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

Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

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

  • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
    Yes, Granger was more polished four seasons ago at age 26 (the prime of his career) than PG was last year at age 22. Of course PG was a bit "clunky" at times. He was 22 years old and his role on the team basically changed overnight. All of the sudden, he was asked to be the best player on the team, and he responded very very well for the most part. He topped it off with a beautiful 19PPG on 49% shooting effort against the Heat. I'll bet on PG to continue to improve next season.
    Yeah, I wasn't trying to put down George. I was trying to point out how good Granger is as many people on this board like you seem to forget.

    Comment


    • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
      Yeah, I wasn't trying to put down George. I was trying to point out how good Granger is as many people on this board like you seem to forget.

      No, you're pointing out how good Granger was. I've never disputed that he was good five, four, or even two years ago. But he hasn't played consistent competitive basketball in a year and a half. A video from the 09-10 season has no bearing on how he will look in 13-14 after this injury. I'm not saying that he can't be a good player again, but a four year old video isn't going to convince me of anything other than how good he used to be.

      Comment


      • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
        Yep. I have no doubt PG will improve, and I look forward to it.

        I wish we could enjoy both players without setting up arbitrary competitions between them. They're both great guys, and I wish it was possible to keep them both as Pacers.
        This. We don't need to be set up in different camps. I think the world of PG and Lance. I just also think Granger is a valuable player as well. It's not like we're talking about the old guard vs the new as when Miller was playing out his final years. Granger may still have many highly productive years left IF his knees come back. I hate getting into these conversations and feeling like I'm arguing AGAINST Lance when I'm just trying to support Granger. (Heck... I made excuses for Lance for some pretty reprehensible things.)

        Comment


        • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
          No, you're pointing out how good Granger was. I've never disputed that he was good five, four, or even two years ago. But he hasn't played consistent competitive basketball in a year and a half. A video from the 09-10 season has no bearing on how he will look in 13-14 after this injury. I'm not saying that he can't be a good player again, but a four year old video isn't going to convince me of anything other than how good he used to be.
          Ok, so he was good before the injury, so why are we assuming he won't be as good after the injury? Cause he will be rusty when he first comes back? Or cause it means your boy Lance won't get to start? Even after the knee injuries JO was still a good player when he played, he didn't turn into a bad player when he was actually healthy, his problem was he couldn't stay healthy anymore. Look at David West, he is as good as ever. Injuries don't mean loss of skill or even athletic ability for that matter.

          Comment


          • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

            Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
            Ok, so he was good before the injury, so why are we assuming he won't be as good after the injury? Cause he will be rusty when he first comes back? Or cause it means your boy Lance won't get to start? Even after the knee injuries JO was still a good player when he played, he didn't turn into a bad player when he was actually healthy, his problem was he couldn't stay healthy anymore. Look at David West, he is as good as ever. Injuries don't mean loss of skill or even athletic ability for that matter.
            I'm not assuming anything. But the fact that he missed 76 games and looked terrible in the 5 he played is definitely cause for concern. It's enough of a red flag that I'm not going to consider him to still be at his 2010 form without seeing him play first.

            I've said all along that no one knows anything about where he is until he plays consistent NBA games. I don't think that this is an outlandish stance to take. If he is a better player than Lance, then he should start over Lance. But that decision should not be based off of a youtube video from March 2010.

            Comment


            • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

              Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
              Look at David West, he is as good as ever. Injuries don't mean loss of skill or even athletic ability for that matter.
              Obviously you didn't get the memo. David West and his torn ACL isn't a good comparison. Gilbert Arenas, and his torn ACL, is a good example though so that should be your comparison, simply because Arenas never came back.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                I've said all along that no one knows anything about where he is until he plays consistent NBA games. I don't think that this is an outlandish stance to take. If he is a better player than Lance, then he should start over Lance. But that decision should not be based off of a youtube video from March 2010.
                Sure, that's reasonable. But the purpose of the video wasn't to predict what he'll be doing next month. The video was posted not to show what post-injury Danny will look like, but rather to refute the claim that Danny Granger is a "one-dimensional" player.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                  Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                  I'm not assuming anything. But the fact that he missed 76 games and looked terrible in the 5 he played is definitely cause for concern. It's enough of a red flag that I'm not going to consider him to still be at his 2010 form without seeing him play first.

                  I've said all along that no one knows anything about where he is until he plays consistent NBA games. I don't think that this is an outlandish stance to take. If he is a better player than Lance, then he should start over Lance. But that decision should not be based off of a youtube video from March 2010.
                  How well Granger will play is rather predictable relative to how healthy he is. The only question is how healthy he is. I have no idea how healthy he will be, but I do know if he is healthy he isn't going to suddenly be a worse player.

                  BTW just cause he is better than Lance doesn't mean he should start over Lance.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                    Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                    How well Granger will play is rather predictable relative to how healthy he is. The only question is how healthy he is. I have no idea how healthy he will be, but I do know if he is healthy he isn't going to suddenly be a worse player.

                    BTW just cause he is better than Lance doesn't mean he should start over Lance.

                    I really don't think we're that far apart on this. I agree that if healthy, he will be a very productive player for the Pacers.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                      I really don't think we're that far apart on this. I agree that if healthy, he will be a very productive player for the Pacers.
                      LOCK THE THREAD!!!! BEFORE "ANYONE ELSE" POSTS!!!!!

                      Comment


                      • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                        No, you're pointing out how good Granger was. I've never disputed that he was good five, four, or even two years ago. But he hasn't played consistent competitive basketball in a year and a half. A video from the 09-10 season has no bearing on how he will look in 13-14 after this injury. I'm not saying that he can't be a good player again, but a four year old video isn't going to convince me of anything other than how good he used to be.
                        Not sure where you're getting the idea that this was supposed to show us anything currently about Danny Granger. The idea was submitted that he was (as in always was) a one dimensional scorer. I just found video of one game that showed him scoring in a variety of ways to refute that notion. There are several other video's out there showing Danny hitting all kinds of shots as well but I just stuck to one.

                        That was in no way a video to predict future success just to show that he is not just a three point shooter.

                        Edit: Or what Anthem said.


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

                        Comment


                        • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                          Now the Star takes up the discussion.
                          http://www.indystar.com/interactive/...a-Pacers-start-












                          Lance Stephenson vs. Danny Granger: Who should the Indiana Pacers start?



                          The Indiana Pacers enter training camp with four of their starters crystal clear: Paul George, David West, Roy Hibbert and George Hill.
                          The fifth spot is less clear. Danny Granger is back after playing in just five games last season because of a knee injury, but he led the team in scoring the five previous seasons. Lance Stephenson made huge strides last season and did it primarily starting in the backcourt next to Hill. He may not be quite as effective offensively as Granger yet, but showed he can play on the wing.
                          Plus, he continued his strong play into the playoffs, most notably when he scored 25 points, grabbed 10 rebounds and committed no turnovers in a Game Six road victory over the New York Knicks that clinched an Eastern Conference semifinal series victory for the Pacers.
                          If healthy, Granger figures to have the edge because of his experience, but here are reasons to argue for both with practice beginning Saturday:
                          Granger

                          • Pacers president Larry Bird and coach Frank Vogel think George can handle the off-guard spot on a more regular basis, freeing Granger to play his traditional wing position. At his best, Granger burns opposing teams with the 3-pointer or on the drive. If he continues to do that, it open things up and should make George even more effective offensively.
                          • Bird also thinks George will be able to handle many defensive responsibilities that Granger had to take on for less talented Pacers teams in the past. In other words, he can concentrate more on what he does best: score.
                          • Granger should be plenty motivated this season. It’s the final year of his contract and he’s almost certain to become a free agent. The Pacers can’t afford him and, frankly, would be crazy to even consider making an offer until convinced he’s healthy. He’ll be 31 next April — still young enough to earn elite-level money, especially if he’s a major contributor to a championship-level team.
                          • The Pacers need to improve their outside shooting. They have a better chance to do that with Granger on the floor than Stephenson.
                          Stephenson

                          • He struggled so much during his first two seasons as a reserve (averaging 3.1 and 2.5 points in limited playing time) that it’s fair to wonder how he would react to coming off the bench. Stephenson said this summer that he’s fine with whatever role the coaches decide on. But he had improved so much by season’s end and showed so much more maturity that some fans understandably ask, “Why mess with a good thing?”
                          • No player on the roster plays with more of an edge. West is the veteran leader, but Stephenson is the guy that really gets under the opposing team’s collective skin. The Pacers need that. It gives them energy.
                          • With Stephenson on the floor, the Pacers will be better suited to take advantage of George’s versatility. You don’t have to worry about him playing the No. 2 spot (either Stephenson or Hill could play it) and you can move George all over the floor to take better advantage of his defensive skills.
                          • Granger is more mature at this stage of his career. A veteran player probably can handle coming off the bench better than a young one. The Pacers are asking newly-acquired Luis Scola to make a similar transition, going from a starter for most of his career to a reserve role. Why not Granger
                          Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                            Originally posted by Peck View Post
                            Not sure where you're getting the idea that this was supposed to show us anything currently about Danny Granger. The idea was submitted that he was (as in always was) a one dimensional scorer. I just found video of one game that showed him scoring in a variety of ways to refute that notion. There are several other video's out there showing Danny hitting all kinds of shots as well but I just stuck to one.

                            That was in no way a video to predict future success just to show that he is not just a three point shooter.

                            Edit: Or what Anthem said.

                            Peck, I know that you weren't trying to show us anything current about Granger. But in post 448, Eleazer said:

                            I think this video really shows how much more polished Granger is offensively than George was last year.

                            I responded by simply saying that of course a 26 year old Granger in the prime of his career was more polished than a 22 year old George who was playing his first season as the main offensive option. Eleazer then responded in 451 by saying that people like me seem to forget how good Granger is. I replied to that with the post that you quoted. My point in that post wasn't directed at your posting the video, but was instead meant to explain to Eleazer that I have never questioned the skills that Granger had in previous seasons. As I said in that post, I've never denied that Granger was good when healthy. My point all along was that I'm just waiting to see how he plays this season, but that doesn't mean that I'm questioning his previous effectiveness.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                              Sure, that's reasonable. But the purpose of the video wasn't to predict what he'll be doing next month. The video was posted not to show what post-injury Danny will look like, but rather to refute the claim that Danny Granger is a "one-dimensional" player.
                              One-dimensional scorer. He's great at what he does, shoot, but he's below average in other offensive areas IMO. Lance is a better ball handler, passer, better in transition, better in the paint, more creative. It's JMO but I believe those attributes are needed more in the starting unit than a volume shooter. We have alot of guys in the starting line-up that need the ball, and Lance is more likely to get it to them. I'm excited either way though. Lance running the second unit would be very interesting. I think he and Scola are gonna be a heck of pick and roll combo.

                              My posts are directed at people acting like we made the finals in spite of Lance. He was crucial to our success last year and he's a damn good player that's barely scrathed the surface of his potential. I still like Danny, and I think, if healthy, he could push us over the top this year whether it be in the starting unit or off the bench.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                                Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                                One-dimensional scorer. He's great at what he does, shoot, but he's below average in other offensive areas IMO. Lance is a better ball handler, passer, better in transition, better in the paint, more creative. It's JMO but I believe those attributes are needed more in the starting unit than a volume shooter. We have alot of guys in the starting line-up that need the ball, and Lance is more likely to get it to them. I'm excited either way though. Lance running the second unit would be very interesting. I think he and Scola are gonna be a heck of pick and roll combo.

                                My posts are directed at people acting like we made the finals in spite of Lance. He was crucial to our success last year and he's a damn good player that's barely scrathed the surface of his potential. I still like Danny, and I think, if healthy, he could push us over the top this year whether it be in the starting unit or off the bench.
                                Lance is more likely to get it to them, but when he's camped at the 3 point line watching the other 4 starters run the offense his man is going to be cheating off of him like crazy. Danny's man won't, which gives the team more space. And if they do, at 6'8" he doesn't need much separation to launch the shot. For a power post offense, space is more important than the individual distributing skills of your (at best) tertiary ballhandler.

                                And for clarification, would one-dimensional offensive player be a better term for what you're looking at? Because Granger is one of the most flexible scorers in the league. And while Lance is a better ballhandler and passer, when you're comparing him to Granger those attributes are much more important in Paul George. Also, Lance is not better in the paint. Granger is a better post-up scorer, post defender, and rebounder. Lance tends to grab the boards that bounce high off the rim or bounce outside the paint, giving him time to get to them from the wings.

                                I would argue that even though Danny is "1 dimensional," it's important to realize that he's not a guard and won't be asked to do the other things on offense. He will camp out, set screens, and iso or post up on occasion. A combination of Hill, George, and our hot big man will handle the ball.
                                Last edited by aamcguy; 09-26-2013, 08:31 AM.
                                Time for a new sig.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X