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

Brain-storming on the rest of this season

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

    Brain-storming on the rest of this season

    Okay, we've added Peja, but lost JO for the forseeable future. You all know the rest of our roster, I won't bore you going through what else we have. Assume for a moment that, one, we make no further trades, and two, Rick will not quit or be fired. How do we make this work? Do we give up and focus on developing our young players? Do we play a 7-man rotation of our vets to try and stay afloat until JO returns? Do we play a 5-point lineup of Jamaal, Cabbage, Gill, Fred, and AJ, just for ****s and giggles?

    This is what I want to see.

    Strategy:

    The goal should be to be as competitive as possible, with two caveats: evaluate how much Peja still has before free-agency, and make it a priority to keep Danny and David involved, because their development is paramount to the future of this franchise.

    As far as the offense goes, scrap the playbook. Debate the merits of our low-post offense until you're blue in the face if you want, but we simply do not have the personnel. Unless you want to run everything through David, which, of course, isn't terribly practical with his foul troubles.

    I know some want to Run-and-Gun, but, even with Peja, we don't have the scoring power to do that on a nightly basis, and a fast pace will not cover up our defensive weaknesses, it'll exacerbate them.

    What I propose is the '99-'00 offense as a base, with some modifications. I start off with that, simply because we know Rick can and has run such a system. Now, for those who forget, this was still a highly structured offense. I've spoken at length before about knowing what play we were going to run before Jax had crossed mid-court.

    Defensively, I hate to say it, but we're going to have to play some zone. The rotations I have below will hopefully minimize it, but things happen. Foul trouble, poor matchups, etc. We're going to have to have a fall back position of a basic 2-3, maybe some zone-and-1 in certain situations. Otherwise, a smart opposing coach will carve us up.

    Tactics:

    Starters
    Tinsley
    Jack
    Peja
    Foster
    Harrison

    Offense- It's time to give Tinsley the keys to the car. We've heard a million times over that everyone is sick of Rick's leash, and Jamaal is at his best when he's running the show.

    However, this is still a structured offense. The difference is, back in the day, Jax called the plays. He knew the playbook backwards and forwards, he was a coach on the floor, and the coaches trusted him in that role.

    With Jamaal, it's different. He's not a student of the game the way Jax was. His first choice isn't to sit down with Rick and chalk up plays and options. He's more improvisational.

    Therefore, Rick needs to play to his ego. Rick needs to go to him and say, "Look, Jermaine's out, Peja doesn't know what he's doing, Jack's a loose canon. You've got to be the one to run things out there. I'm gonna let you, but we need to work together here." Rick needs to sit Jamaal down and blueprint what he wants and why. If Jamaal sees other opportunities, he should go with it, because he really can improv quite well. But Rick needs to drill the base system into his head, and before every game go over what plays will work best against that opponent.

    Peja and Jack are the gunners. I don't believe either one can carry us on their own as the "first option". Think back to Reggie and Jalen the finals year. The offense revolved around screens for Reggie, but Jalen was a primary option, due to his ability to drive as well as post up. Now, obviously, Peja is not as good off the ball as Reggie was, but he is still competent at running off screens. We're certainly not going to see the double or triple run-offs, with fakes under the basket, but Peja does know how to get open.

    Along the same lines, Jack is not going to create offense for others the way Jalen could. I'd like to think that Rick could talk to him, but he's a lost cause when he's got the ball in his hands. It's going to be Tinsley's responsibility to get him the ball where he's got an advantage, but not overuse him, because things will stagnate as a result.

    David and Jeff are support. David's primary responsibility is to screen for Peja. Yeah, he's gonna rack up fouls like a son-of-a-*****, but he needs to learn. Repitition will make him better, and allow the refs to become more comfortable with his game. Jamaal will give him some looks if he gets position, but we won't be force-feeding him like we did Rik at the beginning of games.

    Obviously, Jeff isn't in for his offense. He's in there to cover Peja's *** on D. Scrutinize his ability all you want, he is the most versatile defender we have in the post, and he's gonna have to help his *** off. On offense, his job is to screen and hit the boards. Maybe get a tip in now and then if we're lucky.

    Substitutions

    Harrison's gonna rack up the fouls every night. It's a fact. His replacement (and god I hate to say this, but it's necessary) is Granger. Yep, Danny's 4 and Jeff moves up to 5. Danny takes over the cover position, and Jeff goes down low. Danny gives us a more versatile look, if we're lucky he'll force some changes from the other bench.

    Where's Austin, you ask. He's (and, god, just shoot me now) the center on the second unit. Yep, Peck's laughing his *** off right now. I admit it, with this roster, Cro's a freakin' center. There's no way Cro can play off Peja on D, and it's too much to ask Jeff to be in that help position all the time. Danny keeps that position fresh, and Austin focuses on the one place he can be a credible defender, the low post. He'll also fit in better with the second unit's offense.

    That brings us to AJ and Cabbage. Look, call me a hater all you want, but Cabbage has shown me no signs of getting Rick's current playbook, I'm skeptical he'll pick up a new one on the fly. However, AJ and Cabbage have, in spurts, shown a real knack for playing off each other. First in the preseason, then in early December when Rick experimented with some Princeton sets.

    That's what I want to see here. AJ and Cabbage take over the backcourt, Jack slides over to the 3 (at least until Peja gets more acclimated), with Danny and Cro down low. Give Cabbage some more opportunities to push the tempo here. Cro can catch his defender napping for some 3's, Jack can get some cuts to the basket, maybe play around with trying to get Danny some easy looks there as well.

    Fred's the utility man here. He can be easily inserted into any of the first 3 positions and play off the remaining lineup. He gives us more of a scoring punch and will enjoy the faster tempo. As Peja gets more acclimated, I want him out there more with this unit, considering he's the only one we have besides AJ who has played in a Princeton system.

    That's all I've got for now, and I've spent too long on this as it is.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Brain-storming on the rest of this season

    Ok we can give Tins the keys to the car, but Jack and JO still want to ride together is this possible?


    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Brain-storming on the rest of this season

      I'd start Croshere over Harrison while moving Foster to the 5.

      Harrison hasn't proven he deserves the starting job. Heck, he hasn't proven he deserves any minuates for a good part of the season. He still fouls way to much and cannot and should not be relyed on to start night in and night out.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Brain-storming on the rest of this season

        I'd probably go with Croshere and Harrison, or Foster. Either way I'd like to see Cro starting. Giving Tins the keys is all fine and dandy, but don't forget, it is flu season after all.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Brain-storming on the rest of this season

          There are a lot of great ideas in there.

          I'll have to chew on it for a while (and maybe actually get some work done) before I respond to anything specific, so this is my IOU.
          “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

          “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Brain-storming on the rest of this season

            Good post.

            I agree with you for the most part and I agree that our back court is going to have to be the bulk of our offense for a while. Peja, Stephen, and Tinsley are going to have to run the show in terms of offense. I think Tinsley needs to become alot more involved in the offense while JO is out because I don't think Peja and Stephen can carry our team alot of the times and we are going to need Tinsley to put up anywhere from 15-20 ppg and actually play good. And I believe he can and will do this over the course of the next 2 months while JO is out. When Tinsley is allowed to run fast breaks he is playing to his strengths and can beat a man off the dribble with the best of them. I think we all saw this last year after the suspensions and he was putting up 25 a night with 10 assists. I think the key to winning without JO is going to be Tinsley and solid shooting. Over the past 4-5 games, a common theme with our team has been TERRIBLE shooting. We have missed a number of wide open looks, mainly those being with Croshere and Runi. Last game against the Cavs, we hustled our asses off in the first half and outrebounded them by 7-8 but due to all the ****ty passes and the stagnant offense (35%) we went to halftime down by 5.

            So I do agree with the offense you are talking about. I think Granger needs to be getting some significant minutes at PF now so we can develop him further and get him more attuned to the NBA. The guy definitely has the length to cause trouble for some PF's in this league. This team is going to have to live and die off of the 3 pointer and fast break situations if we hope to stay above .500 and make the playoffs. We potentially have one of the best 3 point shooting teams in the NBA now with JO out of the lineup. You can put Sarunas/Tinsley, Stephen, Peja, Croshere, and Foster(Possible O. Rebounds) in there. That lineup has the ability to kick the ball around and have 4 extremely potent 3 point shooters. We can't continue playing Ricks halfcourt set offense if we hope to stay above .500 because we no longer have our best 2 half court set offensive guys (JO, Ron) I also think Stephen is going to need to play in the post. All the games we won without JO and Ron were mainly attributed to Stephens great play in the post. There were a few games where he was unstoppable down there with the turnaround jumpers. Hopefully a switch back to SG should boost his game up a little more.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Brain-storming on the rest of this season

              Good idea except for starting Harrison and Foster together because neither is a very consistent scorer.
              Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
              -- Albert Einstein

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Brain-storming on the rest of this season

                This is simply a repeat of last year. No JO, no Artest. Peja provides the outside threat that Reggie gave us.

                But there won't be the same underdog romantic motivation and we won't do nearly as well.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Brain-storming on the rest of this season

                  Pacers will play the same exact style they played last March and April.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Brain-storming on the rest of this season

                    OK, I know JO is out for now, but I like this lineup:

                    Tins, Jax, Peja, Cro, JO

                    Imagine Peja and Cro standing on the perimeter and JO on the block. Peja and Cro have to be guarded or they will hit 50+% from 3pt land. Who cares what the other team scores?

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Brain-storming on the rest of this season

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck
                      Pacers will play the same exact style they played last March and April.
                      with Peja taking Reggie's place.. hmm we had some good runs that time. i hope we will have the same too this year.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Brain-storming on the rest of this season

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck
                        Pacers will play the same exact style they played last March and April.
                        That would make me happy. Do you not want to see me happy?

                        -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

                        Previous template Next
                        Working...
                        X