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

Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

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

  • #76
    Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    Wow Peck welcome back to reality

    And to naptownmenace I don't think anybody is suggesting that Boozer is a good defender in my opinion I think him and West suck equally.
    If I had to rate them both defensively, I'd give Boozer a 4 and West a 6.5 out of 10. Unlike Boozer, you can also play David during the 4th quarter and he's usually solid in the clutch. Sometimes he's even spectacular.



    David West over Boozer every day.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

      Thoughts about game (prior to reading the thread)

      1) Danny looks pretty normal, just a bit rusty

      2) G Hill was dialed in, just beast mode on defense especially.

      3) Paul went into superstar mode in the 2nd half prior to fouling out and was clearly the #1 player on the court.

      4) Roy wasn't at G Hill's level but he's not far off his game

      5) West was a tiny bit off, not a great night overall but for the most part was pretty West-like (including risky but successful outlet pass)

      6) Lance didn't have many spots to get involved but did look like himself and not that rusty.

      7) Scola really struggled with the Gibson matchup especially and was pretty awful on rebounds. However he did show some nasty post moves even when he didn't convert. He looked really rusty or out of synch. Also the team seemed stumped in how to play off of his post game.

      8) Watson looked great. He pushed the ball well and in every way just felt like a true upgrade over DJ. It stood out starkly to me. Sloan was closer to DJ level to me, but of course he's the 3rd PG.

      9) Solo looked great but in classic rookie defer mode. There was one trip the ball got pushed to him on the high wing with Danny in the corner. The Bulls dropped to DG in transition defense leaving Solo with about 10-15 clear feet toward the rim. He instantly passed the ball down to the guarded Danny instead of either shooting or driving. He'll stop doing that just like he'll stop deciding dunk or layup while midair. Solo now is better than OJ was all last year, which really surprises me. Heckava pick.

      10) Ian was Ian. He had one nasty move for a score where he held onto the ball, but at other times was more out of synch than he should be. But he didn't look rusty per se.

      11) After Cope missed his 3rd shot Paul was standing at the bench yelling "keep shooting". His stroke looks good and he'll get there. I just wish we'd seen him get some more PT. People are going to like that kid I think.

      12) I forgot Hilton Armstrong was in camp. Always liked him as a player. I'd rather have him than Miles, but now he can't make the roster.

      13) Rose DID NOT LOOK GOOD to me. He looked mostly healthy, sure, but MANY times he got his feet out from underneath him trying to make moves he couldn't pull off. I assume most of it was rust, but he also looked hesitant on some plays and still seemed to be questioning what he could do. Hinrich was putting nastier, quicker moves on guys, including a sick behind the back move that was crazy smooth.

      14) I wish Gibson or Jimmy Butler were Pacers...except the Pacers don't really need them now. But they are good role players and a big reason why they have survived so many major injuries.


      15) I didn't like Roy not getting the verticality call going against Rose. He may have reached down a bit but it's not a trend I want to see continue.



      Rebound better as a team, defend the pick and pop jumpers late, get some offense going in the 4th without Paul and this is a winnable game. The Bulls are going to be tough and I think both Chicago and Indy are set to be better than Miami this year, at least if the Bulls can stay healthy.

      The Pacers have ridiculous depth. Not everyone played well and not everything was in sync, but I never looked at the players on the floor and thought "dang I wish we could hide that weakness".

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

        Originally posted by Lord Helmet View Post
        I didn't see any of the game, but it is really unsettling that you say there may have been more Bulls fans than Pacers fans. I just think we're going to be dealing with big name team bandwagon fans coming in and making it a home game much like they did last year. The Indy fans won't care til about the second round of the Playoffs if we make it that far.

        Just annoys me. Just like how I'm going to see a lot of Seahawk fans later today when I'm in Indy.

        I'm not worried about the team, though. Just ranting.

        Just wish our casual fans were better.
        Part of the reason I went with the A55/G2 group to Detroit last year was Danny's return. Rose was the MVP and has been out for more than a year. It's 3 hours and a Saturday and a preseason game where tickets would be easier to come by. Frankly I can't imagine not having half of United Center being Pacers fans if Reggie Miller was returning after being out more than a year and the Bulls had struggled to fill their own arena for years.


        Also I'm going to disagree with Peck and just about everyone else. It's because they travel for games like this that I respect/hate the Bulls fans. This is nothing like the front runner Heat or Knick/Melo fans, or Kobe fans. These are people from the actual fanbase traveling. I've gone to other arenas and been loud at times, that's what hardcore fandom is all about.

        Save the real hatred for the packed houses of "fans" who are just there to see their favorite "winning" team, ala the Bird era Celtics nights, or Lakers, or freaking "Cavs" fans just a few years ago during the JOB years. THAT was what I hated. The Bulls fans feel like a legit rival fanbase, and as much as their output can annoy you and you wish more locals were there, at least they are willing to drive to see Rose in preseason or the Bulls last year without Rose. They'll support Noah, Boozer, Jimmy Butler, Hinrich, whomever.

        You think you are going to see a ton of Pistons fans driving down this season to support Greg Monroe? Or Memphis fans driving up to Indy? You'll get locals supporting Zbo, but not Memphis travel fans.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

          More on Rose since I see comments about "he was so quick". His lateral work sucked. At least 2 different times he outright dribbled himself to the floor. One time he would have traveled but lost the ball and had it luckily come back to him instead of being stolen. He threw one pass straight into the crowd.

          Transition, straight line speed ala Wall? Sure. Hops to finish dunks to calm Bulls fans' fears? Yes. But shake and bake win you the game Rose? Nowhere near that level. He's got a lot of rehab rust to burn off still. Rose didn't beat the Pacers. Gibson, Butler, Hinrich and terrible team rebounding beat the Pacers.

          I'm not saying Rose won't get there, just that there was a lot of hype of "he's back" when it looked a lot more like Granger in game 3 of his return last year. It was kinda like him but it wasn't quite right yet.


          And I see "Granger wasn't right" talk and I just don't get that. He was out of sync with Scola, yes, but that was true for everyone and Scola. But I saw Danny put down one of his classic "burrow into the lane" power drive moves that got him a decent look that he didn't complete due to rust. Ditto the finger roll he put up a bit hard. He took contact and he got DOUBLED A LOT. The Bulls doubled at him almost every time the Pacers tried to put him in the post. They were worried about him backing guys down.




          An odd note about stats - George Hill is listed with only 1 steal but I watched him make 2 for certain. Once he dropped down on a double and tipped the ball out of someone's hands (forget which Bull) and another time he cut in front of a pass. My guess is they gave the drop down steal to West playing behind the player even though he didn't touch the ball. This is the biggest reason you can't always judge a game just by the box score.


          You know a lot of us felt like Frank was working the starters way more than Chicago, but you look at the minutes played and it's not really the case. The Bulls only went 11 deep and Teague only had 6 minutes. Gibson is typically 6th man-ish for them and is a borderline starter type. If Noah was in then Nazr goes to the bench and probably Erik Murphy loses PT, but otherwise that's about a normal rotation with slightly more bench minutes than normal, just like the Pacers.

          Boozer and Deng get 25, Roy and West get 27, Rose got 20, Paul got 18 (self-inflicted, but still he might have only played another 2-3 minutes), Butler starts for them and got 30. He and Gibson played more minutes than any Pacer, and the leading Pacer was Granger coming off the bench.

          The Bulls didn't play Pittman, Dahntay, DJ White, or Mike James at all. The Bulls gave rookie Snell 17 minutes. The Pacers gave rookie Solomon Hill 21 minutes.

          It felt like in the 4th that the Pacers were trying harder to win, but honestly Tibs ran his own main guys plenty of minutes. It's just a case of wanting to see this deep bench and not really knowing the Bulls lineup outside of Rose, Noah, Deng and Boozer, with the thinking that Dun, Hinrich and Gibson are bench guys and sorta feeling the same way about Jimmy Butler. We only counted Rose, Deng and Boozer as "starters" as we watched. A classic "it feels like" that isn't really as true as you think.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            West is the better rebounder but how come Boozer averages more rebounds? West rebounded over double digits 14 times last year compared to Boozer's 46 times, Boozer grabbed 771 rebounds compared to West 563(208 more rebounds than West)

            And sure West is better at pick and pop but "at everything else" as you guys are suggesting West is not that much better than Boozer, if anything Boozer was the better player last year, he had a bigger chance to be an all star before West(many reports confirm this).





            And to those that like to overreact note that this conversation is not with you.
            I think Boozer and West are quite comparable with each one having strengths over the other. I don't think either is much more talented than the other, and both have effort lapses defensively. Boozer (to me) is the better more aggressive rebounder. West is better in the mid range. So on and so forth.

            Two things that sets the guys apart are leadership and their conteacts. I think Boozer isn't a leader type of guy, which is okay because not everybody is wired that way. David is a tad more head strong and kind if commands respect. Also had Boozer not gotten that large contract, many pundits wouldn't be as down on him that they are; meanwhile West has been paid properly given his production. (Though Given his age he's a tad overpaid now)

            Pacer fans have a loyalty to West and Bulls fans have a hate for Boozer due to his contract. But when you take the emotions out of it, I think they're relatively equal with maybe a slight nod going to West due to his consistency and leadership.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

              I must say, I have never thought, "Man, I wish we had Boozer instead of West."
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                More on Rose since I see comments about "he was so quick". His lateral work sucked. At least 2 different times he outright dribbled himself to the floor. One time he would have traveled but lost the ball and had it luckily come back to him instead of being stolen. He threw one pass straight into the crowd.

                Transition, straight line speed ala Wall? Sure. Hops to finish dunks to calm Bulls fans' fears? Yes. But shake and bake win you the game Rose? Nowhere near that level. He's got a lot of rehab rust to burn off still. Rose didn't beat the Pacers. Gibson, Butler, Hinrich and terrible team rebounding beat the Pacers.

                I'm not saying Rose won't get there, just that there was a lot of hype of "he's back" when it looked a lot more like Granger in game 3 of his return last year. It was kinda like him but it wasn't quite right yet.
                It was a pre-season game for Rose, not Game 7 of the ECF's. It was also his first competitive basketball in a year and a half. The biggest question was whether the quickness would be there, and it clearly was. The lateral movement, dribbling coordination, and decision making are all based off of timing and practice. He will easily be able to regain all of that if his body holds up like it did Saturday night. The hype about Rose on Saturday is well deserved because the guy clearly showed that he is still physical explosive. But after missing a year and a half, he wasn't going to go out there and play near perfect ball like he did in his MVP season. He gets an "A" for his physical explosiveness, which was by far the biggest question surrounding him.

                This is far different than Danny's return last year. With Danny, it quickly became clear that he wasn't holding up physically. Way different than Rose, whose biggest concerns right now are timing and coordination.

                You say Danny looked fine on Saturday aside from rust, yet rust (losing the ball, dribbling out of bounds) is what you're using to say Rose didn't look good.....

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                  80+ posts for the first preseason game? Yes, I love this enthusiasm. I didn't get to watch the game so can't really give any thoughts, but reading what others wrote it does seem we were playing to win more than most preseason games. That being said, I take next to nothing from it. I think we all already knew Bulls funs were a bunch of cockrangers. They continue to cement that in our hearts it appears.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    Also I'm going to disagree with Peck and just about everyone else.
                    Respect them all you want but I never will. I've never had an instance in all of my years attending games where I really wanted to fight fans from an opposing team just because they were in the Pacers building. Happens almost everytime with a Bulls game.

                    Your Laker, Celtic, or whatever bandwagon fan may gloat some but they're usually not obnoxious. Maybe it's me personally but when I hear some dumbass Bull fan scream in my face "It's our house mFer" and that has happened on more than one occasion I come really close to spending a night in jail. Actually it's a reason the Mrs. doesn't like to attend a Bulls game because I don't take their $hi+.
                    Last edited by RWB; 10-08-2013, 10:11 AM.
                    You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                      I thought Rose's straight line speed was absolutely there, but yeah he clearly needs to knock some more rust off when it comes to his directional change both offensive and defensively. That will certainly come with time and more confidence in his knee. Also, I was a little surprised after all the talk about his improved jumper and the work he put in on it while hurt that we didn't see him pull up for one.


                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                        So according to Seth Danny looked "normal" and Rose looked bad
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                          Sloppy play and bad transition defense are the things that stuck out to me
                          Smothered Chicken!

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            More on Rose since I see comments about "he was so quick". His lateral work sucked. At least 2 different times he outright dribbled himself to the floor. One time he would have traveled but lost the ball and had it luckily come back to him instead of being stolen. He threw one pass straight into the crowd.

                            Transition, straight line speed ala Wall? Sure. Hops to finish dunks to calm Bulls fans' fears? Yes. But shake and bake win you the game Rose? Nowhere near that level. He's got a lot of rehab rust to burn off still. Rose didn't beat the Pacers. Gibson, Butler, Hinrich and terrible team rebounding beat the Pacers.

                            I'm not saying Rose won't get there, just that there was a lot of hype of "he's back" when it looked a lot more like Granger in game 3 of his return last year. It was kinda like him but it wasn't quite right yet.


                            And I see "Granger wasn't right" talk and I just don't get that. He was out of sync with Scola, yes, but that was true for everyone and Scola. But I saw Danny put down one of his classic "burrow into the lane" power drive moves that got him a decent look that he didn't complete due to rust. Ditto the finger roll he put up a bit hard. He took contact and he got DOUBLED A LOT. The Bulls doubled at him almost every time the Pacers tried to put him in the post. They were worried about him backing guys down.




                            An odd note about stats - George Hill is listed with only 1 steal but I watched him make 2 for certain. Once he dropped down on a double and tipped the ball out of someone's hands (forget which Bull) and another time he cut in front of a pass. My guess is they gave the drop down steal to West playing behind the player even though he didn't touch the ball. This is the biggest reason you can't always judge a game just by the box score.


                            You know a lot of us felt like Frank was working the starters way more than Chicago, but you look at the minutes played and it's not really the case. The Bulls only went 11 deep and Teague only had 6 minutes. Gibson is typically 6th man-ish for them and is a borderline starter type. If Noah was in then Nazr goes to the bench and probably Erik Murphy loses PT, but otherwise that's about a normal rotation with slightly more bench minutes than normal, just like the Pacers.

                            Boozer and Deng get 25, Roy and West get 27, Rose got 20, Paul got 18 (self-inflicted, but still he might have only played another 2-3 minutes), Butler starts for them and got 30. He and Gibson played more minutes than any Pacer, and the leading Pacer was Granger coming off the bench.

                            The Bulls didn't play Pittman, Dahntay, DJ White, or Mike James at all. The Bulls gave rookie Snell 17 minutes. The Pacers gave rookie Solomon Hill 21 minutes.

                            It felt like in the 4th that the Pacers were trying harder to win, but honestly Tibs ran his own main guys plenty of minutes. It's just a case of wanting to see this deep bench and not really knowing the Bulls lineup outside of Rose, Noah, Deng and Boozer, with the thinking that Dun, Hinrich and Gibson are bench guys and sorta feeling the same way about Jimmy Butler. We only counted Rose, Deng and Boozer as "starters" as we watched. A classic "it feels like" that isn't really as true as you think.
                            Its October Rose looks great IMO. It will take a few months for him to be totally back(Just like every player off an ACL) but he looks like the Drose I remember. I really like what I saw out of Granger movement wise he looks good. His game hopefully come with reps.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                              Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
                              If I had to rate them both defensively, I'd give Boozer a 4 and West a 6.5 out of 10. Unlike Boozer, you can also play David during the 4th quarter and he's usually solid in the clutch. Sometimes he's even spectacular.



                              David West over Boozer every day.
                              WEst is great at sinking and digging into passing lanes, especially after a PnR. It isn't his quick feet, but it is his long arms and quick hands. But he is smart enough to get into the lane.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                                Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                                Its October Rose looks great IMO. It will take a few months for him to be totally back(Just like every player off an ACL) but he looks like the Drose I remember. I really like what I saw out of Granger movement wise he looks good. His game hopefully come with reps.
                                I pretty much agree. I mean I suppose Rose's lateral ability never comes back, but that would be an upset not necessarily expectation. He certainly doesn't have it yet, and maybe he won't all this season but it will come back at some point.

                                I thought Danny looked fine too, Moved well and found open looks, just needs to get his rhythm back, and it's Danny in october, which means he probably won't hit at a good clip til December 1 anyway.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X