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

What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

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

  • What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

    http://www.hoopsworld.com/nba-chat-w...-nugent-11211/

    Cain

    What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?



    Mark Nugent

    I believe they need to get better defensively, and the need another consistent offensive threat to go along with Granger. I like Hibbert, Collison, George, Hill and others on the team, but none of them can score consistently on offense. they have been rumored to be targeting David West in Free Agency, and that makes a lot of sense. He is a good pick and roll player, a good rebounder, and at least an average defender at his position. The biggest problem they have though, is the Bulls and HEAT are likely to be better unless the Pacers can add a true superstar, and I don’t see that happening.
    Sittin on top of the world!

  • #2
    Re: What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

    as most of us already know, what the pacers need is a dale davis clone. a grown man who rebounds, block shots and defends.

    david west is not that guy. neither is nene. but the harsh truth is either of them is beaucoup better than what the pacers have now. either nene or west would be fine. not great but fine.

    is kris humphries dale davis? or landry? idk. i like deandre jordan, a shot blocker. but i have a weakness for size and athleticism.

    idk

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

      As I said in other threads, you aren't going to out talent Miami and Chicago, so you have to beat them physically, and out defend them. Out rebound them. Pacers goal should be the best defensive team in the league. Definitely agree that we need a big physical shot blocker like a De Andre Jordan. We need to be the biggest team in the east as well. Hibber, Jordan, Granger, George, and Hill makes a pretty big and long defensive unit.
      You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

        A season.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

          pray that LBJ and Drose and Dwight retire?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

            I am in the camp that feels we need a bruising PF/C enforcer. I think getting a guy who is athletic and a really strong defender and rebounder would help more than getting a more consistent scoring threat.

            It's unlikely to happen, but I would also jump at any chance (well, any that secure the player's services for at least a few years, that is) to get one of the top PGs. Darren Williams would solve most of the big problems this team faces if we could build around someone like him. Not likely to happen, but the Pacers would have to be insane to not at least try to pursue him.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

              Originally posted by IndyPacer View Post
              I am in the camp that feels we need a bruising PF/C enforcer. I think getting a guy who is athletic and a really strong defender and rebounder would help more than getting a more consistent scoring threat.
              SINGLE AND READY TO MINGLE

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

                Originally posted by CooperManning View Post
                SINGLE AND READY TO MINGLE

                humphries seems to be a good choice. couple of questions for those who have actually seen him play more than a couple of games.

                was last season a breakout season, or just a salary drive?

                draft express says he is the same size as tyler. he looks short to me in the few times i've seen him play. is he athletic enough to make up for his size?

                he does have a nice rebound rate since coming to NJN though. and that is something the pacers really need.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

                  I know Humphries rebounding numbers were crazy, but I really thought Tyler was close to his equal in head to head match ups last year. Tyler was a better offensive player, Humphries a much better rebounder.

                  I'll have to look up the box scores to be sure, since I'm just going from memory.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

                    http://www.indycornrows.com/2011/11/...orward-problem

                    The Pacers' Power Forward Problem
                    by Ian Levy on Nov 3, 2011 5:34 AM EDT in Indiana Pacers Stats

                    Whenever the lockout ends, a brief and intense free agent signing period will inevitably follow. During that time the Pacers seem likely to pursue a power forward, endeavoring to upgrade what's often seen as the team's biggest hole. Fans were excited about the potential Josh McRoberts showed early, and thrilled with the development of Tyler Hansbrough late. Despite all the positive feelings, the season ended with a general sense that the young duo wasn't quite good enough.

                    Hansbrough and McRoberts saw the bulk of the power forward minutes, but they weren't the only contributors. According to 82games.com, the Pacers' minutes last season were distributed like this:

                    Tyler Hansbrough - 38%
                    Josh McRoberts - 33%
                    Danny Granger - 18%
                    James Posey - 8%
                    Jeff Foster - 1%
                    Paul George, Mike Dunleavy, Solomon Jones - 2%

                    At first glance, no one is blown away by that rotation, but the numbers show they were actually very productive. 82games.com has statistics available for each team, listing their production by position. Just using the overall metric PER, the Pacers received more production at power forward than they did from any other position last season. The 17.9 PER posted by the Pacers' power forwards was significantly above average, and two points higher than the mark put up by the team's small forwards.

                    By these numbers, power forward was not the biggest hole for the Pacers' last season. But how did their rotation compare to the rest of the league?

                    I combined the power forward production statistics for each team into a single table. The statistics are all per 48 minutes. iFG% is the percentage of shot attempts which are taken inside the paint.



                    The Pacers' ranks by category come out like this:

                    FGA/48 - 14th
                    eFG% - 16th
                    FTA/48 - 5th
                    iFG% - 21th
                    Reb/48 - 16th
                    Ast/48 - 13th
                    TO/48 - 14th
                    Blk/48 - 16th
                    PF/48 - 20th
                    Pts/48 - 10th
                    PER - 10th

                    In general, the Pacers fell in the middle of the pack. In examining all of these statistics I'm left with two questions. Is an upgrade at power forward really the biggest need for this team? Is a significant upgrade actually available through free agency?

                    I think the answer to the first question lies somewhere in the murky swamp of production vs. potential. In looking at the Pacers' roster many of us apply a heavy dash of potential when assigning value. The sentiment that Paul George is the Pacers' shooting guard of the future is prevalent. This rests on the assumption that some point in the future, hopefully soon, he will make a rapid ascent towards the ceiling of his potential. We hold the same hope for Roy Hibbert and Darren Collison. But the fact remains that all three offered disappointing production in a variety of areas last season. Power forward only appears as a weak spot on the roster when you project out five years in the future, using a hybrid of fantasy and reality to guess at each player's production. The ceilings of Hansbrough and McRoberts seem lower than that of George, Hibbert or Collison and that's why that hole seems so large. The fact is, in the near-past tense, power forward has been a position of relative strength, not weakness.

                    The one fact I'm omitting is that McRoberts is an unrestricted free agent, one who's resigning doesn't appear to be a huge priority. In the interests of full disclosure, I really, really hope I'm wrong about that.

                    Returning to the by-position stats, there are some clear positives. Although their production looked average in most categories, the Pacers did receive top ten production in FTA/48, Pts/48 and PER. A rough generalization of their weaknesses from that list (and having watched any random Pacers' game) would be that they struggle inside the paint, scoring, defending and rebounding.

                    With those weaknesses in mind, I find myself confused by the players most commonly mentioned as free agent targets for the Pacers, especially Carl Landry and David West. Neither is a strong rebounder. Neither is a tough post defender. Neither does much of their scoring damage in the post. In fact, both have a pick-and-pop heavy offensive game that is strongly reminiscent of Hansbrough's.

                    Just for fun, I took some of the free agent power forwards we've all heard mentioned as targets, and combined some of their statistics, leaving off names.

                    TS% ORB% DRB% Ast% Stl% Blk% At Rim FG%

                    Player A 53.8% 3.7% 13.5% 7.2% 1.1% 1.1% 70.1%
                    Player B 55.5% 12.5% 32.2% 7.0% 0.9% 3.0% 67.1%
                    Player C 55.5% 9.3% 10.8% 5.2% 1.0% 1.2% 75.6%
                    Player D 60.8% 7.6% 18.8% 15.0% 1.5% 2.6% 68.8%
                    Player E 55.8% 7.6% 18.7% 12.7% 1.5% 2.1% 66.3%

                    If you're like me, Players A and C don't look particularly enticing from a statistical standpoint. If so, say goodbye to Jeff Green and Carl Landry respectively. Player B provides plenty of rebounding and shot blocking, but not much else. I'll point out that this was a contract year for him, and his rebounding numbers this past season were significantly higher than in any of his previous five NBA seasons. If that and his limited offense are enough to scare you off, than you can say goodbye to Kris Humphries. Which leaves us with Players D and E. Player D is a little more efficient scoring, including at the rim. He also provides slightly more in the passing and shot blocking departments. Player E is David West. Player D is Josh McRoberts.

                    I'm sorry. I know including McRoberts was a dirty trick, and I definitely cherry-picked the stats. McRoberts is much more turnover-prone than West and provided his efficient scoring with a much lower Usage Rate. Those admissions notwithstanding, I'm still skeptical about West. Setting aside all the issues of age, injury and cost he doesn't seem to address the team's most glaring needs at this position. He is a capable scorer, but gets his buckets in very specific ways that don't seem like they would offer the Pacers the option to create a fundamentally different or more effective offense.

                    My frustration with the whole enterprise comes down to this - George, Hibbert, and Collison all appear to have high ceilings so the team is willing to wait and be patient with them, allowing them to progress organically, hopefully to help them reach their high potential. Why can't we take the same route with Hansbrough and McRoberts? Admittedly they have distinct limitations, but they are already as productive as roughly half the power forward combos in the league. Why would the team choose to spend their precious dollars on someone who doesn't provide a significant upgrade at a position of relative strength, when other holes remain unfilled?
                    In the interest of full disclosure, my name is not Ian Levy and I did not write this article, however, it does sound a lot like what I've been posting for the past 10 or 11 months.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

                      Excellent article, makes me rethink what I think they need to do. I'd hate to spend near max on trying to solve the PF position, when thats not what will be the problem in 5 years and isn't now either.

                      He mentions that, right now, PF is solid - based on last year and I have to agree. Its when you look at the development of DC, PG, and Roy and project the positions in 5 years and their improvement. I'm not sure I project DC as "problem solved", at all, in 5 years. Do you hold your cards, and spend the money on a Stud Point Guard a year from now, instead overpaying to fix a position that may not even need fixed?

                      I look at it this way, relative to other teams at their respective positions.

                      Roy vs other centers, I like this match up in 2 years almost every night.

                      Danny vs other SFs, yes

                      Paul vs other SGs, potentially an advantage, good

                      Tyler/Jmac vs the leagues PF - good enough, I don't feel its a glaring weekness honestly, on given nights it can be, but other nights Tyler will out work his opponent.

                      DC...... Well, I'm being honest here. He hasn't shown me yet, he can do it against even the majority of teams.

                      In summary, maybe, as some have said, you need to wait and spend this cap room money on a Point Guard.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

                        As much as I like Josh McRoberts, I just dont think he showed much improvement this past season outside of the first 15 games of the season, and he pretty much disappeared by the playoffs. Hurt groin I know, but I just think he should be further along by now.

                        Why was Josh McRoberts bringing the ball up the court in a playoff game...

                        McRoberts can't play back up center either....

                        In my vision Tyler is a back up PF to our big athletic shot blocking bruiser who can slide over and play center when Roy is in foul trouble.
                        I don't see how McRoberts fits into the that vision.
                        Last edited by graphic-er; 11-03-2011, 09:05 AM.
                        You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

                          This is why I am wary of bringing in a big name PF this offseason. I want to improve at the position, I believe it would go a long way towards helping Hibbert become a better player, but I don't want to overpay either. Especially not for a guy who is already in his 30's when Jones is the only player signed who is over 30 on this team. The only exception to this I would be fine with is if we find a PF/C who can be our starting PF and back-up C. If the only good players available for a reasonable price are only slightly better than McRoberts or Hansbrough I'll pass.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

                            Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                            This is why I am wary of bringing in a big name PF this offseason. I want to improve at the position, I believe it would go a long way towards helping Hibbert become a better player, but I don't want to overpay either. Especially not for a guy who is already in his 30's when Jones is the only player signed who is over 30 on this team. The only exception to this I would be fine with is if we find a PF/C who can be our starting PF and back-up C. If the only good players available for a reasonable price are only slightly better than McRoberts or Hansbrough I'll pass.
                            Posey says thankyou....

                            You need both offense and defense. The pnp/pnr is hard to stop and the Pacers do need a bruiser and I think you can get both if you work the phones. I could see the Pacers trading Hibbert for a quality bruiser and relying on West's offense from the Pf spot. A Chandler West type combo would be really nice.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: What do the Pacers need to do to become a threat in the East again?

                              I say one more year on the PF. Save the gap space next year for a superstar potential. If we go .500 and exit in the first round I do not see it as a negative.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X