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

Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

    http://slate.msn.com/id/2121018/

    An interesting read in light of the recent ridiculous hall of fame talk. Also a nice subtle swat at the Sports Guy nestled in there.


    Sideshow Bob
    Is Robert Horry the NBA's best clutch shooter or its best con man?
    By Felix Gillette


    In Tuesday's Game 3 of the NBA Finals, San Antonio and Detroit are tied with about a minute left in the third quarter. The Spurs' Robert Horry launches a high-arching three-pointer from the top of the key. Nothing but glass. Forty-five seconds later, Horry drives in for a layup—rejected. When the Pistons run out on a fast break, Horry tries to block Richard Hamilton's shot from behind—goaltending.

    In less than a minute, Horry's burst of bad play has helped the Pistons lock up a victory. But don't tell that to the announcers. "That's a guy," says ABC's Hubie Brown, "who is not giving up on anything."

    This year's playoffs have followed an all-too-familiar script. Robert Horry throws up a bunch of bricks. Robert Horry gets celebrated as "Big Shot Bob," legendary sharpshooter and five-time NBA champion. In both 2003 and 2004, Horry's missed three-pointers helped eliminate his teams from the playoffs. Yet during this year's finals, there's a commercial showing then-Laker Robert Horry hitting a three from the corner against the 76ers back in 2001. "The Finals," says a voice-over, "where legends are born." In Horry's case, it's more like, "The Finals, where legends are nurtured, coddled, and defended against reality."

    Robert Horry's career has been built on a great, underappreciated basketball truth: Big shots are only big shots if you make them. Unlike a missed field goal or a botched ground ball, a missed three-pointer is imminently forgettable. Even the best long-range shooters miss most of the time. Every NBA game has dozens and dozens of misfires, all of which look more or less the same. One more miss, no matter how important the context, tends to get lost in the clutter. If you're a role player, that goes double—nobody expected you to make the shot anyway.

    Horry's true genius isn't his clutch shooting. It's his understanding of roundball amnesia. After sinking a buzzer-beater against Sacramento in the 2002 playoffs, Horry explained his philosophy. "If I hit it we win, if I miss y'all are going to blame the stars for losing the game anyway," he told the Washington Post's Michael Wilbon. "There's no pressure on me." Horry has none of the guts and gets all of the glory. In the 2003 playoffs, Horry went 2-for-38 from behind the arc—and everybody blamed Shaq and Kobe for the Lakers' downfall. After this year's Game 3 drubbing, Horry got off again—it was Manu Ginobili's and Tim Duncan's fault.

    The Big Shot Bob persona is so overwhelming that it blocks out more than missed shots. Remember when Horry took a swing at Utah's Jeff Hornacek in 1997? What a clutch punch! Or when he threw a towel in the face of his coach, Danny Ainge, that same year? Dagger! How about when he got fined for shoving a cameraman in 2003? Now that's killer instinct!

    After Game 2 of this year's finals, in which Horry scored 12 points on 4-for-10 shooting, ESPN.com's Bill Simmons declared Horry "one of the more important team players of the last 35 years," and possibly even deserving of a spot in the Hall of Fame. Horry's reputation as a great team player is a bit of a mix-up. It's more accurate to say he's been the teammate of great players: Hakeem Olajuwon in Houston, Shaquille O'Neal in Los Angeles, and Tim Duncan in San Antonio. Horry has made his career coasting on other player's coattails. He's 6-feet-10, yet he lets his teammates scrap in the paint for offensive rebounds while he hovers vulturelike at the three-point line. On offense, he's incapable of creating an open shot for himself. Instead, he stands around waiting for the defense to double-team his superstar teammate, hoping for an open look.

    Horry isn't even the best forward from the University of Alabama in this year's finals. Antonio McDyess' career averages (15.7 points, .494 shooting percentage, 8.5 rebounds) dwarf Horry's feeble stat line (7.5 points per game, .431 shooting percentage, 5.0 rebounds). Yet all the glory goes to Horry.

    During the first half of Game 3, Horry became the all-time leader in three-pointers made during the NBA Finals, passing Michael Jordan. Only Reggie Miller has made more playoff three-pointers than Horry. What a clutch shooter! Better than Jordan! Never mind that Horry has made only 227 of 634 of his playoff threes—a mediocre .358 shooting percentage. After all, who's going to remember any of those 407 misses?
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

    If you are going to take the shots that either win or lose games you are going to be both the Hero and the goat. I dont know how a Pacer fan can ***** about Horry not hitting each and every single game winner. That guy has hit some damn big shots in his career and every team in the NBA needs and wants a guy like that. He is not the highest paid guy on the team but he takes the money shots.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

      I wonder if Felix wrote the same article whenever Jordan missed a clutch shot?

      There's a reason Horry has a rep as a player who hits big shots - because he does. He also misses some. So does everyone.
      The poster formerly known as Rimfire

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

        Guess this nixes his shot at the HOF, eh?

        How many clutch shots has Horry had the opportunity to take in this series? The Spurs have gotten MAULED the last two games -- it hasn't been close enough for a shot or two to matter.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

          You can't miss them if you don't take them. Chris Webber has probably only missed 2 clutch shots in his entire career. Thats definately not a stat to carry with pride.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

            Originally posted by Fool
            You can't miss them if you don't take them. Chris Webber has probably only missed 2 clutch shots in his entire career. Thats definately not a stat to carry with pride.
            Which makes him 0-for-2.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

              Precisely.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

                Actually, CWebb had a buzzerbeater win against the Celtics a couple of years ago

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

                  I'm sure it was accidental.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

                    Originally posted by efx
                    Actually, CWebb had a buzzerbeater win against the Celtics a couple of years ago
                    I think he went to signal a timeout, when the ball slipped out of his hands and into the basket.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

                      Originally posted by Shade
                      I think he went to signal a timeout, when the ball slipped out of his hands and into the basket.
                      did they have any timeouts left?

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

                        Horry was playing pretty well in game 2 when everything was going right for the Spurs.

                        Dice has been huge for the Pistons in games 3 and 4, alot of the time burying those mid range jumpers over Horry.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

                          I agree that Horry is a bit overrated, but that article was pretty overly harsh, insulting even. Who knows how many buzzer-beaters Reggie, Jordan, Bird etc. have missed but it's a lot. Like someone else said you can't miss them if you don't take him.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

                            And there you go.

                            The funny thing is, for the first 35 minutes 59 seconds of this game, Horry was far and away the worst player on the floor. Turnovers, dumb fouls, bad shots - second worst wasn't even close.

                            Then he turned into a hero.
                            The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Good article calling out "Big Shot Bob" Horry

                              The guy who wrote that article can s$$k Horry's d$$k. That was one article full of crap. Of course, the stars would get the blame for losses because Horry does not make the kind of money the stars make. For what he makes, he does contribute a lot.
                              ANDY: I guess it comes down to a simple choice, really. Get busy winning or get busy losing.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X