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

Petition to fire coach O'Brien

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

  • #61
    Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

    I only have 2 points things to say, which have probably already been said but I'll add my 2 cents anyway.

    The reason the Pacers won't make the playoffs are more because:

    1. Injuries.

    Games missed by key players:

    23 - Quis
    15 - Granger
    9 - Murphy
    8 - TJ Ford
    8 - Foster

    Dunleavy of course missed a ton of games but people keep overlooking the fact that TJ, Granger, Quis, and Murphy missed many games. Some of those games the Pacers have played with 3 starters out with injuries. People point to Dunleavy's injury but you can't tell me that the 15 games that Danny missed didn't contribute to the Pacers losing season as well. Coach O'Brien had nothing to do with the injuries.

    2. Lack of defense.

    O'Brien gets some credit for this but I think the Pacers players collectively have few good defenders to get stops at the end of the game. Rush is a very good defender, Quis, Foster, and Danny are above average, while Hibbert, TJ, and Jack have their good moments but find themselves out of position most of the time. Murphy is below average which has really hurt us late in a lot of games.

    Benching Rush was a stupid move by Obrien considering his defense has been consistent even when his shots weren't falling so he takes some blame for that. However, the Pacers don't have one player that can shut down the paint and consistently challenge shots and they don't force a lot of steals. The players lack athleticism in that area and need Hibbert to improve and could use an upgrade defensively at PF.



    Overall I don't think O'brien should be fired for one main reason. Since January 1st, the Pacers are 23-24. That's a major improvement from their 10-20 start of the season. He has the team playing better despite the injuries as they've won 5 out of their last 7 games. The players haven't tuned him out and they're still playing hard for him. He also deserves some credit for Brandon's improved play recently because he started running more plays and has worked with him to use more of his midrange game. Those are positive signs for next season.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

      Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
      I only have 2 points things to say, which have probably already been said but I'll add my 2 cents anyway.

      The reason the Pacers won't make the playoffs are more because:

      1. Injuries.

      Games missed by key players:

      23 - Quis
      15 - Granger
      9 - Murphy
      8 - TJ Ford
      8 - Foster

      Dunleavy of course missed a ton of games but people keep overlooking the fact that TJ, Granger, Quis, and Murphy missed many games. Some of those games the Pacers have played with 3 starters out with injuries. People point to Dunleavy's injury but you can't tell me that the 15 games that Danny missed didn't contribute to the Pacers losing season as well. Coach O'Brien had nothing to do with the injuries.

      2. Lack of defense.

      O'Brien gets some credit for this but I think the Pacers players collectively have few good defenders to get stops at the end of the game. Rush is a very good defender, Quis, Foster, and Danny are above average, while Hibbert, TJ, and Jack have their good moments but find themselves out of position most of the time. Murphy is below average which has really hurt us late in a lot of games.

      Benching Rush was a stupid move by Obrien considering his defense has been consistent even when his shots weren't falling so he takes some blame for that. However, the Pacers don't have one player that can shut down the paint and consistently challenge shots and they don't force a lot of steals. The players lack athleticism in that area and need Hibbert to improve and could use an upgrade defensively at PF.



      Overall I don't think O'brien should be fired for one main reason. Since January 1st, the Pacers are 23-24. That's a major improvement from their 10-20 start of the season. He has the team playing better despite the injuries as they've won 5 out of their last 7 games. The players haven't tuned him out and they're still playing hard for him. He also deserves some credit for Brandon's improved play recently because he started running more plays and has worked with him to use more of his midrange game. Those are positive signs for next season.
      I agree all the way down the line. I haven't been a big fan of JOB's overall strategy or his rotation, but the players are still with him and after he finally adjusted (or was forced to adjust) the lineup it's finally settling into a reliable group. I think this is reflected in the W-L column and how the crowd is reacting to them.

      I hope JOB is taking notice. People are cheering because they like Jack starting at PG, they like seeing Roy and Rush getting the chance to prove themselves, they like seeing Troy drain 3s, they like seeing Danny as the top scorer and I really do think a lot of them like seeing McRoberts finally getting some run.

      The PT and rotation we see now is all many of us were asking for all flipping year. That does tick me off because I think JOB was late in getting to this point.

      But he's there now so why change at this point. Hopefully he realizes what he's got and will carry that into next season. If the team is playing 30-35 win ball by next JAN then we can talk petition and firing. For now he's doing fine. NOT GREAT, simply fine.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

        Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
        Does anyone know the details of his contract? Just curious
        You can't trade the coach.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          I hope JOB is taking notice. People are cheering because they like Jack starting at PG, they like seeing Roy and Rush getting the chance to prove themselves, they like seeing Troy drain 3s, they like seeing Danny as the top scorer and I really do think a lot of them like seeing McRoberts finally getting some run.

          The PT and rotation we see now is all many of us were asking for all flipping year. That does tick me off because I think JOB was late in getting to this point.
          I still say the fans would not be going this direction if the team had simply thrown Rush, Hibbert, and McRoberts in at the beginning of the season and built up a habit of losing games by large margins.

          I don't think any of them have been hurt by getting prepped to play behind guys who were arguably better (I say arguably because it is in many cases JOB's opinion, which is, after all, the one that counts).

          Even at this point in the season I think fans would rather see a win or a close loss rather than a blowout where Rush, Hibbert, and McRoberts got lots of time.
          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


          • #65
            Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

            If the Pacers were in the bottom 5 Teams in wins/losses....then I can see that JO'B is doing something wrong and therefore be enough justification for the Simons to let JO'B go.

            But the fact that we not doing as bad as other Rebuilding Teams like the Kings or Thunder or even doing as bad as other teams that aren't really rebuilding like the Raptors or Wizards ( that has a worse record then we do )......TPTB probably won't let JO'B go ( and take the monatary loss ) based on our record. We are a Playoff Bubble Team that has had many injuries to key players this season. Unless the Simons find a pot of gold underneath one of many Malls they own....then I doubt that they would decide to let him go for the reasons that many of you cite. The reason that JO'B will probably be our Coach until his contract is up is plain and simple $$$ at this point. Coupled with the fact that the Pacers aren't really doing that bad ( but really not that good either )....the Simons just can't afford to buy him out.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              I still say the fans would not be going this direction if the team had simply thrown Rush, Hibbert, and McRoberts in at the beginning of the season and built up a habit of losing games by large margins.

              I don't think any of them have been hurt by getting prepped to play behind guys who were arguably better (I say arguably because it is in many cases JOB's opinion, which is, after all, the one that counts).

              Even at this point in the season I think fans would rather see a win or a close loss rather than a blowout where Rush, Hibbert, and McRoberts got lots of time.
              I think Seth's basic argument, as well as Anthem's, IIRC, is that playing Hibbert and Rush would have helped us win games, not hurt us. I could go either way on that one. Seth might extend it to include McBob, but I don't agree with that, particularly.

              It's kind of a tough call. Like I said, I can see the argument with Rush helping more. However, it's been my sense that both times that Rush fell out of the rotation, he was playing poorly and deserved it. Also, both times he returned, he played better. The second time, he seemed to have finally settled into the team defense, and now, the light switch has clearly flipped on. I believe that O'Brien has been wanting to Rush to win that job all year long, but it didn't really click until the last month or so. I think Obie's done a good job in handling Rush. I don't think Brandon was ready until recently, and when he was, Obie gave him the job.

              I'm less sure of how he handled Hibbert. I think he's been a little too parsimonious with his trust with Roy. That being said, Roy is kind of a self-limiter on minutes with his foul trouble and, to a lesser degree, his conditioning. I think there are some DNP-CD's Roy probably should not have gotten, and maybe a couple of 4th Quarters he should have seen, but on the whole, he's been getting pretty much all the minutes he can handle for the last half of the season.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                I still say the fans would not be going this direction if the team had simply thrown Rush, Hibbert, and McRoberts in at the beginning of the season and built up a habit of losing games by large margins.

                I don't think any of them have been hurt by getting prepped to play behind guys who were arguably better (I say arguably because it is in many cases JOB's opinion, which is, after all, the one that counts).
                Also keep in mind that just throwing most any rookie out there for 30+ mpg and telling those guys "do whatever you want and figure things out for yourself since we're losing anyways" is a good way to ruin rookies.

                That's why you see a lot of coaches hesitant to give rookies too many minutes, even in garbage time, because they don't learn anything in blowouts/garbage time. In fact, they often just develop bad habits in those situations.

                Damon Stoudamire is the prime example of a player who developed bad habits because the coaching staff just let him do whatever the hell he wanted to on a bad team his first couple years in the league. He never got better. Shareef Abdur Rahim was another guy, to a lesser extent.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

                  Originally posted by count55 View Post
                  It's kind of a tough call. Like I said, I can see the argument with Rush helping more. However, it's been my sense that both times that Rush fell out of the rotation, he was playing poorly and deserved it. Also, both times he returned, he played better. The second time, he seemed to have finally settled into the team defense, and now, the light switch has clearly flipped on. I believe that O'Brien has been wanting to Rush to win that job all year long, but it didn't really click until the last month or so. I think Obie's done a good job in handling Rush. I don't think Brandon was ready until recently, and when he was, Obie gave him the job.
                  One thing that I see that weakens your argument is just how coincidental it would have to be with O'Brien's need to get Rush into the lineup when players O'Brien had in front of him fell out of the rotation due to injury.

                  Are you asking us to believe that Rush just happened to have the light bulb go off at the same time the starter spot was handed to him due to the injuries in front of him?

                  -Bball
                  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


                  • #69
                    Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

                    Originally posted by Bball View Post
                    One thing that I see that weakens your argument is just how coincidental it would have to be with O'Brien's need to get Rush into the lineup when players O'Brien had in front of him fell out of the rotation due to injury.

                    Are you asking us to believe that Rush just happened to have the light bulb go off at the same time the starter spot was handed to him due to the injuries in front of him?

                    -Bball
                    I'd have to go back and look, but with some single game exceptions Rush was back in the rotation prior to the last of the injuries. Keep in mind also that the defensive stopper position had been Marquis, so using Rush for that made little sense until Quis was injured. That may have put Brandon in a different position and limited his minutes.

                    Finally, the rule of playing yourself off the bench is to be ready when your time comes. The question in this case was whether to bring a player like Rush or McRoberts off the bench early and risk losing games. The disagreement here seems to be how important that risk was. I happen to believe it was very important, in that wins were needed and development would come. Others disagree. Bottom line is that we can't know if that is true - if Rush etc. would have helped a huge amount earlier in the season or if he/they would have crashed without the amount of seasoning they got. All we can know and be glad about is that he was ready when the time came.
                    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
                      Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

                      Originally posted by Bball View Post
                      One thing that I see that weakens your argument is just how coincidental it would have to be with O'Brien's need to get Rush into the lineup when players O'Brien had in front of him fell out of the rotation due to injury.

                      Are you asking us to believe that Rush just happened to have the light bulb go off at the same time the starter spot was handed to him due to the injuries in front of him?

                      -Bball
                      My initial post reads like O'Brien grew Rush in a lab and was planning this breakout. That's clearly nonsense.

                      What I meant was that I believe that Obie has handled Rush well this year. It seems to me that he has wanted to give Brandon as much time as he could handle, but there were a couple of false starts. January is the time period where it seems most obvious to me. He had some success in late December, then started backsliding. In my opinion, he had reached the point where the playing time he was getting was hurting him because he was so far inside his head.

                      I think O'Brien has done a good job in pushing Rush when needed, and in pulling him back when needed. Early in the season, he showed faith in Rush by playing him down the stretch, sometimes ahead of Daniels.

                      Rush had settled into playing a good consistent floor game when he returned to the rotation in early February. His shooting was still abysmal, but he seemed to have finally settled down to know where he was supposed to be and what he was supposed to do. He had been able to contribute regardless of his offense...something he most notably was not doing during a horrible January. The best example of that was the Clippers game, where his defense on Gordon in the fourth was a huge factor in the Pacers being able to win.

                      There was no injury that thrust him in the starting lineup. O'Brien put him in after the Jack/Ford tete-a-tete in the Dallas game. Both he and the team have flourished since that time, winning 5 of 7, while Rush averages 17 points on 55%. I think O'Brien went with him in the lineup because he wanted his size and his defense. I think that he's been rewarded and pleasantly surprised by the sudden offensive consistency.

                      Now, the lion's share of the credit goes to Rush for being ready and for making the most of the opportunity, but I don't believe that it's accurate to say that O'Brien made this move against his will or because he didn't have any choice. Contrary to the short leash that Obie has kept Hibbert on, he has consistently given Brandon a significant amount of responsibility, particularly with defensive assignments. I firmly believe that O'Brien has wanted, and expected, Rush to succeed, and that he had hoped it would happen sooner this year.

                      In watching O'Brien, I think there are people he plays because he is comfortable with them/likes their game (Granger, Murphy, Jack, Foster), and people he plays because he basically feels he has to (Daniels, Ford, Hibbert). I think Rush is a guy whose game he likes, but he's only recently become comfortable with him.

                      It's hard to extrapolate from just 7 games, but if Rush can play the way he has the last few games (even throwing out the 29 point games), he will become a stalwart for Obie. It's merely my impression, but I really believe that Rush is O'Brien's guy, while Hibbert was probably Bird's.
                      Last edited by count55; 04-07-2009, 01:30 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

                        I think that it is an excellent analysis of what O'Brien has done with Rush this year.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

                          Originally posted by count55 View Post
                          In watching O'Brien, I think there are people he plays because he is comfortable with them/likes their game (Granger, Murphy, Jack, Foster), and people he plays because he basically feels he has to (Daniels, Ford, Hibbert). I think Rush is a guy whose game he likes, but he's only recently become comfortable with him.

                          It's hard to extrapolate from just 7 games, but if Rush can play the way he has the last few games (even throwing out the 29 point games), he will become a stalwart for Obie. It's merely my impression, but I really believe that Rush is O'Brien's guy, while Hibbert was probably Bird's.
                          I totally agree and I think that's something I hadn't really considered but now that you pointed it out it seems to be a very accurate read of Coach O'Brien. Great points!

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

                            Originally posted by count55 View Post
                            In watching O'Brien, I think there are people he plays because he is comfortable with them

                            You just described Carlisle. He liked playing vets, for they were his security blanket.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

                              Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                              You just described Carlisle. He liked playing vets, for they were his security blanket.
                              Actually he probably just described the majority of coach's in the nba. I think it is natural to play those who you have a comfort level with.


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

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Petition to fire coach O'Brien

                                Originally posted by Peck View Post
                                Actually he probably just described the majority of coach's in the nba. I think it is natural to play those who you have a comfort level with.
                                Yeah, I was trying to think of a coach this wouldn't be true of.
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X