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

JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

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

  • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

    Originally posted by ajbry View Post
    Speaking on behalf of Jack's fans, it's pretty simple. We are Pacers fans first and Jack fans second. Same with the JO fans. They are our favorite players on our favorite team, a common thing, I would say. Conversely, Sarunas fans are only Sarunas fans and have only been Pacers fans since last year and take little to no pride in the rest of the team.

    No offense to Saras, but also, Jack and JO are proven good players in this league and they rightfully get more support - Saras is unproven and has not had nearly the NBA productivity.
    I nominate this for the dumbest comment of the year. (never said anything like that before). I'm a Saras fan. But have been a Pacer fan since ..oh, 1966 or 1967...lessee, when did they announce the formation of the team?? Anyway, long before either you or Saras were born. Don't make such chauvanistic comments.
    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

    Comment


    • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

      Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
      Does this read,

      JO said he WANTS MORE TOUCHES in the low post?

      or,

      JO said he wants more touches IN THE LOW POST?

      Big difference, IMO.

      I agree with #2, quite strongly, BTW. We've become a bit of a donut team and that's not necessary. JO in the low post is still our #1 play, but we need to see quick-hitters, off the ball movement, etc. Not a "stand around and watch JO play" offense. But also not a "oooh no, let's overreact and never use JO in the low post ever again" offense.

      And, for the record, this sounds like nothing more than "growing pains" to me. Patience, everyone. Including JO and Rick.
      QFMFingT

      (taking QFT to a whole new level )

      They had rarely been running any plays that posted up JO. The Nets game actually looked different they added so many of them, and was still far from being the most run play.

      Still waiting to get at least 15 games into the season. So far it's been as unsteady as you could have expected. At least half the time things look pretty good. That beats the 10% good the final month of last year's games showed (basically only things JO did).


      Jay, I think the only thing we really typically disagree on is that you blame Rick (if I have read things right), where as I see most of the issues being of circumstance. You can't say Rick doesn't know how to use JO when it was Rick that had the 2nd best Pacers season ever (most wins, HC, lost to NBA champs in ECF) with 98 being a very close 3rd. 2000 of course is #1 since it was the only Finals appearance.

      The last 2 years have been roster wrecks and have created real havoc on the playbook and consistancy. Clearly it shows. When I see the gameplans I see a coach trying to find clarity in the aftermath. He does bench Jack (people say he doesn't, but he just did), he does listen to players (tried to run last year too till if flopped, did go to JO plenty vs Nets), and he is trying to establish some consistancy of rotations and roles.

      It's just that "how things have always been" can't become reality till enough time has passed to meet the "always been" part. The team has faced extreme roster turnover, plenty of new tools are in the box, and Rick is just starting to get a handle on what can be done with all of them. Of course it's going to be problematic.

      I don't fault Rick, and I don't fault JO either. It's the process of sorting things out. If they were clear the team would already have been winning last year.

      Really the 98-2K teams were also a product of plenty of struggles, like 2 ECF losses, then a 1st round upset, then no playoffs at all. They didn't just start at the top. I think this team can find its way as long as patience is the rule.



      Originally posted by Jay
      Fair enough.

      I've not noticed an agenda; but you have.
      Dillon got himself banned at Star (and came back as WhiteOne) for doing just what he did that you responded to with the above..."I'm not saying Seth is a racist, I'm just saying read what he says and that tells you all you need to know". Other posters would ask him to make his terms CLEAR, to plainly state his accusation (many, many times).

      Guess what? Never happened. He just kept on his Karl Rove method:

      "Just read, you can see what he means. I think we all know what he means by 'NBA athlete's body'."
      "So you are saying he's racist?"
      "No, I never said that, that's not my point at all?"
      "So what is your point?"
      "Just read the posts, it's all there."

      Rinse, repeat. He's a troll. He race baits (pro-white) at the Star like there is no tomorrow, and not just in the Sports forums, and most definitely not just with me. I tuned him out once I realized his methods.

      Of course that debate went just as far with Dillon. And on top of it he came back from his ban with the "interesting" name choice "WhiteOne", which in no way fueled the fire.

      And now he's brought that joy to PD. :shakehead

      EDIT - unless this poster is just the very unfortunate victim of name choice coincidence. If so then I strongly apologize for assuming you are the same person, but you addressed me in the exact same manner that this Star version did.

      Comment


      • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

        Originally posted by Pitons View Post
        But why Saras turnover is the turnover of the year and nobody sees Tinsley turnovers?
        Because he threw the ball in-bounds directly into the BACKBOARD!

        How much plainer does it need to get. Don't make me rip this vid and post it because you don't want people turning it into a GIF to post everytime another Saras-only fan defends him on here.

        I agree with Geezer that plenty of Saras fans were Pacers fans first, BUT the fact is that a bunch of new "fans" joined here and at the Star right after Saras joined the Pacers. I'm fine with that too, whatever makes you a fan of the TEAM. But it's not being a good Pacers fan to defend a player's actions when they hurt the team.

        You don't see me talking up Tinsley's game this year. He's been way down and I've seen some poor turnovers (though forcing a pass into traffic isn't bad as much as its just trying to do too much). I considered the Nets game a freaking breakthrough for him and even that was well off the standard he set for himself 2 seasons ago around the brawl period (before and after).

        I'm not ignoring his +/-, I think its an issue. I just don't think the team has a better option right now.

        That crap stretch by Runi I just mentioned at the start of this thread was NOT WITH SCRUBS. Sarunas was on the court with the full starters (besides Tinsley) when he made 3 of his 4 awful plays (including the backboard thing). So enough with the circumstances, playing time, shot attempts and every other lame spin doctor angle. His +/- IMO would be hella worse than -75 that Tinsley has.

        I'll admit that the Pacers need PG help and I'm concerned that Tins might not be turning it around like they need him too. Just don't force that into proof that Gill Jr (aka Saras) should start. I want the PG situation to get BETTER, not worse.


        Jack's shot stinks, but at least the guy is one of the TOP 10 in NBA steals so far and is a top 10 assists guy among shooting guards. And his shot selection has greatly improved, as in the 5 to 1 ratio of shots in the paint to shots from the arc vs the Nets. He's trying to make the right plays.

        That's not a blind defense of his game, it's just tempered by the fact that his positives have outweighed the negatives by a good amount. He can't make a bucket, but he's trying to find it. If he was going 0-6 on forced 3s every night, I'd be ripping him more. I said he got pulled DESERVEDLY in the first vs Boston. But he has to play bad before I mention it.

        Plus didn't I just post in a different thread the fact that Saras takes MORE SHOTS PER MINUTE than Jack, Tins, Daniels and Armstrong. Okay, MORE. He's throwing it up all the time, he's not left as some side note to the offense.

        This crap really gets me because it flies in the face of reality so badly. Sheesh, I was HUGE Cabbages fan in DEC 2005. It's plays like the other night that got me off that wagon.



        So far at PD this season I have criticized every player except perhaps Daniels (and Rawle who hasn't played enough to get knocked much). I've also praised every player (including SarJas) when they have played well or made good choices.

        Comment


        • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          Because he threw the ball in-bounds directly into the BACKBOARD!

          .
          He's not the first player I've ever seen do that, not even the first NBA player.
          Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

          Comment


          • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

            Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
            He's not the first player I've ever seen do that, not even the first NBA player.
            Perhaps, but I can't think of one, and the times it has happened it's been rare enough to take notice of I'm sure.

            The response you quoted was of course to explain why Tinsley throwing a pass out of bounds or forcing something in traffic gets less discussion than the Sarunas TOs. His get noticed because they are particularly bad in a discomforting way, as in he looks out of place bad, not just an NBA caliber player not playing great ball.



            Again, I was jocking SarJas bigtime at Star just one year ago. I'm not anti-players. I am anti-fan boys in denial though. Sarunas has played his way into this opinion from me. Just the same as he played his way out of the #2 PG role last season after it was handed to him despite AJ's effort in the brawl/injury season the year before.

            "Wasn't given a chance" is not a term that applies to Sarunas in the least. If Rawle had played like SarJas did in the preseason, Rawle would not be with the Pacers right now. But Sarunas never had to give it a second thought and still remained the #2 PG right off the bat.


            The defense that he and Tinsley play demands that they keep their A/TO close to 3 at least and their assists at 7-8 per 32 minutes (IMO). Currently (including MIL game):

            Tins 2.07 A/TO - 6.51 A/32 min
            Sarunas 1.38 A/TO - 4.43 A/32 min

            Both are failing to be good enough on offense to make up for the weak defense, but Tinsley is still outplaying him and Tins also comes up with more steals (1 every 26.82 minutes to Sarunas getting 1 every 43.33 minutes).


            Being almost as good as Tinsley isn't a strong defense considering where Tinsley's game is at right now.



            First of all, I don't post at the Star,
            I call shennanigans on this. You just happen to be a totally different poster using the exact same username and with the exact same attacks directed toward me.

            I've been done with you at Star for months now, and I'm done with you here too. I only responded this much for the sake of the PD people who don't know the history behind this crap. The rest of our debates at PD will be one-way at most. I have no interest in it and I'm 100% certain the rest of PD doesn't want to hear it.

            Comment


            • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

              You want to know who else threw the ball into the backboard?

              The man with eleven (!) championship rings:



              And do you want to know when he did it? At the end of a game. An NBA FINALS game, no less. He was inbounding, and he threw the ball into the wire connected to the backboard. That is the turnover that lead directly to "Havlicek stole the ball!!!"

              That is why I will never get upset with anybody doing that. It can truly happen to anyone at any time. Even the most winning player in NBA history (as well as one of the most intelligent players ever).

              Comment


              • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                Regarding Mark Aguire, he was one of my alltime favorite post players.

                I noticed a serious improvement when he started tutoring JO, and I noticed a significant regression when Aguire left.
                It is interesting how much progress the Knicks' young bigs have made this year under Aguire.

                I hope that the team gets things together and that JO can find a happy medium in the offense. I have not seen enough games to give grades one way or the other, but the transition time is still in effect.

                I also hope people start taking things around here a little less seriously. It is only basketball after all. I finally got caught up on this thread and have enjoyed most of it. The ignore feature works wonders on cleaning up and saving head aches.

                By the way, we are tied for 4th in the East right now.

                Comment


                • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                  Originally posted by SycamoreKen View Post
                  It is interesting how much progress the Knicks' young bigs have made this year under Aguire.

                  I hope that the team gets things together and that JO can find a happy medium in the offense. I have not seen enough games to give grades one way or the other, but the transition time is still in effect.

                  I also hope people start taking things around here a little less seriously. It is only basketball after all. I finally got caught up on this thread and have enjoyed most of it. The ignore feature works wonders on cleaning up and saving head aches.

                  By the way, we are tied for 4th in the East right now.
                  I wonder if JO can get lessons from Aguire on the side? Or, at least during the offseason?
                  "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                  Comment


                  • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                    Hicks, not to continue to derail the topic too much, but I need to reiterate that the backboard moment was just the coup de grace of a string of awful plays that ran all of 2 minutes. You can't have 3 TOs, a foul and no defense in 2 minutes. And when they are traveling (which he did again later), throwing the ball 10 rows into the stands and also putting it in-bounds off the backboard it's much worse.

                    A charge, a pass that was just a little wide, a tipped ball that gets stolen...okay, I get that. And even still when it happens is about 6 possessions, denying your 4 teammates even the slightest chance to impact the game during that span, then it's a LOT worse than Russell having his pass clip the wire for a steal so amazing that it's one of the legendary plays in NBA history.


                    If it had been Foster after a hustle rebound and score, a nice bit of defense maybe, and then this silly backboard thing, then I would have chuckled about it. Guys do have those moments. You just can't have them 50% of the time you are on the court.

                    Comment


                    • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                      Quick update:


                      Since his post game meeting in Boston...


                      58 of 104 shooting for 55.7 FG%.


                      I think FG% is easily the most important statistic for Jermaine. It shows how he's playing over an extended period of time. He's getting better shots and has played great since Boston.

                      Comment


                      • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                        How about the team?

                        I could give a rats @ss about Jermaines individual stats. How is the team playing since then?

                        Let me see we've had to have two differant lineup changes at the shooting guard now a change at the center position, oh & btw per Rick that change alone will probably result in less of a running offense & more of the good old low post offense. I wonder who benefits from that?

                        The team record since that date 4 wins 3 losses. Our record prior to that game 4 wins 3 losses.

                        In the mean time Al Harrington who was on an aboslute tear prior to this meeting has since lost his offensive touch & has had to change positions. Now could it be back injurys? Sure. But could it also be that he has now been move farther from the basket & since we don't get out & run as much he is no longer the first big man down the court getting easy baskets because somebody had to have more low post touches.

                        I know this is going to come across as some stuck in the mud old man but I'm going to say it anyway. There is no I in team.

                        However you can't spell multiple all-star without an I so I guess that counts for something.

                        Don't let last nights win in Portland fool you to much. We shot over 50% from the field. Do you really think that will happen often?

                        Then not only does he want more low post touches he now wants to make sure he gets the ball at the end of games to draw fouls. Of course in his mind everytime he shoots he is fouled so I guess I can understand that.

                        Maybe it's just me but (& I'm sure I've seen this somewhere before) team ball beats Jermaine ball everyday.


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

                        Comment


                        • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                          Originally posted by Peck View Post
                          Maybe it's just me but (& I'm sure I've seen this somewhere before) team ball beats Jermaine ball everyday.
                          Absolutely. What makes you think anybody here wants Jermaine iso-ball?

                          Last night Jermaine got his touches in the post instead of 20 feet out, and he played a great team game.

                          Not sure what there is to argue about. Even BBall said he played a great game.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                            Absolutely. What makes you think anybody here wants Jermaine iso-ball?

                            Last night Jermaine got his touches in the post instead of 20 feet out, and he played a great team game.

                            Not sure what there is to argue about. Even BBall said he played a great game.
                            Never said a thing about him being bad last night.

                            I won't argue about whether or not he played a great team game or if the team had to change their game to fit him but I will say he had a great individual game & yes it ultimately helped the team so therefor if you wanna claim he played team ball then feel free.

                            I will just say now what I said over the last few seasons about another player.

                            Character matters.

                            If your idea of good character is when the chips are down for one or two games that the "leader" goes to the management & complains of him not getting his offense where he wants it then great.

                            However it's just the final straw in the "me" contest that I have seen him wage for years & years.

                            Character comes out more, IMO, when the chips are down.

                            My thought is that the teams leader should be looking for ways for everyone to improve, not just how he can improve & thus improve everyone else. A rising tide lifts all boats but an isolated stream can cause a hole.

                            Gee, am I doing a good job of trying to hide my feelings for him? Beleive it or not I am being very very very tame compared to what I want to say & how I really truely want to break free & post.


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

                            Comment


                            • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                              Originally posted by Peck View Post
                              Beleive it or not I am being very very very tame compared to what I want to say & how I really truely want to break free & post.
                              Oh trust me, I think we all know that's true.
                              This space for rent.

                              Comment


                              • Re: JO, Carlisle and Bird have heated conversation after game in coaches office

                                Jermaine gets all of his touches in the flow of the game. It's ridiculous that any claim besides team-ball involving Jermaine is made, especially since Boston.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X