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

Pacers should look at this offence.

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

  • Pacers should look at this offence.

    Doe's O'B already run a version of this?

    http://sports.excite.com/news/04072008/v3699.html

    New Offense Leads Calipari, Memphis Within One Win of National ChampionshipApr 7, 9:24 AM (ET)
    By EDDIE PELLS

    SAN ANTONIO (AP) - By nature, coaching is a business of copycats.
    That puts John Calipari on the verge of becoming one of the most mimicked men in his profession.

    The "dribble-drive motion" offense he uses is among the hottest things going in hoops these days, and his Memphis Tigers show it to the world for the final time this season in Monday night's championship game against Kansas.

    Calipari calls the creation he borrowed from a relatively unknown high school coach in California, "Princeton on steroids," a bow to the constant-motion, cut-and-backdoor offense perfected by Pete Carril.

    He also calls it "dribble-drive motion," in part because it sounds good, and also as a nod to the idea it does not rely on pick-setters and post men who clog up the paint and sometimes stifle free-flowing offense.

    Some say it's an extension of the penetrate-and-pass schemes so commonly seen in Europe, where big centers with strong post games are few and far between.

    The essence of the offense is to keep the middle clear, give the ball to playmakers on the perimeter and let them penetrate for layups or kick out to guys who come open.

    It is controlled chaos, indeed, but it takes the effort of a good coach - one who does the bulk of his job in the practice gym, not calling plays from the bench on gameday.

    "Sometimes I think we overcoach with certain things we do," said the offense's inventor, Vance Walberg, who is in San Antonio this week rooting for Calipari and the Tigers. "All this does is show how simple the game is if you give your best players the ball and open gaps for them."

    Walberg started using it 11 years ago when he was coaching high school in California, struggling to find more ways to get his best player more opportunities by taking him out of clogged-up offensive sets so common in the game. The plan worked and gradually spread, first among the grass roots in high schools, then into the small-college ranks, then beyond.

    Calipari was the first major-college coach to take the plunge. He started tinkering with it after a conversation with Walberg in 2003.

    "I said, 'Tell me about what you guys do,"' Calipari said. "He said, 'You don't want to see it because you won't do it."'

    Walberg had every reason to believe as much, in large part because he figured no big-time, big-money coach would risk his job on a system that a) has very little to do with calling plays and b) puts the players so much in charge of their system that it often looks like an uncoached mess.

    "Instead of teaching them plays, you start really teaching them how to play," Walberg said. "It's principles of the game. It's, 'What happens if you go this way and you stop? What comes open? What happens if you go that way and you stop? What comes open there?"'

    Calipari said a coach must commit to a fair amount of letting go to turn his program, and therefore his fate, over to such an offense.

    "You have to count on your team to be unselfish, you have to count on your team being able to make great decisions on the run, and you have to understand that what makes it good is they can feel unleashed," Calipari said.

    The benefits can go beyond simply winning games in the present.

    "You can go to a kid and say, 'Do you wanna play a style where we're scoring in the 50s and 60s every night, or a style where we're in the 80s and 90s?"' Walberg said. "It's a style that gets you ready for the next level."

    Memphis freshman Derrick Rose has thrived playing that style. He'll probably move to the NBA next year. Chris Douglas-Roberts is also an NBA prospect. He's averaged 18 points a game in this, his third year of playing in Calipari's dribble-drive.

    "The offense isn't for everybody," Douglas-Roberts said. "If you can't play 1-on-1, this offense will expose you. But for me, it was good. I've never lost a game of 1-on-1 in my life."

    EDIT; He will!

    The Tigers, of course, augment this style with plenty of good transition offense, trying for easy layups and 3-on-2 fast breaks.

    Their opponent, Kansas, is also wide-open, but in a more traditional way, looking to drop the ball into post players - like Darrell Arthur and Darnell Jackson - in traditional strong-side positions, then kick it out for 3-pointers for Brandon Rush and Mario Chalmers if the double teams come.

    "The way they run their offense is different than the way we run it, but the philosophy's still the same: Get the ball to the paint," Jayhawks coach Bill Self said.

    Indeed, Memphis does that differently.

    The post player almost always will be on the weak side, looking for a backdoor cut if the ballhandler's penetration sets it up. The other four players will be on the perimeter, and whoever has the ball is urged to take it to the hoop and see what develops. If it doesn't work the first time, recycle and repeat with a different player handling the ball.

    Some believe packing it in with a zone defense is the best way to neutralize this attack. In the regional semifinals, Michigan State tried that and was trailing 50-20 at halftime.

    "We play two or three possessions of it a year," Self said jokingly of the zone that Kansas largely avoids. "Without telling you what we're going to do, we have to be prepared to guard them in a way that gives us our best chance."

    Which almost certainly means man-to-man.

    Nobody has stopped it yet this season, save Tennessee, which handed Memphis its only loss against an NCAA-record 38 wins.

    If Memphis makes it 39, Calipari's gamble will have paid off with the biggest reward - the school's first national title.

    Certainly, that would bring more converts.

    There are plenty already. A Sports Illustrated story in February listed a few hundred who have bought in - from high school teams in Colorado all the way up to the Boston Celtics.

    "In the typical year, I get 300 to 400 calls from coaches asking me about it," Walberg said.

    Very few of those calls come from traditionalists who Walberg says curse him and "say that's not the way you're supposed to play."

    Calipari's not one of those traditionalists - at least not anymore.

    "Obviously, I'm biased, but I'm happy as heck for John," Walberg said. "He had the guts to see it. He's got good athletes, guys who can do things. But for him to change, I thought it took a lot of guts."

  • #2
    Re: Pacers should look at this offence.

    Good read.

    Are you asking whether JO'B should run his offense like this?

    Or

    Are you suggesting that he already is running something like this?
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Pacers should look at this offence.

      "If you can't play 1-on-1, this offense will expose you."

      That says it all!!! Unless the Pacers can find one or two players who can create shot opportunities for themselves, such an offense just won't work for them. But to JOB's credit, I can see the similarities. The Pacers just lack a bonified playmaker.

      (Sidenote: Murray somewhat fits the bill as the only active the Pacers have who can creative shots for himself; Tinsley is another but since he's on the inactive list we can forget about him. And then there's the prospect of Stephen Graham, but I'm not sure if he's a legit "high flier" or just a decent transition player, ala, Dunleavy with more "gettiup-ness". Time will tell...)
      Last edited by NuffSaid; 04-07-2008, 06:04 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Pacers should look at this offence.

        This offense would require players on the team who could actually break down their defender off the dribble...

        Last time I checked, the Pacers had one active player who could "sort of" do that in Flip Murray.
        Sometimes a player's greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team. -- Scottie Pippen

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Pacers should look at this offence.

          Did you ever notice how often great strategy magically seems to follow great players?

          Now I am all for strategy, but there are a lot of great ways to make things work. The biggest key is talent that can do it and a coach that can teach and control it (keep it focused). But the idea of the current hot strategy is good only till the next star player shows up with a different system.

          Frankly as much as Memphis might be giving the kids a touch of NBA exposure, I'd say Kansas St or even IU (Sampson) were more iso/2 man NBA oriented. I'm sure there are other programs more "NBA like" than just those 2.

          Rose makes anything great. He'd make JOB's system look a lot better too.

          Comment

          Working...
          X