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

Who or what is at fault for the defensive collapse that has occurred over the previous 8-10 games

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by BillS View Post

    From my perspective I think it has been happening all season. It was less obvious previously because

    1) it was sharper at the beginning but got sloppier as time went on
    2) we were playing teams that didn't take advantage of it
    3) the problem is exacerbated by disrupting lineups due to injury and injury returns
    I agree with you however the only question is regarding #3. In reality earlier in the year we were changing lineups due to injury more frequently. So yes Victor has caused a cascade of events but we have started Small Holiday, Lamb, Brogdan, Tall Holiday & McConnell at some point over the season. Why was there not more disruption then?


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

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by kent beckley View Post

      I have been pretty sure this whole time that this is a second account opened by V. I think he forgot which account he was signed in to.
      oops....

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Peck View Post

        I agree with you however the only question is regarding #3. In reality earlier in the year we were changing lineups due to injury more frequently. So yes Victor has caused a cascade of events but we have started Small Holiday, Lamb, Brogdan, Tall Holiday & McConnell at some point over the season. Why was there not more disruption then?
        Note the stretch at the beginning of the season where folks were thinking we would completely miss the playoffs because we were so bad. Things then actually stabilized for a while until we lost Brogdon over and over and then Vic came back.

        But there's a reason I have that listed third - the other two have more effect, I think.
        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


        • #64
          Originally posted by BillS View Post

          Note the stretch at the beginning of the season where folks were thinking we would completely miss the playoffs because we were so bad. Things then actually stabilized for a while until we lost Brogdon over and over and then Vic came back.

          But there's a reason I have that listed third - the other two have more effect, I think.
          That makes sense.

          My thought about comparing this current teams structure to the team that had Roy/Paul/George etc. is that the personnel are different. To me schemes of any type have to be somewhat catered to the players playing it. This was one of the main reasons I hated O'Brien was that while his offensive scheme made sense whenever he would describe it or you read it, it just never worked because he did not have the players to play that style. You can blame Bird for this as much as Jim to be honest with you, you don't have Jim O'Brien be your coach and then go and draft Roy Hibbert & Tyler Hansbrough. So that was on Bird.

          I digress.

          The reason that defensive scheme worked so well with Paul George (6'11" wingspan) & George Hill (6'9"wingspan) & to some extent Lance (6'10"wingspan) is because each of them are blessed with ridiculously long arms and Paul & George were each grade A defenders while Lance was at times a C but whenever he focused he could be a B+ defender.

          Now to be fair Malcolm has the same wingspan as Paul but he is just not the defender. Victor is an A defender himself and T.J. Warren has made himself very useful with quick hands (however he has the shortest wingspan of all the above at 6'8".

          But I think the thing mostly is this. Even just going back 5 years ago teams are just more willing and capable of ripping off a series of long distance shots that in the past they may not have been so willing to do.

          But I think your reasons are logical as well.


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

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Peck View Post

            Let's just go with this and assume that it is mostly correct (I'm not sure it is but for the sake of my question let's say so).

            Why? What happened between 3-4 weeks ago that caused all of our wing players to do this?
            Our guards/wings were never particularly good at doing that, imo. Brogdon is, as many have said, too slow-footed and upright in his stance to guard other PGs so most of his opponents blew by him earlier in the season as well. Lamb has been worse at it lately than he was earlier in the year. He's struggling a bit lately, in general. Maybe it's due to the transition to a back-up role. He did have an quite good game last night, though, so kudos for that. I also think that Aaron was generally quite adept at shadowing his opponent so taking him out of the rotation has played a role (albeit small since he didn't play a ton of minutes anyway).

            But, frankly, what changed the most is simply that Myles hasn't played a ton of minutes lately due to the illness and some strange coaching decisions by Nate. He is an important part of our defense, whether some posters on here like it or not.

            Last edited by Peck; 02-13-2020, 10:55 PM.
            People who try to win arguments are the worst. The point of an argument isn't to find a winner, it is to find the truth.

            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post

              One other thing I would like to point out is that maybe the premise of your question is wrong as well. You describe it as a collapse. But if we look back at the last 10 games (starting with the GS game which is often cited as the start of this problem), which have not been good defensively, it's not even the worst 10 game defensive stretch of the season.

              So maybe it's just a rough patch. Other than the Portland game, it's not jump off the page bad defense, just not good either.

              I can tell you things are a little worse almost across the board. Teams are shooting better, the Pacers are fouling more and rebounding less.
              This also holds merit. ESPN showed something pretty interesting in their telecast yesterday. They said that during the 6-game losing streak we held the lead going into the 4th in 4 of those games. So, we had the game in our hands and we threw it away. Defense was not the only reason we did that. The lack of offensive execution down the stretch also played a big role.
              People who try to win arguments are the worst. The point of an argument isn't to find a winner, it is to find the truth.

              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                The lack of offensive execution down the stretch also played a big role.
                In parallel with the pretty impressive string of years where we've had a team that plays exceptional team defense we have also had teams that go into complete scoring limbo for stretches of 3-5 minutes or even more.

                We get pressed or complacent and begin settling for quick contested long-range shots with no one in position for an offensive rebound.

                Now, that last part I believe is because of the emphasis on getting back on defense - we'd rather prevent the opponent having a break than fight for second-chance points.

                But I am really tired of the long stretches of bricked jumper after bricked jumper.

                I would note that last night after the Bucks' run instead of continuing to try to hit the desperation 3 we took the ball inside to try for the easier basket or the contact and foul. That's about the first time we've done 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


                • #68
                  Originally posted by BillS View Post


                  I would note that last night after the Bucks' run instead of continuing to try to hit the desperation 3 we took the ball inside to try for the easier basket or the contact and foul. That's about the first time we've done that.
                  Did they? After the Bucks cut it to 4, here are the next Pacers shots:

                  Warren 17 footer-make
                  Lamb 3 pointer-make
                  Warren 3 pointer-make
                  Brogdon 2 free throws
                  Brogdon 14 footer-make
                  Oladipo 18 footer-make

                  Seems more like they hit a bunch of jump shots. Now while most of those jump shots likely involved drives to start the play, the other games where they missed jump shots probably did as well.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post

                    Did they? After the Bucks cut it to 4, here are the next Pacers shots:

                    Warren 17 footer-make
                    Lamb 3 pointer-make
                    Warren 3 pointer-make
                    Brogdon 2 free throws
                    Brogdon 14 footer-make
                    Oladipo 18 footer-make

                    Seems more like they hit a bunch of jump shots. Now while most of those jump shots likely involved drives to start the play, the other games where they missed jump shots probably did as well.
                    As I was listening on the radio in the car I don't have the same feel as I do when I'm at the game, but I seem to remember these actually coming in the flow of the offense rather than the immediate shots we normally see.

                    Looking back into the play-by-play, the shots were all more than halfway into the possession rather than immediately after getting across the line. Someone could go through video and confirm if needed, but I think the greater point still stands, that it isn't the defense that collapses.

                    I'll grant the offense still relies too much on jumpers, especially when we aren't hitting them and we just keep shooting them over and over.
                    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


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by BillS View Post

                      In parallel with the pretty impressive string of years where we've had a team that plays exceptional team defense we have also had teams that go into complete scoring limbo for stretches of 3-5 minutes or even more.

                      We get pressed or complacent and begin settling for quick contested long-range shots with no one in position for an offensive rebound.

                      Now, that last part I believe is because of the emphasis on getting back on defense - we'd rather prevent the opponent having a break than fight for second-chance points.

                      But I am really tired of the long stretches of bricked jumper after bricked jumper.

                      I would note that last night after the Bucks' run instead of continuing to try to hit the desperation 3 we took the ball inside to try for the easier basket or the contact and foul. That's about the first time we've done that.
                      Yeah, I fully agree. Iffy offensive execution down the stretch is far from a new problem.
                      People who try to win arguments are the worst. The point of an argument isn't to find a winner, it is to find the truth.

                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by BillS View Post
                        Someone could go through video and confirm if needed
                        Gladly.

                        Warren's 17-footer -> https://stats.nba.com/events/?flag=1...0AST)&sct=plot

                        Lamb's 3 -> https://stats.nba.com/events/?flag=1...0AST)&sct=plot

                        Warren's 3 -> https://stats.nba.com/events/?flag=1...0AST)&sct=plot

                        Middleton's foul that led to the Brogdon FTs -> https://stats.nba.com/events/?flag=1...dair)&sct=plot

                        Brogdon's 14-footer -> https://stats.nba.com/events/?flag=1...0PTS)&sct=plot

                        Oladipo's 18-footer -> https://stats.nba.com/events/?flag=1...0PTS)&sct=plot
                        People who try to win arguments are the worst. The point of an argument isn't to find a winner, it is to find the truth.

                        Originally posted by IrishPacer
                        Empty vessels make the most noise.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

                          Our guards/wings were never particularly good at doing that, imo. Brogdon is, as many have said, too slow-footed and upright in his stance to guard other PGs so most of his opponents blew by him earlier in the season as well. Lamb has been worse at it lately than he was earlier in the year. He's struggling a bit lately, in general. Maybe it's due to the transition to a back-up role. He did have an quite good game last night, though, so kudos for that. I also think that Aaron was generally quite adept at shadowing his opponent so taking him out of the rotation has played a role (albeit small since he didn't play a ton of minutes anyway).

                          But, frankly, what changed the most is simply that Myles hasn't played a ton of minutes lately due to the illness and some strange coaching decisions by Nate. He is an important part of our defense, whether some posters on here like it or not.
                          The team is 7-3 without Myles playing this season. The last game the Pacers won prior to that Giannis-less Bucks victory he didn't play.

                          The last 7 games he played, 5 times he averaged more than 28 minutes. Four times he averaged 32 points or more. We lost all but 1 game.

                          The prior 7 games he played (prior to him being out 2 games), he never got 28 minutes. We won all but 1 game. Also, the least he played was 19 minutes against Denver (on the road) when he scored just 3 points in one of our most impressive victories of the year.

                          His FG% is the lowest of his career. His Rebounds per Game are the lowest of his career. This includes his rookie year. His stats are way down from last year which wasn't anything to write home about.

                          I fully realize he looks EXTREMELY good blocking shots. He does stuff that apparently many people are blind to but the fact remains we don't win the more he plays.
                          Last edited by BlueNGold; 02-13-2020, 08:05 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Good God, is there any possible way we could not turn this thread into another "Myles Turner is trash" or "Myles Turner is the most important player ever" thread? Our defense is not about any one player. Myles playing at his peak performance will have nothing to do with teams having continual kick out three's and Myles being the suckiest suck who has ever sucked has nothing to do with our guards not being able to keep their man in front of them.

                            sigh...I'm sure it's already probably to late.


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

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

                              Our guards/wings were never particularly good at doing that, imo. Brogdon is, as many have said, too slow-footed and upright in his stance to guard other PGs so most of his opponents blew by him earlier in the season as well. Lamb has been worse at it lately than he was earlier in the year. He's struggling a bit lately, in general. Maybe it's due to the transition to a back-up role. He did have an quite good game last night, though, so kudos for that. I also think that Aaron was generally quite adept at shadowing his opponent so taking him out of the rotation has played a role (albeit small since he didn't play a ton of minutes anyway).

                              But, frankly, what changed the most is simply that Myles hasn't played a ton of minutes lately due to the illness and some strange coaching decisions by Nate. He is an important part of our defense, whether some posters on here like it or not.
                              I actually think not playing Small Holiday may have more to do with it than we are all saying. He has his weaknesses but he actually is a very good on the ball defender IMO. Gambles a little to much but not overly so. However Victor is a very good defender as well so you would think that he would more than make up for it.

                              Turner is an important defensive piece, however IMO what is happening to us on the defensive end really doesn't have much to do with whoever is playing the big position. I just feel that this is all about the scheme and whether or not it fits the personnel. However on the other hand, it did seem to work earlier in the year. It could just be fatigue I suppose but my fear is that it is because other teams have had time to witness our defense and have adjusted accordingly. Nate is a lot of things but being a person who adjusts much just isn't one of them.


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

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                OK Peck. I spent some time Looking at NBA.com stats. We have been allowing much more in terms of fast break points the last 8-10 games compared to the season as a whole. We went from about 14th to 25th in the league in that category. I have not correlated that to lineups but found that interesting.

                                Edit: In conjuction with that, I recall seeing that our 3 point percentage dropped. That might be leading to some long rebounds and fast breaks. Poor shooting can impact the defense. We are also doing very poorly on the offensive boards which does give the opposition more chances for those fast breaks and more pressure on the defense. It's all related.
                                Last edited by BlueNGold; 02-13-2020, 11:18 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X