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

3/23/15 Game Thread #70: Pacers vs. Rockets

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

  • Re: 3/23/15 Game Thread #70: Pacers vs. Rockets

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    But this post, just like the last one, is focusing on one side of the ball. You're using Roy's offensive numbers to say he's not improved. You're using his offensive numbers, to say you're disappointed he didn't step up.

    We continually keep trying to judge Roy's impact on the game, based on his offensive numbers, when the majority of his impact comes on the other side of the floor.
    I could truly care less about Roys offensive numbers. The Hibbert that earned the contract vs the Heat looked like the second coming of Olajuwon, was never realistic. However, the rebounding numbers he put up in the series vs the Heat were above 10 per game.

    Its on record I appreciate roys impact on the defensive end, but i do not consider his rim protection elite, good but not great I guess you can say. I believe he is limited due to his speed/athleticsm/balance as an overall defender; and at times very vulnerable vs quick teams (ie Atlanta, Gragic - suns, western conference teams).

    point is, if Roy were a stronger rebounder I would have less to say regarding Roy Hibberts $15,000,000 dollar contract.

    I get Roy impacts the game defensively, but I do not consider him one of the all-time greats by any stretch. I would simply like to see Roy dominate the boards more than he does in addition too strong defense. any offense from roy is a bonus, esp if its off of putbacks in the paint - in which roy really has a hard time on a carom going back up wiht any sense of balance.

    I know at one point Denari had mentioned the pacers were getting out rebounded during the recent slump of play. Obviously DWEST is a part of the equation, but Roy also has to take a fair share of the blame.

    Roys rebounding standards are average by all estimations. That's the area of his game realistically there was reason for optimism.

    Point blank. I at times question the effort given by Roy on the boards. The rebounding is the area of Roys game that brings the most disappointment for me as a fan.

    Comment


    • Re: 3/23/15 Game Thread #70: Pacers vs. Rockets

      Originally posted by Cousy47 View Post
      Wow! that discussion fell apart in a hurry. There are a few truths in PP's argument about Roy, but the bottom line is, you can't trade a player nobody wants. Roy has an option for next year, the Pacers don't. They matched a contract that was what the League priced Roy at, and it's either worked or not. We can't just tell him to go away if he opts in for his contract, we can't pay him to go away and lose the salary cap. We CANNOT replace Hibbert or West if they don't leave on their own.
      CJ Miles is what we knew he was. He's a decent, streaky backup 2/3 who can shoot you into or out of a game. Stuckey is the same, just cheaper. Damo is at least a year away from being able to play long minutes against good competition, if ever.
      IMO, the Pacers are in the same situation as the Knicks, Nets and Lakers. Too much salary tied up in players who are no longer worth the money and not tradeable for value.
      Next year we have an all-star level SF coming back, a decent backup in Solo, a very solid PG in GH with a decent backup in Watson. We can live with Roy and Ian if our defensive scheme is to remain the same.
      That leaves us in need of a starting quality SG and PF. Assuming West and Roy stay, I would like us to draft or trade for a quality 4/5 to start the process of replacing David and/or Roy.Easy, right?
      wrong. I have searched rock and crevice and see no adequate replacements for DWEST via free agency. draft is always a crapshoot.

      I dont see us acquiring a Horford, Lamarcus, KD type of player even with the cap space.

      http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11...ents-2015-2016

      I believe in all likelihood we are going to have to swing for the fences with second tier type players and hope for the best. Two under the radar type additons that could help may be a Danny Green (SA) or even the Luc a Moute Mbah a Moute (Philly).


      I am very intrigued to find out how the Front Office can upgrade this roster. The unrestricted free agents that are elite may as well consider a pipedream, the draft where we are selecting has no sure fire selections, and DWest is all but done this season after next.

      Not a good feeling seeing this championship window close so quickly. First Danny Granger got hurt, then last years cluster, this season PG.

      sh*tty timing.

      Comment


      • Re: 3/23/15 Game Thread #70: Pacers vs. Rockets

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        But this post, just like the last one, is focusing on one side of the ball. You're using Roy's offensive numbers to say he's not improved. You're using his offensive numbers, to say you're disappointed he didn't step up.

        We continually keep trying to judge Roy's impact on the game, based on his offensive numbers, when the majority of his impact comes on the other side of the floor.
        But, if so, he's still not living up to his contract, IMO. It's not like every player are hesitant going into the paint when Roy is there. I'm seeing alot of guards go right into him and usually getting the bucket or foul; or, they use his slowness against him (ex. Harden on the pic-and-roll the other night/Wade in last years playoffs). And it's not like he's winning a big advantage one-on-one against other centers.

        I'm not saying he's complete garbage; but, again, there isn't anyone who can get me to change my stance on him, and tell me he's earning that contract offensively or defensely, when I'm watching alot of games of him getting into foul trouble, getting torched, and/or getting outrebounded. Sure, there are times that he'll get 20 points, or 14 rebounds, or 7 blocks....but then, he'll go through like a 5-10 game stretch of scoring way below 10 ppg, getting 2 rebounds, and how many fouls he has being his best numbered stat. He's just way, way too inconsistant for my liking.

        Comment


        • Re: 3/23/15 Game Thread #70: Pacers vs. Rockets

          Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
          I am very intrigued to find out how the Front Office can upgrade this roster.
          I agree. If West returns (I know Hibbert will), we will be limited in what we can do.

          I remember when JO was all but done and I thought there was no way we could get rid of his $20 million contract, Bird managed to do that, so maybe he has a trick or two that he will pull off this summer.

          The good news is that I think there will be a lot of players taking 1 year contracts this summer. That means in the summer of 2016 when Hibbert, West and Mahinmi come off the books, there should be some adequate replacements available.

          Comment


          • Re: 3/23/15 Game Thread #70: Pacers vs. Rockets

            Originally posted by pogi View Post
            But, if so, he's still not living up to his contract, IMO. It's not like every player are hesitant going into the paint when Roy is there. I'm seeing alot of guards go right into him and usually getting the bucket or foul; or, they use his slowness against him (ex. Harden on the pic-and-roll the other night/Wade in last years playoffs). And it's not like he's winning a big advantage one-on-one against other centers.

            I'm not saying he's complete garbage; but, again, there isn't anyone who can get me to change my stance on him, and tell me he's earning that contract offensively or defensely, when I'm watching alot of games of him getting into foul trouble, getting torched, and/or getting outrebounded. Sure, there are times that he'll get 20 points, or 14 rebounds, or 7 blocks....but then, he'll go through like a 5-10 game stretch of scoring way below 10 ppg, getting 2 rebounds, and how many fouls he has being his best numbered stat. He's just way, way too inconsistant for my liking.
            If the highlighted was true, stats would reflect it, somewhere. Roy averages less than 3fouls per game, and is still has one of the best defensive FG% in the entire league.

            And that's cool Roy loses the individual rebounding battle with his opponent, considering the Pacers are still 6th in the league in rebounding, and tied for 1st for defensive rebounding% with Char.


            And his contract is irrelevant. He's at the very end of it right now. The horse isn't just dead, it's been buried and a house as been built on top of the plot.
            Last edited by Since86; 03-25-2015, 11:22 AM.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • Re: 3/23/15 Game Thread #70: Pacers vs. Rockets

              Originally posted by sav View Post
              I agree. If West returns (I know Hibbert will), we will be limited in what we can do.

              I remember when JO was all but done and I thought there was no way we could get rid of his $20 million contract, Bird managed to do that, so maybe he has a trick or two that he will pull off this summer.

              The good news is that I think there will be a lot of players taking 1 year contracts this summer. That means in the summer of 2016 when Hibbert, West and Mahinmi come off the books, there should be some adequate replacements available.

              We all hope there are some "adequate" replacements. but from this list I dont see it. and of those that are... whats the likelihood they end up in Indiana.


              http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11...ents-2015-2016

              Hence the reason I was suggesting stock up on second tier players. Alas... Danny Green, Luc a Mbah a Moute, etc.

              Comment


              • Re: 3/23/15 Game Thread #70: Pacers vs. Rockets

                Some people, myself included, contend that having Hibbert and West on the court at the same time makes our bigs to slow and immobile. Just out of curiosity, I went back to the start of the season to see what Hibbert was doing. At that time our Centers were Hibbert and Mahinmi and our PF's were Scola and Allen.

                Hibbert played 12 games and then in game 13 injured his ankle. I took the stats from those 12 games and here is what they look like:

                30 mpg
                14 ppg
                8.3 rpg
                3 blg
                1.75 apg
                1.9 TOpg
                47% FG
                81% FT

                He also averaged 4.5 FT attempts per game.
                The team was 5-7 in that stretch.

                I know 12 games is a small sample size, but it seems to me like Hibbert is more effective with a more mobile PF.

                Comment


                • Re: 3/23/15 Game Thread #70: Pacers vs. Rockets

                  Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                  We all hope there are some "adequate" replacements. but from this list I dont see it. and of those that are... whats the likelihood they end up in Indiana.


                  http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11...ents-2015-2016

                  Hence the reason I was suggesting stock up on second tier players. Alas... Danny Green, Luc a Mbah a Moute, etc.
                  We are probably going to have to make some kind of trade to find West's replacement...unless Whittington is the answer. After all, Larry did say he was very high on him.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 3/23/15 Game Thread #70: Pacers vs. Rockets

                    [
                    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                    If the highlighted was true, stats would reflect it, somewhere. Roy averages less than 3fouls per game,
                    Does that stat show when he accumulates those fouls? For instance, if he gets 2 fouls in the first 5 minutes of the game and has to sit for a majority of the first half?

                    and is still has one of the best defensive FG% in the entire league.
                    Which he should, considering that he's usually the biggest player on the court most of the times.

                    And that's cool Roy loses the individual rebounding battle with his opponent, considering the Pacers are still 6th in the league in rebounding, and tied for 1st for defensive rebounding% with Char.
                    Maybe saying "getting torched" wasn't the correct phrase to use, but regardless of stats, I still see players go right at him in crucial moments (like the last few minutes till end of half or end of game) and often get a bucket or the foul called. And, granted, there are times that Roy has stuffed their shot back into their face, or play good enough defense and whatnot....but, I find it more common, that a star player will get the best of Roy in these situations, than the opposite.

                    And his contract is irrelevant. He's at the very end of it right now. The horse isn't just dead, it's been buried and a house as been built on top of the plot.
                    I disagree. Whether in NBA, NFL, MLB, whatever....a players contract is always relevant.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 3/23/15 Game Thread #70: Pacers vs. Rockets

                      Originally posted by pogi View Post
                      I disagree. Whether in NBA, NFL, MLB, whatever....a players contract is always relevant.
                      For the Front office, but for our discussions? It's worthless. No amount of whining about it will lower the contract one cent, so why in the world does every thread that even broaches the subject of Roy need to have 5 people bringing up his contract?

                      We might as well start talking about how the sun should stay out longer. At some point in time we need to accept it, and realize that it is what it is, and it's what it's going to be no matter how many people wish it was different.

                      EDIT:
                      Originally posted by pogi View Post
                      Does that stat show when he accumulates those fouls? For instance, if he gets 2 fouls in the first 5 minutes of the game and has to sit for a majority of the first half?
                      No it doesn't. But he's averaging less than 3 per game. In order for the average to be that low, that has to mean that he goes entire halves without fouling a single time, and I don't think that's true either.
                      Last edited by Since86; 03-25-2015, 03:37 PM.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 3/23/15 Game Thread #70: Pacers vs. Rockets

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        We might as well start talking about how the sun should stay out longer.
                        Isn't that why we have Daylight Saving Time?
                        BillS

                        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                        Comment


                        • Re: 3/23/15 Game Thread #70: Pacers vs. Rockets

                          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                          For the Front office, but for our discussions? It's worthless. No amount of whining about it will lower the contract one cent, so why in the world does every thread that even broaches the subject of Roy need to have 5 people bringing up his contract?

                          It is like on a soccer board when people bring up a city for expansion in the NASL someone always asks is there an owner. It is like, obviously not as there is no team. The odds of that person being in the know, or anyone on that board for that matter, of any potential owners is virtually zero. It should be irrelevant to the discussion because it isn't something fans on a message board will know anything about, and because if there was an owner there would have been an announcement instead of just fan speculation. People just can't seem to wrap their heads around that simple concept though.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 3/23/15 Game Thread #70: Pacers vs. Rockets

                            Came back to check out the article you embedded, PP. Wish I hadn't. There is not a lot of unrestricted PF, SG that I could see we would have a really good chance of getting. And, of course, you're right about the draft, anywhere outside the top 10 is a crapshoot. A lot of what the Pacers can do with the money they have depends on who decides to opt in for next year and who we decide to keep. I'm for keeping Scola and Stuckey if the price is right but we're going to need some real growth from Solo and Rudez next season. Paul George MUST come back full strength next year.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X