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

Bruno article on McRoberts

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 5
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 template Next
  • #1

    Bruno article on McRoberts

    http://my.nba.com/cms/Indiana%20Pace...In%20The%20Web

    A couple of things you may not know about Josh McRoberts:

    A third-year veteran on a team with two rookies and two second-year players, he's nevertheless the youngest player on the roster; and, though some fans clamor for more playing time for the Carmel product, he already has more minutes this season than his first two combined.




    Which is to say he's coming along nicely. It isn't happening all at once, a fact which seems to strain the patience of his strong local fan base, but it is happening.

    The 23-year-old forward is fresh off the most productive game of his career, 18 points on 8-of-9 shooting and 12 rebounds, in a 133-102 rout of Houston on Sunday in Conseco Fieldhouse. It was his second double-double in the last six games, the third of his career.

    All of which is nice, but the spectacular dunks and blocked shots aren't the main reasons McRoberts has found a regular place in the rotation the past few weeks.

    "The metrics from the standpoint of his defense have changed, which is why he's getting playing time," said Coach Jim O'Brien. "He's taking more pride on the defensive end in getting stops, being more active with his hands. That has helped, I think. …

    "We have to know guys play at both ends of the court – Josh or anybody else. If you're scoring X amount of points and your opponent is scoring 1.5X, it might look good that you're scoring X but the object is to score more than the guy guarding you. Josh has seen that.
    "I sat down with him a couple of weeks ago and showed him his numbers, defensively, when he was on the court, what our field-goal defense was, and it wasn't a pretty sight. That has changed. To his credit he has focused on that and earned the playing time he is getting. I think that's a great sign."

    After appearing in just 21 of the first 57 games, McRoberts has played in 16 of the last 18, averaging 15.4 minutes, 6.0 points and 3.6 rebounds.

    "I've always been confident that I can do a lot of things on the basketball court," McRoberts said. "But getting a lot of minutes, I've been able to get kind of a rhythm and be involved a little bit more. I guess I'm having an opportunity to show what else I can do a little bit.

    "We talked a while back and I'm going to try to do everything I can to try to play. If he tells me to do anything out there I'm going to try to do it to try to get on the court. I'll try to make a concentrated effort on the defensive end to do the things he wants me to do."

    In addition to improving defensively, McRoberts has made 8-of-21 from the 3-point line this season after going 0-of-11 his first two seasons. If he continues to progress in that area, he could become even tougher to keep on the bench.

    McRoberts, who has worked with shooting specialist Billy Keller on his stroke throughout the season, sounds willing to do whatever is necessary to remain with the Pacers. The team has the option to pick up the final season of his contract for 2010-11.

    "I hope to be here for a long time but it's hard to say at this point," McRoberts said. "It's something I haven't thought about. I'm just out there playing and competing and trying to do my best every day. I'd love to be with the Pacers and be a contributor forever, for as long as I can."

    It's beginning to sound like this marriage just might last.

    "Significantly he factors into the plans," said O'Brien. "We have Troy (Murphy) in the last year of his contract and I love bigs that can pass the ball and space the court.

    "Now, he's not at Troy's level spacing the court yet but if he takes a Larry Bird, Reggie Miller mentality from the standpoint of the volume of the threes he can get up, and listens to Billy Keller, who works with him on his shoot, and becomes the type of 3-point shooter that I think he can, with his driving ability and his passing ability, I think he's a significant piece."

    __________________________________________________ _________

    I don't have numbers to support anything, but doesn't Troy's man score a lot more than him on a regular basis?

    Why does he want Josh to have a Larry/Reggie mentality? He's a POWER FORWARD!!!
    Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Bruno article on McRoberts

    Not to side track things, but more and more Obie sounds like a coach who will be here next year.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Bruno article on McRoberts

      Originally posted by Speed View Post
      Not to side track things, but more and more Obie sounds like a coach who will be here next year.
      Bird said this a couple of weeks ago:

      "(Owner Herb) Simon will have to look at everything," Bird said. "After next year, my contract is up, so is David's, (coach Jim O'Brien), all the scouts and most of the players. They're going to have money. I know one thing, when (Simon) looks at it, he's going to have seven core guys he's going to like."
      I asked Wells for clarification, and he said that Bird had specifically included O'Brien (referring to him as "Jimmy") in that statement.

      When I said that sure sounded like Bird had already decided to keep O'Brien, Wells responded, "I haven't heard anything different."

      On several occasions earlier this year, Wells tweeted that Bird had no intention of firing O'Brien, but that was all before that road trip out West.

      I'm not going to get into the rest of the silliness that's associated with talking about O'Brien around here, but, yeah, I'd say that if Bird's back, then O'Brien's back.

      At this point, it sure as hell looks like they're a combo.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Bruno article on McRoberts

        Is the man who is in love with Troy Murphy seriously talking about defense? Seriously?

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Bruno article on McRoberts

          I don't even know where to begin......

          I guess I do, I am now about to join in on the anti-Bird bandwagon. I have been a pretty solid supporter of him so far and really liked some of the moves he has made, but keeping this coach around is just more than I can take.

          I really can no longer blame Jim for being Jim, it is now on Bird. If he is going to keep him around then he really should make the changes that are essential to give him the players that he wants and will use. No more of these players that will take a year to learn the system only to have them really be no better at it (T.J. Ford) and no more defensive players that do not stretch the floor (S. & D. Jones).

          He needs to aquire a team of Kyle Korver, Mike Miller and figure out if there is anyway to pry Ben Gordon from the Pistons.

          Man I didn't really need to read this today.


          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Bruno article on McRoberts

            Originally posted by USF View Post
            http://my.nba.com/cms/Indiana%20Pace...In%20The%20Web

            "Now, he's not at Troy's level spacing the court yet but if he takes a Larry Bird, Reggie Miller mentality from the standpoint of the volume of the threes he can get up, and listens to Billy Keller, who works with him on his shoot, and becomes the type of 3-point shooter that I think he can, with his driving ability and his passing ability, I think he's a significant piece."
            I just want to throw up! If JOB were standing here, I'd be sure to throw up on him!

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Bruno article on McRoberts

              He mentions defense, yet is enamored with Murphy.

              He mentions a Bird/Miller-like volume of 3s from McBob. Seriously, can you not tell that his comfort area and strength is inside, up close? So tired of 4's who are 25 feet from the basket. It's nice to be able to shoot the 3, but I don't want J'Ob training McBob, who gravitates towards the paint naturally, to be standing forever out on the 3 point line. That's like buying a truck for the acceleration and a Corvette to haul things. Why don't we train our PGs to hang out in the paint and block-out and rebound and set picks?
              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

              • #8
                Re: Bruno article on McRoberts

                When people on this site are saying they are fed up with the direction of the team, that's saying something.

                I made it through the Artest years, followed by the actions of Tinsley, Jackson, Williams. Made it through the losing the past couple of seasons.

                But keeping this coach around is making me turn away from this franchise. And I know I'm not the only one, Seth saying he's not renewing his half-season tix, along with others, and more debating it.

                How long until football season is here?
                “Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Bruno article on McRoberts

                  I'm very encouraged with what I'm seeing. I think Bird and O'Brien are doing a very good job - they are committed to a long term strategy, they are developing the younger players and the recent strong play has shown promise for the future.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Bruno article on McRoberts

                    Here's an article from NBA.com writer Sekou Smith about Josh that will at least not make you want to rip your hair out like Bruno's. Click the link to see the videos. I couldn't find the embed codes.


                    http://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2010/04/07/air-mcroberts/

                    Sekou Smith
                    NBA.com

                    HANG TIME HEADQUARTERS – Don’t laugh.

                    The most underrated dunker in the league deserves a nickname.

                    It always helps if you can identify said dunker. And with Pacers’ reserve forward Josh McRoberts hiding behind that lumberjack beard, you could confuse his mug shot with one of say a hockey player or professional bowler.

                    Check him out on the floor, though, and it’s clear that he operates in that space above the rim that we all love.

                    ***

                    ***

                    Now I know we’ve been down this road before; playing the hype game with an exciting dunker and assuming that somehow translates into him being able to perform on the contest stage during All-Star Weekend (you know who you are Shannon Brown and DeMar DeRozan).

                    But our previous test subjects didn’t have the signature look McRoberts does. The former Duke star (yes, I used those two words together and didn’t make a snide comment) has everything we need, the hops, chops and desire (per a couple of our best spies in Indianapolis).

                    If we can’t start a grassroots movement for the NBA’s first lumberjack dunker, then we all need to find something else to do with our time.

                    Check him out and tell me we haven’t stumbled on to the sleeper pick for the 2011 Slam Dunk title (sorry Krypto-Nate):

                    ***

                    ***

                    Oh, and this one, too:

                    ***

                    ***

                    And this nice catch and finish here:

                    ***
                    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                    -Lance Stephenson

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Bruno article on McRoberts

                      I've not watched Josh's defense, so I can't come at this from that direction, but I think even on Troy's bad defense days I don't see him give up more points and rebounds than he scores.

                      This is often because he isn't on the top big man for whoever we are playing, while Josh tends to be, but still, saying Murphy gives up 20 points when he scores 14 is a stretch even for people who would deny the sky was blue if Jim O'Brien said it.

                      I know there are people out there who might be able to show what Josh did or did not give up, so perhaps that's a better way to refute JOB than to switch gears and say, "what about Troy, then..."
                      BillS

                      A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                      Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Bruno article on McRoberts

                        this was an ok piece until that last paragraph where JOB goes:

                        "Now, he's not at Troy's level spacing the court yet but if he takes a Larry Bird, Reggie Miller mentality from the standpoint of the volume of the threes he can get up, and listens to Billy Keller, who works with him on his shoot, and becomes the type of 3-point shooter that I think he can, with his driving ability and his passing ability, I think he's a significant piece."
                        Did somebody forget the green text or is this for real?! I thought USF was making a joke here with that last paragraph...that is just disturbing.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Bruno article on McRoberts

                          I know I posted this in another thread, but if "THE CLOWN" is back I am done with this team.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Bruno article on McRoberts

                            Man, this coach really is out of touch.
                            You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Bruno article on McRoberts

                              Originally posted by BillS View Post
                              I've not watched Josh's defense, so I can't come at this from that direction, but I think even on Troy's bad defense days I don't see him give up more points and rebounds than he scores.

                              This is often because he isn't on the top big man for whoever we are playing, while Josh tends to be, but still, saying Murphy gives up 20 points when he scores 14 is a stretch even for people who would deny the sky was blue if Jim O'Brien said it.

                              I know there are people out there who might be able to show what Josh did or did not give up, so perhaps that's a better way to refute JOB than to switch gears and say, "what about Troy, then..."
                              It's not the "well look, Troy sucked worse"

                              It's more like...how can a guy, who has so much love for the game of a guy who doesn't play defense, make like the reason Josh wasn't getting time was because of defense. If a coach is playing Dunleavy and Murphy on a consistent basis, and in Murphy's case an extended amount of time, that coach either does not care about defense, or does not care about defense at the position those two are playing at. And seeing as both have played the same position as Josh...it's just another example of JOB talking out his butt.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 template Next
                              Working...
                              X