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

04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

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

  • #31
    Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    Can we all agree now that Brandon Rush is not the long-term answer at SG?

    Nope... we can't all agree.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

      Great job by Brandon... refusing to let Gallawhatever draw a foul.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

        Originally posted by cdash View Post
        Can we all agree now that Brandon Rush is not the long-term answer at SG?
        I can.

        He just needs the ball passed to him more when he's open behind the arc because he usually makes them.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

          I don't think he's the be-all end-all at SG, but I will say that of our starting 5 there are two positions I'm more worried about than SG.

          If we lucked into the #2 spot I'd have no problems at all with taking Evan Turner and bringing Rush off the bench. But he's the best SG on our roster and the best we're likely to get in the immediate future.
          This space for rent.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            That's awesome. Rush is awake.

            I love his poker face, though. He just jammed it hard over both guys and you'd think he was doing drills.
            Told my wife this was coming right before he did it. I noticed him getting into the game, seeing a spot where they needed him to assert himself.

            You know you could make a case about his lack of shots last game or part of this one, but in the context of the flow in both cases you didn't even notice. This is more like what he did at Kansas, he steps aside for others to be that guy. So he lets Danny have his shots without demanding the ball himself, but if he sees the wheels coming off he will step up and make plays.

            They had one easy score that came off his defense on the baseline at the other end. Not sure if he got the official steal credit but he created the TO that led to the break.



            Speaking of stats that don't show up, where's the "should have been an assist" for one of the greatest passes I've seen this year by a Pacer - Josh in the lane between his legs to Watson cutting BEHIND him. Then Earl blows the layup.

            I mean let's be fair here, the behind the head, behind the back and now between the legs passes were vintage Jax kinda stuff, and all 3 passes were on the money and directly created opportunities that weren't there without that type of pass.

            Like behind the head. He got into his man and by not having to have space to make the pass between him and his defender he was able to pin him off the play and hit the angle he otherwise wouldn't have had. The pass to Watson tonight came when it looked like NY had him trapped. The crowd gasped, it was that kind of play.

            That stuff isn't flashy playground junk, that's crafty 80's ball. I'm starting to think Josh might turn out even better than I used to think.


            What I didn't get is why JOB insisted on Troy late in the game when he was playing rather poorly. He padded his rebounds with a couple of tip drills (3 on one set of tip misses alone), got burned on several tough defensive boards (guess he only gets them if you leave him a clear path), and wasn't even lighting it up on offense.

            Price lost the ball, so I get him coming out. Roy wasn't sharp, so okay there. I want them to learn and develop, but okay JOB is in full-on win mode. But IMO Josh was outplaying Troy and would have helped a ton later in the game.


            Dun's tip into his own basket was dreadful, and a classic case of his limited vert hurting his game. It was darn near a perfect layup. And while Dun was able to go at Walker and get some nice scores, Walker also gave him the business quite a bit including some 3s when Dun dropped way off him.


            He just needs the ball passed to him more when he's open behind the arc because he usually makes them.
            That F'n play. What the F was Earl thinking? Rush is just standing there wide open, Earl is fumbling for the ball. Um, hey, maybe get the ball to the dude that is heating up AND happens to be shooting something like 45% from 3 in 2010. Or send it elsewhere for the rotation to a guy shooting around 32% from 3 instead. Great basketball.

            BTW, Rush was one of the few Pacers playing good defense out there. The best defense of any Pacer in fact. Of course part of that is due to Dahntay getting really burned at times. DJ is sometimes lazy about screens and spacing.



            BTW, for the Knicks:

            Walker looks good, fully recovered. Nice dunk and near dunk. Silky 3. That's the kid I loved at KSt. Boston never should have given up on him.

            Gallinari - zero defense, but very nice offensive player. Good pick.

            Barron - I'm coming around on him. Not a starting C, but a decent bench C for sure. Good moves for a guy with his length, pretty active defender. He gave Roy some trouble, gave other guys problems too.
            Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 04-07-2010, 10:50 PM.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
              Told my wife this was coming right before he did it. I noticed him getting into the game, seeing a spot where they needed him to assert himself.

              You know you could make a case about his lack of shots last game or part of this one, but in the context of the flow in both cases you didn't even notice. This is more like what he did at Kansas, he steps aside for others to be that guy. So he lets Danny have his shots without demanding the ball himself, but if he sees the wheels coming off he will step up and make plays.

              They had one easy score that came off his defense on the baseline at the other end. Not sure if he got the official steal credit but he created the TO that led to the break.



              Speaking of stats that don't show up, where's the "should have been an assist" for one of the greatest passes I've seen this year by a Pacer - Josh in the lane between his legs to Watson cutting BEHIND him. Then Earl blows the layup.

              I mean let's be fair here, the behind the head, behind the back and now between the legs passes were vintage Jax kinda stuff, and all 3 passes were on the money and directly created opportunities that weren't there without that type of pass.

              Like behind the head. He got into his man and by not having to have space to make the pass between him and his defender he was able to pin him off the play and hit the angle he otherwise wouldn't have had. The pass to Watson tonight came when it looked like NY had him trapped. The crowd gasped, it was that kind of play.

              That stuff isn't flashy playground junk, that's crafty 80's ball. I'm starting to think Josh might turn out even better than I used to think.


              What I didn't get is why JOB insisted on Troy late in the game when he was playing rather poorly. He padded his rebounds with a couple of tip drills (3 on one set of tip misses alone), got burned on several tough defensive boards (guess he only gets them if you leave him a clear path), and wasn't even lighting it up on offense.

              Price lost the ball, so I get him coming out. Roy wasn't sharp, so okay there. I want them to learn and develop, but okay JOB is in full-on win mode. But IMO Josh was outplaying Troy and would have helped a ton later in the game.


              Dun's tip into his own basket was dreadful, and a classic case of his limited vert hurting his game. It was darn near a perfect layup. And while Dun was able to go at Walker and get some nice scores, Walker also gave him the business quite a bit including some 3s when Dun dropped way off him.


              That F'n play. What the F was Earl thinking? Rush is just standing there wide open, Earl is fumbling for the ball. Um, hey, maybe get the ball to the dude that is heating up AND happens to be shooting something like 45% from 3 in 2010. Or send it elsewhere for the rotation to a guy shooting around 32% from 3 instead. Great basketball.

              BTW, Rush was one of the few Pacers playing good defense out there. The best defense of any Pacer in fact. Of course part of that is due to Dahntay getting really burned at times. DJ is sometimes lazy about screens and spacing.
              I agree 100% with everything you're saying about Rush.

              I've said this before, he needs a PG who can spread the floor because they'll be able to find Brandon wide open. A guy like Jack did just that and it appears AJ is bringing that type of PG play.

              I don't blame Brandon too much for his inconsistency. He's wide open half the time and like you said Earl is taking ridiculous shots that he's forcing himself to take because he won't give up the ball to Brandon.

              Brandon is definitly someone who can fit into this system. All he mainly does is shoot 3's and is a catch and shoot type of player.

              I don't think he gets enough credit for his defense. He always knows where his man is and is very good 1-on-1.

              So all in all, I hope we're able to bring in a good, reliable PG who can space the floor or just start AJ.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post

                Price lost the ball, so I get him coming out. Roy wasn't sharp, so okay there. I want them to learn and develop, but okay JOB is in full-on win mode. But IMO Josh was outplaying Troy and would have helped a ton later in the game.

                He should let the younger guys try to fight back, and get themselves into it, because at some point, he'll need them to know how to do that (or at least the Pacers will)

                I mean, with Roy it depends on the matchups, McBob just typically isn't in it..and AJ it depends on how he's playing. (Basically if the team was down by a bunch of points and AJ dragged the team back into it..he usually gets to finnish up crunch time..)

                But never, do I see those three lose a lead and then get to stay and fight it out. JOB runs to the vets...and yet, if the vets lose the lead, he sticks with them.

                He could see how AJ and Roy and Josh handle that now, instead of waiting until it counts..

                I also really think Brandon is an incredibly talanted basketball player. And could be an extremely good shooting guard for the Pacers. I mean, if they get an All star there, then so be it. But I'd take Brandon. I also love the way the three kids play together (Roy, Rush, and AJ) they work really well together, you can tell they like playing together. I think their personalities mesh really well too....and I think I'm starting to see Danny included into that group with them..which was important. (I think Josh plays well with everyone, but doesn't have any noticable chemistry with anyone either..like TJ/Murphy or in this case Roy/Rush/Price..perhaps he plays best with Earl..but just throwing it out there, I'm not saying he's not in our future plans, just that he's not really part of the unit that it seems that Roy/Rush/Price have formed)..anyway..I'd like to see them all together..In fact I'd love to see a game where AJ/Rush/Danny/Josh/Roy play the majority of the minutes together...just once..please JOB.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

                  The Good:

                  AJ looking good with the outside shot. The turnovers have been way down as of late and were again tonight. Danny continues to dominate, not by chucking away from the perimeter but by driving, and it looks like he has a better sense of when his team needs someone to step up and create their own shot.

                  The Bad:

                  It was the Troy Murphy show again tonight, and Hibbert was out of the game for such long stretches of time that I wondered if he'd gotten injured (he was not in foul trouble at all, before you ask). Rush seemed to be stuck on the bench too until I looked at the box score and saw that he was actually out there for 30 mins tonight, he just wasn't doing anything.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

                    What I didn't get is why JOB insisted on Troy late in the game when he was playing rather poorly. He padded his rebounds with a couple of tip drills (3 on one set of tip misses alone)
                    Obviously you were able to watch the game too so let me ask you. On that play early on were Troy went into the second row to save the ball, did he not swat that ball away from Danny (which caused it to sail towards the sideline)? I thought to give him the benefit of the doubt, but then as the game went on, I kept getting the impression that, on both ends of the court, he seemed more concerned with setting himself up for rebounds than anything else?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

                      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                      I don't know.

                      Whether JOB wants to play Price or not, Larry Bird has made it clear he likes AJ. And AJ has proven he, at the very least, can handle the backup role right now.

                      I'm sure the only issue though, is with Ford. We don't want Ford, so having Price as the only PG on the roster (and possibly Williams) we'd like to keep might be scary. Particularly if Ford plays as well this season as he did last season. Then our PG's become "terrible TJ, AJ..who will sort of be having another rookie season, and Williams..D Leaguer, who wasn't a PG until he played in the PG" ..could be a problem.

                      But still, if we don't have enough money to sign Earl Watson..how on earth would we have enough money to sign someone like Earl Watson.
                      If we don't draft a PG this year, and that doesn't look likely that we will, we have to find a way to resign Watson. TJ is gone at some point, if not in the offseason then before next year's trade deadline, so we'd probably end up signing another PG anyways. I'd rather we kept Watson than do that, he's been a good veteran presence on the team and his play is obviously helping everyone else. Splitting the minutes next year between Watson and AJ sounds like a good plan, until (if and when) AJ shows he's ready for starters minutes.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

                        Originally posted by ToasterBusVIP View Post
                        Obviously you were able to watch the game too so let me ask you. On that play early on were Troy went into the second row to save the ball, did he not swat that ball away from Danny (which caused it to sail towards the sideline)? I thought to give him the benefit of the doubt, but then as the game went on, I kept getting the impression that, on both ends of the court, he seemed more concerned with setting himself up for rebounds than anything else?
                        I noticed it too. On more than one occasion, I noticed him fight Danny for a board. Two of them nearly went out of bounds. One he dove for, and I think the other happened in the first quarter. He jumped out to save it and throw it back to Danny.

                        It's nearing the end of the season. Is he near some milestone that will kick in a bonus in his contract or something?
                        2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

                          I didn't even know there was a game tonight. I guess there wasn't one that mattered for any team playing...

                          Was it on TV?

                          GD Pacers...

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

                            Nope FSI pre-empted it for the world championship of underwater euro league grade school lacross...
                            http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
                            "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

                              Originally posted by ToasterBusVIP View Post
                              Obviously you were able to watch the game too so let me ask you. On that play early on were Troy went into the second row to save the ball, did he not swat that ball away from Danny (which caused it to sail towards the sideline)? I thought to give him the benefit of the doubt, but then as the game went on, I kept getting the impression that, on both ends of the court, he seemed more concerned with setting himself up for rebounds than anything else?
                              Yes. I laughed about this with my wife, pointing out that his heroics were self-created when he turned a routine rebound into a 3rd row event.

                              And the crowd goes wild. Sheesh. That play and Dun's defensive "rebound" tip that smacked the ball right back up and into the basket are lowlight reel material, not highlights.


                              Also Gnome was the one who confirmed the "3 rebounds on one set of tip misses" by Troy. Why? Well right before that was one uncontested DEF rebound that Danny had clearly but Troy also tried to get, except Danny didn't give it up to him. Troy kinda looked at him and off they went the other way.

                              In another part of the arena Gnome thinks the same exact thing I do, which is "there's Troy fighting his own player again" and this prompts him to check the stat board. Danny with his 4th rebound to tie Troy with 4.

                              Then that sequence unfolds on the offensive trip and now Troy has 7 on his tip drill. He texts me about it which is funny because I just remarked to my wife about both things - there's your designated rebounder* on the Danny thing and then that they probably credited him with a bunch of rebounds on the tips. I even looked up to see his totals change but they had already marked them up by that point.

                              So Gnome and I thought the exact same things about the exact same plays sitting on opposite ends of the court.





                              Sookie - I'm not saying take those guys out, I'm saying that if you are coming from the "win today" POV that JOB obviously is, then you take them out. Roy and AJ were struggling at that point, but Josh wasn't and Troy kinda was.

                              So then my issue is that he won't play a kid even when he's actually a clearly better option on the night.

                              Of course several of us (I know Anthem for sure) have been saying that this is often the case, that the kids give you a better chance to win anyway even if you don't want to develop them. That's like the cherry on top of the stupidity.




                              * BTW, true story here - my wife follows them very lightly. She knows about the McRoberts issue and that I want him to play, but couldn't tell you Luther Head from Dahntay Jones still.

                              So at the Houston game, totally unprompted by me, she asks "is he the designated rebounder"? It was an attempt by her to understand the game a bit, and she thought it was a specific role for a player because he takes all the uncontested ones. Of course I knew who she meant and just started laughing that as a very casual fan this even stood out to her.

                              Just when you think "well maybe I'm biased" you get some innocent verification that you aren't.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: 04/07/2010 Game Thread #78: Pacers vs Knicks

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                                Of course several of us (I know Anthem for sure) have been saying that this is often the case, that the kids give you a better chance to win anyway even if you don't want to develop them. That's like the cherry on top of the stupidity.
                                All of this season and a good bit of last season.
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X