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

10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 50
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 50 template Next
  • #1

    10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

    SLOW, STEADY MARCH
    TOWARD ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


    -VS-


    Game Time Start: 7:30 PM ET
    Where: Air Canada Centre, Toronto, CA
    Officials: Ken Mauer, Bennie Adams, Leroy Richardson

    Media Notes: Indiana Notes, Toronto Notes
    Television: FOX Sports Indiana / TSN
    Radio: WFNI 1070 AM, 107.5 FM / CJCL 590, 1050 AM
    NBA Feeds:

    REMINDER: Per PD policy, please do not share a link to, describe how to search for, request a link to, or request a PM about streaming video of a NBA game that is not coming directly through the NBA. Not even in a "wink-wink, nudge-nudge, know-what-I-mean" round-about sort of way. Thank you
    0-0
    Away: 0-0
    East: 0-0
    0-0
    Home: 0-0
    East: 0-0
    Oct 29
    Oct 31
    Nov 3
    Nov 4
    7:00pm
    7:00pm
    7:30pm
    7:00pm

    MAHINMI
    MILES
    GEORGE
    ELLIS
    HILL
    VALANCIUNAS
    SCOLA
    CARROLL
    DEROZAN
    LOWRY


    PACERS
    Glenn Robinson III - sore right shoulder (questionable)
    Myles Turner - sore right ankle (probable)


    RAPTORS
    None to report



    Indiana Pacers Season Preview

    FLANNERY: There's this weird dynamic around the Pacers that some people think they're going
    to be better without Roy Hibbert and David West. Maybe this will pay off in the long run and I
    give Larry Bird credit for pulling the plug on a team that maybe had another year left in its tank,
    but this is a huge transition to go from slow and plodding to sleek and fast.

    The key is Paul George. If he's really a top-10 player, then this can work. You know I'm chapter
    chairman of the PG Fan Club, but that might be a little too much to ask. What are your
    expectations for Mr. George this season?

    ZILLER: Oh gosh, I really don't know! That was a horrific injury and we haven't really seen him
    since. (I don't put much stock in his April dance.) And it's hard to base expectations on
    personality, right? We learned that with Derrick Rose, who was a totally aggressive, no-fricks-
    given player who came back totally tentative and cautious. Will PG do the same, or will he try
    to immediately prove he can fly again? It's hard to know until we see 20 games or so.

    I am bullish on the Pacers' post-Hibbert/West transition in total, though. That's primarily
    because of Myles Turner, who could have a Drummondian instant impact. Also, at the risk of
    upsetting the David West Fan Club president, I'm not sure Indiana will miss the vet leadership
    so much given the Pacers' dysfunction over the past 18 months. Like, one man can only do so
    much anyway. And Lance and Roy are gone regardless.

    FLANNERY: Don't you blaspheme D-West! (It's true, I'm totally in the tank for that guy.)

    I like Myles Turner a lot, although I'm not ready to grant him Drummondian powers quite yet.
    I like Jordan Hill on this kind of team. I freaking love Monta Ellis on this team. I'm totally down
    with the direction they've chosen. I just don't think they're going to be that good this year. I
    am curious to see how Frank Vogel handles this change in tactics. He made his bones with that
    great defense and now they'll be going up-tempo. I'm also curious to see how PG feels about
    playing the four, because it's going to happen and he's already worried about the idea.

    What I'm saying is, let's give them a year to figure out who they are and what they want to be
    and then take a full assessment. That shouldn't be so much to ask.

    ZILLER: Oh that's fine, but Indiana is also one of those "never rebuild!" markets and I suspect
    Bird won't have a ton of patience if things aren't panning out. There is urgency from Vogel,
    and I think his rotations and tactics will reflect that reality as much as they reflect the new
    vision. In other words, this team is a candidate to run out small lineups in many of the first 40
    minutes of the game and try to grind out wins per tradition in crunch time.

    We've discussed this before, but we're both enamored with Monta on this team. I'm a bit
    nervous about the fit with George Hill and Rodney Stuckey, though. One deep shooter in your
    three-guard rotation ... and you're playing fast? PG at either forward spot helps. But enough?

    FLANNERY: Probably not, but that's basically what I'm saying. I think this team is halfway
    toward completion. (I do love Joe Young, by the way. He's going to be a steal.) One thing
    people don't give Bird enough credit for is his eye for talent. You can say they got lucky with
    Hibbert and George, but nailing the middle of the draft twice is a nice coup. That's where
    Turner comes in, and Young. Give Bird another draft and a free agency period, especially if
    George gets his game back, and I think the Pacers will be fine pretty quickly.

    I'm not counting them out of playoff contention, but I don't have them in the field. Another
    one of those 35 win-teams, maybe 40 if it all comes together. That describes about a third
    of the East, if not more. You have higher expectations, or does that seem right to you?

    ZILLER: That seems right, and that's perfectly in playoff contention in my book. (How sad
    that we're talking about 35-40 getting you in the conversation in the East and 46-50 being
    the zone in the West. Ugh.) I wonder how badly the defense will fall off from last season's
    No. 7 effort given the loss of Hibbert (a legitimately top-flight defensive center) but the
    return of George. The Warriors proved you can have an elite defense at pace (the Spurs
    had proved this before, of course), but Golden State (and S.A. before them) had good
    load-balancing on offense -- it was multiple guys working to get shots, not one or two
    dudes carrying it all. Monta helps there, but then his defense causes some issues.

    The offensive performance will depend on Good Monta and an effective PG. Even then I
    think it tops out around average until they get some more frontcourt scoring talent or
    shooting.
    Toronto Raptors Season Preview

    FLANNERY: There's this weird dynamic around the Pacers that some people think they're
    going to be better without Roy Hibbert and David West. Maybe this will pay off in the long run
    and I give Larry Bird credit for pulling the plug on a team that maybe had another year left in
    its tank, but this is a huge transition to go from slow and plodding to sleek and fast.

    ZILLER: Let's tackle the elephant in the room up front. Neither of us are very high on the
    Raptors, and Toronto fans are super passionate, and we're going to get raked over some quite
    hot coals if Toronto gets off to a fast start.

    They added DeMarre Carroll (really good) and Cory Joseph (cool), got a meeting with LaMarcus
    Aldridge (neat) and lost Amir Johnson and Lou Williams. Obviously both Amir and Lou have
    their limitations, but I'm not personally convinced getting Carroll and Joseph makes up for the
    veteran losses Toronto suffered, especially given the lack of size up front. Carroll will be playing
    some power forward; unless Bebe Nogueira is ready to play real minutes, the other options at
    the four are an undersized Patrick Patterson, an aging Luis Scola and James Johnson. I know
    the NBA's getting smaller, but I'd be pretty nervous about the size deficiency in T-Dot.

    FLANNERY: I'd be nervous about a lot of things in T-Dot this season. Let's stipulate that this is
    still a decent team and by decent, I'm thinking 45 wins and playoffs. Three years ago that would
    have been fine, but this feels like stagnation. I like Kyle Lowry. I like DeMar DeRozan. I like
    Dwane Casey and DeMarre Carroll. They're all good at what they do. But you look up and down
    this roster and don't see a lot of potentially great things.

    The one variable that makes me think there's more potential here is Jonas Valanciunas. He's
    still so young and if he puts it all together, then the equation changes considerably. But we have
    to see it first.

    They could absolutely get off to a decent start just like last season. Teams that have been
    together for a while tend to have an advantage early in the season. But they've got 11 of their
    first 15 on the road, with a lot of that coming against the West. If they struggle early, things
    could get very tense.

    ZILLER: Valanciunas is a big piece of the potential of this franchise and that actually makes me
    a bit pessimistic about the Raptors. He hasn't shown the sort of defensive ability that made him
    such a high draft pick. He's efficient in the post and there are the outlines of a good overall
    offensive center there. But the fit with the coach and the rest of the roster just doesn't seem
    right. I think Valanciunas can be a productive NBA starter, but I'm skeptical he'll ever reach All-
    Star status. And I feel like the Raptors' long-term goals need Valanciunas or one of their
    eventual big men to be an All-Star. But big men do develop on their own schedules, and
    Valanciunas is young, so he could prove this hypothesis very wrong. We'll see.

    This team depends so much on Kyle Lowry, doesn't it? When he's healthy and happy, he's a star
    and the Raptors are terrific. When he's banged up, he's mediocre and so is Toronto. So in
    projecting the Raptors, we're in some ways being asked to project the health of a player whose
    style has caused him to miss about 10 games per season in Toronto and frequently play at far
    less than 100 percent. Injuries affect every team, but I feel like predictable, frequent minor
    injuries have an overbearing influence on the Raptors.

    FLANNERY: I've been a huge Kyle Lowry fan since I first saw him at Villanova. The issue is that
    he has to play all-out to be really effective and that inevitably wears him down over the course
    of the season. DeRozan is good player, but he's too inefficient for that leading role. Terrence
    Ross hasn't shown that he can be anything more than a decent role player. So, who picks up
    the slack when Lowry is banged up? This is what Paul Pierce was getting at when he said the
    Raps lacked the necessary ingredient that made you worried as an opponent. Sorry, but the
    Truth hurts.

    A big question I have for Toronto is what happened to the defense? The Raps were solid to good
    two years ago on that end and fell off a cliff last season with a lot of the same personnel. If
    they can somehow get back to defending at a top-10 level, then I'd be willing to reconsider my
    stance on their prospects. That's on them.

    ZILLER: Agreed. They have some good defensive players -- especially with Carroll in place --
    but I'm mad concerned with what happens up front if you start Patterson or go small from the
    jump. Lowry, Carroll and to a lesser extent DeRozan can do their jobs on the wings, but teams
    will attack the hell out of the paint. Valanciunas hasn't proven to me he can do anything about
    that.

    I'm interested in what Toronto would consider a successful season. They might actually be the
    first "victim" of the seeding reform that doesn't guarantee division winners a top-4 spot. They'll
    win the Atlantic but I think they could end up as low as No. 6. I think they need 50 wins and a
    series victory to continue down this path with this coach and main cast, though.

    FLANNERY: The Raptors set a franchise record for wins last season with 49 and throughout the
    second half of the year there was sense that it was a hollow accomplishment. Casey was
    understandably annoyed by that notion, and it's hard to blame him. Getting 50 wins is nice,
    but not much of an improvement. Winning a playoff series would be validation of the core to
    some degree. Neither of those things indicate whether this team can seriously contend for a
    title, or whether the core can improve.

    If the defense improves back to 2013 levels, if Lowry can stay healthy and productive and if
    Big Jonas takes a huge leap in his development, then I could see continuing down this path.
    That's a lot of ifs, unfortunately.

    ZILLER: The good news is that the division (16 games) is pretty awful and the conference
    (36 more games) is shallow. Toronto might be able to grab 35 or so wins in the East itself,
    which means they can go .500 against the West and hit 50. A soft No. 3 seed is incredibly
    attainable even should some of those ifs turn into nahs.

    Man, I hope Drake doesn't drop a track on us for this skepticism. And I sure hope Raptors
    Twitter doesn't start calling me Meek Zill.


    Pacers
    Candace Buckner @CandaceDBuckner
    Nate Taylor @ByNateTaylor
    Jared Wade @8pts9secs
    Tim Donahue @TimDonahue8p9s
    Tom Lewis @indycornrows
    Whitney @its_whitney

    Raptors
    Doug Smith @SmithRaps
    Holly MacKenzie @stackmack
    Sam Holako @RapsFan
    Adam Francis @raptorshq
    Joseph Casciaro @JosephCasciaro
    Blake Murphy @BlakeMurphyODC
    This is the darkest timeline.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: 10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

    It's here! It's here!
    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

    • #3
      Re: 10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: 10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

        Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
        Whoa. Matching up to us instead of making us match up to them? I thought no team would bother to do that...
        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

        • #5
          Re: 10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

          Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
          My god, really? I thought the whole reason they dished out all that money to DeMarre Carroll was so he would play the four in a smallball lineup with Ross, DeRozan, and Lowry as the wings/backcourt.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: 10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

            Not having Hibbert and West will take some getting used to, but I think it's going to be even harder to adjust to that dyed lettuce George Hill is sporting.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: 10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
              Not having Hibbert and West will take some getting used to, but I think it's going to be even harder to adjust to that dyed lettuce George Hill is sporting.
              I'm already used to it and I actually kinda dig it. Makes him easier to find on the court if nothing else.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: 10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

                Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                Already got teams matching up to us instead of the other way around. I bet Larry Bird and Frank Vogel turn to one another and high five penises when they see this.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: 10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

                  Thanks to atc not only for the awesome game threads as always, but for putting Miles at the four, which is where he has been playing and where it certainly looks like he will be slotted tonight.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: 10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

                    I do not like these matchups at all for the Pacers. A week ago I was actually feeling pretty confident with this game, but looking at the matchups now - I'm a little worried.

                    A lot of people know that I very much dislike small ball. Ellis is a good player, just not my kind of player, and tonight is a prime example why. Ellis is going to have to guard either Lowry or DeRozan. Neither of which are good matchups for him. Of those two, it would make more sense for him to guard Lowry. This is still an issue for a few reasons: Lowry is much stronger and knows how to use his strength and it will force George Hill to guard DeRozan who has a huge size mismatch there. Whether the Raptors go big or small with their lineup tonight might not matter as both strategies give them an advantage anyway. Scola has size offensively over CJ and defensively really only has to worry about whether CJ is hot or not. Miles doesn't drive a whole lot, potentially taking that threat away. On the other side, Ross is just a better play than CJ is. Then we have Carroll, Mr. Overpaid himself. He may be overpaid, but he is still a great defensive player who plays hard, he can probably slow George down more than most.

                    I don't know. I'm getting nervous now. Just those season opener nerves kicking in at the last moment. We'll see how it all plays oat(yes oat, the game is in Canada).

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: 10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

                      Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                      I do not like these matchups at all for the Pacers. A week ago I was actually feeling pretty confident with this game, but looking at the matchups now - I'm a little worried.

                      A lot of people know that I very much dislike small ball. Ellis is a good player, just not my kind of player, and tonight is a prime example why. Ellis is going to have to guard either Lowry or DeRozan. Neither of which are good matchups for him. Of those two, it would make more sense for him to guard Lowry. This is still an issue for a few reasons: Lowry is much stronger and knows how to use his strength and it will force George Hill to guard DeRozan who has a huge size mismatch there. Whether the Raptors go big or small with their lineup tonight might not matter as both strategies give them an advantage anyway. Scola has size offensively over CJ and defensively really only has to worry about whether CJ is hot or not. Miles doesn't drive a whole lot, potentially taking that threat away. On the other side, Ross is just a better play than CJ is. Then we have Carroll, Mr. Overpaid himself. He may be overpaid, but he is still a great defensive player who plays hard, he can probably slow George down more than most.

                      I don't know. I'm getting nervous now. Just those season opener nerves kicking in at the last moment. We'll see how it all plays oat(yes oat, the game is in Canada).
                      Hmmm...I kinda had the opposite reaction to the lineups. I feel good about this game.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: 10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

                        Originally posted by cdash View Post
                        Hmmm...I kinda had the opposite reaction to the lineups. I feel good about this game.
                        How so?

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: 10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

                          Also, I'll go ahead and say this is a must win game.



                          ;-)

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: 10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

                            Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                            How so?
                            If Scola does start, he's WAY too slow to keep up with Miles running around the perimeter on defense. I don't think he has enough in the tank to consistently punish CJ on the other end. Monta isn't my cup of tea either, and that blurb you had about being worried about who is he going to matchup with is going to be a season long problem because he's just not a very good defender. I think GHill can guard Lowry well enough, although we will get to see how well Ian can do at protecting the rim right from the get go. Lowry can and will get to the rim.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: 10/28/15 Game Thread #1: Pacers vs. Raptors

                              Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                              Also, I'll go ahead and say this is a must win game.



                              ;-)
                              Who had "game 1" in the pool?
                              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

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 50 template Next
                              Working...
                              X