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

Passing Greatness

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

  • Passing Greatness

    I'm intrigued by this lineup due to the passing abilities of all the players:

    Hibbert: Already acknowledged to be an excellent passer at center

    McRoberts: Passing may be his best attribute

    Lance: Could become elite as a passer

    Collison: His assists numbers last year showed he has skills

    Granger: Actually perhaps the weakest of the five at passing, but still, he is a decent to above average passer. I've seen him make some very clever dimes. He just has been put in a role where he mostly shoots.


    Anyway, this group of five on the floor could be very, very interesting to watch. Three or four of those players could be described as elite passers, or could become that way depending on how things develop.
    Last edited by McKeyFan; 08-14-2010, 01:22 PM.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference


  • #2
    Re: Passing Greatness

    Great point....sorry for the lame kinda-pun.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Passing Greatness

      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
      I'm intrigued by this lineup due to the passing abilities of all the players:

      Hibbert: Already acknowledge to be an excellent passer at center

      McRoberts: Passing may be his best attribute

      Lance: Could become elite as a passer

      Collison: His assists numbers last year showed he has skills

      Granger: Actually perhaps the weakest of the five at passing, but still, he is a decent to above average passer. I've seen him make some very clever dimes. He just has been put in a role where he mostly shoots.


      Anyway, this group of five on the floor could be very, very interesting to watch. Three or four of those players could be described as elite passers, or could become that way depending on how things develop.

      Great post! Very good points as Mildlysane said! I agree this would be a very interesting group to watch. That could be a great passing team and those are the teams that are hard to stop.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Passing Greatness

        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
        I'm intrigued by this lineup due to the passing abilities of all the players:

        Hibbert: Already acknowledge to be an excellent passer at center

        McRoberts: Passing may be his best attribute

        Lance: Could become elite as a passer

        Collison: His assists numbers last year showed he has skills

        Granger: ...He just has been put in a role where he mostly shoots.
        About Hibbert - yes, very much on his way as a complete player (do we believe he can't be at least average on the defensive board some day? Surely not). One thing to note about his passing - he was third in the league, per minute, in assists at the rim for 20-minute or more centers.

        Josh - it's good to see people recognize this strength. 2nd in the league among 10-minute or more PF's in Assist/Turnover ratio - outstanding feel for the game (and that's especially intriguing, combined with his athleticism). But to be effective making plays he's just got to get better at his jump shot, either a 15-18 or a 3-pointer. At this point he shoots them about equally well (which means poorly from 15-18, and well from the arc), so it makes a lot of sense to use him as a stretch big, though to do that and use his playmaking skills he'll have to improve his ball-handling.

        Lance - I agree with you that putting him with Collison is gold. Lance will break down defenses, and Darren and Danny will get driving lanes and open looks out of it.

        Collison - like Stephenson, he's been accused of pounding the ball and calling his own number, but I think that that's inaccurate in both cases.

        Granger - well, they needed him to score. The addition of Darren changes the whole dynamic around Danny.

        Hard to tell if Josh is going to break through this year, but I'd also point out that Tyler is a good passer, too, alongside the other nice odds and ends he brings (you don't usually see rookies taking so many charges, for example).

        I love the idea of putting a lineup of shot creators (I know that you said passers, which I'm expanding on) on the floor together. I'd propose substituting Hansbrough for McRoberts, and then you don't just get a lot of open shots, but also draw a ton of fouls, as all five guys can do that (Hibbert's going to get there sooner or later), and what's predictable is that those five can also all become grade-A FT shooters, or are already there.
        :
        :

        "Defense doesn't break down on the help, it breaks down on the recovery." - Chuck Daly

        "The first shot does not beat you." - Chuck Daly

        "To play defense and not foul is an art that must be mastered if you are going to be successful." - Chuck Daly

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Passing Greatness

          Originally posted by O'Bird View Post
          I'd also point out that Tyler is a good passer, too,
          :
          I know McBob is a fantastic passer, which is why I used him in this list. I just can't remember either way on Tyler's passing.
          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Passing Greatness

            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            I know McBob is a fantastic passer, which is why I used him in this list. I just can't remember either way on Tyler's passing.
            I wasn't trying to improve your thought experiment about a strong passing lineup - Josh is almost as good as it gets for a passing big man. But I think that substituting Tyler for him (we don't have to add "if he's able to play" every single time we write his name, do we?) adds some very interesting dimensions to your "starting five", and I think that it's also a more likely lineup, given the level of McRoberts' development. Tyler was a very good offensive rebounder (in limited court time) last year, for instance, while Josh hasn't shown much on either board.

            When we're talking about passing, we're thinking about how players create an open shot for one another, so shot creation is the superset, if you will, of that. Tyler is not as good a passer as Josh, but he can get points for himself by drawing fouls (I think he'll shoot FG's at a decent clip, too, once he gets a regular rhythm and minutes), and drawing fouls helps the team by getting them in the bonus (a kind of assist, if you will).
            :
            Last edited by O'Bird; 08-14-2010, 02:35 PM.
            :

            "Defense doesn't break down on the help, it breaks down on the recovery." - Chuck Daly

            "The first shot does not beat you." - Chuck Daly

            "To play defense and not foul is an art that must be mastered if you are going to be successful." - Chuck Daly

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Passing Greatness

              Originally posted by O'Bird View Post
              I wasn't trying to improve your thought experiment about a strong passing lineup - Josh is almost as good as it gets for a passing big man. But I think that substituting Tyler for him (we don't have to add "if he's able to play" every single time we write his name, do we?) adds some very interesting dimensions to your "starting five", and I think that it's also a more likely lineup, given the level of McRoberts' development. Tyler was a very good offensive rebounder (in limited court time) last year, for instance, while Josh hasn't shown much on either board.
              Okay. We agree McBob is a great passer. But do you remember Tyler passing well?

              I remember good court awareness, finding good position to get the pass, etc. I just don't remember him passing that much. And that could be more due to him being given the role of finisher rather than playmaker.
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • #8
                Greating Passness

                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                Okay. We agree McBob is a great passer. But do you remember Tyler passing well?
                I think that you'll see it clearly when he's getting a lot of minutes. He's an efficient passer, has very good feel for flow and not turning it over. I'd remind you that he went to North Carolina, one of the ultimate "system" programs in the NCAA, for four years. He was criticized for his production in his senior year, and it was suggested that he was picked lower in the draft because of it - but he was just doing his job in their system.

                Of course, O'Brien wanted him getting into the lane and to the line to get them points in the paint and FT's, and that's not going to change. Like Granger, you don't want him passing up scoring opportunities.
                :
                Last edited by O'Bird; 08-14-2010, 02:48 PM. Reason: cocaleecoh
                :

                "Defense doesn't break down on the help, it breaks down on the recovery." - Chuck Daly

                "The first shot does not beat you." - Chuck Daly

                "To play defense and not foul is an art that must be mastered if you are going to be successful." - Chuck Daly

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Passing Greatness

                  Originally posted by O'Bird View Post
                  When we're talking about passing, we're thinking about how players create an open shot for one another, so shot creation is the superset, if you will, of that. Tyler is not as good a passer as Josh, but he can get points for himself by drawing fouls (I think he'll shoot FG's at a decent clip, too, once he gets a regular rhythm and minutes), and drawing fouls helps the team by getting them in the bonus (a kind of assist, if you will).
                  :
                  Shouldn't shot creation, in the presence of players with passing ability, be a subset of a quality passing game as opposed to shot creation being the superset above passing?

                  This is the crux of the arguments against what we have seen that has led to a lot of our difficulties as a team. An offense that stagnates as a result of players being told to look for shots early in the clock, or before the defense sets up, and, failing to do that effectively, the offense breaks down and our players from our driving pgs out to our perimeter players get hung up and don't have adequate driving or passing lanes due to having looked for their shots instead of each other.

                  Obviously, the ability to make shots mitigates this inadequacy to an extent, as it does all other basketball inadequacies for that matter, but when shots no longer fall our team has gotten beaten like a drum with no passing game to fall back on because the players either are being instructed to look for passes mostly when they have no option to create their own shot, or are not able to comprehend when passing is more advisable than creating their own shot (calling their own number) in any given situation.

                  If passing is given a higher level of importance in the minds of the players than it has been, in my opinion, the players will have more opportunity to create higher quality shots in the flow of an offense that they will recognize gives them more opportunities for touches and scores, and players will be more likely to find those with the hot hand when it is appropriate, and fewer of our customary pg mistakes will be made, resulting in fewer turnovers.

                  And, the all important spacing will occur naturally as defenses are forced to work longer and harder to defend. Nobody can outrun a properly thrown pass. That is fundamental, and it needs to be emphasized as the primary element of spacing the court as opposed to simply having the making perimeter shots be the key element to making defenses defend the perimeter and not sag into the paint as they tend to currently.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Passing Greatness

                    groups i'm interested in seeing

                    collison,paul, granger, rolle, hibbert (could be a strong D)

                    collison, lance, paul, rolle, hibbert (possible future of indy if granger is traded in the next 4yrs or so)

                    collison, rush, paul, granger, hibbert

                    collison lance, paul, granger, rolle (run n gun)

                    collison, rush, paul, rolle, hibbert (another nice lineup for D)

                    I can't wait to see how well our youngs chemistry is on the court.
                    2012: Pacers return to glory

                    Paul George All Day

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X