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

ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

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

  • #61
    Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

    Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
    That exclamation point should belong next to Dunleavy Jr.

    He has no business starting for this team.
    No? In '06-'07, Duns played in all 82 games and averaged 19 points, 5 rebounds, and 3.5 assists. He also shot 42% from three. Those are definitely starter's numbers.

    '07-'08 was obviously a throw away (he only played 18 games), and clearly he was not remotely close to 100% with the knee last season either.

    History has shown that a completely healthy Dunleavy is far more effective than Rush will likely ever be. If Dunleavy comes into training camp at 100% this year (and granted that may be a big if), then I see no reason at all why he wouldn't have a good chance to win the starting SG job.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

      Originally posted by bphil View Post
      No? In '06-'07, Duns played in all 82 games and averaged 19 points, 5 rebounds, and 3.5 assists. He also shot 42% from three. Those are definitely starter's numbers.

      '07-'08 was obviously a throw away (he only played 18 games), and clearly he was not remotely close to 100% with the knee last season either.

      History has shown that a completely healthy Dunleavy is far more effective than Rush will likely ever be. If Dunleavy comes into training camp at 100% this year (and granted that may be a big if), then I see no reason at all why he wouldn't have a good chance to win the starting SG job.
      That was three years ago, three years ago in basketball is a long time, I don't think Dunleavy is ever going to be able to be the guy we saw that year.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

        And he still couldn't defend guards very well during that season. He gave up as much (if not more) as he got. I hope he's in position to win one of the starting forward spots, but I don't want him in the backcourt.
        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
          And he still couldn't defend guards very well during that season. He gave up as much (if not more) as he got. I hope he's in position to win one of the starting forward spots, but I don't want him in the backcourt.
          It is a little bit of a myth to suggest that Dunleavy was defending guards. What the Pacers did was put Granger on who ever the better offensive player was, either the shooting guard or small forward. Dunleavy was at the time our best team defender (much better than Danny especially back then) and he was our leader in taking charges and I believe one of the league leaders.

          I always said that Dunleavy was at worst status quo on defense, what he gave in his one-on-one matchup, he made up for in the team defense.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

            The only thing I will say is that Mike Dunleavy was a better defender than Troy Murphy.

            As for "fronting the post"... J... I think my statement was a bit quirky. I think both of those things are very important. I definitely prefer to not front the post, but it definitely needs to be something that post defenders are proficient at when necessay. In an instance where Jeff is matched up against Shaq, fronting the post to prevent the entry pass is important because Shaq estbalishes post position so easily. In that instance Jeff is completely outmatched and relies on fronting the post (similar to Duncan who scores from anywhere). I would rather he body the post to prevent a better shot, but that isn't always the best option. If you can mix and match your defensive attack, it can help keep the offensive player on his heels. Jeff IMO won't be the same Jeff that we were used to, but at the same time Jeff wasn't an elite defender either. He was amazing at making the most of his ability however.

            It is imperative that you body the post well, but it helps to be capable of creating turnovers by fronting the post. That turnover may require some help defense hopefully without creating a foul. Like you said, in spurts or to change things up where you have a poor offensive post player or when you are completely outmatched, it may warrant the fronting of the post.
            "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

            Comment


            • #66
              Chocolate or Vanilla - choose. I'll take both.

              Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
              The following are serious, honest questions that I would like your insights on. Plainly, you spend substantial time following the team at the very least, and are capable of expressing complex thoughts in your writing, and despite my previous rants in your direction, I do value your views on the franchise.
              I am struck and moved by your generosity of heart, if I may use a grandiose expression like that. Actually, I knew you had it in you, even when you sounded like a complainer, and it’s very much to your credit that you reach “across the aisle” in this way - you’re a bigger man than I am. At least for one day!

              Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
              In your opinion, what do we, as jaded Pacers fans who don't share your vision, need to focus on to see the defensive improvements that you refer to?
              You say “jaded” - okay, I’ll buy it. But other factors come into play - people repeat what they hear other people say, for instance, and are reinforced by a lot of people professing an idea - for instance, that the Pacers don’t play defense. That’s dead wrong, but as I said in my last post, if you can’t see it when they play then there’s not much point in arguing about it.

              To see team defense, you (and by “you” I mean anyone) have to keep your eye off the ball, overturning the old cliche. Then you’ve got to look at the spaces instead of the individuals (Larry Brown is legendary for being able to see where everyone is all the time). A lot of us have heard about spacing the floor on offense - but of course the defense is trying to prevent good offensive spacing, so to see team defense you look at the negative of that. That probably sounds peculiar and maybe doesn’t even make sense to a lot of people, but there you go.

              Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
              Also, why did the team seem to come around somewhat when Danny went down with his injury after his plantar fascia finally ruptured, and then seemed to gel down the stretch even in a few games that, despite conventional wisdom, still held meaning at times for a few teams involved due to their playoff implications for the opposition, other than Danny getting healthier?
              “Why” is not a simple question to answer. Complacency tends to set in toward the end of a season as playoff fates are sealed (one way or another), and everyone is hurt and tired, including the coaches. I’ll only say that I think that to counter that you’ve got to have leadership. Somebody has got to step forward and both create inspiration and demand accountability in the face of adversity. My personal belief is that you’ve got to have both player leadership and coaching leadership; and that leadership is less telling someone what to do than creating opportunities for them to use what they’ve got.

              Another discussion for another day... For now, I think that what you’ve noticed (it happened the year before, too) is cause for hope going forward.

              Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
              And, why do you believe that the Pacers are stronger defensively than they are offensively? And, what do you believe the team needs to do to improve offensively beyond individual players working on individual skills, in an effort to execute the offense more effectively than it has been during the last three years? Do you believe that we will see improvement this year, and, if so, why?
              Frankly, I don’t think that it’s a question of belief; team defense is easy to measure, or at any rate a team’s ability to prevent the other team from scoring is easy, and the more possessions you can include in what you look at, the more you know how good the defense “is”. And of course this is yet another case of it depending on what the meaning of “is” is. What I mean is: for last season as a whole the Pacers were a significantly better defensive team than the previous season, and a much better defensive team than offensive team. Okay good, that’s clear.

              That’s looking at a team’s defense as a black box, at the final result, that is to say, with no regard for how it was done.

              Defense is stopping the other team from scoring, right? For that to mean anything, you have to look at this: for every time the other team gets the ball, how many points, on average, do they score? You have to look at it per possession, because a possession is a scoring opportunity. Some games have more scoring opportunities than others, so the crucial unit is the possession, not the whole game. That also means that in a quick tempo game (meaning, with a lot of possessions) both teams get more scoring opportunities, so they also have to defend more possessions.

              So how’d the Pacers do? They went from 19th in 2009 (106.5 points per 100 possessions) to 15th in 2010 (104.2 per). They were average. Basketball Reference has them 14th; the difference is in how they calculate possessions - whatever, they were average. If they’d accomplished 104.2 in 2009 they would have been 10th in the league, by the way; they advanced, in other words, by more than their climb in the league rankings shows.

              Another way to look at the difference, showing how significant a jump that was, is to look at the range between the best and worst teams: Charlotte/Orlando to Toronto was 10.0 points, so a jump of 2.3 is pretty big.

              That’s the black box. What we want to do is look inside the box, though.

              Remember that what we’re interested in is team defense rather than individual defense. Posters on Pacers Digest are almost exclusively commenting on this or that individual’s capability (for example, trying to determine if Troy Murphy is the worst defender in history or merely the worst in the last decade... having said that, I probably need to make sure that you know that I’m being facetious; he isn’t by any stretch that bad). By the way, Mike Dunleavy is an excellent team defender, and was this year, despite being on a rehabbing knee and not hugely athletic to begin with.

              How can you look at such a thing objectively? That is to say, one part of any team defense is just staying in front of your man and contesting the shot (the Pacers do track contests, by the way); but you don’t get any “team defense dividend” from that - it’s just a matter of a defender staying in front of his man. Team defense has to be evaluated in terms of what happens when a man gets beat and needs help, because that sets up a domino effect, potentially, where the ball winds up at the front of the rim. Bad. NBA players are some awesome offensive machines, so defenders get beat; it’s just the way it is, and the rules promote it. So a good team defense has got to provide effective help and expeditious recovery. That means hard work and not a lot of recognition, because the fans don’t see it, the message boarders don’t see it, SportsCenter doesn’t see it, only your coaches and teammates see it. If a team is going to work hard down the stretch of games and of a season, they’ve got to have leadership from both coaches and teammates.

              I mentioned getting to the front of the rim - that’s the holy grail of any offense, including the Pacers’ - I hear murmurs here, and I’d be glad to take that up in another post; that’s something I stand by and am prepared to justify. In any case, if you’re going to evaluate a team defense, you’ve got to give some consideration to how often opponents get to the front of the rim against it, and how well they do when they get there. There’s another thing that’s particularly revealing: just how are opponents getting there? In other words, is it through a one-on-one move, or is it set up by a pass in the flow of the offense? If more the latter, then the defense is not handling organized team offense, in particular pick and rolls. Let’s take a look.

              First of all attempts. Indy was 8th fewest in the league at 25.0 per game. I don’t have per possession data, so given that the Pacers played the second quickest tempo it’s certain that Indiana was one of the very best teams at keeping opponents from shooting dunks and layups and tip-ins, and that’s even with their weakness on the defensive board. Percentage? 7th in the league. What about that other consideration - how many shots at the rim were assisted? Indiana led the league for fewest. This shows you that opponents found it difficult to set up a play to the rim with a pass. That aspect of team defense, at least, functioned very well last year.

              You’ve heard tell that Jim O’Brien wants his team to take open three-pointers by guys who can make them (so does Larry Bird: “I’m like Jimmy, I want to run and shoot a lot of threes.”). Given that, you’d expect that he’d also value stopping the threes on the defensive end. How’s that working out?

              Attempts: 8th, per game (again bearing in mind that the Pacers have more possessions per game than anyone except for GS). Percentage: not so good, 21st. So they were good at minimizing the shots but weak at contesting, which is a conclusion supported by the assist %: .867, 20th in the league.

              There’s been a growing recognition that taking a lot of long midrange jumpers is the worst way to run an efficient offense. Indiana led the league in the number of opponents’ 16-23 footers. That tells us something very interesting about the Pacers’ team defense; it allows only a low number of three-point attempts, but a high number of long twos. That CANNOT happen by accident, or from a lackluster team that isn’t motivated to defend, since a slow buildout would mean the opposite. In other words, it is not a matter of them being slow at pursuit and closeout, since they’re preventing the more distant (and more valuable) three-pointers and allowing the low-value long twos.

              There’s a lot more to be gleaned from the shooting data, and we should at least briefly take a look at the other factors of defense; but first a perspective comment: looking back to training camp 2009, Jim said that if they could be a top ten team in field goal defense, they’d make the playoffs. He may have been right; but they finished 13th so we’ll never know. If you factor in the value of made 3’s (i.e., eFG%), the Pacers were a more respectable 10th - that’s the value of allowing few three-point attempts, despite the poor % they allowed.

              Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
              Also, with the coaching staff having done such a fine job given the adversities the franchise has faced, why has there been a seemingly high turnover rate amongst the ranks of the assistant coaches during this offseason?
              By my count, two coaches have left. Vogel, Burke, and Jay DeFruscio are still there, and Frank Vogel goes way, way back (he was video coordinator at Kentucky). Harter and Conner are gone.

              I don’t know them and I was not there. Having said that, Dick Harter will be 80 years old in October; I was amazed when he came out of retirement to join O’Brien to begin with. Obviously the guy is a lifer, but it’s a pretty rugged life. I’m guessing that he was not participating in the 1AM post-game video sessions, but the constant travel, irregular hours, and family separation are unavoidable in this job.

              Dick Harter needs an encomium, because people on Pacers Digest don’t seem to know who he is, or who he has been for the modern game of Pro Basketball. He’s one of the chief architects of the way defense is played today - and maybe the most important of them - having been the originator of the defense for the ‘80s Pistons and the ‘90s Knicks.

              You’ll remember that toward the end of the 2009 season Jim identified Conner as head coach material, and he took over when Jim was gone. He seems to have left awkwardly; if I had to guess, I’d say it had something to do with the TJ Ford situation, but as I say I wasn’t there. I wish him luck.


              Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
              A more educated fanbase would probably be a more satisfied and understanding fanbase, and perhaps it is a worthwhile effort to more fully explain why things have taken the course they have, which has been, in the opinion of many here, divergent from conventional wisdom with respect to a rebuilding franchise for the last three years. If "This thing is working®", please let us in on why you truly believe that. We want to believe, we just haven't seen things the same way you have for the most part.
              Morway compared trading Jermaine O’Neal, or rather his contract, to “turning an aircraft carrier” - they had to take back a couple of bad contracts, handicapping them until 2011; still, it was a good and necessary accomplishment to do it, and deciding to do that was the decisive step that put them past the part of the cycle where you’re adding pieces to the part where you’re acquiring assets. The silver lining was that they got Roy Hibbert out of the deal, and it looks like his upside may be starter or at least rotation player on a contender.

              Is the conventional wisdom you mention something like, “getting bad to get good”? If so, I’ll never subscribe to that, and my poster child for that is the Los Angeles Lakers.

              The cycles teams go through are inevitable, as injuries, aging, management miscalculations, and plain chance (not excepting brawls and bad behavior) turn the wheel of fortune. The question when the wheel is going down is, more than anything: are you managing your financial structure so that you can make a move when you need to? The answer for Indiana is, yes, very much so.

              Fans tend to focus on the ability to sign an unrestricted free agent superstar, but getting under the cap also makes it much easier to get a superstar through a trade as well; and if you’ve done well in acquiring promising young players and developing their potential, it allows you to sign them for good money.

              I think that the Pacers have drafted very well and haven’t gone crazy trying to get a quick fix that makes them a perennial seventh seed. AJ Price is a second-rounder with rotation on a contender upside, excellent lateral quicks, can shoot it, and is careful with the ball.

              Rush? The old wisdom is that you don’t know what you’ve got until the third year; Bird says it’s “make or break” for young Brandon, and he’ll get his chance. He’s been a liability on offense; some guys never put it all together, but he’s got a chance to be very, very good.

              Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
              Also, please share with us your vision of what we should expect to see changing as the next year unfolds to further improve on the successes that have, in your opinion, been achieved thus far, and what you would like to see from a talent improvement standpoint that has not already occurred, and whether you believe that our current young players can develop into any of the future talent needs of the franchise based on your personal observations.
              By “vision”, I take it you mean my prediction, or perhaps something like, “what to look for as the significant benchmarks of improvement.”

              Average defensive rebounding is a reachable goal; the whole team needs to make sure it happens, but Roy Hibbert has got to be the one who makes it his business to get every defensive board, especially now that Murphy is gone.

              Collison has a ton of capability to pressure the ball and stay in front of even the quickest points; that’ll help with the foul problem - that, and growth by Hibbert and Rush in help defense.

              Post defense has got to be better; again, I look for growth from Hibbert, but the return of Jeff Foster would help immensely. I think that Tyler will have a lot to offer in this area, too; his defense was surprisingly good for a rookie, especially considering he was almost never fully healthy.

              On offense, the number one issue is turnovers. Collison/Price is already going to give you a significant improvement over Watson/Ford/Price, and with Collison being a legitimate threat from anywhere in the front court, the rest of the team will find it easier to find open shots and move the ball, which should also improve the turnover situation.

              Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
              Thank you in advance for any views that you would like to share regarding my queries above.
              You are most courteous.

              And, er, Go Pacers.
              Last edited by O'Bird; 08-28-2010, 01:58 PM. Reason: s
              :

              "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


              • #67
                Chocolate or Vanilla - choose. I'll take both.

                Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                O'Bird, who seems to be a masked man of sorts, knows more about the inside workings of our team more than he or she lets on.
                He.

                Not sure where you're going with that, but I am not employed by the Pacers.

                Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                It almost seems as though he/she is an apologist for our coach.
                Let's say that I think that he's been wrongly judged. I think he's done a lot with a little in the three NBA franchises he's been with. The next question is, can he do it without Harter; and the one after that is, is he as great a leader of men as Phil Jackson or Red Auerbach or Pat Riley or Chuck Daly or Popovich.

                I don't know those answers, but we'll have a good idea about the first by the All-Star break, I am sure.

                Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                The funny thing is that I have always thought that we have to play to win the games. Every game.
                Totally, completely agree.
                :
                :

                "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


                • #68
                  Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

                  speaking of "offseason buzzes"


                  lmao...
                  .
                  "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    It is a little bit of a myth to suggest that Dunleavy was defending guards. What the Pacers did was put Granger on who ever the better offensive player was, either the shooting guard or small forward. Dunleavy was at the time our best team defender (much better than Danny especially back then) and he was our leader in taking charges and I believe one of the league leaders.

                    I always said that Dunleavy was at worst status quo on defense, what he gave in his one-on-one matchup, he made up for in the team defense.
                    I missed this before, and I agree with it. Actually I think that Mike was a plus defender before surgery, and slightly minus last year; he was still significantly plus on offense last year, but nowhere near '07-'08.

                    Love the guy and his game, but they should trade him.
                    :
                    :

                    "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


                    • #70
                      Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

                      Originally posted by O'Bird View Post
                      I missed this before, and I agree with it. Actually I think that Mike was a plus defender before surgery, and slightly minus last year; he was still significantly plus on offense last year, but nowhere near '07-'08.

                      Love the guy and his game, but they should trade him.
                      :
                      Who would you suggest they trade him for?

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: ESPN Insider: NBA Offseason Buzz: Teams 25-30

                        Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                        Who would you suggest they trade him for?
                        Someone in the 20 percent who doesn't smoke weed.
                        Last edited by McKeyFan; 08-30-2010, 08:24 AM.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X