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

Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

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

  • Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

    http://www.indystar.com/article/2010...rse-in-defense

    Mike Wells
    IndyStar
    Lance Stephenson was given the nickname "Born Ready" for his basketball skills while playing on the blacktops of New York City. But it is clear the Indiana Pacers rookie guard got that name for what he could do offensively, not defensively.

    Stephenson, a second-round draft pick, has been a defensive liability during the first part of training camp.

    "If we were playing a game tonight, he wouldn't get a minute," Pacers coach Jim O'Brien said.

    Stephenson's offensive skill allowed him to play in high school and college despite defensive shortcomings. That's not the case anymore.

    His mistakes are broken down, either on the spot in practice by the coaching staff or the next morning during a video session.

    "In college, I was definitely able to take shortcuts and try to get over," Stephenson said. "In the NBA, you can't get over. I have to get better at it."

    Stephenson's biggest problem has been off-the-ball defense.

    He's sticking to the true meaning of man-to-man defense. He stays on his man and doesn't pay attention to where the ball is on the court.

    That was the case during a recent scrimmage when Stephenson stood and watched as fellow rookie Paul George caught the ball, squared his body to the basket and took an uncontested 3-point shot in the corner.

    "I've got to be at the right spot on the court and see the where the ball is at when my man doesn't have it," Stephenson said. "The ball will be across court and I'll still be on my man. I'll get better at it."

    The 6-5, 210-pound Stephenson is also having difficulty defending the pick-and-roll. He gets screened instead of fighting through the pick, or going around it when the opportunity is there.

    O'Brien wants him to pressure the ball so it would be harder for Stephenson to get picked.

    Stephenson was shifted from point guard to shooting guard in practice Monday because he couldn't stop Darren Collison on the pick-and-roll.

    Playing Stephenson at shooting guard better conceals his defensive flaws, according to O'Brien.

    "It all starts with ball pressure," O'Brien said.

    "Pick-and-rolls are easier to guard if you pressure the ball. Sometimes young guys think it's easier to back off to avoid the screen. They'll still get screened. He needs to use his strength to jam the guy and push him toward the sideline or corner."

    Stephenson, who came to the Pacers with a reputation for having a questionable attitude, has handled the criticism well. He listens and attempts to fix the problem right away.

    The Pacers have enough depth at the guard positions that they don't have to force-feed minutes to Stephenson.

    "I think he understands the difference between coaching and criticism," O'Brien said. "I see some growth in his defense. I told him I want him to come in with the goal to get better defensively each day. If he does that every day, it'll get to the point in time where he'll be good enough of a defensive player that he'll be able to get some playing time."

    Injury update
    The Pacers have suffered their first two injuries in training camp.

    Point guard T.J. Ford and forward Solomon Jones sat out most of practice with strained right and left hamstrings, respectively.

    Both are listed as day-to-day.

  • #2
    Re: Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

    He'll learn. No big deal.

    Plus, it's not like he's the only person on this team who plays no defense.
    Stop quoting people I have on ignore!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

      I still feel that AJ should be getting more time than Lance as well as being Darren's backup, but we'll see who's most worthy of it as the season begins.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

        I guess then he'll fit into JOB's system just perfectly
        "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

          The good thing is he is looking to learn. He has several Defensive specialists to learn from in brush, posey, and jones.

          If he can commit to defense and spend his time learning he will be a top pg in this league within 4 years. If not he will be a bench player. Doesnt matter if he can score 20 if the others team pg can score 25 on him.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

            3 players will be inactive and 3 players will be sitting on the end of the bench not part of the regular rotation. That's what will limit Stephenson's playing time...

            I still hope they send him to the D League. Make learning D his priority. I'd rather see that then see him playing garbage time in the NBA. At least in the near term...

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

              Originally posted by Strummer View Post
              3 players will be inactive and 3 players will be sitting on the end of the bench not part of the regular rotation. That's what will limit Stephenson's playing time...

              I still hope they send him to the D League. Make learning D his priority. I'd rather see that then see him playing garbage time in the NBA. At least in the near term...
              personally I dont think that is the right path for him. He needs to be guarding elite talent. If you want to be the best you have to play against the best every day. ITs great he has DC to guard because you cant get much quicker than that.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

                Originally posted by dohman View Post
                personally I dont think that is the right path for him. He needs to be guarding elite talent. If you want to be the best you have to play against the best every day. ITs great he has DC to guard because you cant get much quicker than that.
                What I've read indicates he doesn't have the basic idea how to play team defense and guard the pick and roll. He has to learn the basics before he can hope to contend with the elite. But once he can hold his own in the D league I agree he should be brought up.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

                  Read more NBA news and insight: http://www.hoopsworld.com/Chat.asp?C...#ixzz11VmDB9e6
                  by Luke Barnes at Hoopsworld


                  Eric P in Naptown:
                  Hey Luke, hope all is well with you. Why do so many rookies struggle with defense?

                  Luke Byrnes:
                  Adjusting from the competition level from college to the pros is a daunting task. Typically, guys that are NBA talents can get by in college by simply being the better athlete. In the NBA, everyone is a great athlete. Film study, understanding of what the offense as a whole and the individual player are trying to do, and playing within the defensive system are almost more important that the physical attributes you bring to the table. That is why there is such a period of adjustment. Like a running back in the NFL. They may have all the necessary skills with the ball in their hands, but you have to be able to protect the passer as well as run with the ball in your hands. It is a real transistion to start blocking a guy like Clay Matthews instead of some college linebacker we'll never hear from again.
                  Sittin on top of the world!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

                    Lance is a young cat and needs to be groomed like every one else. He didn't play for a big time college where they focused on fundamentals and defense. He'll come around fairly quickly IF he wants to get on the court and play a few minutes each game. I still think he'll cause some match-up problems and he will definitely be a better matchup against the 6'4" or bigger PGs that run amok in this league. DC at 6'0" (and AJ)will get beat-down and abused by these bigger PGs. Since Lance is much stronger and taller, he'll be the matchup ANSWER to these other big PGs. Can't wait to see Lance matched up with Tyreke Evans again. They ain't played each other since Lance was a runt in 8th Grade and Tyreke was an 11th grader. Now, Lance is 6'5" and should provide great entertainment going up against Tyreke Evans at 6'5" or John Walls at 6'4" or even Deron Williams at 6'3".

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

                      Murphy didn't play defense, and he got a lot of minutes. The kid has a sweet touch and good ability to drive. So why was murphy special to jim. Cause they both had irish backgrounds?
                      Bambam

                      Follow me on Twitter @http://twitter.com/brockhubble

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

                        Originally posted by bambam View Post
                        Murphy didn't play defense, and he got a lot of minutes. The kid has a sweet touch and good ability to drive. So why was murphy special to jim. Cause they both had irish backgrounds?
                        I'm sure Murphy played excellent team defense, or better yet, he was crucial in spreading the floor.

                        It's just more lip-service. I recall him saying the same things about Roy, JMac and Brandon at one point in time as a way of justifying his rotations.

                        Lance will learn. I have a feeling he's never been taught how to play defense before, so this is all new to him. It's like you never learned a language before and someone just drops you in that particular country. Yeah, you'll be lost for a while, but you'll catch on soon enough and you'll be more than capable. It also helps he just turned 20 and he has a vet like Posey to learn from, not to mention the attitude with which he's approaching this whole thing.
                        2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

                          Sure Lance cant (and possibly will never be able to) guard the smaller, lightning fast PG's at an average level, but they too wont be able to guard him with his size and strength, therefore I feel that Lance should be used (in the short term) as a kind of offensive spark plug when the offences stagnates. he offers the chance to get some cheap buckets on post ups and 1 on 1 situations

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

                            Originally posted by Asteezy View Post
                            Sure Lance cant (and possibly will never be able to) guard the smaller, lightning fast PG's at an average level, but they too wont be able to guard him with his size and strength, therefore I feel that Lance should be used (in the short term) as a kind of offensive spark plug when the offences stagnates. he offers the chance to get some cheap buckets on post ups and 1 on 1 situations
                            Sure they'll be able too. Lance's ball handling isn't that spectacular either. They'll just pressure him all the way up the court..which will result in not great things for the Pacers.

                            I don't believe this is true for all positions, but I think for PGs it's much better to be small and speedy than big and slow.

                            Fortunatly, there's a better position for him to play on the basketball court. That does not involve him taking care of the ball, defending smaller quicker players, and making decisions for the entire offense. And it does involve him doing what he's best at...scoring. He's a strong guy. I think he'll be strong next to most shooting guards too.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Lance's lack of defense may equal limited time

                              Murphy's defense was bad. Lance's is supposedly horrendous.

                              That's ok, though, because Murphy's defense wasn't going to get better, while Lance is improving already.

                              I think playing at the 2 makes sense for him this year... give all of the PG minutes to AJ and Collison.
                              This space for rent.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X