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

Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

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

  • #61
    Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

    Originally posted by count55 View Post

    or for wearing an ugly tie.
    Ah, you have noticed he wears some pretty ugly ties too!


    Well, at least he dresses better than Bird---and Walsh for that matter.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

      Originally posted by count55 View Post
      Yet, if they'd missed them, he would've been roasted for playing them too long, or not having so-and-so in the game, or for wearing an ugly tie....

      .......I've seen this team blow leads. I've seen them make mistakes. I've seen them miss shots. However, I have not seen them once stop playing or stop trying to defend and do the right thing.

      That's all I need to know about the quality of the guys we have playing, and the quality of the job that O'Brien's doing.

      And the criticisms would've been unfair, because there was a LARGE difference in his coaching tonight from the previous several games. Aside from the substitutions, we had full court pressure in the 4th (it's about time). We were forcing Houston into bad passes and it threw them off. He kept Troy out there against Yao because of the huge mismatch on offense (which allowed two wide open threes).

      I don't think Jim should get off the hook just because the team is playing hard. I see NO reason why the substitutions have been so poor, and I believe they given us little to zero chance to win some of these games. How many times does he need to see Rasho struggling up the court before he notices he's too tired?

      Near the end of the games lately, our players are holding their knees during timeouts while the opponents are standing up straight, looking they're waiting for the tipoff.

      I love watching Rush play at the end of games. There's something about his demeanor that gives me confidence, even when he's having an off night. He seems to make his teammates play better even when he's not truly affecting them.

      I felt the same way watching him in college.
      Last edited by imawhat; 11-27-2008, 01:14 PM.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

        Also, anyone think Danny got into Artest's head last night after that block? I found it remarkably odd that Ron got so close to the basket and then handed off to Yao on that final play.


        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
        True, but I did notice a few times they sagged off him he was still able to use that crazy style of his to drive right to the glass. He is remarkably crafty with his moves to the glass. Of all the skills on the team that is one of the highest grade ones they have. Few players have better moves to the rim in traffic, and I mean league wide.

        Yes his 3 is one of the worst, but then if it wasn't the dude would be an all-star with that combo of inside/outside game.
        I would love to see Daniels coached the way Dunleavy was by Carlisle in early '07. I think Mike effectively spaced the floor while hitting a majority of shots just inside three point range. Daniels looks just as good inside the line, plus has ability to finish.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

          Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
          But Troy Murphy was interviewed by Mark at the end of the game and said - and I quote - "Yao's so tall that you can't really front the post with him."
          The irony of this statement. Did Troy even watch the game?

          btw, the 2 highest +/- players were Rush and Hibbert

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

            Originally posted by imawhat View Post
            And the criticisms would've been unfair, because there was a LARGE difference in his coaching tonight from the previous several games. Aside from the substitutions, we had full court pressure in the 4th (it's about time). We were forcing Houston into bad passes and it threw them off. He kept Troy out there against Yao because of the huge mismatch on offense (which allowed two wide open threes).

            I don't think Jim should get off the hook just because the team is playing hard. I see NO reason why the substitutions have been so poor, and I believe they given us little to zero chance to win some of these games. How many times does he need to see Rasho struggling up the court before he notices he's too tired?

            Near the end of the games lately, our players are holding their knees during timeouts while the opponents are standing up straight, looking they're waiting for the tipoff.

            I love watching Rush play at the end of games. There's something about his demeanor that gives me confidence, even when he's having an off night. He seems to make his teammates play better even when he's not truly affecting them.

            I felt the same way watching him in college.
            There's no hook to let him off. I believe that O'Brien's substitution patterns have lost us no games this year, and they did not win the game last night.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

              Even in the losses, the Pacers have shown the ability to execute well through the first 70% of the game.

              If it isn't fatigue causing the failure to execute the last 30%, what is it?

              Sounds like a hook if we're willing to ignore the poor execution just because we are playing hard.

              It's solely Jim's responsibility, as the person who manages the game, to recognize fatigue and make the necessary substitutions. The players aren't going to tell him.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

                Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                Even in the losses, the Pacers have shown the ability to execute well through the first 70% of the game.

                If it isn't fatigue causing the failure to execute the last 30%, what is it?

                Sounds like a hook if we're willing to ignore the poor execution just because we are playing hard.

                It's solely Jim's responsibility, as the person who manages the game, to recognize fatigue and make the necessary substitutions. The players aren't going to tell him.
                I don't think it's fatigue. I think it's a team that doesn't know how to deal with the run. The run that happens in every NBA game.

                Essentially, this team hasn't figured out how to weather a lull and respond. They don't know where to go to get that basket that stems the tide, and when things go south, they make a lot of dumb turnovers. The dumb turnovers lead to easy baskets at the other end, and as the run gets longer, or the deficit deeper, they get worse at the offensive end.

                It's O'Brien's responsibility to get them to that point, and if you want to criticize him for them not being there, then I can't really argue other than to say it's still early. I think fatigue's just an excuse. The only guy I ever really see labor is Rasho, and he'd doing that 90 seconds into the first quarter.

                Last night's game was a positive step for the team, but they've still got to prove that they can do that when they're in front. O'Brien needs to continue to focus on the fundamentals in practice, and the players need to keep working to understand what works during the game.

                I do not think O'Brien is a perfect coach, but, as I pointed out in the other thread, I firmly believe that 95% of a coach's contribution to a game occurs before the tip. I am sure that if you asked O'Brien if he coached last night's game any differently than basically any other game he's coached, he's say, "not particularly".

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

                  I feel I've wandered into the weeds a little on this conversation. In re-reading some of my posts, I could see someone would think I am saying that coaches and their decisions during games are completely inconsequential. This would a wholly inaccurate, and somewhat silly point of view for me to take. (I admit that from time to time, I follow the path of the discussion down rabbit holes and lose sight of the big picture.)

                  Clearly, to the extent that a coach interacts in the game, they have an impact. However, I tend to believe that this portion is of far less importance than many here assign to it. It is but one portion of the impact the coach has on the team. The focus which it is consistently given is far too narrow of a lens to accurately judge the quality of the performance of any coach.

                  When I look at this team and consider how O'Brien has done, I see the following:

                  - A team whose defense has greatly improved over last year.
                  - A team who has been competitive in every game.
                  - A team who consistently gives 48 minutes of effort, even if they struggle with execution from time to time.
                  - A team of players who play hard for the coach and support each other.
                  - A team that has not mailed any games, quarters, or even significant stretches.
                  - A team that wants and expects to win, even if they don't quite know how yet, and hates to lose.
                  - A team that gets up after it gets knocked down and comes back for more.

                  Through 14 games last year, the Pacers were an identical 6-8. However, four of those eight losses were by 10 or more, including two by 15 and one by 20. This year, only two have been by double digits, and the worst was by 13. They've scored 3.3 fewer points per night, but are giving up a staggering 7.4 fewer points to the opposition. The Pacers have increased their FG% by .014 while reducing their opponent's by .012. They've increased their rebound average by 0.6 boards per night while reducing their opponent's rebounds by 0.9 per game. Clearly, personnel is playing a role in this, but coaching deserves some of the credit for this improvement.

                  The problem with in game decisions (for all coaches) is that there are so many of them, and almost all of them are a 50/50 proposition at best. Basketball, by it's nature, arguably offers the least amount of control for the coaches during the game. It is not a set-piece battle like football, where each play represents one team's tactic vs. another's. It's not a chess match like baseball. It is a fluid, ever changing game that requires players to play with each other, but freelance and improvise to a much higher degree. The most perfect play can be blown by a sloppy pass or missed layup or open jumper, or by great anticipation by the opponent, or just a great play by the opponent (i.e. Dwight Howard's block).

                  Even if I were to concede that fatigue was causing the bad execution 30% of the time (which I'm not really prepared to do), the response back is what role does the coaching have in the good execution for the other 70%? I believe there's even some credit to be given to O'Brien in one of the favorite criticisms: his reluctance to use the deep bench. Players like McBob, Baston, or even Graham have delivered in their short minutes, prompting some to call for spots in the rotation. However, while it's certainly a credit to those players that they delivered when called upon, it's also a credit to O'Brien and his staff that those players were prepared and engaged enough to be ready to answer the call. (Though Putty might trot out the "post hoc ergo propter hoc" card on that one.)

                  I've never said O'Brien was a perfect coach. Could O'Brien make better in-game decisions? Possibly...probably. At some point in time, O'Brien may become a limiting factor for this team and franchise. However, I believe we're pretty far away from that at this point. I am comfortable saying that the contribution of O'Brien and his coaching staff is a net positive for this team. In other words, we are better off with him than without him at this point. Whatever vague discomfort I may have with his occasional lineup decisions or his use of time outs is far outweighed, in my mind, by my belief that his players are improving, playing hard, and competing for him. There has been clear and relatively steady progress for the Pacers under O'Brien's tutelage, and that, to me, is the mark of a well-coached team.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

                    I don't think it's fatigue. I think it's a team that doesn't know how to deal with the run. The run that happens in every NBA game.
                    Strongly disagree. They seen runs early in games and counter just fine most of the time.

                    What you see as the specific problem that creates all the other problems is "lazy" offense. When they start settling and back way off the hard work the full system requires, all the cutting and moving off the ball to get those high PCT shots.

                    And IMO some of that comes from just getting tired. I don't think there is a guy on this team that doesn't care about his effort and it's too early for guys to just be broken.

                    Personally I've seen Jeff ask out of a game already (or it sure appeared that way). These guys are getting dogged and I think that's creating the runs against them. They can't stop them because nothing changes if you are tired. It's not like giving up a bucket makes you less tired.

                    What stops runs in those cases is an injection of energy that breaks the run. And that's what Imawhat and I (and some others) feel like we see going on.


                    We all love the players and personally I love the system at both ends. I just happen to think that this system requires a deeper rotation to function well for a full 48 minutes.


                    They've scored 3.3 fewer points per night, but are giving up a staggering 7.4 fewer points to the opposition.
                    Ahem (pat on back), I was complaining about this fascination with a high pace the last 2 years. They slowed down their offense just a bit and now take many sets deep into the clock. This is the result, a lot less easy transition situations for the opponents as well as a few more quality shots for themselves.

                    And ironically the team has had more good fast breaks this year than the last 2 when they were more focused on trying to be a track meet team.

                    There has been clear and relatively steady progress for the Pacers under O'Brien's tutelage, and that, to me, is the mark of a well-coached team.
                    I agree. But for both sides of this argument, let's see where it goes. 30 wins after this start is not going to be good, but closer to 40 and JOB makes a strong case for himself.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                      Strongly disagree. They seen runs early in games and counter just fine most of the time.
                      A run in the first quarter is a completely different beast than a run in the fourth quarter. Houston hangs an 8-0 run over 2 1/2 minutes on the Pacers last night, and the team knows it has 38+ minutes to get it straightened out. Dallas puts together a 9-2 run in about a minute in the fourth quarter, and the team is reeling with only 2:26 to get it straightened out.

                      This really isn't a particularly explosive team. Last night's game winning 7-0 run took over three minutes and included empty outcomes on three of seven possessions. From the nadir of the 4th quarter (down 10), the Pacers basically went on a 17-6 "Power Walk" that took them the last 6:28. (This actually reminds me of that '94 team, who I can remember them going on 100point "runs" that took like 10 minutes.)

                      What you see as the specific problem that creates all the other problems is "lazy" offense. When they start settling and back way off the hard work the full system requires, all the cutting and moving off the ball to get those high PCT shots.
                      All teams in the NBA, particularly playoff quality teams (which is who is giving us these problems) step up their defense in the fourth quarter. They're more active and aggressive, and calls are harder to come by. The passing/motion offense that we run will become less effective under those conditions. I consider this to be a much more valid criticism of the system than the fatique issue.

                      Fatigue may in fact play some role, but I don't consider it to be significant, let alone the primary factor here. The Philly game (the one loss I consider to be egregious) was lost in the second quarter, and the Phoenix game was lost in the third. Looking at games like Dallas or Orlando, where the difference could arguably be one or two possessions, I'm not convinced that those possessions wouldn't have been lost earlier had the deep bench been playing.

                      Originally posted by Naptown Seth
                      I agree. But for both sides of this argument, let's see where it goes. 30 wins after this start is not going to be good, but closer to 40 and JOB makes a strong case for himself.
                      If this team ends up with 30 wins, then (barring significant injury) it will be because they haven't figured out to correct the problem I think they have with knowing how to win games. If that's not resolved by January, then that will be a failure by O'Brien. However, I really don't expect him to fail. If he does, it won't be the first time I've been proven wrong.

                      However, we should note that after tomorrow night's game, the Pacers will play 7 straight games where they will be decided underdogs. I would think that we'd have to play awfully (awfully) well to come out of that stretch with a YTD record of 9-13.

                      On the whole, however, I still believe that O'Brien is a positive influence on this team and their results. I consider discussions of his termination, at least based on his performance to date, to be baseless.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

                        Originally posted by count55 View Post
                        I don't think it's fatigue. I think it's a team that doesn't know how to deal with the run. The run that happens in every NBA game.

                        Essentially, this team hasn't figured out how to weather a lull and respond. They don't know where to go to get that basket that stems the tide, and when things go south, they make a lot of dumb turnovers. The dumb turnovers lead to easy baskets at the other end, and as the run gets longer, or the deficit deeper, they get worse at the offensive end.
                        I certainly agree that they don't know how to "win", but I think fatigue is currently the primary issue/cause. Like Seth says, they've handled runs just fine; it's the lazy offense that creates almost all of the problems. The lazy offense is fatigue. It's a complete game-changer; even TJ stops penetrating on great opportunities.

                        I know this has been mentioned, but the best example was the Orlando game. Clark K. mentioned the Magic were tired and we could take advantage of that. Instead, I saw a tired Pacers team that allowed the Magic defense to rest while we were on offense. I'm sure you can figure out the rest of the problems this caused.

                        Ultimately they have to learn how to handle the runs, but they have to be in a good position to learn.

                        Last night it took 10 minutes to get from 5:40 to 3:11 in the 4th quarter. In general, the 4th quarter slows down remarkably and there is plenty of opportunity to rest players.

                        For the most part, I think O'Brien has done a tremendous job. The player development has been remarkable. I'm actually saddened that we've seen some players who could've used O'Brien earlier in their careers (Foster). I think the coaching staff took way too long to make the defensive changes that (painfully) obviously should have been made last year, but glad we've made them. Their offense has improved dramatically, and is great because it's extremely tough for opponent's to create a gameplan (see Garnett's comments). The players are really competing and seem to buy into the system, so I'm very happy about that.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

                          Originally posted by count55 View Post
                          All teams in the NBA, particularly playoff quality teams (which is who is giving us these problems) step up their defense in the fourth quarter. They're more active and aggressive, and calls are harder to come by. The passing/motion offense that we run will become less effective under those conditions. I consider this to be a much more valid criticism of the system than the fatique issue.
                          While I certainly agree that good teams step up their defense in the 4th, that certainly hasn't been the case in most of our losses this year.

                          Nothing changed in the Bulls/Magic/Heat/etc. losses; our offense just stopped moving. All three teams recognized that we were "exhausted" and started cherry-picking.

                          The only two games (imo) in which the defense assertively stepped up against us were the Pistons/76ers games.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

                            Goddammit...did I really type "fatique"?

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

                              Fatique is an alternate spelling, and likely more favourable in other countires.

                              *&^%...countries.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Houston - Road trip ends well, so....

                                Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                                Fatique is an alternate spelling, and likely more favourable in other countires.

                                *&^%...countries.
                                For some reason, I kept typing the 'q', but thought I'd caught all of them. I could understand the 'our' mistake, because I write MD&A for our UK plant in Blackburn, England (with the four thousand holes), and will occasionally lapse into Brit spelling.

                                I have no freakin' clue where the I'm getting the 'q'.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X