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

Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games. Updated post #106 with a good article

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

  • Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games. Updated post #106 with a good article

    Many of us don't like the three point shot, some of us hate it. Well more than ever the best teams in the NBA take and make the most three point shots.

    In these NBA playoffs, the top 4 teams in three pointers attempted are the Warriors, Hawks, Rockets and Cavs in that order.

    OK you say, well that is just coincidence.

    Looking at the past regular season - The top 5 teams in makes are in order. Rockets, Warriors, Clippers, Cavs and Hawks. Attempts, the Hawks are 7th, but the other three final four teams are ranked 1, 2 and 4.

    That is not just a coincidence.

    The fact is the top teams in the NBA take a lot of threes and hit a lot of threes. This is not going to change. Pacers need to get more three point shooters and they need to let them fly.

    The stretch four is here to stay, making a lot of threes is a very key component needed to be a top team in the NBA.
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 06-04-2015, 11:20 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games

    I for one love watching the Warriors and Hawks play. Passing, ball movement and player movement is a lot more fun than watching isolations.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games

      Important to note that taking 3s isn't merely for the sake of taking 3s. It's to open up the floor for cuts to the basket as well as any post players you have. These days, with the elimination of the Illegal Defense, it's easier for defenses to pack the paint and defend the post. So if you can't shoot the 3, teams are just going to clog the paint and congest passing lanes. That's basically what the Warriors did to the Griz. Grizz shot something like 38% in the last 3 games.

      Of note: I went to a D-League game featuring the Santa Cruz Warriors and Rio Grande VIpers (Houston Rockets affiliate). I could probably count the number of mid range jumpers the Vipers took on 1 hand. Everything from them was either a 3, layup, or getting to the FT line. The Rockets' philosophy trickles down directly to their D League affiliate.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games

        JOB was a visionary.

        edit: But seriously, if you have good 3pt shooters, let them shoot a lot. Pacers do need better 3pt shooters, but even when they were respectable, they were still in the phase of force feeding Hibbert, with the awful inside-out strategy.
        First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games

          Three point shooting has done one thing for these winning teams. It has opened up the floor and allowed for the ball to not get stuck as much on one side. I don't have time to look it up. But I bet we are one of the worst teams in the last decade at utilizing the corner three. If that is not a threat in your offense you will never open up the lane.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games

            What's interesting about the Rockets is that while they are a huge volume 3P team, their shooting percentage is actually quite average. They shot 34.8% as a team in the regular season, and coincidentally are currently shooting the same percentage in the playoffs. This is actually a little below the Pacers' mark (35.2%) which is around the league average.

            I tend to buy the spacing argument as d_c mentioned. Even shooting at a league average rate, having the defense chase your shooters out to the 3 pt line gives a big boost to the offense.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games

              I think we've definitely improved this year with our 3 point shooting and it's only going to continue to improve with getting PG back. Think what I said is straight up nuts? Well hear me out:

              For the season as a whole, we shot about the same percentage wise (about 35%) as the previous year, but also increased in the number of makes and attempts (fun fact: OKC only made 20 more 3 point shots than we did this season).

              However, after we got George Hill back on January 23rd, we then shot 38.2% from 3 from that point until the end of the season. Before that, we were shooting a pretty pathetic 32.3% from long range. Additionally, that put us 4th (vs. 24th before) in the NBA percentage wise for that time period and 13th (vs. 22nd before) in total makes.

              This isn't directed at anyone at all but more of a general statement, but I don't think we're as crappy of a 3 point shooting team as a lot of people believe with a healthy roster. Adding PG back into the mix should also improve the quality of looks for out outside shooters next season.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games

                I want shots that players can make. I don't care where the shots are taken, only that they're good shots taken by players with the ability to make them. Trying to decide whether it should be a two or a three, without discussing who, is like trying to build a house and starting with the roof.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  I want shots that players can make. I don't care where the shots are taken, only that they're good shots taken by players with the ability to make them. Trying to decide whether it should be a two or a three, without discussing who, is like trying to build a house and starting with the roof.
                  You'd think that would make sense. But that's exactly what Houston is doing. Whether it's Harden (37.5%) or Ariza (35.0%), or Smoove (33.0%) or Brewer (28.4%), the Rockets' perimeter players all take a massive amount of 3's, and it's kinda working.

                  It's one thing to build around elite shooters like Curry or Thompson or Korver, it's quite another to rely on more pedestrian shooters like what Houston is doing.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games

                    Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                    You'd think that would make sense. But that's exactly what Houston is doing. Whether it's Harden (37.5%) or Ariza (35.0%), or Smoove (33.0%) or Brewer (28.4%), the Rockets' perimeter players all take a massive amount of 3's, and it's kinda working.

                    It's one thing to build around elite shooters like Curry or Thompson or Korver, it's quite another to rely on more pedestrian shooters like what Houston is doing.
                    Yep. Rockets are basically just playing the stats and moneyballing it. They're doing what Morey has been preaching, and so far it's worked for them.

                    They're easily the most religious team when it comes to the "3 or layup (or foul)" philosophy set out by their management.

                    It's ugly, but they just beat what I feel was a better team than them (Clippers) because of it.

                    Rockets are basically doing the equivalent of card counting in blackjack. Play the percentages regardless of each individual situation and count on the fact that you'll come out ahead based on stats, law of large numbers or whatever else they're using for analytics.
                    Last edited by d_c; 05-19-2015, 12:49 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games

                      Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                      You'd think that would make sense. But that's exactly what Houston is doing. Whether it's Harden (37.5%) or Ariza (35.0%), or Smoove (33.0%) or Brewer (28.4%), the Rockets' perimeter players all take a massive amount of 3's, and it's kinda working.

                      It's one thing to build around elite shooters like Curry or Thompson or Korver, it's quite another to rely on more pedestrian shooters like what Houston is doing.

                      But there's a lot of examples out there that it doesn't work for. The heavy reliance on 3pt shooting isn't a new phenomenon.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        But there's a lot of examples out there that it doesn't work for. The heavy reliance on 3pt shooting isn't a new phenomenon.
                        Not to the same scale that the Rockets are doing. I don't have time to look it up right now, but believe me it's historic.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games

                          I know it's historic. I'm saying the thought process of "well it works for Houston, so it will work X" doesn't really pan out, because there's just as many instances of teams that relied heavily (even if it's not AS heavily) on 3pters.

                          I honestly think Houston's large number of FT attempts per game is the balance. A lot of teams that shoot 3's don't get to the FT line. Houston has the luxury of having James "I'll flop my way to 12FTA/gm" Harden that most teams don't.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            I know it's historic. I'm saying the thought process of "well it works for Houston, so it will work X" doesn't really pan out, because there's just as many instances of teams that relied heavily (even if it's not AS heavily) on 3pters.

                            I honestly think Houston's large number of FT attempts per game is the balance. A lot of teams that shoot 3's don't get to the FT line. Houston has the luxury of having James "I'll flop my way to 12FTA/gm" Harden that most teams don't.
                            The bottom line is the Rockets made it their mission to eliminate mid-range/long 2's from their repertoire. That was the name of their game. They wanted a high percentage 2 first (who doesn't?). Otherwise, they'd go for a lower percentage jump shot that would reward you with an extra point if you made it.

                            Analytics told them that long 2's = bad, so they avoid them like the plague. Somebody should really pull up some of their shot charts and compare them with other teams (I'm lazy).

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Love it or hate it, the 3pt. shot wins games

                              I get that. That's exactly what JOB preached too, and we all saw how that worked out. Success is completely dependent on who is taking the shot, not where the shot is being taken. Like every strategy, it comes down to execution. You either have the horses, or you don't. Houston does, inspite of their mediocre 3pt% because of their FTs.

                              EDIT: Harden led the league in total FTA on the season with 824. Westbrook was #2 with......654. So Harden shot nearly 20% more than the #2. And then you realize that Cousins was #3 with 541, which means Harden shot 35% more FTs than Cousin. Harden tied for #3 in 3PTA.
                              Last edited by Since86; 05-19-2015, 01:31 PM.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X