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

Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

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

  • Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

    Warning: please do not take anything Unclebuck posts in this thread seriously - obviously he is joking



    One of the very few interesting topics that came up during the forum party last night was about the Pacers offensive rebounding. I was surprised that many thought it would improve under Jim O'Brien's system - perhaps the theory is that well it can't be any worse than it was under Rick Carlisle. I was pretty emphatic about it not getting any better and I suggested it will probably get worse.

    So I thought, well maybe I was wrong, so I did a little research and I have some bad news for those of you who hope the offffensive rebounding will get better. It won't, it will get worse (assuming OB plays the same system as he did in Boston and Philly) And I certianly think it will be the same.

    O'Brien has coached 3 full NBA seasons and his teams were last in the whole NBA in offensive rebounding for 2 seasons and 2nd worse in the other season. That to me is enough of a trend to draw the conclusion that the Pacers offensive rebounding numbers will not get any better and likely will get worse. Pacers will likely be the worst offensive rebounding team in the NBA, if the trend continues.


    The only rebounding stat that is worth anything is rebounding %.

    In the 2002 season the Celtics were the worst offensive rebounding team in the NBA at .240. That means when the Celtics missed they rebounded their own miss 24% of the time. Interestingly enough during that same season Rick Carlisle's team in Detroit was the second worst in this category at .242

    In the 2003 season the Celtics were last again, by a wide margin. at .235. The Pistons under Rick were 5th worst at .258

    You might be saying, well maybe it was just the personnel in Boston. Not really, in Philly the Sixers under O'Brien were 2nd worst at .254. The Pacers that same season under Rick were 5th worst at .264


    I hope I didn't lose you in all the numbers and yes I hate stats, but I fully expect the Pacers next season to be one of the very worst offensive rebounding teams in the NBA (that doesn't bother me, by the way). If they are any better than 2nd or 3rd worst I would be shocked.

    And for those of you who hated the fact that under Rick the Pacers wouldn't send players to the offensive glass, instead worried about getting back on defense, you won't like what you are going to see for the next several seasons because it will be about the same or maybe even more so.

    This is fine by me, in fact I agree with the strategy of not crashing the offensive boards, but I know many of you won't like it.
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 10-25-2007, 01:24 PM.

  • #2
    Re: Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

    UB - how do you see Foster fitting in with this?
    “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


    • #3
      Re: Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

      Many = me.

      And I based it not on scheme, but on the nightmares seared into my head of Boston beating us in '03, not with 3's, but with offensive rebounds. But then, UB and I have long disagreed with every single aspect of that series.
      Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

        I disagree with that, UB.

        The more long jumpers you take, but more chances for long rebounds, which are easier to offensively rebound.

        That said, you'll be a much worse team in transition D, because the long rebounds you don't get will be easy fast break fodder.

        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

          Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
          UB - how do you see Foster fitting in with this?
          This was also discussed last night. I see Jeff getting significantly fewer minutes. Jim O'Brien will not play a power forward who cannot shoot the ball from the outside (unless the center can really shoot). I fully expect to see Murphy, Williams and even Granger playing all the power forward minutes. Foster will back up the center. I cannot foresee a reasonable scenerio where two of the follwing list of players will be on the court at the same time. JO, Jeff, Ike, Harrison. Except for serious foul trouble or injury, one of the centers will be paired with one of the power forwards I listed earlier.

          So I see Jeff struggling to get much playing time -- Unless JO is traded for guards, but right now, I would have to say JO will start at center, with Ike backing him up and Jeff will only get spot minutes or when they need a really good defender. Murphy and Williams will get the power forward minutes.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

            Originally posted by Kstat View Post
            I disagree with that, UB.

            The more long jumpers you take, but more chances for long rebounds, which are easier to offensively rebound.

            That said, you'll be a much worse team in transition D, because the long rebounds you don't get will be easy fast break fodder.
            I'd be willing to make a really large bet with you, the Pacers will be in the bottom 5 in offensive rebounding. A really large bet. Kstat, how can you explain away the team stats in my first post.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              I'd be willing to make a really large bet with you, the Pacers will be in the bottom 5 in offensive rebounding. A really large bet. Kstat, how can you explain away the team stats in my first post.
              Eric Willaims, Tony Battie, Vin Baker, Walter Mccarty, and Bruno Sundov...

              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                I disagree with that, UB.

                The more long jumpers you take, but more chances for long rebounds, which are easier to offensively rebound.

                That said, you'll be a much worse team in transition D, because the long rebounds you don't get will be easy fast break fodder.
                Is that even possible?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

                  Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                  Many = me.

                  And I based it not on scheme, but on the nightmares seared into my head of Boston beating us in '03, not with 3's, but with offensive rebounds. But then, UB and I have long disagreed with every single aspect of that series.
                  Once again I hate using stats to prove a point. But Kegboy, these stats might surprise you, they even surprised me.

                  I looked up the box scores from the 2003 series. Isiah's last season as coach.


                  McCarty got 6 offensive rebounds the whole series. here are the offensive rebounding numbers.

                  Game 1 - the Celts as a team got 9, McCarty got zero, the pacers got 11
                  Game 2 - the Celts as a team got 9, McCarty got 3, pacers got 8
                  Game 3 - Celts got 5, McCarty got 1, Pacers got 14
                  Game 4 - Celts got 10, McCarty got 1, pacers got 5
                  Game 5 - Celts got 9, McCarty got 0, Pacers got 17
                  Game 6 - Celts got 11, McCarty got 1, Pacers got 24.


                  Kegboy, you are probably remembering a few key ones that Walter got, but as far as overall he was a non-factor in the rebounding.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

                    Jeff as center in this kind of offense will probably thrive as the center needs to be moving and grabbing long rebounds and getting put backs. This may
                    play into his strengths. Jeff starts and Bynum plays the rest of the minutes.
                    Assuming JO is traded.
                    {o,o}
                    |)__)
                    -"-"-

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

                      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                      Eric Willaims, Tony Battie, Vin Baker, Walter Mccarty, and Bruno Sundov...
                      OK, explain the Sixers numbers

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        OK, explain the Sixers numbers
                        They didn't take a lot of threes...\\Nobody other than korver and Iverson could shoot past 20 feet.

                        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

                          I thought my head was going to explode when everyone was saying they thought the offensive rebounding would improve. I was so busy trying not to scream "ARE YOU PEOPLE STU..." I didn't even hear UB say he didn't think it would get better.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

                            Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                            They didn't take a lot of threes...\\Nobody other than korver and Iverson could shoot past 20 feet.
                            I'm really suprised you of all people would disagree with me on this issue, you saw the drastic difference in offensive rebonding numbers for the Pstons under Rick vs Larry Brown. That is probably about as stark a difference in systems as you can have and I think it proves that offensive rebounding is a result of coaching systems. Why do the Jazz lead the NBA almost every season in Ofensive rebounding - it isn't because of the players, it is because of the coaching system.

                            if Jerry Sloan were the Pacers coach this upcoming season, I would fully expect them to be in the top 5 in offensive rebounding

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Pacers will be a worse offensive rebounding team under Jim O'Brien

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              I'm really suprised you of all people would disagree with me on this issue, you saw the drastic difference in offensive rebonding numbers for the Pstons under Rick vs Larry Brown. That is probably about as stark a difference in systems as you can have and I think it proves that offensive rebounding is a result of coaching systems. Why do the Jazz lead the NBA almost every season in Ofensive rebounding - it isn't because of the players, it is because of the coaching system.

                              if Jerry Sloan were the Pacers coach this upcoming season, I would fully expect them to be in the top 5 in offensive rebounding
                              we were never discussing rick or Larry's philosophy, though.

                              We're discussing Obie's, and while I won't say I agree with his methods, his style really does lend itself well to long offensive rebounds.

                              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X