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

Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

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

  • #16
    Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    OK, but my question is - isn't it harder for the Warriors to be agood defensive team because of their offensive style than it is for the Cavs to be a good defensive team because of their offensive style. or do you disagree with my theory and think it doesn't matter
    I think my answer did cover your question but just in case I blabbered too much:

    It is harder for the Warriors to be a good defensive team because of their offense over the Cavs.

    -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


    • #17
      Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
      I hate, absolutely hate all these different defensive schemes.

      Defense should be stopping pentration with your on ball defender and having everyone else in helpside. These complicated defensive rotations just suck. In high school we played a trapping defense made popular by then Bowling Green's coach Jim Leranegra (sp?) who is now at George Mason.

      It was just a waste of time. If all five guys don't understand it, it cannot work, it's impossible. If all five guys don't move perfectly together, it cannot work. You have to be perfect time and time again, or you give up layups. Even when being perfect there's still a system to beat it.

      Every junk scheme is like that. It's okay to be used in spot situations, but to have this grand design about things is just fool's gold.

      Give space if you lack lateral quickness to stop pentration. When they shoot, put and hand in their face. If they hit it, then pat them on the butt and say good shot.

      Good offense will always beat good defense, especially the way the rules are in the NBA.

      EDIT: Good defensive teams in the NBA have the athletes to do so. They also play no nonsense man to man. Detroit doesn't do anything special but put pressure on shooters and stop pentration. Defense in basketball should be about simplifying it down to the basics IMHO.
      I agree 100% with this.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        I hate, absolutely hate all these different defensive schemes.

        Defense should be stopping pentration with your on ball defender and having everyone else in helpside. These complicated defensive rotations just suck. In high school we played a trapping defense made popular by then Bowling Green's coach Jim Leranegra (sp?) who is now at George Mason.

        It was just a waste of time. If all five guys don't understand it, it cannot work, it's impossible. If all five guys don't move perfectly together, it cannot work. You have to be perfect time and time again, or you give up layups. Even when being perfect there's still a system to beat it.

        Every junk scheme is like that. It's okay to be used in spot situations, but to have this grand design about things is just fool's gold.

        Give space if you lack lateral quickness to stop penetration. When they shoot, put and hand in their face. If they hit it, then pat them on the butt and say good shot.

        Good offense will always beat good defense, especially the way the rules are in the NBA.

        EDIT: Good defensive teams in the NBA have the athletes to do so. They also play no nonsense man to man. Detroit doesn't do anything special but put pressure on shooters and stop pentration. Defense in basketball should be about simplifying it down to the basics IMHO.
        Interesting.......I don't consider the Pacers defense as a junk defense.

        Defense should be stopping penetration with your on ball defender and having everyone else in helpside - that is exactly what this Pacers defense is.

        The only part of this defense that may be considered "junk" is the pre-rotating to the strong side to stop a player from getting to the basket. - but a lot of teams in the NBA do that now. Yes even the Spurs do it from time to time - not as much as the Pacers do- but they do it. I don't think there is anything else in the Pacers schemes that I consider junk - but I would be open to discussing if you believe otherwise.

        Let me make somehting clear. The two most important things in any defense: 1) all out effort - if you don't have this - nothing else really matters. 2) playing as a team - all 5 players must work together and have complete trust in each other. - I always say that in the NBA defense takes a lot more teamwork than does offense

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

          Easily. In fact this is explictly what the Nets did to get to the Finals. They used defense to create running offense. Every TO they got was a freaking track meet, guys literally took off like a starter pistol at the first sign of a TO.

          It was when they were forced to slow down into the HC that they often struggled for points.

          They hated that, they wanted sets that started above the FT line on their end with 3-4 of your guys below the FT line or even on the baseline. When that happened you were toast.

          The Pacers have had TO issues at times that lead to breaks, but that often isn't in the running game. Other than that have they really failed to get back after running? I say not at all.

          They get beat on traps and zone overloads when a team shows patience, and they get beat on halfcourt dribble penetration. Frankly I'd almost rather see them in transition defense.

          They don't look tired per se, but that is part of it. Good teams start off games picking them apart with passing in the HC. The issue is very clearly a combo of the system and the lack of pure stoppers.

          It's like to stop the Pick n Roll they've gone out of their way (great) and instead have given up just about everything else (yuck).


          is the pre-rotating to the strong side to stop a player from getting to the basket.
          This is what I label "zone overload", just for clarity's sake. 2 man game brings 3 defenders to that strong side, and with the lane gap it's basically a strong side zone that says "go ahead and rotate". Where it gets burned more than rotations is if on the rotation the top man decides to instead drive, which then pulls that baseline help back over. You've got 3 guys on 2 on the formerly strong side and now your other 2 are guarding one driving. 5 on 3 is no way to go through life, son...well, something like that for Animal House fans.
          Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 03-13-2008, 03:57 PM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

            You're right, UB. It does come down to the players wanting to get down and dirty and put forth the defensive effort. That's why I say watch future games where Murray (PG), Granger (SG), Daniels (SF), Harrison (or Foster) (C) and Foster (or Ike) are on the floor. These five will put forth defensive effort w/Daniels being the weakest link of the group. But as long as he can stay in man-D and he doesn't have to rotate on a perimeter switch he's usually okay.

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            This is what I label "zone overload", just for clarity's sake. 2 man game brings 3 defenders to that strong side, and with the lane gap it's basically a strong side zone that says "go ahead and rotate". Where it gets burned more than rotations is if on the rotation the top man decides to instead drive, which then pulls that baseline help back over. You've got 3 guys on 2 on the formerly strong side and now your other 2 are guarding one driving. 5 on 3 is no way to go through life, son...well, something like that for Animal House fans.
            That is exactly what I was referring to concerning how Daniels tends to get burned on rotating defensively. He usually becomes that "2nd" defender chasing down the ball handler on dribble penetration when instead what he should be doing is picking up the open man on the PnR. Unless he can assist in trapping the ball handler out beyond the 3-pt line it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever for him to try and cover an man who's already covered on dribble penetration. Rotate to the man waiting out on the wing and you can stop alot of the open jump shots that have killed the Pacers all season long. And most of those have come by Daniels leaving his man open!!!
            Last edited by NuffSaid; 03-13-2008, 04:10 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

              I think there is a difference between actively looking to fast break and taking the first shot that presents itself in a half court set.

              The Spurs are a slow team but with Parker and Manu, they get their fair share of fast break points whenever an opposing shot goes into a position that is favourable for them to get into the open court. When its not there they slow it down and run their offense.

              I'm not sure you cant be a good/great defensive team if you are playing the offense that the Pacers run, but it may require more coordination about when the shot is going to go up so players know when to the shot is going to go up so that guys not going to the offensive glass are ready to get back.

              Though its fairly consistant that the more 3s you shoot the more fast break points you will give up.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

                Seth brings up a good point about those Nets. It's a Byron Scott thing because the Hornets defense is also about forcing TO's. I don't watch them so I don't know how much they run, but I remember from the preseason how it was said (while we played them) that their defense is about creating turnovers.

                That's the only way I think you could be a "running" team while playing great D.

                Of course, I don't know if I'd call them (NJN) a running team or not.

                Shouldn't the term be reserved for teams who will run on you even if you make a shot? I still don't see how you can be that kind of a team and play great D at the same time. Maybe at lower levels of basketball, but not the NBA. Too much talent, too much time on the clock.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

                  To answer the original Q, "NO!" And, for all you zealots that just love the way Phoenix played "BS" (before Shaq), there's a reason why management there gave up on it. If we want to clone a style, let's go back to the style that made the East so powerful for so many years. The team that plays that way today is Detroit. I do not like Detroit, but having said that, I admire and respect the way they play. There's nothing wrong in pushing the ball up the floor when you have a great point guard (we don't) and the defense is asleep (which is pretty rare in the NBA), but when it comes down to it, you have to be able to grind it out. That's what the Playoffs are all about. JOB's style of chucking up 3's with no offensive rebounding is doomed to fail.
                  Last edited by madison; 03-13-2008, 05:32 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

                    Yes. Low scores are not good defense.

                    A bad team, a team with no shot at winning a championship may win a few more games by slowing the game down and stretching out the game.

                    A good team plays good defense and doesn't have to slow down a game to win.
                    "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


                    • #25
                      Re: Can a running team like the Pacers still be a great defensive team

                      of course not...or a good rebounding team. Cause you got all our guys flying out on the break trying to stop and pop for that transition 3 each time down...
                      "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X