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

All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

    If you're a coach in the NBA, I believe you have the ability to instruct players on the court. Chucking a shot as soon as you get it is as much of a result of coaching as it is of the player themselves - especially young players. If you want to say that you can't tell Kobe to stop chucking the ball (which I disagree with) then fine, but you can tell Nick Young, Jordan Clarkson and D'Angelo Russell to move the damn ball. If they don't listen, sit them down and talk to them until they do. That's what coaching is.

    At this point, if that gets you fired, then fine. It's better than letting players walk all over you while they do whatever the hell they want. You lack any type of credibility at that point (not that B.Scott had much as a coach in the first place)

    Comment


    • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
      If you're a coach in the NBA, I believe you have the ability to instruct players on the court. Chucking a shot as soon as you get it is as much of a result of coaching as it is of the player themselves - especially young players. If you want to say that you can't tell Kobe to stop chucking the ball (which I disagree with) then fine, but you can tell Nick Young, Jordan Clarkson and D'Angelo Russell to move the damn ball. If they don't listen, sit them down and talk to them until they do. That's what coaching is.

      At this point, if that gets you fired, then fine. It's better than letting players walk all over you while they do whatever the hell they want. You lack any type of credibility at that point (not that B.Scott had much as a coach in the first place)
      I mostly agree with you up until "if that gets you fired." I'm not going to bash someone for wanting to keep their gig that only 30 people can have.

      A coach is responsible for putting out fires, but when you have this many fires I can see the idea of just letting it play out. It's a young roster with a lot of ball dominant players. Your best players like to chuck shots, but they still give you the best chance to win. Benching really isn't an option on that squad. Scott runs the risk of embarrassing blow outs and appearing as if he doesn't let young talent play through it, that could not only get him fired but cost tim future jobs.

      Comment


      • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
        If you're a coach in the NBA, I believe you have the ability to instruct players on the court. Chucking a shot as soon as you get it is as much of a result of coaching as it is of the player themselves - especially young players. If you want to say that you can't tell Kobe to stop chucking the ball (which I disagree with) then fine, but you can tell Nick Young, Jordan Clarkson and D'Angelo Russell to move the damn ball. If they don't listen, sit them down and talk to them until they do. That's what coaching is.

        At this point, if that gets you fired, then fine. It's better than letting players walk all over you while they do whatever the hell they want. You lack any type of credibility at that point (not that B.Scott had much as a coach in the first place)
        The only way to get Kobe to stop shooting is to bench him. That's it. The guy has been chucking for like 30 years at this point - 20 of them professionally. There is absolutely no way that any human being on the planet could convey to Kobe that he needs to stop shooting. It's who he is. It made him a five time champ and one of the best ever. It's his fundamental basketball personality that cannot be changed. He has absolutely zero interest in trying to be any sort of complementary piece no matter how much his skills have declined. He would rather die trying to be the best player on the court for a 2-11 team than be the fifth best player on a good team. Byron Scott is not going to bench Kobe in his farewell tour. It's a business and people are going to games to get one last live look at Kobe Bryant.

        The entire setup of the team is one massive contradiction. On one hand, Byron Scott is supposed to be developing young players and teaching them team-first fundamentals. On the other hand, these same young players have to play with an old all-time great washed-up player who still thinks it's 2009 and has little interest in a team-first approach to offense. The young guys should be disciplined, but they're playing with an old legend who is completely untouchable and does the exact opposite of what they should be doing. I don't think Scott is a very good coach or anything, but the make-up of that team is going to be f'd up as long as Kobe is there.

        How can the young guys get into the flow of doing things "the right way" when such a massive amount of the offense is hogged by Kobe? Even if they got elite coaching, there is no way to realistically act it out on the court as long as Kobe is there. I need you four guys to do this, this, and this.....but you have to mix it with a fifth guy who is doing the exact opposite of everything I'm teaching you.
        Last edited by Sollozzo; 11-23-2015, 09:55 AM.

        Comment


        • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

          I know the Lakers have issues on defense that have nothing to with Hib, but doesn't the fact that they aren't any better at D this year reflect poorly on Hib?

          The Pacers on the other hand are now 3rd in defensive efficiency.

          http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/tea...t/defensiveEff

          Comment


          • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

            Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
            The only way to get Kobe to stop shooting is to bench him. That's it. The guy has been chucking for like 30 years at this point - 20 of them professionally. There is absolutely no way that any human being on the planet could convey to Kobe that he needs to stop shooting. It's who he is. It made him a five time champ and one of the best ever. It's his fundamental basketball personality that cannot be changed. He has absolutely zero interest in trying to be any sort of complementary piece no matter how much his skills have declined. He would rather die trying to be the best player on the court than be the fifth best player on a good team. Byron Scott is not going to bench Kobe in his farewell tour. It's a business and people are going to games to get one last live look at Kobe Bryant.

            The entire setup of the team is one massive contradiction. On one hand, Byron Scott is supposed to be developing young players and teaching them team-first fundamentals. On the other hand, these same young players have to play with an old all-time great washed-up player who still thinks it's 2009 and has little interest in a team-first approach to offense. The young guys should be disciplined, but they're playing with an old legend who is completely untouchable. I don't think Scott is a very good coach or anything, but the make-up of that team is going to be f'd up as long as Kobe is there.

            How can the young guys get into the flow of doing things "the right way" when such a massive amount of the offense is hogged by Kobe? Even if they got elite coaching, there is no way to realistically act it out on the court as long as Kobe is there.
            If you benched the people who chuck, you'd be playing Bass, Metta, Huertas and Hib 40 mpg.

            Comment


            • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

              Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
              I know the Lakers have issues on defense that have nothing to with Hib, but doesn't the fact that they aren't any better at D this year reflect poorly on Hib?

              The Pacers on the other hand are now 3rd in defensive efficiency.

              http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/tea...t/defensiveEff
              He's still defending the rim at an high level, and has even raised his individual shot blocking. There isn't an interior defender in the world that would change the fortunes of the Lakers defense.

              It's somewhat unusual to nitpick at a role player who is playing his role at a high level. That'd be like blaming JJ Redick for the fact that the Clippers are 23rd in the league in 3pt shooting in spite of the fact that he's shooting 43% from 3.
              Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 11-23-2015, 10:20 AM.

              Comment


              • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                He's still defending the rim at an high level, and has even raised his individual shot blocking. There isn't an interior defender in the world that would change the fortunes of the Lakers defense.

                It's somewhat unusual to nitpick at a role player who is playing his role at a high level. That'd be like blaming JJ Redick for the fact that the Clippers are 23rd in the league in 3pt shooting in spite of the fact that he's shooting 43% from 3.
                That wasn't directed at you. I know that you and I are pretty close when saying Hib is a role player.

                Specifically, Roy is still a good rim protector, but he is no longer elite. Nuntius and I have a bet that he would fall out of top 10. Of NBA bigs playing at least 17 mpg, Roy is currently 11th.

                Gobert
                Terrance Jones
                Draymond
                Duncan
                Biyombo
                Favors
                Taj
                Ibaka
                Olynyk
                Mozgov
                Hibbert

                http://stats.nba.com/tracking/#!/pla...ayerPosition=C

                His opponent FG% is lower than Jordan Hill's as well. Roy is holding players to 43% that usually shoot 46.9% while JHill is holding players to 41.3% that usually shoot 44.9%

                http://stats.nba.com/league/player/d...ayerPosition=C

                As Hibbert's defensive stats continue to decline, I think it's fair to look at his overall presence and how he helps a team win on defense. The Pacers could actually end up being the best defensive team in the league without Hibbert, while the team with Hibbert may be the worst.
                Last edited by freddielewis14; 11-23-2015, 10:42 AM.

                Comment


                • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                  I brought this up before to people who argue that bringing player X in free agency would cost the Pacers in defensive efficiency. Every year I think people make that argument but nearly every player brought in has increased their individual defensive ratings from their previous years on other teams. Stuckey, CJ Miles, and now Jordan Hill who everyone labeled as sieve. Whatever Frank does its amazing really to get all these guys to buy into it every single year with a rotating roster.

                  Comment


                  • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                    Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                    I know the Lakers have issues on defense that have nothing to with Hib, but doesn't the fact that they aren't any better at D this year reflect poorly on Hib?

                    The Pacers on the other hand are now 3rd in defensive efficiency.

                    http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/tea...t/defensiveEff
                    Well, remember, Indiana's defense didn't become a top 5 D until we had the perimeter defenders to go along with Hibbert's inside presence. That quality combination was, in my opinion, what made those defenses pretty "complete."

                    The Lakers don't have those perimeter defenders.

                    Our defense remains solid because of excellent coaching and player buy-in. Vogel and Burke are really impressive.
                    "man, PG has been really good."

                    Comment


                    • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                      Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
                      Well, remember, Indiana's defense didn't become a top 5 D until we had the perimeter defenders to go along with Hibbert's inside presence. That quality combination was, in my opinion, what made those defenses pretty "complete."

                      The Lakers don't have those perimeter defenders.

                      Our defense remains solid because of excellent coaching and player buy-in. Vogel and Burke are really impressive.
                      Absolutely, my point was Hibbert manning the middle wasn't the key. Right now the defense efficiency number is better than it was when Hib was here.

                      Further, Hibbert's value is defense. If he's not a difference maker and needs to play with ALL D wings to be good, I think that's a problem.
                      Last edited by freddielewis14; 11-23-2015, 11:11 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                        Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                        That wasn't directed at you. I know that you and I are pretty close when saying Hib is a role player.

                        Specifically, Roy is still a good rim protector, but he is no longer elite. Nuntius and I have a bet that he would fall out of top 10. Of NBA bigs playing at least 17 mpg, Roy is currently 11th.

                        Gobert
                        Terrance Jones
                        Draymond
                        Duncan
                        Biyombo
                        Favors
                        Taj
                        Ibaka
                        Olynyk
                        Mozgov
                        Hibbert

                        http://stats.nba.com/tracking/#!/pla...ayerPosition=C

                        His opponent FG% is lower than Jordan Hill's as well. Roy is holding players to 43% that usually shoot 46.9% while JHill is holding players to 41.3% that usually shoot 44.9%

                        http://stats.nba.com/league/player/d...ayerPosition=C

                        As Hibbert's defensive stats continue to decline, I think it's fair to look at his overall presence and how he helps a team win on defense. The Pacers could actually end up being the best defensive team in the league without Hibbert, while the team with Hibbert may be the worst.
                        I think Roy will end up in the top 10 (there's no way Olynyk, Terrance Jones stay there lol). Also the Pacers have two elite perimeter defenders as well as an elite coach who has now proven to be tremendously adaptable. The Lakers second best defender is probably Jordan Clarkson, who isn't bad but has picked up bad habits.

                        The fact that Jordan Hill struggled individually defensively while playing for the Lakers, whereas Roy has remained elite or near elite in several categories doesn't bode much for a comparison. I am surprised that his opponent FG% is that low right now, but his blocks and overall rim protection numbers aren't good.

                        Ultimately, I think Hill is benefitting from the setting around him, much as Roy did as well. The difference is that Roy is able to still be a strong defender when the pieces around him are crap, whereas Hill was not able to.

                        Also, I have said it before and I'll say it again - I have been surprised and pleased with Hill's effort for most of the season. He never demonstrated this consistent type of motor with the Lakers. He's still struggling to convert offensively, and I still think he's not that good of a defender, but as long as his activity is up and his rebounding remains strong, then he's a contributing bench piece.

                        Comment


                        • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                          Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                          I think Roy will end up in the top 10 (there's no way Olynyk, Terrance Jones stay there lol). Also the Pacers have two elite perimeter defenders as well as an elite coach who has now proven to be tremendously adaptable. The Lakers second best defender is probably Jordan Clarkson, who isn't bad but has picked up bad habits.
                          Maybe, but players like Bogut will also be in the top 10. I still think Roy stays out of top 10. And heck, I see no reason why Olynyk doesn't stay in.

                          The fact that Jordan Hill struggled individually defensively while playing for the Lakers, whereas Roy has remained elite or near elite in several categories doesn't bode much for a comparison. I am surprised that his opponent FG% is that low right now, but his blocks and overall rim protection numbers aren't good.

                          Ultimately, I think Hill is benefitting from the setting around him, much as Roy did as well. The difference is that Roy is able to still be a strong defender when the pieces around him are crap, whereas Hill was not able to.

                          Also, I have said it before and I'll say it again - I have been surprised and pleased with Hill's effort for most of the season. He never demonstrated this consistent type of motor with the Lakers. He's still struggling to convert offensively, and I still think he's not that good of a defender, but as long as his activity is up and his rebounding remains strong, then he's a contributing bench piece.
                          We can agree to disagree. I still think Roy is really good on D, but his numbers are declining this season so I can't really call him near elite IMO. Or at least any better than Mozgov.

                          Before the season Roy was looked at to improve the Lakers defense, now the idea is nobody can improve the Laker's defense. I bet if you put Gobert, Draymond or any other elite defender on there the defensive would improve.

                          Comment


                          • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                            Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                            Before the season Roy was looked at to improve the Lakers defense, now the idea is nobody can improve the Laker's defense. I bet if you put Gobert, Draymond or any other elite defender on there the defensive would improve.
                            There's no way. Every other defender in that lineup is a minus defender. Gobert may help at the rim, but a guy like Draymond wouldn't do a thing (his individual defense is a bit overrated IMO, but he fits perfectly within GS scheme)

                            I do agree, Roy was looked at to improve the Lakers defense, and they have improved at the rim marginally. But when their second best defender is a minus defender in his own right, there's only so much one guy can do.

                            Comment


                            • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                              There's no way. Every other defender in that lineup is a minus defender. Gobert may help at the rim, but a guy like Draymond wouldn't do a thing (his individual defense is a bit overrated IMO, but he fits perfectly within GS scheme)

                              I do agree, Roy was looked at to improve the Lakers defense, and they have improved at the rim marginally. But when their second best defender is a minus defender in his own right, there's only so much one guy can do.
                              I thought Roy would at least shave off 4 opponent points per game in the paint, put them around the low 20s just by his presence.

                              The question ultimately becomes, if your defense is no better with Hibbert, wouldn't you rather have JHill's scoring?
                              Last edited by freddielewis14; 11-23-2015, 11:55 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                                Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                                I thought Roy would at least shave off 4 opponent points per game in the paint, put them around the low 20s just by his presence.

                                The question ultimately becomes, if your defense is no better with Hibbert, wouldn't you rather have JHill's scoring?
                                Jordan Hill: 9.4, 43%, 16.5 PER
                                Roy Hibbert: 9.1, 49%, 17.3 PER

                                Jordan isn't scoring any better nor more efficiently than Roy did this year or last year. He's only been a double figure scorer once in his career. So I'm not sure his offense is as much better (or better at all) than Roy. Especially with Roy not attempting to be a focal point offensively.

                                Also, if you place Roy on a team with better perimeter defenders, he helps your defense tremendously. On the Lakers, Hill was a part of the problem (look at his individual defensive numbers) whereas Roy is a positive defensively despite the porous defenders around him (again citing his individual defensive numbers).

                                I understand the "new toy" syndrome that many have with Hill in and Roy gone. It was time for Roy to leave - there's no doubt about it. But Hill has not been an upgrade in any way, shape, or form (outside of rebounding). He's a new face with a less expensive contract.
                                Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 11-23-2015, 12:12 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X