Daniels, and maybe even since Reggie retired.

                        I think as a coach and general manager its very important to build your team defense first, and defense starts at the point guard spot. You can pressure the ball, wearing out the opponents guards. You can run time off the shot clock, maybe eliminating that one extra pass later in a possession that leads to a bucket. A great point guard defender can cause the opponents coaches to have to limit their playbook, since they may not be able to run complicated complex set plays. A great point guard defender can cause communication issues with the opponents guard and coaching staff. A great pg defender can make the opponent have to create and use other ballhandlers to initiate, which is something that is often out of character and out of their comfort zone to do.

                        A great point guard defender can do all of that, and there are other benefits too. Having one keeps your bigs from having to help to early or too often and helps keep them out of foul trouble. It enables your other wing defenders to stay closer to shooters and not to have to help as far or as often, letting them contest others jumpers better. It also helps establish a toughness and intensity right at the beginning, telling your opponent that they are in for a war, not just to score but to even run a play, or start offense, or even to get the ball up the floor. Its a winning mindset, and few teams with great point guard defenders end up with losing records.

                        Lets face it, not all but almost all true great point guards are fading away, or morphing into being "combo" guards......i.e. players who are asked to bring the ball up but still be shooters/slashers/scorers. Its sexier as the game evolves to be Allan Iverson instead of John Stockton, at least in the eyes of today's youth and players at the high school level.

                        Of course, all of this is coming from a guy who is a defensive coach first, and who's favorite Pacer point guard was Haywoode Workman, not Mark Jackson.

                        Speaking of Woody, he is a great example of how a coach can "plan around" a subpar ballhandler and offensive player at that spot. Woody played awesome pressure defense for us, but struggled offenssively. Larry Brown's solution was to run alot of offense for Derrick McKey as the playmaker/passer "point forward" type, after Haywoode got the ball upcourt. Particularly, Brown liked to get the ball to McKey near the top of the circle, and run Reggie off baseline screens with McKey as the passer to him, reading Reggie's cutting. That's a play you seen ran by other coaches who like defensive point guards alot, particularly in the college ranks by Michigan State's Tom Izzo.

                        I vote big time for defense here, but smart people can disagree.

                        Tbird

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

                          Maybe I'm not understanding the question.

                          The words "initiate defense" are confusing me.

                          I agree that the PG needs to be an excellent defender, but I think the point guard more than any other position needs great 1-on-1 defensive skill. He doesn't call the defensive setup or tell the other players what to do. Just because he's likely to come near the ball earliest in the shot clock doesn't mean he's "initiating" anything. The other four players are counting on him to cover his man, but beyond that, the PG is not in charge out there.

                          I'm not denying that defense in a PG is important. I'm saying that he's not the "initiator" the way he is (and should be) on offense.
                          Last edited by Los Angeles; 06-08-2007, 11:21 AM.
                          “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                          “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

                            If your point guard isn't the offensive initiator is he still a point guard? For instance were Ron Harper, Larry Hughes or Smush Parker ever point guards?

                            It seems to me if the offense doesn't go through the point guard a combo or shooting guard is used rather than an actual defensive minded point guard.
                            "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                            "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Q.O.D. for 6-8-07

                              Offense normally, but with the right roster you can find yourself with a "point" forward or even SG (ahem, AI, Wade, Barkley, Pippen, Lebron) where the offensive is clearly initiated by them. Their advantages and court vision are leveraged to get ahead in a play and create things for themselves or others.

                              In such cases some teams have chosen to have the PG be a defensive disrupter and you can inititate defense from that spot, primarily for the very reason you are asking Peck - most teams start their offense with that position.

                              Because of that fact you can force the ball to either leave that spot early, prior to a play properly setting up, or can deny clean ball movement/entry from that spot.

                              Say a team runs PnR with the goal of getting the ball into the hands of the start C/PF in the lane for his shot. Perhaps the PG isn't a great shooter so the pass is the primary outcome of the play. A strong defensive PG gets through the PnR clean, denies the entry pass and the offense comes to a halt and must move to plan B. Continue this process and it goes on to C, D, E...

                              So in that way the PG has been the one to initiate the offensive reaction/adjustment to the defense, meaning he has truly initiated the defense. The defense is now "ahead" in the play, meaning the ball position and floor spacing are being dictated by the defense more than the offense.

                              And it all started with a defensive PG.

                              I would strongly suggest that Snow/AI for the Sixers Finals team was built like this, and in fact it was basically 4 defensive players and AI much of the time. AI had the benefit to roam off-ball and jump the passing lane in their defense since he didn't have to play "PG" most of the time.


                              I like T'Birds Workman/McKey example too, they did run things that way. And this is from a guy who's favorite player IS Mark Jackson.
                              Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 06-08-2007, 12:20 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X