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 would Reggie be without the 3???

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

  • What would Reggie be without the 3???

    http://www.indystar.com/articles/1/225891-7951-179.html

    The article about the 3 point shot in today's Indy Star got me to thinking.....

    Just how effective an NBA player would Reggie Miller have been without the 3 point shot? How might his legacy be different if he didn't have that line to step back behind? Would he still be considered a possible Hall-of-Famer?

    How do you envision his career turning out if the 3 point line didn't exist?

  • #2
    Re: What would Reggie be without the 3???

    I still think he would be about where he is now. I think his shooting percentage from mid-range would have been higher creating the same number of points.
    The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: What would Reggie be without the 3???

      Originally posted by A-Train
      http://www.indystar.com/articles/1/225891-7951-179.html

      The article about the 3 point shot in today's Indy Star got me to thinking.....

      Just how effective an NBA player would Reggie Miller have been without the 3 point shot? How might his legacy be different if he didn't have that line to step back behind? Would he still be considered a possible Hall-of-Famer?

      How do you envision his career turning out if the 3 point line didn't exist?
      Call me dumb but I always thought Reggie would have had a better career if he didn't have the three point shot. I don't know if he would have lasted as long on the court because of it but man that guy had a mid-range game that was just wonderfull to watch.

      I think he became to dependant on the gunslinger mentality.

      It's like the night he scored 57 vs. the Hornets. He had that with like 4 min. to go but instead of driving to get his points he kept jacking up three after three trying to get to 60 on the nose. If he would have only driven he could have had 65 that night.

      Don't get me wrong, he would be nowhere as famous (Maybe) because that is what he is known for. But I just think he screwed himself out of about 4-5 more ppg because of it.

      But that's just me.

      Good quesiton though.


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

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: What would Reggie be without the 3???

        His floater, his mid-range game...

        Remember Larry Bird used to use him in the post against shorter SGs.

        His game wasn't dependent on that line that he became synomyous with, although his reputation was...
        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: What would Reggie be without the 3???

          It would be different but remember he learned the three because it was there. He would have learned something else had it not been there.

          Even if there was no three point line and say he had practiced shooting from that far back he would still have been important because he would have stretched the defense of the other team.

          He just would not have as many points.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: What would Reggie be without the 3???

            Jerry West never played with a 3-point line.

            That said, there's one problem. Think of all those game tying/winning shots. They wouldn't have tied/won the game, because they'd only be worth two points. For example, Game 1 against NY in '95 would have been "6 points in 8.1 seconds", which only would have tied the game, if memory serves. Of course, this is all moot because you'd have to go back and change every 3-pointer by either team in every game to 2's.
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: What would Reggie be without the 3???

              Originally posted by Kegboy
              Of course, this is all moot because you'd have to go back and change every 3-pointer by either team in every game to 2's.
              Exactly. The score of the game would be different to begin with.

              Originally posted by Ragnar
              He just would not have as many points.
              Sometimes, the best answer is the most obvious one!

              Originally posted by Peck
              Call me dumb but I always thought Reggie would have had a better career if he didn't have the three point shot. I don't know if he would have lasted as long on the court because of it but man that guy had a mid-range game that was just wonderfull to watch.
              Interesting point. This has always been a source of frustration for me when it comes to Reggie.... I've always thought he could have done more as a player. When he would incorporate those floating jumpers, drives to the bucket, mid-range game... he was capable of being more of a complete player.

              It could very well be that the 3 point line "forced" him into being a more one dimensional player.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: What would Reggie be without the 3???

                He would have been.......Rip Hamilton

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: What would Reggie be without the 3???

                  Rip Hamilton? Please, Reggie Miller is Reggie! Rip Hamilton is Reggie wannabee.. hehe! Back to topic.. A-Train i thinked about that alot of times actually and i have studied Reggies game since 1989, i had a magazine from early 90s that i cant find today, maybe i throwed it Anyways they did a stats research on Reggies 3PT% 2PT% Ratio and gave his PPA (points per attempt) thru his career, and they said how Reggies stats would maybe look like if he would take less 3PT shots and more 2PT shots... It showed that Reggies 3PT% thru his career was 40% and 2PT% was somewhere in 60%.. which leaves his FG% at 50%... so with other words, if Reggie would only shoot 2PT shots he would had a Rip Hamilton look a like game bit with a tremendously Accurate shot at 60%... that would bring him to at least 30 PPG thru his career... maybe even 40 PPG who knows? So the answer is YES, he would score alot more, but that doesnt mean he would be better, because he was not that kind of player... He is not one of those players that ballhogs just for stats.. You know i cant remember only ONE GAME there reggie has scored 40 Points and lost the game... he is just phenomenal

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: What would Reggie be without the 3???

                    Originally posted by 3ptmiller
                    ...maybe even 40 PPG who knows?
                    10 points per game better than Wilt and Jordan.

                    However, if it raised his average by seven-to-nine PPG, that put him at 27 ppg for his career, that would put him right in line with Jerry West. That makes sense. Here's another relevant, tangible question.. would Jerry West have averaged seven fewer PPG with the three-point line?
                    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                    And life itself, rushing over me
                    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: What would Reggie be without the 3???

                      Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                      10 points per game better than Wilt and Jordan.

                      However, if it raised his average by seven-to-nine PPG, that put him at 27 ppg for his career, that would put him right in line with Jerry West. That makes sense. Here's another relevant, tangible question.. would Jerry West have averaged seven fewer PPG with the three-point line?
                      Yea man thats interesting, you never know! But all i know is that having 60% FG percentage is very accurate.. think about it, Reggie took like 15-30 Attempts per game... Lets do some research:

                      15 x 2 means 30 points
                      30 x 2 means 60 points
                      60% of 15 Attempts is 9 hits of 15
                      60% of 30 Attempts is 18 hits of 30
                      9 x 2 means 18 points
                      18 x 2 means 36 points
                      18+36 = 54 points in 2 games
                      54 / 2 = 27 points per game at minimum (not bad at all!!)

                      Plus he took like 5 attempts from the FreeThrow line and even more.. and sometimes could take even more than 30 Attempts from 2PT territory and even almost hit ALL shots.. so we are talking about 30+++ ppg here ... and with other words, if Reggie decided to step in and shooter closer to basket he would be the greatest player of all time? Nice thought!! Well its a shame, he offered 2500 3PTs for this and hellava lot Miller Clutch moments.. but i shall not underestimate him.. hall of famer for sure!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: What would Reggie be without the 3???

                        Originally posted by A-Train
                        http://www.indystar.com/articles/1/225891-7951-179.html

                        The article about the 3 point shot in today's Indy Star got me to thinking.....

                        Just how effective an NBA player would Reggie Miller have been without the 3 point shot? How might his legacy be different if he didn't have that line to step back behind? Would he still be considered a possible Hall-of-Famer?

                        How do you envision his career turning out if the 3 point line didn't exist?
                        Negating the homer factor, I don't think Reggie would have come close to being a HOFer.

                        He fell in love with the three pointer cause he was too scrawny to tough it out down lower. As his career went on I got angrier and angrier at him at his overreliance on the big shot (three pointer). He became a go-to guy because he hit the big shot. Take away the big shot, I don't know that Reggie is the go-to guy.

                        Most telling about Reggie is his time with Larry Brown. Reggie finally had a coach who pushed him to be more than he was. I've mentioned this before, but remember that year where we started the season with Smits out, along with McKey. Reggie was basically our sole source of offense. LB started chiding him in the press a bit about how he needed to develop more of a mid-range game. How he needed to use his size in the paint. He started pushing Reggie and chastizing him during the game when he stood safely on the perimiter and tried to snipe.

                        I was never a Reggie fan (until recently). but that was the first time I saw the potential for him to be a dominant player. That's when he started making that running floater. He started posting guys up. He went at guys. I kept thinking how if he played like that, he'd be another Clyde Drexler, or some such player.

                        but he didn't keep it up. :

                        He reverted back to his old ways and you could sense the disappointment in Larry. I especially was bothered that Reggie joined the chorus dissing Larry as being to hard on the team. I kept thinking, LB pushed you to be a better all around player and you couldn't take it.

                        Only when age started catching up with Reggie did he start truly working on his defense and going back to the well of what he learned with Brown. Without the 3 pt shot, I think Reggie would have been one of those really good players you have some fond memories of, but I don't see him approaching the HOF.

                        I'm sure that opinion won't sit well with some!
                        Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: What would Reggie be without the 3???

                          Yea he would never be my favourite player today if he was not killing people from the 3PT Line... i cant imagine him playing without it, he would then be just another... Jordan? I just loved it when Reggie just dribbled in front of Spike Lees face 1 Foot in front of him and "swisch!!" and reggie turns around gives him the "choke"... hahaha he just makes me laugh, reggie rules!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: What would Reggie be without the 3???

                            Originally posted by 3ptmiller
                            Yea he would never be my favourite player today if he was not killing people from the 3PT Line... i cant imagine him playing without it, he would then be just another... Jordan? I just loved it when Reggie just dribbled in front of Spike Lees face 1 Foot in front of him and "swisch!!" and reggie turns around gives him the "choke"... hahaha he just makes me laugh, reggie rules!
                            Yeah, take away the 3 ball and Reggie would just be nothing more than Michael Jordan. The 3 ball is what separates Reggie from the likes of a Jordan. Without it, we're talking about the same player....
















                            Ummmmm ok..... If you say so...



                            -Bball
                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

                            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X