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

Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

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

  • #61
    Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

    If a set play is no option for this team, we will continue to lose many, many competitive 4th quarters...and set even more records for historical comebacks by the opposition.

    You have to control tempo, control turnovers and get stops in the 4th quarter to win close games...or at least a couple of those things. We do none of them and it's not just the players' faults. It's a combination of talent deficit and the helter-skelter style we play. There's a reason we are 5th in the league in turnovers, and it's not just the personnel.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

      Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
      So our backup PG scores 29 points including a game winner after some dude on the other team ties it up with an amazing monster dunk drive plus the harm and I have to read three pages of silly bickering about coaching?

      I'm not sure many of you even enjoy the sport of basketball.

      Staggering. Truly, staggering.
      Oh, I think it's staggering that anyone enjoyed that display last night.

      Based on JOb's press conference, he wasn't impressed either.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

        I'd have more to say about this game...if I saw it. Since I couldn't see it I'll just add this. I think most people were prepared to watch the team lose a lot this season. What most people weren't prepared for was to see th quantum leap in chemistry this team showed early on. They play hard every game, seem to care about their teammates as much as themselves, and tend to at least look like they have some pride in being a professional basketball player playing for the Indiana Pacers.

        Most importantly, I don't think many expected the team to be of a quality to steal wins from teams like Boston and LA as well as carry so many leads deep into games. The fact that we end up losing those leads has led people to look for answers and many people have put JOB in the crosshairs for that reason.

        Oddly, he'd probably be better off if we were constantly chasing the opponent, not out in front. Instead, we've had the enviable position of being in the lead too many times for the argument that we're just not talented enough to win or compete to really get any traction. We obviously CAN compete, we just can't finish.

        I don't think there's any question that JOB is part of the problem there... the question is whether there's a method to his madness and we're just too far removed from practice and the lockerroom to see it.

        We might just be ahead of schedule in some aspects and that has put JOB in an awkward position.

        Whether that means he needs to reassess our priorities or we need a different coach probably doesn't matter now. Why would we fire him midseason and for what replacement? And of the midseason replacements... would we get an interim someone who is just good enough to leave giant question marks about what they'd do with a full offseason and the team as their own? We don't want or need painted into a corner of a Mike Davis type situation where someone does just good enough, and has just enough player and fan support, to force the team into signing the coach instead of assessing our options fully and looking to a more experienced candidate. OTOH, it's always possible that interim coach IS the answer. It just seems more times than not you get Bill Lynch, not Woody Hayes that way.

        Until the team stops playing hard for OBrien I think he's sitting on a block of ice. If the team would ever fracture and start mailing it in, I think a midseason replacement might be tried.

        That said, unless something changes with these late game collapses, OBrien's seat will be hot this offseason. If there is a method to the madness it better start showing results by the end of the season if not sooner.
        Last edited by Bball; 01-03-2009, 11:40 AM.
        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

        ------

        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

        -John Wooden

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

          What bothers me about this thread are the comments made to stop personal views that don't coincide with others views. Maybe it isn't intentional, but it's there all the same. If a poster says what they feel is negative to the held view of others, then it is wrong. It's seems some are trying to systematically force censureship on others beliefs and thoughts. Isn't a forum a board for discussion of views?

          I can name numerous posters that hold certain views that are not held by me, but they have the right to hold those views as I have the right to hold my views that may be different than theirs.

          Example, I have given reasons why I like David Lee. I'd take him over Foster any day of the week and twice on Sunday. As much as I like Lee, I don't feel he is the answer to the PF that the Pacers need. Yet, others feel he isn't much better than Foster. They are entitled to their view even though I disagree. Last night's game showed why I personally feel they are wrong. Yet, they are still entitled to their belief even if it isn't the same one I hold.

          There are those that feel 30 wins is all that can be expected from the talent the Pacers have. They refuse to see it any other way. I guess I could call that negativism, but I don't. They are entitled to that view even if I disagree with it. Others, including myself, have pointed out this team has more talent playing this year than last year, and this team should have a record that is better than 11-21. I don't disagree this is a rebuilding year, but I truly feel it's better than it's record. If others disagree with my view, are they being negative? Absolutely not. They are just expressing their view that is different than mine.

          The same with JO'B. You have those who feel he's a good coach that sees no wrong, and then you have others who want his head on a platter for various reasons. When those that voice their displeasure with JO'B, they are being too critical or negative. They see things they don't like, and voice their opinion. It's not, they don't like JO'B because he wears ugly ties, has a funny hair do, etc. It's something they feel he isn't doing, like playing certain players, going with a short rotation, coaching decisions, game management, etc. Are they not allowed to voice their opinions b/c others are tired of hearing it? If that's the case, it becomes censureship by being pressured not to voice one's opinion. Has it come to the point that if you can't say something positive to satisfy the Sally Sunshiners don't say anything at all?
          JMOAA
          Last edited by Justin Tyme; 01-03-2009, 11:52 AM.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

            Justin - I think people are tired of the incessant harping. I can understand that and will attempt to reduce my own contributions to it. At the same time, the whining about the whining is just as bad and will only antagonize. I would suggest that people make use of the ignore feature if they want to filter certain views or certain methods of posting.

            Pacers Digest is very "clubby". There is an air of political correctness and sheepishness at times. Some of the members act like other posters are intruding even though it's a forum open to the public, where there should be more inclusiveness to views and methods of posting. For those who think only one set of views or methods of posting are legitimate, stop the whining about posts and try the ignore feature. It was designed for this very purpose.

            If they are an Admin, well, it was their choice. This is a public forum and I suppose they could change the rules and ban people for whining.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
              Obie is not going anywhere. Just sit back and consider him our ticket to a high draft pick.

              In the 35 or so years I have followed basketball, I have rarely if ever criticized a coach. He is getting more from me than any other coach in any sport. The fact he benched Hibbert might be explained. The fact he didn't call a time-out and lucked out with helter-skelter scoring a bucket at the end...is more concerning. Most good coaches would have called a play at the end. I would like someone to explain why he didn't call a time-out.


              I thought it was a very Phil Zen move. I LOVE Jackson's timeout, or rather, lack of them. It cultivates creating thinking players and on-court leaders. I actually liked that he didn't call a time out. I though it was the smartest coaching play/non-play Obie made all game.
              Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                I have decided to officially avoid the post game threads. Pacers lose blame the coach. Pacers win blame the coach, the sun comes up in the morning, blame the coach, it is cold in the winter time, blame the Pacers coach.

                Very tiring
                I agree. The negativity level on this board has spiked. I can't believe the amount of wailing and gnashing of teeth over that New York game last night. It was an ugly win, yes. But personally I found it refreshing to see the P's stick the game winner at the end for once. Even the best teams in the league have to grind out ugly wins so I don't see why it is a crime for a bad team to win ugly. 11-21, we need all the wins we can get.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

                  Originally posted by Skaut_Ech View Post


                  I though it was the smartest coaching play/non-play Obie made all game.
                  I hadn't kept track of the time outs, so I didn't know if the Pacers had one left or not... still don't know. I was critical of JO'B's decision a while back for not calling a time out, so when there wasn't a time out called I knew what JO'B was trying to do... catch the Knicks off balance w/o the opportunity to set up "D". I thought well let's just see how this works out. It worked out fine and a win, but I still feel there are times it's best to call a time out at the end of the game.

                  Kudos to it working out. If it hadn't and the Pacers had a time out left would I have been upset b/c no time out had been called, probably b/c they are playing the Knicks who aren't known for their "D". I would have felt the time out wouldn't have been helpful to the Knicks setting up a defense.

                  Anyway it turned out to be a good move, and the Pacers won. Hopefully, tonight another win, but one where a last second shot doesn't determine the game. Hopefully, a win tonight along with last nights win can get this team back on a winning track!

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

                    So I just watched the full game (had only seen the "Knicks in 60" truncated replay this morning previously). And watching with the hindsight of some posters' opinions in this thread allowed me to watch for some specific things.

                    Ostensibly, it does seem a little puzzling that Hibbert didn't get more burn after his good offensive start. He had two nice little jump hooks to start off and finished two other half-broken plays, then came out at 4:51 in the 1st, never to return until after half time. You would think Jimmy would have given him another opportunity to try to exploit the utter lack of height on the Knicks roster.

                    But...My purely speculative belief is that JO'B saw him blow his pick-and-roll defensive assignment one too many times and got fed up. I'm led to think this because Lee scored on an uncontested lay-in off a pick-and-roll on one end, then we came down, missed a shot, got the offensive rebound back and Jimmy instantly called a timeout. The Knicks had been running the Duhon/Lee screen/roll on three or four of the last half dozen possessions and while they weren't exactly finishing on a Stockton/Malone level, they were exploiting Roy's poor trapping, hedging, recovering and general poor footwork, and Lee was popping free with about zero difficulty. It wasn't leading to direct scores every time, but it was making our entire defense vulnerable and the only thing that was preventing a lot of points was the inability of the Knicks to convert on the open looks it was getting them (often in a "hockey assist" type of way to a cutter/spot-up shooter). Additionally, Hibbert also got smoked down the court by Lee on two occasions, so that plus the pick-and-roll failures could have driven Jimmy to say enough is enough.

                    I'm not sure that's exactly why, but it seems pretty logical and we know Jimmy isn't going to yank someone for an offensive mistake most likely. And we also know, as with Rush and McRoberts, that missing your defensive assignments gets you a prolonged seat on the bench pretty quickly.

                    And, honestly, despite his early offensive productivity...it's a pretty long-shot that a 7'2" rookie with stamina issues is going to see much court time when the 1st and 3rd fastest-playing teams in the NBA square off. So maybe Jimmy told him something like "you're starting tonight, but if I see ______, then we're not going to be able to use you out there." That's just more pure speculation obviously.

                    As for the 2nd half, Hibbert started and played five minutes, by which time he looked like he was about to fall down. While his tiredness shows he was busting his tail to play D and just get up and down the floor, it was also costly to the team. Defensively, he couldn't get out on Lee, who made two wide open 17-footers (one from the top of the key and one from the wing) on two of the last four-ish possessions that Hibbert was in the game for. Hibbert also just couldn't get back on D on his final possession and ending up having to guard Duhon after Marquis picked up an otherwise-wide-open Lee under the hoop.

                    Then he never played again.

                    You can argue all you want about whether a coach should let him "play through" these mistakes -- God knows I won't be participating in such a discussion -- but I think what we're seeing is that there are some things that Jimmy puts his foot down about and takes a stance of "we went through this 1000 times in practice and if you screw it up, you're not playing. Period."

                    And.since coaching and rotations seem to be the only thing people are interested in nowadays...there was also a notable moment with Danny right before the end of the first half. He clearly got benched with about 90 seconds left before half time (a particularly strange time to bench your best player) after one of his quickly-becoming-signature passes into the third row towards nobody. Well, maybe not nobody because it actually almost hit Jimmy in the face while he was in his little leprechaun crouch. Then, without hesitation, had no problem yanking his star player, presumably to give him the message that he -- and the whole team -- needs to take care of the damn ball. Maybe JO'B thought such a turnover signaled the fact that Danny was too tired to be out there -- but with 15 minutes of half time to rest 90 seconds later, me don't thinks so.
                    Read my Pacers blog:
                    8points9seconds.com

                    Follow my twitter:

                    @8pts9secs

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

                      Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                      But...My purely speculative belief is that JO'B saw him blow his pick-and-roll defensive assignment one too many times and got fed up. I'm led to think this because Lee scored on an uncontested lay-in off a pick-and-roll on one end, then we came down, missed a shot, got the offensive rebound back and Jimmy instantly called a timeout. The Knicks had been running the Duhon/Lee screen/roll on three or four of the last half dozen possessions and while they weren't exactly finishing on a Stockton/Malone level, they were exploiting Roy's poor trapping, hedging, recovering and general poor footwork, and Lee was popping free with about zero difficulty. It wasn't leading to direct scores every time, but it was making our entire defense vulnerable and the only thing that was preventing a lot of points was the inability of the Knicks to convert on the open looks it was getting them (often in a "hockey assist" type of way to a cutter/spot-up shooter). Additionally, Hibbert also got smoked down the court by Lee on two occasions, so that plus the pick-and-roll failures could have driven Jimmy to say enough is enough.

                      I'm not sure that's exactly why, but it seems pretty logical and we know Jimmy isn't going to yank someone for an offensive mistake most likely. And we also know, as with Rush and McRoberts, that missing your defensive assignments gets you a prolonged seat on the bench pretty quickly.

                      Everyone who asks why Hibbert isn't getting more minutes (especially at the end of games) should read your post. Most people only see what he does on offense.

                      I thought last night was a little extreme. He looked to be exploiting the Knicks defense more than he was getting exploited.

                      One of my complaints about O'Brien's substitution patterns is that he tightens the rotation too much in the fourth quarter and players get too tired (i.e. 3 4th quarter subs last night compared to 19 in q1-3). When they get too tired, they stop moving. When they stop moving, the offense becomes stagnant and so on. The offense moves very well when Roy plays, so why not put him in for 2 minutes and get the offense moving while allowing the finishers to rest?

                      Also, last night was one of the rare instances where O'Brien pulled Rush after passing up a wide-open 3 and then traveling.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

                        I'm guessing this would be a good place for this and maybe an explanation for those questioning JOB's decision to not call a timeout on the last play.

                        Via IndyCornrows:

                        Knicks outpaced by Indiana at Garden
                        BY FRANK ISOLA
                        http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ba...t_garden_.html


                        Everyone inside Madison Square Garden, from Chris Rock to James Dolan, knew that Jarrett Jack was taking Indiana's final shot. Even Mike D'Antoni knew it, which is why he wanted Jared Jeffries in the game for defensive purposes, only to be foiled by Jim O'Brien's decision not to call a timeout.
                        2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

                          ohhh...So JOB didnt call a timeout to ensure NY wouldnt get their best defenders out there...make sense
                          "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

                            I rarely listen to JOB's radio show, but the one time I did they were talking about timeouts. He said sometimes the important timeout is the one you don't call.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

                              Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                              So our backup PG scores 29 points including a game winner after some dude on the other team ties it up with an amazing monster dunk drive plus the harm and I have to read three pages of silly bickering about coaching?

                              I'm not sure many of you even enjoy the sport of basketball.

                              Staggering. Truly, staggering.
                              haha. yea. i'm new here and i'm already sick of what i see. i see coach bashing is popular here. if you can't play coach? oh no that is teach. but i imagine most here can't play so they wish they were coach. you want to whine about not calling a timeout?? really?? there is such a thing as taking a defense by surprise. you will note that there was a timeout called before the knicks play tied it up. i'm certain obrien drew up a play for the event the knicks tied it up. murphy was boneheaded for fouling. but to think a timeout is necessary after they tied it up, is rediculous. it is a good thing you who criticize the coach aren't coaching, because for one you cannot fathom how silly your original criticism is in the first place.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Pacers vs Knicks Postgame

                                Originally posted by krayyy View Post
                                haha. yea. i'm new here and i'm already sick of what i see. i see coach bashing is popular here. if you can't play coach? oh no that is teach. but i imagine most here can't play so they wish they were coach. you want to whine about not calling a timeout?? really?? there is such a thing as taking a defense by surprise. you will note that there was a timeout called before the knicks play tied it up. i'm certain obrien drew up a play for the event the knicks tied it up. murphy was boneheaded for fouling. but to think a timeout is necessary after they tied it up, is rediculous. it is a good thing you who criticize the coach aren't coaching, because for one you cannot fathom how silly your original criticism is in the first place.

                                Welcome to PD Krayyy.

                                You'll find at PD not everyone is a Sally Sunshiner like they are chastized into being over at another forum where you post, whos forum name won't be mentioned. A post with constructive criticism isn't shunned, especially when the post has validity backing it up. Opinions are encouraged here not just the regurgitating of the opinions that are popular from those who frown on reading anything that doesn't conform to their "positive views" as at that other board. There is more enlightenment in thinking here with the difference of opinions. You don't have to agree with the post or poster, and have to be worried about being called names b/c someone disagrees with your view or opinion. It may be your cup of tea or it might not, but again, welcome to PD.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X