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

Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

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

  • #61
    Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

    It's a concern to every team because no one has a backup as good as the starter.

    Having said this, many of the postings in this thread that proclaim that Foster is "not healthy" lead me to believe that you posters know something that other folks, possibly even the Pacers medical staff, does not know. I doubt this is the case.

    Foster had a "procedure" done for his sore back. At no point during the games that he missed prior to this was there an announcement that he had actually injured himself. In fact, for at least a couple of these games, Vogel had said that Jeff had a sore back and indeed could have played, but they wanted to rest him.

    For all we know, the procedure may have been a pre-emptive move, or could have been done to alleviate chronic pain. Maybe he could have played, but why should he be in pain? There was nothing that I heard that indicated that Foster actually aggravated his condition in the last game he played this season.

    I could be wrong---maybe there is some info that I missed, but I think it is somewhat narrow-minded to think that LB did not know the risks vs. benefits of signing Foster. Yeah, sure, if we could add a quality big without breaking the bank or trading key players, great. But I have to believe that the grand plan is to ease Jeff back, give him his 12-15 minutes per game or play him when the matchup calls for it, and give him some games off so he is playoff-ready.

    I don't have any problems with Jeff not traveling for some away games. Long road trips cramped in a plane or bus seat don't do backs any favors, and Foster would not be the first older pro athlete not to travel on away contests.

    If the sky does start falling (that is, if Roy is going to ever miss a bunch of games), I've gotta believe that Larry will get us a big.
    Last edited by joeyd; 01-24-2012, 12:11 AM.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

      Originally posted by joeyd View Post
      It's a concern to every team because no one has a backup as good as the starter.
      No one has a backup as good as the starter, true.

      But some teams have legitimate backups. Denver has 4 Centers in its lineup (Nene, Mozgov, Andersen, Koufos).

      We have the blessing to have Roy as our big man who is the tallest player in the league behind Thabeet. If we could get another 7 footer (or well someone over 6'10") we would have an amazing frontcourt depth.

      Foster is amazing and I totally wanted us to sign him again. But since we plan to rest him for the playoffs (sounds legit to me), I'd like to have a 7 footer to fill when Roy needs to rest for a bit.

      Lou is nice but he is only 6'9". I think that we can certainly grab someone at 6'11" or 7'0" without breaking the bank or trade a key player. We could possibly grab Koufos or Kanter for cap space and maybe a pick and then we would have a legitimate Center who can score along our second unit.
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

        We don't need a big, in any sense than another big always helps. We need a scorer who can create his own shot coming off the bench. It's a shame we missed on Mayo, his price has probably doubled. In an ideal world, the scorer could play SF, but our personnel is flexible enough that a SG would work

        I think we're still in the market. It would be nice if Paul learned to dribble drive. Someone needs to tell him to bend over and keep a low dribble. His actual handle isn't bad, but his form doesn't work against pros. 6'9" guys coming in vertical are like fresh meat.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

          Originally posted by joeyd View Post

          lead me to believe that you posters know something that other folks, possibly even the Pacers medical staff, does not know. I doubt this is the case.

          I think it is somewhat narrow-minded to think that LB did not know the risks vs. benefits of signing Foster. Yeah, sure, if we could add a quality big without breaking the bank or trading key players, great. But I have to believe that the grand plan is to ease Jeff back, give him his 12-15 minutes per game or play him when the matchup calls for it, and give him some games off so he is playoff-ready.

          I don't have any problems with Jeff not traveling for some away games. Long road trips cramped in a plane or bus seat don't do backs any favors, and Foster would not be the first older pro athlete not to travel on away contests.

          If the sky does start falling (that is, if Roy is going to ever miss a bunch of games), I've gotta believe that Larry will get us a big.


          What we know is Foster got paid 6 mil the year b4 last for playing 16 games while out the rest of the season. We know Foster missed 26 games (31%) last season at 6.6 mil. We know Foster has a history of back problems that doesn't allow him to play. We know the odds of Foster playing much this compressed season isn't high. We understand the Pacers have loyalty to Foster, but we don't understand why Bird bet on Foster as being the B/U to Roy with what WE know. Bird's gamble on Foster isn't looking real smart.

          Bird bet on Foster being healthy, and he hasn't been. If Foster was playing a consistant 15 minutes each game, we wouldn't be wanting another quality b/u 5. There would be no need, but unfortunately that's not the way it is.

          I do have a problem with Foster not playing games. He's being paid to do a job, and that job is to be available for each and every game. Same as each of his fellow teammates.

          At this stage of the season if Hibbert went down, where is Bird going to find this new center to replace Hibbert when half the other NBA teams are looking for the samething?

          Figure out how much the last 2 seasons and this season that Foster has been paid for not playing. Loyalty works 2 ways, and Foster at this stage of the game with his health issues should have signed for the vet's mim instead of 3 mil considering all the money he was paid for not playing 88 games the last 2 seasons. 88 games not played and Bird didn't plan on Foster having health issues this year? Unbelieveable!! If Bird's b/u plan is Lou, Bird dropped the ball big time. That's not a smart FO decision, that's nothing but a poor odds gamble by Bird.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

            Originally posted by danman View Post
            We don't need a big, in any sense than another big always helps. We need a scorer who can create his own shot coming off the bench. It's a shame we missed on Mayo, his price has probably doubled. In an ideal world, the scorer could play SF, but our personnel is flexible enough that a SG would work

            I think we're still in the market. It would be nice if Paul learned to dribble drive. Someone needs to tell him to bend over and keep a low dribble. His actual handle isn't bad, but his form doesn't work against pros. 6'9" guys coming in vertical are like fresh meat.
            I watched Mayo at the Warriors game yesterday night, I was not too impressed....he really didn't do anything that stands out.

            If the cost was not too great, as in...not at the cost of a 1st round pick, I'd take him as a rental....but he doesn't appear to be a "difference maker" ( my price for the 1st round pick ).

            Sure, he's better than Inferno on the offensive end...but honestly, who isn't?
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

              Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
              What we know is Foster got paid 6 mil the year b4 last for playing 16 games while out the rest of the season. We know Foster missed 26 games (31%) last season at 6.6 mil. We know Foster has a history of back problems that doesn't allow him to play. We know the odds of Foster playing much this compressed season isn't high. We understand the Pacers have loyalty to Foster, but we don't understand why Bird bet on Foster as being the B/U to Roy with what WE know. Bird's gamble on Foster isn't looking real smart.

              Bird bet on Foster being healthy, and he hasn't been. If Foster was playing a consistant 15 minutes each game, we wouldn't be wanting another quality b/u 5. There would be no need, but unfortunately that's not the way it is.

              I do have a problem with Foster not playing games. He's being paid to do a job, and that job is to be available for each and every game. Same as each of his fellow teammates.

              At this stage of the season if Hibbert went down, where is Bird going to find this new center to replace Hibbert when half the other NBA teams are looking for the samething?

              Figure out how much the last 2 seasons and this season that Foster has been paid for not playing. Loyalty works 2 ways, and Foster at this stage of the game with his health issues should have signed for the vet's mim instead of 3 mil considering all the money he was paid for not playing 88 games the last 2 seasons. 88 games not played and Bird didn't plan on Foster having health issues this year? Unbelieveable!! If Bird's b/u plan is Lou, Bird dropped the ball big time. That's not a smart FO decision, that's nothing but a poor odds gamble by Bird.
              There's 2 points that you bring up here:

              1 ) The lack of "Healthy" depth in the Frontcourt to backup Hibbert and Bird's plan to address that during the last offseason and whether he will address it in the near future.

              2 ) Foster being paid to play when he clearly isn't healthy.

              I am ( obviously ) concerned about the "former"....but not as concerned about the "latter".

              I don't like that Foster has barely played and that his health is and has been a concern for the last couple of seasons. But let's be realistic about this....Foster is only paid $3 mil for 1 year. I don't have any problem paying a player of his caliber to stay and play in Indy as a "very expensive but clearly a difference maker, break in case of emergency" 4th Big Man to backup Hibbert/West/Hansbrough/????. I want depth at the frontcourt and having him as the 4th Big Man ( not the 3rd ) makes sense to me. Yes, he's paid $3 mil and I HATE that we are dependant on him more than we should be......but that's the cost to keep him. If we didn't have the capspace to take him on, I'd be concerned...but we did...so I have no problem with it.

              Both of us can agree upon the notion that we are royally screwed if Hibbert goes down and hope that the FO will address this sooner rather than later...but when it comes to Foster being paid what he was paid....I can let it go. Foster has IMHO earned it.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                I watched Mayo at the Warriors game yesterday night, I was not too impressed....he really didn't do anything that stands out.

                If the cost was not too great, as in...not at the cost of a 1st round pick, I'd take him as a rental....but he doesn't appear to be a "difference maker" ( my price for the 1st round pick ).

                Sure, he's better than Inferno on the offensive end...but honestly, who isn't?
                He's better than a lot of guys on the offensive end. In particular, he can create his own looks, and score in limited minutes. The pacers lack a plug in instant offense guy. Mayo would be a really nice fit.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

                  If Pacers were in a pinch, they would just call up that Famous kid from training camp. He is 6-11.

                  But yes i agree it would have been ideal to bring in a guy like Fesenko to back up Hibbert. Larry Bird is playing with matches. I will be very disappointed if we don't draft a high motor center in the upcoming draft.
                  You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

                    Originally posted by maragin View Post
                    Paging Stanko novelty account, paging Stanko novelty account...
                    Seriously, is he even an option next season?

                    or better yet...will he ever be an option?
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

                      Is it an issue? Sure... But it doesn't have to be addressed until we are really contending.. Lou and Foster when available isn't going to single-handedly cost us any games. If we had an uber talented backup center that would win us some games, sure, but Lou instead of Joel Pryzbilla isn't going to kill us.

                      Looks like Rush really had zero value. Lou is a good rebounder and can be counted on to play 100%, but nothing really else. Better than Solo and Posey though by a mile. Those guys will cost you some games if they're playing even spot minutes.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

                        We need a passing guard on the roster at least one on second unit. Every single guy we play wants to score other than Foster. Even a guy like Lance who has some assists when he's in there is still getting well over 10 Per-36 attempts up.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

                          Originally posted by danman View Post
                          We don't need a big, in any sense than another big always helps. We need a scorer who can create his own shot coming off the bench. It's a shame we missed on Mayo, his price has probably doubled. In an ideal world, the scorer could play SF, but our personnel is flexible enough that a SG would work

                          I think we're still in the market. It would be nice if Paul learned to dribble drive. Someone needs to tell him to bend over and keep a low dribble. His actual handle isn't bad, but his form doesn't work against pros. 6'9" guys coming in vertical are like fresh meat.

                          No we need a true low post player who has the ability to score in the second unit. We don't even need someone who is really good at scoring, just someone who other teams have to respect and can put up 8 to 10 points on their own (i.e. not offensive rebounds).

                          This team has players who can be scorers off of the bench. Price, Hill, Lance, and Jones all have the ability to create their own shot. In fact if it really is that big of a deal Jones actually wouldn't be that bad at teh job, but don't expect the offense to flow well or for Hansbrough or Hill to ever see the ball. The problem this bench has is it has too many scorers. To many guys who don't do much on offense unless they actually have the ball. In fact the only three who consistently play well without the ball on offense from our bench are Price (never gets to play), Hill, and Foster (nagging back problems). I don't think it is much of a surprise that as far as +/- goes our best bench group consists of those three players plus Jones and Hansbrough. Minus the starters and the starters plus Hill that is the group that displays the most balance between smarts, offensive skill, and defensive skill.

                          If there is one thing that I think has been Bird's and Vogel's biggest flaw to this point is they put too much focus on individual ability of individual players and not enough focus on players who don't have to be the center of attention to be effective. This is why George and Hansbrough became starters last year, they didn't even consider bringing back McRoberts, take advantage of Rush's skill set, play Price this season, and start Hill over George. Yes as an individual player guys like Lance and Hansbrough might be better than guys like Price and McRoberts, but from a team stand point those two guys and their skill sets make the team as a whole better. Put Price in there as the best offensive option, and he is going to struggle. Put him in their with Hansbrough and Hill he is going to play well and help those two to play better. While guys like Hansbrough and Lance might thrive as the best option on the court, but struggle to do much when there are other much better options than themselves. That is what people like Sookie and I have been harping on about. We don't look at this game from an individual perspective, but from a team perspective. From that perspective you see value in players who might not stack up in a vacuum, but do those things that make your team as a whole better.


                          /end rant

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

                            Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                            No we need a true low post player who has the ability to score in the second unit. We don't even need someone who is really good at scoring, just someone who other teams have to respect and can put up 8 to 10 points on their own (i.e. not offensive rebounds).

                            This team has players who can be scorers off of the bench. Price, Hill, Lance, and Jones all have the ability to create their own shot. In fact if it really is that big of a deal Jones actually wouldn't be that bad at teh job, but don't expect the offense to flow well or for Hansbrough or Hill to ever see the ball. The problem this bench has is it has too many scorers. To many guys who don't do much on offense unless they actually have the ball. In fact the only three who consistently play well without the ball on offense from our bench are Price (never gets to play), Hill, and Foster (nagging back problems). I don't think it is much of a surprise that as far as +/- goes our best bench group consists of those three players plus Jones and Hansbrough. Minus the starters and the starters plus Hill that is the group that displays the most balance between smarts, offensive skill, and defensive skill.

                            If there is one thing that I think has been Bird's and Vogel's biggest flaw to this point is they put too much focus on individual ability of individual players and not enough focus on players who don't have to be the center of attention to be effective. This is why George and Hansbrough became starters last year, they didn't even consider bringing back McRoberts, take advantage of Rush's skill set, play Price this season, and start Hill over George. Yes as an individual player guys like Lance and Hansbrough might be better than guys like Price and McRoberts, but from a team stand point those two guys and their skill sets make the team as a whole better. Put Price in there as the best offensive option, and he is going to struggle. Put him in their with Hansbrough and Hill he is going to play well and help those two to play better. While guys like Hansbrough and Lance might thrive as the best option on the court, but struggle to do much when there are other much better options than themselves. That is what people like Sookie and I have been harping on about. We don't look at this game from an individual perspective, but from a team perspective. From that perspective you see value in players who might not stack up in a vacuum, but do those things that make your team as a whole better.


                            /end rant
                            Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Price, Hill, Lance, and Jones are not particularly good at creating shots for themselves (perhaps Lance will be some day, but he's got a lot of spazz in his game right now). None constitute what I would call instant offense off the bench.

                            As far as playing the rotation that we're playing, I think the results speak for themselves.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

                              Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                              No we need a true low post player who has the ability to score in the second unit. We don't even need someone who is really good at scoring, just someone who other teams have to respect and can put up 8 to 10 points on their own (i.e. not offensive rebounds).
                              You talk about needing this player and also talk about not bringing back Josh, but Josh isn't this player you describe.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Is lack of Frontcourt depth at the Backup Center spot a concern?

                                Originally posted by danman View Post
                                Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Price, Hill, Lance, and Jones are not particularly good at creating shots for themselves (perhaps Lance will be some day, but he's got a lot of spazz in his game right now). None constitute what I would call instant offense off the bench.

                                As far as playing the rotation that we're playing, I think the results speak for themselves.
                                Hey my dog(a kinda crazy border collie named spazz) resents that.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X