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

Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

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

  • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

    Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
    I don't expect him to grab 12 every night. Personally I would like to see him just get 3 offensive rebounds and 7-8 total, consistently. I think that's a reasonable expectation for a center.
    Those numbers are his season average, by the way. He is averaging 2.7 offensive rebounds and 7.1 total rebounds so he's getting consistently the exact numbers that you're asking for.

    Honestly, Roy could easily average 9 or 10 rebounds if Vogel instructed him to crash the boards every single game instead of contesting shots or running back on defense. Would that benefit the team, though? I doubt it.

    That's why I'm glad that Roy is sticking to what Vogel is telling him to do and allows his wings to clear up the boards after he forced a miss. I just cannot tolerate it when people blame Roy for doing that because they only look at a box score.
    Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
    Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

    Panopticon

    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


    • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
      I'm arguing with a lot of people for a lot of things. I enjoy debating although I really wish that this forum would be more united.
      Haha probably never happen nuntius, it's a nice thought though.

      You should of been here during the JOB years my man. It was ugly, lol. I think the board is pretty peaceful now for the most part. Everybody is happy really, we just can't agree on why. There were a few times I thought I was gonna stroke out in the middle of a post back then. Fighting everyday, all day. But most of us still come here and look forward to arguing with each other some more. It just shows we all are passionate about the game.

      And I enjoy your optimism nuntius, so don't take me the wrong way. And I appreciate you fallowing this team from so far away. Hope you keep rooting for the team and hopefully you can come over here and catch a game someday.
      "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

      Comment


      • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
        Those numbers are his season average, by the way. He is averaging 2.7 offensive rebounds and 7.1 total rebounds so he's getting consistently the exact numbers that you're asking for.

        Honestly, Roy could easily average 9 or 10 rebounds if Vogel instructed him to crash the boards every single game instead of contesting shots or running back on defense. Would that benefit the team, though? I doubt it.

        That's why I'm glad that Roy is sticking to what Vogel is telling him to do and allows his wings to clear up the boards after he forced a miss. I just cannot tolerate it when people blame Roy for doing that because they only look at a box score.
        Roy completely shut down Joakim Noah tonight. Roy impacts the game on so many levels that will not show up on the stat sheet.
        Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

        Comment


        • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

          I don't care too much about his rebounding, I am a big Roy supporter. I try to be objective and call him out when he needs it tho, but for the most part he don't bother me. As long as we take care of the glass as a team, I'm good.

          Hell one time I actually argued with unclebuck that Roy was "athletic" for a 7'2" guy, haha wow. Not so sure about that one looking back. I probably should've just went to bed that night.
          "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

          Comment


          • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

            Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
            Haha probably never happen nuntius, it's a nice thought though.

            You should of been here during the JOB years my man. It was ugly, lol. I think the board is pretty peaceful now for the most part. Everybody is happy really, we just can't agree on why. There were a few times I thought I was gonna stroke out in the middle of a post back then. Fighting everyday, all day. But most of us still come here and look forward to arguing with each other some more. It just shows we all are passionate about the game.

            And I enjoy your optimism nuntius, so don't take me the wrong way. And I appreciate you fallowing this team from so far away. Hope you keep rooting for the team and hopefully you can come over here and catch a game someday.
            I was really impressed when I first joined this board. I searched some threads from the JOB era and seeing that so many guys have stuck with the team (and the forum) throughout those dark years impressed me a lot. I have a lot of respect for what some of you did.

            I'm a naturally optimistic person (although I do get gloomy at times and yesterday was one of those times) and I'm always passionate about the things I believe in and that's why I often butt heads with others.

            I certainly want to visit Indiana some day. In general, I want to visit the Midwest and the Pacific Northwest.
            Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
            Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

            Panopticon

            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

              Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
              Roy completely shut down Joakim Noah tonight. Roy impacts the game on so many levels that will not show up on the stat sheet.
              I think that their battle was a draw, actually. They cancelled each other out.
              Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
              Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

              Panopticon

              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                I think that their battle was a draw, actually. They cancelled each other out.
                Roy didn't dominate Noah offensively, but Joakim really thought he was going to score vs Roy one on one
                Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                Comment


                • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                  Another comment on the low Hibbert rebounding numbers and blaming Lance for "stealing" them, can we please give credit to Lance Stephenson for being a terrific rebounder. The offensive rebound he had in the second half was incredible. This isn't Roy's fault that the best rebounder on the team is Lance. You don't typically find an elite rebounder that is only 6-5 inches tall, but Lance really has a knack for grabbing rebounds
                  Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                  Comment


                  • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                    I was really impressed when I first joined this board. I searched some threads from the JOB era and seeing that so many guys have stuck with the team (and the forum) throughout those dark years impressed me a lot. I have a lot of respect for what some of you did.

                    I'm a naturally optimistic person (although I do get gloomy at times and yesterday was one of those times) and I'm always passionate about the things I believe in and that's why I often butt heads with others.

                    I certainly want to visit Indiana some day. In general, I want to visit the Midwest and the Pacific Northwest.
                    Well the landscape here ain't much to look at man, so go to the Pacific Northwest if you want to see some beauty.

                    But if you come here be prepared to see some basketball. Go check out a game in Hinkle Fieldhouse if you can. Maybe come during our high school sectional and check out a game. And most definitely, go check out Bankers Life. We have the best gyms in the country, no doubt about it.
                    "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                    Comment


                    • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                      Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                      Another comment on the low Hibbert rebounding numbers and blaming Lance for "stealing" them, can we please give credit to Lance Stephenson for being a terrific rebounder. The offensive rebound he had in the second half was incredible. This isn't Roy's fault that the best rebounder on the team is Lance. You don't typically find an elite rebounder that is only 6-5 inches tall, but Lance really has a knack for grabbing rebounds
                      Lance is certainly a terrific rebounder and deserves credit for it. I obviously agree on that and it's one of the main reasons why I love Lance
                      Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
                      Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

                      Panopticon

                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        Stealing this from the Random Thoughts thread.


                        I wish I could just isolate the Pacers, but if this is accurate, I think it's a bit concerning Lance's passing patterns mirror Roy's while the other 4 starters have much thicker lines. I also notice Lance's thinest line is to Roy. There has to be frustration starting to boil over.
                        They play on opposite sides of the floor. Lance usually lines up with David West.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                          Originally posted by BillS View Post
                          Do all of you thinking Roy doesn't run down the court because he doesn't want to understand how our offense is designed?
                          I think it's more simple than that. Roy conserves his energy for the defensive end. He's a low stamina guy, always has been. I think it was O'Brien that told Hibbert to focus on moving efficiently on the court, like Bill Russell did, and that includes coming up the court slowly.

                          I don't fault Hibbert for being slow on offense at all. It won't matter when we hit the playoffs and the game slows down. Yes, he gets better position if he beats his opponent down court, but it's at the expense of his defense, which had been slacking before tonight's Bulls game.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                            In tonight's post game, Vogel did not blame Lance for the recent lack of ball movement. He placed the blame almost solely on the lack of screens set by the screeners. He said people have to get open for passes to be made.

                            I noticed better screens from both Roy and West, and even some screens from Lance in the Bulls game.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                              Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                              I think it's more simple than that. Roy conserves his energy for the defensive end. He's a low stamina guy, always has been. I think it was O'Brien that told Hibbert to focus on moving efficiently on the court, like Bill Russell did, and that includes coming up the court slowly.

                              I don't fault Hibbert for being slow on offense at all. It won't matter when we hit the playoffs and the game slows down. Yes, he gets better position if he beats his opponent down court, but it's at the expense of his defense, which had been slacking before tonight's Bulls game.
                              So after giving Roy **** all day because I took exception that he could pass judgement on others, I sat and focused on him for the 10 mins he played in the first qtr.. I was thinking, have you gone overboard on the big Dawg and got a little too prickly in your old age?

                              I thought his energy was really great. On 2 possessions early he was the FIRST one down the floor. Once he had Noah on his hip in the middle of the paint low and should have been rewarded, but I think we are so used to looking away, we did. So the lesson learned is that Roy is actually capable of running the floor without passing out.

                              On the first post entry (from Lance), it got to him early (I can't remember who said in this thread - first 2 secs or go somewhere else) and even though he missed the shot it was everything you would want in a post feed.

                              If we could get the kind of effort we got from Roy tonight on a more consistent basis, we would be very hard to beat.

                              very hard.

                              Big Dawg looked good tonight, but then it was a good performance pretty much across the board.
                              Last edited by seeker80; 03-22-2014, 12:46 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                                Originally posted by Since86
                                Maybe you're right, but we've yet to hear the Pacers coaching staff nor the players talk about that being an issue with GHill. We have heard them talk about it as an issue with Lance. I think their feelings towards the tendancies of their teammates carries a lot of weight.
                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                OK, or maybe George Hill is trying to run the play that is called waiting on the players to get open. Lance just goes and disregards the play.

                                Most likely George Hills plays involve others, whereas Lance's plays involve him running a quick pick and roll. You would have to watch the tape of the game to determine for sure


                                Regardless it seems the players have a problem with Lance to some degree. And whether the players should have a problem with PG or GH or DW or anyone is almost irrelevant, if his teammates have a problrem with lance that is what matters.

                                Maybe all this came to a head after Granger was traded. Traded for another guy who likes to have the ball and shoot a lot. (Turner). Maybe a few of the players were hoping Granger would be there when it counted. Just a thought
                                I think it's this: Lance's plays, both good/bad, are dramatic and very easy to spot, and Hill's plays aren't.

                                George Hill being unwilling, unable, and indecisive with the ball leads to a bad shot. Lance dribbles through the legs for a few seconds and takes a bad fadeaway jumper.

                                Both plays have the same exact effect, and Hill's occurs more frequently, but Lance's looks 10 times worse.

                                I agree with both of you. Lance's teammates have a valid complaint about his game lately, and their word carries a lot of weight. And ironically, Lance's play and our offense in general started going downhill when we started taking the ball out of his hands, especially in transition. Lance hasn't adjusted well and is overcompensating by overdribbling.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X