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

Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

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

  • #46
    Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

    Originally posted by MiaDragon View Post
    Does his breathing "problems" prevent him from boxing out or loosing positing to someone 75lbs less than him? Trying to pin his **** poor play on that is again silly.

    Frank is the PERFECT coach for Roy, back in the day ya know when he tried. We would force feed him the rock. Why on earth would we do that now!?


    I agree. I remember the days when Roy would just dunk it on people in the post. He'd get the rock, clutch the ball with one hand, and just running-dunk it on people. That was the year before he got his contract extension. Or two season's before.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

      Originally posted by Grimp View Post
      I remember the days when Roy would just dunk it on people in the post. He'd get the rock, clutch the ball with one hand, and just running-dunk it on people. That was the year before he got his contract extension. Or two season's before.
      Roy got paid for Defense. I never recall Roy dunk face posterizing anyone tbh??

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

        Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
        Roy got paid for Defense. I never recall Roy dunk face posterizing anyone tbh??
        He got paid because he brutalized the eventual nba champions. Over 6 games in the 2012 series he averaged nearly 12 points, 12 rebounds and 3 blocks on 48% shooting. In game 3 alone he had 19 and 18.

        The next year, he averaged 22 and 10 on 56% shooting in the ECF.

        He was up supposed to be the one guy Miami had no answer for.
        Last edited by Kstat; 04-13-2014, 12:17 AM.

        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

          Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
          Roy got paid for Defense. I never recall Roy dunk face posterizing anyone tbh??
          There was a game maybe two years ago where he made it a point to palm the ball three or four times and just run and dunk it on the guy guarding him. Also look at this clip from earlier in the season......https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCMjzfNXzDA


          ^ He looks so much more spry, engaged, quick. Not sure what happened in between November and now. It's so weird. My theory is the constant contact has worn him down over 82 games. Elbows, knees, etc. into the gut, stomach, abdomen, and lower extremities all season long. Might've really done a number on him.
          Last edited by Grimp; 04-13-2014, 12:15 AM.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

            Hibbert has lost passion for the game. I would not be surprised if he retires within 3 years just like Brian Williams.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

              Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
              I never recall Roy dunk face posterizing anyone tbh??
              What remains of Ivan Johnson says hi.
              "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

              "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

                Originally posted by eldubious View Post
                Hibbert has lost passion for the game. I would not be surprised if he retires within 3 years just like Brian Williams.
                Brian Williams never had passion for the game to begin with. He wasn't any more same than Ron.

                It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

                  Asthma coupled with larger muscle mass which consumes more oxygen and produces more CO2 as well as other wastes due to the necessary consumption of more food could lead to a very complex chain of events. The demand for more of everything while under exertion could be placing an additional load on his heart to deliver the needed nutrients and oxygen and remove the increased CO2 and waste. I wonder if the team doctors have put monitoring equipment on him recently and done some kind of stress test? Athletes often end up with enlarged hearts which become less and less efficient over time.

                  I have no idea if this thought process has any merit whatsoever, but a physical change overall could be taking its toll.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

                    Originally posted by MiaDragon View Post
                    Who in the world would take him!?
                    Pick a random team out of a hat, and they will take him.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

                      If Hibbert is playing like this......Mahinmi can only do so much. At this point, I'm just hoping that Bynum plays in a few games in the Playoffs. Maybe roll him out once every 3 games in the Playoffs?

                      Can we do a 3 headed Center where Hibbert/Mahinmi/Bynum play once every 3 games?

                      That translates into 1 game ever 4 to 5 days.....can Bynum handle that?

                      I mean.....18 minutes of Bynum at 50% has to be as good as whatever Hibbert is contributing now
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

                        If Bynum could play, Roy would've been on the bench yesterday.

                        I agree. Benching Roy isn't going to help him play better, and we ultimately need him if we want to win. However, limit his minutes. Give Mahinmi and Lavoy more time because he's not giving us much right now.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

                          Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                          If Bynum could play, Roy would've been on the bench yesterday.

                          I agree. Benching Roy isn't going to help him play better, and we ultimately need him if we want to win. However, limit his minutes. Give Mahinmi and Lavoy more time because he's not giving us much right now.
                          Never thought it would get to the point that I want to give Mahinmi more time......but here it is.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

                            Originally posted by Peck View Post
                            I want LaVoy Allen to start the rest of the regular season myself.

                            Same thing every single year from Roy. He starts off playing great and we all think wow now this is a real center and then inevitably he will just fold like a chair.

                            I like rim protection as well as anyone but I'd take less rim protection (which teams have compensated for anyway) to have more rebounds and points.
                            Huh, I never would have guessed this.
                            Nothing surprising here as Peck and I were trying to figure out how to say goodbye to Roy at the PD party. Felt sorry for Sandman 21 as soon as I came in I was *****ing about Roy and Peck felt he couldn't put everyone's PD pal on the hotseat becasue of his relationship to #55. I was serious enough to say an Indiana high school kid could out rebound Roy (including my son). Forget technique, simple desire and hustle will at least get you some and that is what burns me personally about Roy. I just don't see the effort.
                            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


                            • #59
                              Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

                              Safe to say we can eliminate fatigue as an excuse.

                              Three full days off for the starters, a purportedly inspiring victory by the reserves in Milwaukee Wednesday followed by a lively practice Thursday that produced a lot of jibber-jabber about refreshed legs and renewed energy, and the Pacers proceeded to play half a game against half the Miami Heat and wound up getting bludgeoned, 98-86, Friday night.

                              So, what’s up next on the Pacers’ implosion checklist?

                              Don’t know about yours, but on mine, Roy Hibbert is No. 2.

                              It’s time to face some hard truths when it comes to the man primarily responsible for the death of the center position on the NBA All-Star ballot.
                              What does this even mean? Roy is responsible for there not being a center position in the All-Star game?


                              The first of which is this: somebody else, anybody else, should be starting at center. Not just for the final two regular-season games – for however long the playoffs last.

                              In 34 minutes in Miami, against a team that lacks anything remotely resembling an actual center, Hibbert did not make a bucket until 4:08 remained in the third quarter, when the game was already out of hand.

                              He did not pull a rebound until 2:18 remained in the fourth quarter.

                              HE DID NOT PULL A REBOUND UNTIL 2:18 REMAINED IN THE FOURTH QUARTER.

                              Swirl those stats around in your mouth and then spit them out quickly. To swallow would induce vomiting.

                              I’m not sure how much more evidence Larry Bird and Frank Vogel need in order to be convinced of the need for change in the middle.
                              A lot more evidence, Conrad. As a coach, you don't make decisions on a whim based on two stats presented without any analysis. That's the kind of yo-yo managerial style that has players in LA ready to run D'Antoni out of town.

                              >> In his last 10 games, Hibbert has averaged 27.3 minutes, 8.5 points, 2.9 rebounds, 1.3 blocked shots and .333 shooting. In his 273 minutes, the Pacers have been outscored by 76 points, so small wonder the team lost eight.
                              And what about the other starters? What about Evan Turner? Or are we only looking for stats that fit our narrative here?

                              >> His last two have been utterly despicable: 43 minutes, five points, three rebounds, 2-of-12 shooting.

                              >> In his career, Hibbert had never played at least 30 minutes and grabbed so few rebounds. The man let himself be boxed out by Ray Allen. Enough said.

                              >> Face it, when you have to bench your guy because the other team has Pero Antic, your guy is limburger.
                              So now we're only looking at two games? Okay, where did Hibbert get boxed out by Ray Allen? Did Ray Allen outmuscle him for positioning or was Hibbert recovering from helping on a drive and in a bad position? We really have no idea. You know why? Because Conrad thought it wasn't necessary information to analyze since it might not have fit his frame.

                              Pero Antic is a pretty good player, by the way. Because his name sounds foreign and you don't know who he is, doesn't mean he isn't a good player.

                              The empty first half against Antic and the Hawks last Sunday prompted Vogel to bench Hibbert for the second half. The Pacers, who managed a franchise record-low 23 in the first half, racked up 65 in the second which was too little, too late – but a whole lot better than they did with Hibbert.
                              What other variables could have been responsible for the difference between halves? Maybe something the Hawks did? Maybe other Pacers started sharing the ball more, playing more aggressively? No, you didn't look into that? Oh, I see... well, whatever helps your story.

                              That alone could’ve convinced Vogel that Hibbert was at least part of the problem with this slumping team. But the coach didn’t want to hang him out to dry, so he benched all five starters in Milwaukee.
                              In effect, the head coach took an unprecedented risk, putting his own neck on the line with a radical gamble in order to protect his center’s eggshell ego.
                              Is this really true or does it just sound nice for your article? Did West and George not ask Frank for rest or are we just going to conveniently leave that part out?

                              The response was a performance in Miami so bland, so passive, so utterly invisible it would need an elephantine testosterone injection just to reach the level of milquetoast.
                              So clever.

                              Can the Pacers win a championship without Hibbert?

                              Probably not, but it’s increasingly obvious they won’t win more than one playoff series with him. A team can only play four-on-five so long, no matter how good the four.
                              Four on five? On which end of the court? Or are we completely discounting half of the game? Even looking at offense only, why is Hibbert the biggest problem? Sure, he isn't scoring well, but is he actively turning the ball over at alarming rates like some of our other starters? Which hurts a team more? A missed shot or a turnover? Is Hibbert the only one in a shooting slump? While we're graphing his decline in rebounding numbers, let's get a graph of PG's field goal percentage too.

                              Vogel has plenty of options. The obvious play would be to move Ian Mahinmi into the starting lineup. Mahinmi is a serial fouler but always plays with energy and runs the floor with abandon.

                              There’s also Lavoy Allen, who has the requisite size and strength, plus a little bit more of an offensive game than Mahinmi.

                              If Vogel really wanted to change the team’s look, he could start Chris Copeland as a stretch four and move David West to center.

                              It’s just possible having a space-making big man on the perimeter would make life a lot simpler for Paul George and Lance Stephenson, open up some driving lanes while causing matchup issues for the other team, for a change.

                              The same might be true to a lesser degree with Mahinmi or Allen. They aren’t floor-spacers, but they also aren’t lane-cloggers. The center-by-committee approach could also include Luis Scola. Any plan that creates more minutes for the team’s second-best big man is a good thing.
                              Now, we're firmly in NBA 2K Fantasy Land, a land where we only worry about offense and ratcheting up the score with complete disregard for the consequences of our decisions. Ian Mahinmi is not a starter. He simply fouls too much. Lavoy Allen? Your starting center? What are we, the Sixers? Start Copeland? And have him guard who on the other end? I don't even think he can guard Josh McRoberts considering the way Josh handles the ball and his activity on the glass. More minutes for Luis Scola? Let's try to think further back than two games ago, you know, where he looked completely out of gas.

                              And to say that we don't cause matchup issues for the other team goes against every single scouting report from opposing coaches and comments from opposing players. In fact, what's the first thing they mention? The size of our frontline.

                              Can you win a championship with Mahinmi, Allen, Copeland or Scola in the starting lineup?

                              Probably not, but at least you wouldn’t want to claw out your eyeballs watching.
                              Ah, here we finally get to the real issue. I'm sure glad Vogel and the coaching staff aren't in the coaches' room trying to gameplan for how to make the Pacers play more aesthetically pleasing for Conrad Brunner instead of how to win.



                              In all seriousness, Brunner gets paid for this stuff? If I'm Frank or any of the players, I either offer one-word answers to his questions if I absolutely have to or I completely shut him out. It's not that his reporting is adversarial or criticizing. It's just lazy reporting. It's almost like he spends all day on forums reading fan opinion and just parrots back what he reads for page views. Dude, you have access to the team! Go do some real reporting, provide some inside scoop and see if you can find out what the real problem is! To single out Hibbert when it's a team-wide slump not only conceals the real problems this team has, but it adds more pitchforks to the "trade x" population that wants to run out of town a player who plays such an integral part of our defensive schemes and team identity. We're acting like he's Stephen Jackson post-brawl. Relax.
                              2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Sticking with Hibbert pointless for Pacers (Bruno's Blog)

                                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                                Defending the rim is pointless if you can't secure the rebound. It doesn't matter if it take the other team 2-3 chances to score at the rim if they're getting those 2-3 chances.

                                The 15-64 Milwaukee Bucks have two players in the top 13 on that list.

                                Also, I'm wagering that if you restricted that stat to the last two months, Roy would not be in the top 20.
                                How is one player supposed to protect the rim and simultaneously grab the rebound? Even if it results in a block, most the time Hibbert rises to challenge an opposing player he's too busy absorbing and recovering from the body contact to "second-jump" for the rebound in time.

                                Never mind that the team is third in total rebound percentage, though. That's not important. Only Hibbert's statline.
                                2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X