Tweet
any thoughts from the peanut gallery?
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.
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
-
-
Re: Post-Game: Utah wins game in last 8 minutes
Thought Ford, Jack and Daniels looked good driving to the basket and Murph, Rasho, and Roy didn't look half bad.
Lots of TOs but Utah leads the league in steals.
Guys need to learn not to backdoor cut and pass when Utah overplays the passing lanes. So many backcourt TOs that led to breakaway layups on the other end. -
Re: Post-Game: Utah wins game in last 8 minutes
If games were only 1 half long Troy Murphy would be a superstar.
BTW... that's not a knock on Murphy. I think we tend to overuse him in the 1st half and milk him for everything we can, plus the other team learns to adjust to his 3 point prowess and negates some of his offensive effectiveness.
If it wasn't for Murphy I'm not sure the Pacers would've still be in the game with 8 mins to go in the 1st place.
Any more I tend to tune the game in, catch a little action early. Then do some stuff with the game on in the background and finally catch the 4th qtr. I'm no longer sure watching the other 3 qtrs gives us a read at all on what is going to happen. Whether the Pacers are dominating or not, it will come down to the 4th qtr and be a tight game. Utah just seemed to be the more disciplined team when it mattered and pulled away using us as our own worst enemy.
Part of me also wonders... When we're in a game against a really disciplined team, should we see more of Diener? I think he runs the offense better (in spurts any way) and we break more team defenses down getting them out of position as opposed to Marquis or TJ freelancing something. But that's an observation and not necessarily backed up by hard evaluation, game tapes, and stats.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 WoodenComment
-
Re: Post-Game: Utah wins game in last 8 minutes
We were killed by our turnovers tonight...Comment
-
Re: Post-Game: Utah wins game in last 8 minutes
So. Maybe the solution is to bench him until he second half, when games are actually won.Originally posted by Bball View PostComment
-
Re: Post-Game: Utah wins game in last 8 minutes
Pretty much the story.Originally posted by PacersRule View PostPassion. Pride. Patience. PacersComment
-
Re: Post-Game: Utah wins game in last 8 minutes
Even though we lost tonight i had a blast at the game tonight. Murph lit it up in the first half. Its a shame we couldn't hit baskets in the 3rd and 4th. The turnovers and a few bad calls sucked
The fans came alive when murph was on fire from the 3 point line.[/center]If you havin' depth problems, I feel bad for you son; I got 99 problems but a bench ain't one! - Hicks
@thatguyjoe84Comment
-
Re: Post-Game: Utah wins game in last 8 minutes
Utah is playing maybe the best ball in the league at the moment... not really that surprising that they took it to us.
We stuck with them longer than I thought we would, and they put us away midway thru the 4th. Good teams do that.There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.Comment
-
Re: Post-Game: Utah wins game in last 8 minutes
When Murph hit his 6th the whole crowd buzzed, and as it came back down you could hear chirping about "give it to Murph". So when they did and he nailed it the place of course went nuts. You follow that with a defensive stop and a 3 by Rush (IIRC) and the place was on fire. It was a really good feeling, the kind of vibe you used to get all the time. I miss that.
BTW, did you guys see Murph after he made the 7th three? He did this funny pose thing that was definitely out of character which shows just how much he was feeling it.
Also after his first or 2nd three it was right after he got his shot swiped and it seemed like a no-call foul. So he hit the three and went TINSLEY on us..." and one m**********", and he glared at the ref the entire way back while yelling it. Maybe that's what got him fired up.
Now the negative on Troy - hands up, who thinks he's a better guy on the glass than Dale or Kellogg in his prime or even Antonio. Hopefully no hands are raised.
Now consider the fact that he just passed the team record for DEFENSIVE rebounds in a season by a Pacer with a MONTH of games left. Pace or not, that's nuts and it emphasizes my knock on him (OFF to DEF rebound ratior). He gets a lot of cheapies which hides the fact that he got punked by Boozer and Milsap on several tougher boards that the team really needed, and I mean defensive boards even.
I love his 3pt shooting, he's maybe this team's Reggie because that 3 is so reliable, but remembering him as the greatest Pacers rebounder is not something I'm about to do no matter what the numbers say.
Rush, my boy, got burned twice by some crafty Utah play. They turned him and drove him toward the lane. It looked like the right move by how they played it, but it was really just a setup to lead him into a steal by a guy coming from his blind spot. They got Quis the same way. That's why they lead the league.
At halftime as the Jazz walked to the tunnel Deron was YELLING at Milsap I believe about either him or someone else "not wanting the damn ball". He was mega PO'd at that play to end the half because someone didn't want it when he tried to feed them. It was wild how mad he was about it.
Pacers were more in this than they were last year when Utah came to town, so at least we got that.
Comment
-
Re: Post-Game: Utah wins game in last 8 minutes
Wow.....7-9 from the 3pt line for Murphy.Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.Comment
-
Re: Post-Game: Utah wins game in last 8 minutes
I agree with most of yer post, but dude, there are no cheap rebounds. Rebounds are rebounds. You seem really fixated on the fact that he gets few offensive rebounds, but there's a MAJOR reason for that ---- he spends most of his time on offense out on the wings and at the top of the key. That's not a small reason! It's a biggun! He's not Jeff Foster, who cannot shoot reliably at all outside of 10 feet, so he hangs out under the rim. You're talking about a style of play, not a lack of rebounding. He's a major offensive weapon behind the 3-pt line and he simply is not in position to get all those offensives... now you may look at that as a negative, but only if you're casting Murph in the role of the typical PF who doesn't shoot any 3s and has the luxury of hanging out in the paint and boxing out for rebounds... Murph just isn't that type of PF. He's a great rebounder on the defensive end where he actually focuses on rebounding, and when on offense, he's out there behind the arc, sinking daggers. It's a give-and-take thing. How are you gonna get a lot of offensives if you're not even in the paint? But you also don't wanna waste a 3-point shooter like that. It's 3's over offensive rebounds in this case, and I tend to think it's probly a smart way to go. If OBi told Murph to scrap the 3, focus on the paint and box out for offensive rebounds, he'd probly get a ton of them... but do you wanna lose those 3's? He's the best 3-point percentage shooter on the team... .436! That's a great percentage. You gotta have Troy out there stretching the opposing defense out...Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
I do think he's a very good rebounder, certainly under-rated. I seriously doubt he's out there averaging over 10+ rebounds/game by collecting nothing but worthless rebounds. Comparing Murph to players like Dale Davis just doesn't work. DD couldn't shoot a 15-footer, let a lone a 3-pointer... so ya, his offensive contributions outside the paint were mainly just setting screens for teammates, and then he returned "home" to collect the rebound --- much like Foster. I think you're hung up on Murph's offensive reboundes and ultimately comparing apples and oranges. Is Murph as good as DD was? Maybe. Maybe not. Hard to tell, different time, different team, different style. But you don't get single season records with a month remaining by not being pretty damn good at it.Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 03-11-2009, 12:02 AM.There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.Comment
-
Re: Post-Game: Utah wins game in last 8 minutes
I'll just go back to this fact, he got clearly beaten heads up for a couple of defensive boards (not offensive so no "he's on the arc") late in this game. MILSAP is a head to head better rebounder. Both guys are right there, both go up, Milsap gives the Jazz another possession.I agree with most of yer post, but dude, there are no cheap rebounds. Rebounds are rebounds. You seem really fixated on the fact that he gets few offensive rebounds, but you're failing to realize that on offense he spends most of his time out on the wings and at the top of the key
I'm sorry it bugs people, but for all the people that rip me on stats, going with the most basic, totally unqualified stats of Points, Assists, Rebounds is far worse. All 3 of those stats are the most flawed and prone to not telling you anywhere close to the entire picture.
Troy does get some tough boards and my main point remains that I just downgrade his rebounding total by 2-4 per game and make that his line. That's still pretty good.
But MANY people would push Troy aside in a heartbeat to have Dale Davis circa 1998 on the team in his place, and Dale wasn't exactly a 3pt threat and obviously doesn't come close to having the defensive rebounding record Troy just got.
I mean you're saying "hey, Dale wasn't on the arc", but what's that got to do with DEFENSIVE boards. Do you honestly recall Dale defending the defensive glass worse than Troy??? Come on, Dale made the All-Star team strictly as a rebounding/defensive ace. And yet Dale's defensive rebound total for a season is going to pale in comparison to Troy's. So by the numbers Troy is 15-20% better at rebounding than Dale.
That tells me something is off.
It's the final 20 seconds and Jordan puts up the shot and miss, Rodman's in there. Do you want A) Troy or B) Dale under there with him to get the Pacers a possession and deny the Bulls a 2nd chance. That's my question for people that saw Dale in his prime.
If Dale was the man and couldn't get as many boards as Troy on the defensive end only, how is that possible? Maybe not pushing Tony out of the way enough, or Rik or McKey? Maybe not having the assigned role of collecting all uncontested boards no matter what?Comment
-
Re: Post-Game: Utah wins game in last 8 minutes
I'm not sure Jim O'Brien is one of them though. I think this coach would prefer Troy's 3's over Dale Davis' interior D and rebounding.Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
Of course there's no way to prove that but I'm one of those people that think Murphy is custom made for Jim O'Brien's Pacer system. The faults most ascribe to Murphy are (at least in part) simply what he's being asked to do.
I now return you guys to your debate.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 WoodenComment
-
Re: Post-Game: Utah wins game in last 8 minutes
I got news for ya, Seth: Dale Davis didn't collect every offensive or defensive rebound when he was on the court, he won more than he lost, but you still gotta lose a few. I watched practically every game the dude played in from the time he was drafted 'til he left for Portland, so it's not like I don't recognize what Dale was.Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
So Murph got beat a few times. He also won quite a few battles. A few lost rebounds you noticed is not the entire sample. Milsap and Boozer ARE good rebounders. Getting beat by them once doesn't mean they'll beat you every time. They just beat you THAT time. Murphy, btw, led all players in rebounding in this game, but who cares, right? They were all cheapies.
I also never said that I think Murphy is a better rebounder than Dale. I'm trying to get you to realize the point about OFFENSIVE rebounds that you like to talk about so much. You constantly point to it as a weakness of Murph's. And ya, statistically, it is a weakness. But I'm trying to make you realize there's a reason there's such a huge discrepancy in offensive vs defensive rebounds. You deflected my argument to the defensive side of the ball. My entire post is about offensive rebounding.
I never, ever related his DEFENSIVE rebounds to him being behind the arc.
And now you're just being silly.Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
Here's a thought, if the numbers aren't adding up for Dale as much as you wanna remember him --- Maybe Murph is actually pretty good?Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 03-11-2009, 12:28 AM.There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.Comment
-
Re: Post-Game: Utah wins game in last 8 minutes
I think it's clear Nap doesn't think Murphy can't rebound straight up and Murphy pulling 2 off. boards a game isn't excusable playing from the high-post and the perimeter.
You have me looking very closely at Murphy lately. I allowed myself to suspend my disbelief and critique Murphy's rebounding strengths and weaknesses.
What I see, is exactly what you have professed. Murphy only has about a 20-24" vertical and short arms. Which hurts him a little when blocking out from the post. He gets beat consistently about 2 to 4 times per game resulting in a putbacks. He really doesn't ever get the hard fought rebounds. I think Dale was better at rebounding in that certain aspect. Another thing that factors into his overall rebounding numbers is the number of shots opponents attempt on us. I'd pro rate his total to about 10.5 to 11.0 if the Pacers played that same old tempo they did when Dale was playing.
Murphy does have better rebounding instincts than Dale Davis(most NBA forwards for that matter). Murphy is on top of where the ball will play off the rim 95% of the time, and that's why he get so many defensive boards. He has Rodman-like instincts(without the athletics). I spent some time recently watching some Pacers classics and I can honestly say Troy leaps to the ball very effectively, something Dale was very poor at. He mostly held his position(some of that is coaching style). Murphy sucks at blocking out because he plays the ball instead of a space(a reason he tends to steal rebounds and gets beat for putbacks).
Also, Murphy has a hunger for the ball, and great timing on his jump. Despite his lack of vertical, Troy gets up quick Timing, instincts, quick ups, hunger, and then sorry blockout skills, but he deserves what he earns. I think we can forgive him for shooting 43% from outside. Even if it results in lopsided rebound ratios. Dude is unique to say the least, but I can't help but like what I have been observing lately.Last edited by Noodle; 03-11-2009, 01:29 AM.Comment
Comment