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

The Pacers have the 6th best FG% defense in NBA history

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

  • #61
    Re: The Pacers have the 6th best FG% defense in NBA history

    Originally posted by Mad-Mad-Mario View Post
    You mean a dysfunctional Lakers team, that nobody thought played like they had earlier in the year. Oh and 5 games against the offensively inclined bucks totally makes up for the 13 playoff games against Pacers and Bucks.

    Are Pistons fans so disappointed by their current team that they have to go back and retroactively go back and add to their former glory.
    Are some Pacer fans so unaccustomed to success that they have to pretend this year's squad is one of the best defensive teams of all time?
    #DBAP

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: The Pacers have the 6th best FG% defense in NBA history

      Originally posted by Deadshot View Post
      That seems to make what Indy is doing in this season seem a little more impressive then I think.
      The average team FG% for 03-04 was .439.
      The average for this season? .447.

      In 03-04, eight teams shot under .430, and only four teams shot over .450.
      This season, four teams shoot under .430, and a whopping 11 teams shoot over .450.

      In 03-04, only six teams shot a FG% higher than the current season's average, whereas, 20 of the league's 30 teams are shooting higher than 03-04's FG% average.

      Those Pistons were a great defensive team, sure, but no rational person (that excludes a few of you, sadly...) can deny that their defensive numbers are clearly inflated by the fact that 03-04 was arguably the low-point of modern NBA offense. They were a slow-paced, plodding, ugly team, playing in the era of hideous offense.

      My personal opinion is that those Pistons deserve about 80% of the credit for the defensive numbers they put up, while the other 20% is credited to terrible offense, league-wide. I'd put those numbers at about 90/10 for this current Pacers team.

      One of the best testaments to the Pacers' defensive dominance is to compare their top-ranked oFG% (.413) to the second-ranked oFG% (Warriors; .429), and see how it stacks up to past margins.

      Here are the top-ranked oFG%'s, and their margin over the second-ranked oFG's, since 1990:

      1. 1993 Knicks (3.0)
      2. 1998 Spurs (1.7)
      3T. 2013 Pacers (1.6)
      3T. 1995 Knicks (1.6)
      5. 2008 Celtics (1.4)
      6. 1990: Pistons (0.8)
      7T. 2003 Kings (0.7)
      7T. 1997 Knicks (0.7)
      7T. 1994 Knicks (0.7)
      10T. 2007 Rockets (0.6)
      10T. 2000 Lakers (0.6)
      12T. 2011 Bulls (0.4)
      12T. 1996 Heat (0.4)
      12T. 1991 Spurs (0.4)
      15T. 2006: Bulls (0.3)
      15T. 2004: Spurs (0.3)
      17T. 2012: Celtics (0.2)
      17T. 2001: Knicks (0.2)
      18T. 2010 Magic (0.1)
      18T. 2005 Bulls (0.1)
      18T. 2002 Lakers (0.1)
      18T. 1999 Spurs (0.1)
      18T. 1992 Spurs (0.1)
      23. 2009 Celtics (<0.1)

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: The Pacers have the 6th best FG% defense in NBA history

        I'm honestly not surprised, they have been playing some of the best defense i've ever seen.
        Turner and Young are THE FUTURE!

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: The Pacers have the 6th best FG% defense in NBA history

          People need to lay off Kstat, that Pistons team absolutely was one of the best ever defenses. I don't understand why people are trying to downplay their accomplishments.
          That'll do.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: The Pacers have the 6th best FG% defense in NBA history

            Originally posted by pig norton View Post
            People need to lay off Kstat, that Pistons team absolutely was one of the best ever defenses. I don't understand why people are trying to downplay their accomplishments.
            Agree with this. Kstat's right. That Pistons team was phenomenal.

            Shags is wrong, though, to insinuate that this Pacers' defense is not one of the best ever.
            This space for rent.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: The Pacers have the 6th best FG% defense in NBA history

              I'd worked through the rankings of the Pistons playoff opponents and how they fared, but it seemed more like a pile on against KStat and I'm not really trying to tear that team down because once they added Sheed they were tough.

              But with some of the other discussions let me bring up one of the main findings. They did hold their opponents to lower than their normal FG%, but the Nets and Pacers were below average FG% teams and fundamentally that post-season FG% number was built on 7 games - the first game vs the Nets (in the 25% range) and the 6 games vs the Pacers. The Nets actually went over 41% for 4 of the games (as I recall from looking last night) and the Bucks/Lakers both shot in the "decent" low 40% for their series.

              But the Pacers...well they couldn't make a shot to save their life apart from one game and basically won at all on their own defense. This doesn't really dismiss the Pistons effort and has nothing to do with the sub-70 run (though league-wide the pace was much slower that year), but it does suggest factually that if you take out that Pacers series and only face teams with top 14 offenses DURING THE PLAYOFFS (where you'd expect to find quality teams) then the Pistons don't put up a number nearly as nasty as they did.

              They were title caliber and one of the great defenses, but dwarfing what other great defenses did? No. Put them in the 2000 Finals and you don't see them keeping LA or Indy under 80 points. In my opinion obviously.

              Remember that this is why the Pacers made the Al for Jackson trade. Detroit was able to use Sheed/Ben/Prince on the frontline as length against any interior offense, and the Pacers found out quickly they only had one outside threat - Reggie. So they swapped low post Al for outside shooting Jackson, and right before the brawl it appeared to have worked. Stupid brawl helped ruin what could have been a fantastic 3-4 year rivalry on par with 90's Pacers/Knicks.




              Anyway to me it seems to be truth to say that the Pistons were an awesome defense and the currrent Pacers at full strength (but even without DG) are an elite defense. The days of a pace that supports regular sub-70 games is gone, but the Pacers are capable of knocking out several sub-80s games in a row in a season when that's abnormal.

              Comment


              • #67
                We were hurt... We were dysfunctional....we just couldn't make shots....yeah, I recall getting that a lot in 2004. From everybody.

                And yes, take out their best performances and the averages drop. That's stunning. I've never, ever heard that one before...

                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


                • #68
                  Re: The Pacers have the 6th best FG% defense in NBA history

                  Originally posted by Kstat View Post

                  And yes, take out their best performances and the averages drop. That's stunning. I've never, ever heard that one before...
                  Yeah and if only we could add another 59 games we could actually have a decent comparison to other great defensive teams. They were simply a great defensive team over a 23 game stretch of a season (or however many games it was). Why so defensive?

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    I'm not being defensive at all. I'm just pointing out they set more defensive records in 25 games than any other team did over 82.

                    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


                    • #70
                      Re: The Pacers have the 6th best FG% defense in NBA history

                      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                      I'm not being defensive at all. I'm just pointing out they set more defensive records in 25 games than any other team did over 82.
                      I bet if you took the best 25 game stretch of some of those other elite teams they would put that Pistons mark to shame.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: The Pacers have the 6th best FG% defense in NBA history

                        Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                        I'm not being defensive at all. I'm just pointing out they set more defensive records in 25 games than any other team did over 82.
                        But doing it over an 82 game season is what makes a defense truly great, fighting through fatigue and injury. As you said, Sheed got hurt and limited what they could do on defense. Do you think they put up the same insane numbers over 82 games?

                        Having said that, I think people here are underestimating that Pistons defense. If I needed to win a game, I'd take them over this year's Pacers defense.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Mad-Mad-Mario View Post
                          I bet if you took the best 25 game stretch of some of those other elite teams they would put that Pistons mark to shame.
                          Wow....you're really just guessing and throwing slop at the wall, huh?

                          That team held more teams under 70 points in their last 25 games than any other NBA team in history managed in 82...so I'm going to go out on a limb and say no.

                          At one point, they strung together five in a row. The old NBA record was two. They also hold the NBA record for 36 straight games keeping opponents under 100.

                          The bottom line is, even if you take the averages out of the equation, they strung together more dominating defensive performances in 25 games than any other team has ever cobbled together in 82.
                          Last edited by Kstat; 01-14-2013, 08:02 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


                          • #73
                            Re: The Pacers have the 6th best FG% defense in NBA history

                            This is really just sad. If you need to pretend like that should go right on ahead. The rest of us over here in reality no otherwise. Btw in those 25 games you played a whopping 2 top 10 offenses

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: The Pacers have the 6th best FG% defense in NBA history

                              I've often said two things.

                              The Pistons after they acquired Sheed were the best defensive team I have ever seen. But the rules were changed after that season and the Pistons style they played in 2004 would cause them to foul way too much to be effective.

                              However if that Pistons team were playing right now, they would still be a great defensive team, just different because of the rules - but still great. The best I have ever seen? I don't know that - would have to see how they adjusted to the new rules.
                              Last edited by Unclebuck; 01-14-2013, 12:30 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: The Pacers have the 6th best FG% defense in NBA history

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                I've often said two things.

                                The Pistons after they acquired Sheed were the best defensive team I have ever seen. But the rules were changed after that season and the Pistons style they played in 2004 would cause them to foul way too much to be effective.

                                However if that Pistons team were playing right now, they would still be a great defensive team, just different because of the rules - but still great. The best I have ever seen? I don't know that
                                About as true as it gets. I still remember when the Pistons were gifted Rasheed. I loved our team and had faith in them but immediately stated that Rasheed was the x-factor and "there went our championship".

                                In our Pacers history, two of my biggest regrets are the day the Pistons acquired Rasheed and the Pacers trading Antonio a year too early.

                                I believe both moves cost the Pacers a championship.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X