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

The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

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

  • #16
    Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

    I would say that Roy is our most important and probably valuable player.
    Danny is a very good player who is our unquestioned leader.
    However, he's a good 2nd option forced into the 1st option scoring role. Because of our lack of scoring, he's become more of a jump shooter as other teams have learned to focus their defense on him.
    That's hurt Danny's overall game as he's 30' from the basket far too often. The Danny BEFORE this was a very effective rebounder and shot blocker and defender.
    A much more well rounded player.
    About a year ago I got a free month to one of the insider NBA report rags and the one thing that really struck me was a couple of scouts talking about the Pacers and saying that nobody worried about the P's because if Danny is the main threat, and it takes him 20 shots to get his 25pts, they can live with that every time.
    Because Danny has the comparatively large contract (to Roy not other borderlne all stars), I would guess Roy would be the Pacer most teams would be interested in acquiring.
    I think anyone that doesn't put a WHOLE BUNCH of value on a 7' low post scorer that passes well doesn't understand the game that well.
    I can't imagine more than 3 or 4 teams that wouldn't LOVE to have Roy.

    IMO - Danny has been our star by default. A very good player that has had to play "star" for this team. I would dearly love for Roy to average close to 20pts a game, have Tyler come back healthy and get 10, George good for a few, Brandon as consistant as he was at the end of the season, etc and let Danny get back to being the ALL STAR he could be if he didn't have to shoot so much.
    Let Danny spend more time in the paint, drop to 18pts, 10 rebounds and a couple of blocks and this team is completely different in configuration and competitively.

    Get a quality pg and this team is ready to blow up. (in the good way)

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      No player is untouchable. Should the Lakers trade Kobe if Miami offered DWade and Lebron? I think so and I don't think it would be close. With that said, do you think DWade and Lebron would ever be on the same team for that type of trade to even be possible? I guess we have the answer to that.
      wrong kobe was a no trade policy in his contract but i get your point

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

        I wouldn't be shocked (but pleasantly surprised, to a point) if Jim does finally make Roy more of a focal point this season. His praise for Roy during the summer league went above and beyond what I'm used to hearing him say.

        I wonder if the combination of the latest improvements to Roy's game combined with now being a 3-year "vet" will prove to be what allows Jim to turn a corner on how he uses Hibbert.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
          I wouldn't be shocked (but pleasantly surprised, to a point) if Jim does finally make Roy more of a focal point this season. His praise for Roy during the summer league went above and beyond what I'm used to hearing him say.

          I wonder if the combination of the latest improvements to Roy's game combined with now being a 3-year "vet" will prove to be what allows Jim to turn a corner on how he uses Hibbert.
          Temper everything that Jim said about Roy during the summer league with the reminder that at the end of the season he said that he still see's Roy as a situational starter.

          In other words whenever we face the beast that is Toronto you will see Roy riding the pine.


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

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            Temper everything that Jim said about Roy during the summer league with the reminder that at the end of the season he said that he still see's Roy as a situational starter.

            In other words whenever we face the beast that is Toronto you will see Roy riding the pine.
            JOB has always been prejudiced against Roy.

            At the end of games, he will look for every excuse to have Roy on the bench: foul trouble, matchups, etc.
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

              I would say that he is the best player by position we have...my theory is that scoring wings come by all the time. There's many of them--even the great ones, such as All-Stars. Joe Johnson, Danny Granger, Melo, LeBron, Wade, Durant, etc. Then you even have like J.R. Smith, John Salmons, Corey Maggette, Anthony Morrow, Evan Turner, Wesley Johnson, etc. They all can score the ball and that is what they do best. The hardest thing to come by (imo) is a good true center, which is what we have in Roy Hibbert. Nowadays if you have a good center, they are smaller guys, but they muscle their way in (like Dwight...but he's a beast in every aspect) and don't really have many "post moves." Big Roy has some great post moves right now and is still working to refine his game. I honestly think this season will be a big one for Roy and I just hope that O'Brien makes plays for him and actually thinks about directing the players to throw the ball down low to Roy and go to work that way. Even as good as Granger is and has been, I think our most important piece is Hibbert as you just can't hardly find good true centers anymore.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                It became clear in December of 2008 what JOb's strategy is...and what he really wants out of a team and its players. That was the night when all of my questions about JOb were answered.

                It was the game against Golden State where we beat them something like 127-121. He was more animated than I had ever seen him...giddy like a school girl after that game...and I believe he said that "that is the way the game is supposed to be played". At the same time, Jarrett Jack said it was like a game played at the park. Lots of running up and down the floor and lots of threes. Both teams just happened to be hitting them that night.

                I guess you can claim that defense can be the focus in this type of game. Good luck convincing most people. A defense has no chance to setup and make it difficult to make shots when there's so much player movement. It's not a strategy that's normally successful when there is some level of parity across the league in terms of talent.

                So, with that said, I expect Hibbert to be underutilized regardless of what he might bring to the table.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post
                  Temper everything that Jim said about Roy during the summer league with the reminder that at the end of the season he said that he still see's Roy as a situational starter.

                  In other words whenever we face the beast that is Toronto you will see Roy riding the pine.
                  I remember when Lester Conner took over for O'Brien when we played against Toronto at home this past season and instead of using that dumb small lineup yet again, we used our "what we should use all the time" lineup (big lineup) and we absolutely killed Toronto...I believe we won by like 30 points or something like that. O'Brien is an idiot and I don't know why we still have this clown around.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                    Originally posted by DrFife View Post
                    I don't really disagree with you at all, 'fish; but let me do a UB impersonation and ask,

                    "What if TPTB's win-however-you-can attitude implies that Obie has felt that Hibbert isn't yet ready to be the focal point; that Murphy, however suboptimal, has been the best option?

                    "Moreover, what if, through a strong training camp, Hibbert convinces Obie that he now is ready?

                    Can you allow that Obie may indeed adjust his offensive priorities ... or have you soured on him (in part) for being 'too stubborn' and therefore doubt his ability to adjust?"
                    OB said exactly that. That when Roy was benched it was because he wasn't decisive with the ball when they got it to him. He was firm on that from the beginning. Don't let the OB bashers get away with saying otherwise. WHEN he showed a lot of improvement in that area, he started playing a whole lot more. And a whole lot better.
                    Down the stretch he was playing exceptionally well.
                    And playing just like his coach had requested..........

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                      Originally posted by MLB007 View Post
                      OB said exactly that. That when Roy was benched it was because he wasn't decisive with the ball when they got it to him. He was firm on that from the beginning. Don't let the OB bashers get away with saying otherwise. WHEN he showed a lot of improvement in that area, he started playing a whole lot more. And a whole lot better.
                      Down the stretch he was playing exceptionally well.
                      And playing just like his coach had requested..........
                      I would almost agree with you, but Jim went against his word (no!! [/shockface]) the last game of the year in DC when Roy was having a very good game and he pulled him out late in the 4th.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                        Originally posted by Hicks
                        Jim went against his word (no!! [/shockface])

                        He says what he says. He does what he does. But he doesn't do what he says.



                        .
                        And I won't be here to see the day
                        It all dries up and blows away
                        I'd hang around just to see
                        But they never had much use for me
                        In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                          Lets see... lets play the value of Roy Hibbert game.

                          Lakers: Could we even get Bynum? Maybe for salary reasons, but not for player reasons.
                          Suns: Not Nash. Not J-Rich. So who else on that team has value? Hedo for a dump?
                          Jazz: At best Milsap?
                          Mavs: Not Dirk, not Roddy, not Kidd- who else is left on that team?
                          Spurs: No to the big three, no to Hill (unless packaged with Rush?)
                          Denver: Not Melo. Maybe JR Smith? Probably not Nene. Who's left?
                          Blazers: Who would they give up? Not Batum, not Roy, not Aldridge. Oden, Bayless?

                          Celtics: Probably not the big 3, or Rondo
                          Magic: Not Nelson, not Howard, maybe Rashard?
                          Hawks: Not Joe Johnson, not Al Horford, maybe Josh Smith for a contract dump?
                          Miami: No.
                          Bucks: Not Jennings, Not Bogut, so who's left? Redd? Salmons? Maggette?


                          So....Hibbert's value? A solid starting 5. Not a star, not a player to build a team around.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                            Originally posted by flox View Post
                            Lets see... lets play the value of Roy Hibbert game.

                            Lakers: Could we even get Bynum? Maybe for salary reasons, but not for player reasons.
                            Suns: Not Nash. Not J-Rich. So who else on that team has value? Hedo for a dump?
                            Jazz: At best Milsap?
                            Mavs: Not Dirk, not Roddy, not Kidd- who else is left on that team?
                            Spurs: No to the big three, no to Hill (unless packaged with Rush?)
                            Denver: Not Melo. Maybe JR Smith? Probably not Nene. Who's left?
                            Blazers: Who would they give up? Not Batum, not Roy, not Aldridge. Oden, Bayless?

                            Celtics: Probably not the big 3, or Rondo
                            Magic: Not Nelson, not Howard, maybe Rashard?
                            Hawks: Not Joe Johnson, not Al Horford, maybe Josh Smith for a contract dump?
                            Miami: No.
                            Bucks: Not Jennings, Not Bogut, so who's left? Redd? Salmons? Maggette?


                            So....Hibbert's value? A solid starting 5. Not a star, not a player to build a team around.
                            Not somebody you trade, because he is not worth enough to other teams to bring in an All-Star, but he is clearly too important as a starting center on a rookie contract to a team like ours to consider trading for what other teams would be willing to give up. He is one of those "stuck in the middle" type of players. They just don't get traded. I would say Rush fits that to a degree, but Hibbert is a young center who shows promise on both sides of the ball.

                            There are a lot of players you just try not to trade. Look at Cleveland last year with JJ Hickson. Good example of a player you just don't trade because their value and upside is too high for the price tag.
                            "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                              I bet Hibbert could land you Tony Parker, the spurs aren't going to resign him, and they need another big man to groom as the replacement to Tim Duncan.
                              You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: The Value of Hungry Hungry Hibbert

                                Originally posted by DrFife View Post
                                I don't really disagree with you at all, 'fish; but let me do a UB impersonation and ask,

                                "What if TPTB's win-however-you-can attitude implies that Obie has felt that Hibbert isn't yet ready to be the focal point; that Murphy, however suboptimal, has been the best option?

                                "Moreover, what if, through a strong training camp, Hibbert convinces Obie that he now is ready?

                                Can you allow that Obie may indeed adjust his offensive priorities ... or have you soured on him (in part) for being 'too stubborn' and therefore doubt his ability to adjust?"
                                Wow, I hope I make more sense than that. LOL

                                Murphy is not the focal point of the offense. He only scores off the delayed fastbreak and off the pick and roll or kick outs. He's not one of our primary offensive weapons (although admittedly, we have very few if any real offensive weapons)
                                Last edited by Unclebuck; 07-19-2010, 10:46 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X