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

The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

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

  • #61
    Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

    Originally posted by indyaway View Post
    Please make the pain stop... Makes you wonder how centers ever managed to score in the post before the invention of the "stretch 4".
    Different set of rules, different players, different game. The way the game is played evolves and the geometry of the game has changed quite a bit. If you wanted to duplicate the way the game was played 20 ago, you'd need not only the same rules that were in place back then but also a larger court.

    It's not like the stretch4 is some idiosyncrasy from a handful of coaches. Not all the teams use a 4out formation as much as Orlando, Indiana and Golden State, but you'd be hard pressed to find a couple of teams without a perimeter oriented 4/5 as a key cog in their big man rotation. And it's not going back.

    Originally posted by IndyPacer View Post
    A "stretch 4" also makes it hell to get offensive rebounds.
    Sure, but my point was more about how it impacts Hibbert's game from an individual perspective. A 4out1in system has, like any other type of formation, some positives and negatives.

    Anyway, offensive rebounding-wise I think the 2 largest factors are:
    - the quality of the rebounders individually.
    - how much transition defense is one willing to sacrifice in order to crash the board. I think the biggest problem for Indiana is that when they have Murphy+Hibbert together on the court they can't afford to crash the offensive board because it - but it's more about the slowness of the players, not the 4out system itself. For example, if it was an Ilyasova+Okafor combination it'd be completely different.

    Originally posted by IndyPacer View Post
    In addition, I'm still searching for the answer of how a "stretch 4" works without great slashers and when "going small." I thought the entire point of making the opponent pay with outside shots and stretching the D with outside shooting so you could capitalize inside with slashers and interior players attacking the basket. O'Brien doesn't care for traditional bigmen and doesn't have much in the way of slashers on this team. It just doesn't add up.
    Hmm... I think it's even more important when you lack great slashers. Makes life easier for not-so-good slashers. Not sure how can I explain my point of view. See Orlando, for example. Guys like Hedo and Nelson aren't great slashers, but they were able to look very good there getting inside off pick'n'roll situations due, to a large extent, to the spacing their typical formation provides. Once Howard rolls inside, they're left in a good situation to make plays or score because it's difficult for the other team to bring help in time. Guys like Wade, Rose or even Maggette, with some combination of quickness/first steps/footwork/advanced dribble moves need a degree of spacing but they don't need it to be accentuated that much.

    Why do you say O'Brien doesn't care for traditional big men? He has Hibbert as the traditional big man on the roster and he uses him as such. What exactly do you mean by traditional big man?

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

      Originally posted by count55
      there is absolutely no way to extend either Hibbert or Rush prior to the lockout.
      This is the key.

      So once again the personal relationships between the front office and the players, the coach and the players, etc. becomes all important.

      There's no way to make Hibbert stay beyond the lock-out. But a healthy locker room can make him want to stay.
      And I won't be here to see the day
      It all dries up and blows away
      I'd hang around just to see
      But they never had much use for me
      In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

        There is no way to know how the new CBA will effect our ability to retain Hibbert and Rush but our payroll position at the time will certainly put us in a better position then most teams. I don't think the new cba could make things more difficult for us solely because of our payroll position at the time. If there is indeed a hard cap we'll be in a real buyers market at the start of the 2011/12 season, or it may be the 2012/13 season if the lockout last that long.
        Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

          And it's not going back.
          Says a guy posting about how much the game has changed in the last 20 years...


          I'm not even trying to blast you nor would I suggest that the game hasn't evolved, but honestly 20 years is quite the exaggeration given Dale/Tony/Rik. Even the Perkins team in 2000 didn't feature him as a starter, that was still Dale/Rik. Rik might not have pounded guys into the rim, but he set up his shots from the low block, not the high PnR.

          And who was the major stretch PF for the Spurs? They attacked with Duncan on the low block constantly.

          I'd say that the 3 ball PF is as much a "wave of the future" as small ball, the triangle offense or any other style that comes and goes or only sticks with a few teams/coaches.

          Heck, Troy was part of that wave of guys considered to have gotten BAD deals based on this idea of rebounding and 3 shooting, much like Cardinal got.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

            Originally posted by Kemo View Post

            It is a good time to be a Pacers fan... whether you realize it yet or not .
            .
            This is what I've been missing on this site. I stopped looking in here last year (got into the Kings - great fans - and the Bucks - lots of good people - instead). You had one of the worst teams in the league last year, especially after the injuries - but you won 32 games; given healthy Granger, Dunleavy, Foster, and Hansbrough, that could easily have been 41.

            And yet around here there is mostly discontent! Dissatisfaction seems especially directed at the coaching staff, who did a heroic job in some pretty difficult circumstances. Even the Legend himself is no longer immune to the scorn of the armchair executives.

            This thing is working. You've got some young guys with potential, thanks to Larry, and as they mature and learn how to win, they'll either stay or get traded for difference-makers. The coaching staff has done a superb job of creating roles for everyone. I would have extended them, too.

            I love the Bucks, but I doubt their GM. I love the Kings, but I doubt their head coach (Carrill is consulting, though, so how bad could it be?). ThePacers have excellence at both spots, and yet the fans... So many whiners, so many pontificators!

            Enjoy the show, this thing is working!
            :
            :

            "Defense doesn't break down on the help, it breaks down on the recovery." - Chuck Daly

            "The first shot does not beat you." - Chuck Daly

            "To play defense and not foul is an art that must be mastered if you are going to be successful." - Chuck Daly

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

              Originally posted by flox View Post
              Do we have a traditional point guard? A point guard that can run halfcourt sets? How good is DG in halfcourt sets? How good is Murphy? Why is Rush better on a halfcourt set when he only shoots three's anyway? In what NBA world does Josh McRoberts warrant a part of a system to account for? I could see a system for maybe your star player(s), and a system for the 2nd unit or around a 6th man or unique sets, but Josh McRoberts? In what system is Josh better in than a high paced situation where we run the ball?

              Even if I give the fact that this is not a good system for these guys, then the question becomes: Why must we cater to players like McRoberts, Rush, and Hibbert? What if the offense we run is better for Granger/Murphy (which I suspect it is), who are currently the better players? I don't see a problem with that. Do you? If so- why? Why does Rush, McBob, and Hibbert deserve a better system for them OVER DG and Murphy? Running obviously is good for DG, and we should take advantage of the fact that DG is such a good shooter and offensive player.

              Why not focus on a guy who gave us 24.1 ppg with heel problems and Plantar Fascia- a foot problem so bad that it lead to a large dip in production for Parker and Duncan.

              What magical system do we have that makes our team better than it is right now? Running an offense through Roy? Heck no. Our offense should go through DG. Second option? I'd take Murphy's set threes at the top of the key over giving the ball to Roy. Third option? Sure, but thats only if we don't have a point guard. Given Roy 10% of the possessions is a ok number, and I personally still think that's a lot. Roy should not be counted on for us to get points, or to be a focal point of the offense.

              What system is better for the team right now? Surely not a halfcourt set? Surely not a grinding, in your face set. Who scores outside of Granger? If you assume Granger gives us 28, Hibbert gives us 17, and Murphy gives us 13, then we get to a magical number of 58. 55 points come from these players! Lets assume that this wonderful system gives Rush and McRoberts 15 and 7 points respectively, which is a huge stretch IMO. We then get to 80 points a game. The worst NBA offense last year (NJ) scored 92.37 points per game. The middle (15th) was 101.36 (SA). The Pacers were 16th!!?!?!!? at 100.76ppg. The average was 100.4ppg. So in this case, assuming we slow down the pace, we lose a lot of points, so lets say we score 95 ppg. So we need to find 15 ppg from somewhere, and lets say we find that pretty easily. Say we stay the same, and score 100.76ppg (very unlikely)

              So what about the defensive end?

              The best defensive team gave up 93.8 ppg. The middle team (the Wiz) gave up 101.0ppg. The league average gave up 100.4ppg. We gave up 103.8ppg.

              Lets assume that we somehow improve our PPG from the ratio of the 2nd to last season to the last season. 2 seasons ago our oPPG was 106.2. So this season ours was 103.8, an improvement of 2.4 ppg. So lets say our new system puts us to 101.4. Yay, we still lose games!

              Lets also assume that we got put to an average defensive team with this grinding style.

              Yay, our differential is now +.36 per game, ASSUMING we have the same offensive output from last season at a slower pace. (HIGHLY DOUBTFUL)

              So...in short, I cannot agree to these claims at all. A much slower and different system would have lead to MORE losses, not less.
              I knew you were out there somewhere O'Brien.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                Hibbert, Granger, George and Stephenson are the only untouchables on the team. Granted George and Stephenson still have to prove them selves, but Im highly optimistic we just had the best draft we've ever had. Rush is borderline untouchable because I think he makes the perfect 6th man with his defense and 3 point ability. Hansbrough could be but his health is a concern.

                So that leaves Hibbert and Granger as the only certain untouchables, with George and Stephenson untouchable at least for now until we see what they got. Also Rush should remain untouchable right now because the 3rd season is usually tell all for a wing IMO. He does play great defense and has a great 3 point shot. I think people severely undervalue him as a 6th man. I could see him winning 6th man of the year on a decent playoff team.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                  Originally posted by IndyPacer View Post
                  A "stretch 4" also makes it hell to get offensive rebounds.:
                  Not really. Opening up the floor, especially if you've got a 4 on your stretch 4, makes it hard for the defense to make a rebound perimeter. It magnifies the importance of team speed (ever wonder why Rondo gets so many?).
                  :

                  "Defense doesn't break down on the help, it breaks down on the recovery." - Chuck Daly

                  "The first shot does not beat you." - Chuck Daly

                  "To play defense and not foul is an art that must be mastered if you are going to be successful." - Chuck Daly

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                    Originally posted by O'Bird View Post
                    This is what I've been missing on this site. I stopped looking in here last year (got into the Kings - great fans - and the Bucks - lots of good people - instead). You had one of the worst teams in the league last year, especially after the injuries - but you won 32 games; given healthy Granger, Dunleavy, Foster, and Hansbrough, that could easily have been 41.

                    And yet around here there is mostly discontent! Dissatisfaction seems especially directed at the coaching staff, who did a heroic job in some pretty difficult circumstances. Even the Legend himself is no longer immune to the scorn of the armchair executives.

                    This thing is working. You've got some young guys with potential, thanks to Larry, and as they mature and learn how to win, they'll either stay or get traded for difference-makers. The coaching staff has done a superb job of creating roles for everyone. I would have extended them, too.

                    I love the Bucks, but I doubt their GM. I love the Kings, but I doubt their head coach (Carrill is consulting, though, so how bad could it be?). ThePacers have excellence at both spots, and yet the fans... So many whiners, so many pontificators!

                    Enjoy the show, this thing is working!
                    :
                    I share your optimism except for two things. Jim O'Brien and Troy Murphy. I will join you in the sunshine brigade as soon as these guys exit the franchise.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                      Originally posted by O'Bird View Post
                      Not really. Opening up the floor, especially if you've got a 4 on your stretch 4, makes it hard for the defense to make a rebound perimeter. It magnifies the importance of team speed (ever wonder why Rondo gets so many?).
                      Ahh, I see! If we only shoot 3 pointers then there will be long rebounds and then everyone will be in position to get the rebounds while being on the perimeter!

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                        Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                        Hibbert, Granger, George and Stephenson are the only untouchables on the team.
                        I don't think you know what untouchable means.
                        "man, PG has been really good."

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          And who was the major stretch PF for the Spurs?
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                            Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
                            Ahh, I see! If we only shoot 3 pointers then there will be long rebounds and then everyone will be in position to get the rebounds while being on the perimeter!

                            It's a myth that threes mean long rebounds (sorry, Bill Walton). I think that you misconstrued my use of the word "perimeter". A rebound perimeter is the circle your defense makes in the paint to make sure one of your guys gets the ball. That's why you "build out" the defense, so that your defensive perimeter protects the area where the rebound perimeter can be formed when the shot goes up.

                            Good offensive spacing pulls the defense apart; forcing a 4 to defend the arc takes a big out of the rebound perimeter.

                            Here's a quote from Chuck Daly, one of the masters: "Offense is spacing and spacing is offense."
                            :
                            :

                            "Defense doesn't break down on the help, it breaks down on the recovery." - Chuck Daly

                            "The first shot does not beat you." - Chuck Daly

                            "To play defense and not foul is an art that must be mastered if you are going to be successful." - Chuck Daly

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                              There's nothing wrong with a stretch 4 who can defend. .....so I have no problem with Sheed or Horry.

                              The problem with Murphy is not that his offensive game is almost totally perimeter. It's that he cannot defend my mother.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                                Originally posted by O'Bird View Post
                                It's a myth that threes mean long rebounds (sorry, Bill Walton). I think that you misconstrued my use of the word "perimeter". A rebound perimeter is the circle your defense makes in the paint to make sure one of your guys gets the ball. That's why you "build out" the defense, so that your defensive perimeter protects the area where the rebound perimeter can be formed when the shot goes up.

                                Good offensive spacing pulls the defense apart; forcing a 4 to defend the arc takes a big out of the rebound perimeter.

                                Here's a quote from Chuck Daly, one of the masters: "Offense is spacing and spacing is offense."
                                :
                                Chuck may have been good...and spacing is key...but a stretch 4 is not required to have spacing. Rik Smits and Dale Davis formed our best 4-5 combo in the last 20 years...and that team was all about offense with Rik being #2. A solid mid range game ala Charles Oakley and Antonio McDyess can be just as effective IMO.

                                So, a stretch 4 is hardly a prerequisite to winning. The Celtics lost with Sheed and Garnett and won with Perkins and Garnett. Also, I don't consider Odom's perimeter game to be the reason the Lakers dominate. Size in the middle along with Kobe are the reasons the Lakers are tough. The reality is, if a stretch 4 that cannot defend was all that valuable, Troy Murphy would not be on the trading block...or he would be out the door.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X