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

Why is defense a bad word in the NBA

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

  • #31
    Re: Why is defense a bad word in the NBA

    Originally posted by Unclebuck
    The defense in 1984 was no where near as good as it is today, it really is not even in the same league. Defenses were extremely soft back then, they did not pressure the ball, they did not get into people. The ball movement was amazing because the defense allowed it, the shooting was amaxing because there were more open shots.

    I'll grant you the Lakers and Celtics were better offensive teams than the current Pistons and Spurs, by maybe 25%, but the Spurs and Pistons are better defensive teams by close to 75%.
    I think this is pretty close to hitting the nail on the head. It seems to me that offense has stagnated, or even gotten worse over the past 20 years, whereas defense, and the allowance of defenses to press harder has made today's NBA defense much more potent than in years past. At some point, something will change, whether it be a change in the way they call the game, or an offense that exploits the way teams currently play defense, or even a fundamental change to the sport. Until then, you must play at least above average defense to hope to win a title.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Why is defense a bad word in the NBA

      Originally posted by Unclebuck
      Name the last "run and gun' team to get to the NBA Finals. Or name the last high scoring team to get to the Finals.
      A. Showtime
      B. Depends on what you mean by high scoring. The recent Laker teams were among the highest scoring teams in the league. So were the Bulls - even the Bad Boys averaged over 100 ppg. A lot of that fed from their defense but they could definitely score the ball.

      Heck, last year's Laker team averaged close to 100.
      The poster formerly known as Rimfire

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Why is defense a bad word in the NBA

        The league marketed and hyped (overhyped) offensive players (stars) and gave them their own set of rules (extra steps, swallowed whistles on fouls, foul immunity in some cases, etc.). The media hopped on the bandwagon.

        A funny thing happened, some people figured out a way to counter that stuff. Solid, fundamental basketball with an emphassis on defense. Play the stars as honest as possible and shut down the other guys. Make passing difficult. Take away the role players, take away the alley opp passes, take away the behind the back and no look passes by being tough on the passing lanes. Keep the opposition from setting up their offense early in the shot clock. Take the star(s) out of their comfort zones (as much as the refs will allow it). Secondary to this is that you probably have several players who were raised on this 'highlight basketball' who don't have a clue when they need to find other ways to win. They try and rely on their high-flying nature and athletic skills to get to the basket or try and get a rebound and find themselves stymied. The league (and teams) try to make them a star and reality always comes crashing down on them at some point to some degree.

        Then the problem becomes- Nobody told the general sports media about this change or what is happening. A few get it, many don't. The casual fan then hears this is 'bad' basketball because the scoring is down, looks at the score and agrees scoring is down so the media must be right. If you emphasize circus basketball and WWF type 'action' in your sports don't be surprised when a real 'wrestler' actually wins the matches.

        I don't believe college basketball has this problem because teams get marketed more. Sure, they hype individual players BUT those players are in a constant state of turnover. Nobody plays past 4 full seasons on the court. The other thing is you have commentators pointing out fundamental basketball plays and making a point to the casual fans how what you are seeing is 'good stuff' and what to watch for. I think back to Dick Vitale's "Freeze it!" and pointing out things like Brian Sloan's screens and emphasizing them in games he did. Think about his "All Windex team(s)" (or whatever he called it) that were players he highlighted their rebounding ability.

        Not that Dick Vitale is everybody's favorite announcer but the NBA could use someone like that highlighting for (or 'teaching') the media and casual fans that scoring isn't the be all-end all of the NBA game of basketball. Networks like ESPN need to move the spotlight off the 'flashy stuff' and get it back on the 'important' stuff.

        The game doesn't revolve around tongue wagging freethrow line starting dunks, 360deg stuffs, behind the back passes, quick 3's, etc.

        A 3 point basket within the flow of the offense and after a few passes still counts for 3 points BUT it also doesn't necessarily leave your team out of position to rebound or get beaten on transition like a quick (missed) 3 does. It also tends to get you a better look as you keep the defense off balance and moving.

        A layup counts the same as a behind the back dunk.

        Blocking out is still important. Limiting the other team's possessions is a big factor in giving yourself a chance to win.

        There is no crime in using the glass near the basket. It's an easier shot, harder to block and counts the same as a dunk or 'pretty' shot does.

        Perhaps it is time the league itself acknowledge they've done a poor job or marketing 'the game'. You might argue they've done an excellent job of marketing players but IMHO they've taken that too far and to the point of pushing some 'not ready for prime time' players down the throats of fans.

        It's simply gotten to the point that in the pro game casual fans and 'casual sports media' are simply uneducated to the 'team' game. Not that they wouldn't like it if they give it a chance... they simply are looking for and expecting the wrong things.

        They can't take their 'eye off the ball'.

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

        ------

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

        -John Wooden

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Why is defense a bad word in the NBA

          Originally posted by Eindar
          At some point, something will change, whether it be a change in the way they call the game, or an offense that exploits the way teams currently play defense, or even a fundamental change to the sport.
          Yep. All things must cycle. Somewhere down the line, perhaps even next year, let's suppose the WWF, oops I meant the nba, refs will be told to tighten up on the foul calls a bit. Teams will be ticked when players start to foul out, but they will change the way they defend slightly which will open up the offense. Or maybe they will do away with the half circle charge zone or maybe they will extend it. There are already threads here which make it obvious that the casual fan and some series ones as well don't understand all the rules or ramifications thereof. Something will happen to adjust the game to make it more "entertaining" for the masses. I was really surprised to see them allow zone defenses, but don't bet on them ever disallowing dunks.

          Can't you see it? It's the tail wagging the dog. The marketing folks, ala Schtern, have taken over and will change the game to suit the lowest common denominator fan base -- the same ones who watch reality tv. It's happened before in this game and others.
          Don't thank me, I'll kill ya.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Why is defense a bad word in the NBA

            Bball, just read your post. You are the man.
            Originally posted by Bball
            Perhaps it is time the league itself acknowledge they've done a poor job or marketing 'the game'. You might argue they've done an excellent job of marketing players but IMHO they've taken that too far and to the point of pushing some 'not ready for prime time' players down the throats of fans.


            Did anyone else find it annoying that TNT's halftime stats include "Points in the paint" and "Fastbreak Points" rather than Rebounds and Turnovers?
            Don't thank me, I'll kill ya.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Why is defense a bad word in the NBA

              Did someone order some offense? Well, at least the Spurs brought it tonight. If Ginobili isn't on the cover of every NBA video game next year then something is wrong.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Why is defense a bad word in the NBA

                Originally posted by Unclebuck
                Name the last "run and gun' team to get to the NBA Finals. Or name the last high scoring team to get to the Finals.

                Have the Kings been there. No . have the Mavs, No. Have the Suns. No.

                The Lakers werre an excellent offensive team, but they really slowed it down and played a very controlled offense. And their defense was underrated, it was pretty good.
                The 2000 Paces got over a 100 a game.
                "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Why is defense a bad word in the NBA

                  2002 Nets were also pretty high octane.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X