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

A question for the OB haters

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

  • #61
    Re: A question for the OB haters

    Originally posted by ballism View Post
    Personally, i feel we are a bit too far into this coaching regime to still be operating with a general notion 'can't blame the coach, the team was bad'. I mean, we have this coach for the 4th year now, and we've followed the roster and its gaps for many years. If we can't discuss coaching quality just because 'talent was bad'... where have we been looking for 4 years. In 4 years, you can see if a coach overperforms or underperforms, or is average - no matter the talent level.

    There have been so many weird decisions and plays, especially late into the game. Probably none of us has as much experience as JOB. But that does not make us blind, the man is no Popovich.
    I'm certainly not operating under that general notion.

    To me the Pacers over-performed in every season under O'Brien except in the last one (+ Boston and Philly overperformed in every season with him as coach).

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: A question for the OB haters

      I think the team overachieved while underachieving all at the same time.

      There was no reason to be in "win now mode" when they clearly didn't have the roster to do anything with the wins, considering they weren't going to win enough to even make the playoffs. Sure they won a few more games than what the roster should have won. Congrats.

      Instead of losing a few more games and letting a player like Josh develop, or even AJ, we are now having to do it this season on the fly. In the long run, it actually hurt the franchise more, than it helped it.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: A question for the OB haters

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        I have never made such a claim. In fact I have said for years that the job Jim O'Brien did two seasons ago to get 36 wins out of that team was an excellent job coaching. Even his first season with the JT and JO distractions 36 wins was pretty good. I think in bopth instances, the team over-achieved.

        Last season 32 wins was probably about where the team should be. Maybe a couple of games better maybe, but overall 32 wins wasn't too bad for the lack of talent and lack of players with enough experience to win.

        This year we have Collison, a health Dunleavy, Roy is much better, Rush is much better, Ford is playing better than he has, Granger is playing defense. I expect more than 32 wins this season.
        Last year's results were indeed ok considering how the players performed. However, maximizing players' performance is part of the job. And O'Brien did it marvelously for stretches, while at other times the effort looked abysmal. He's doing a great job right now again effort-wise, but why has the effort been so on and off during his tenure?

        I feel like we keep over-blaming the coach during the bad times, and then over-forgive everything during the good times.

        To use Granger's example. I think a coach deserves part of the blame when Granger is not playing defense, or making hustle plays or is breaking the system. While it's in huge part his fault, it is coach's job to make players buy into what he teaches.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: A question for the OB haters

          Originally posted by MLB007 View Post
          If all the maladies of this team are due to the coach,
          what say you now?

          We're playing significantly better. Too bad "significantly better" translates to .500 ball. As others have pointed out, it's taken Jimmy 3+ years to implement some of the things we've been screaming about for the duration.

          If we can continue to play this well and make the playoffs, great. Doesn't mean I want him back next year.
          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: A question for the OB haters

            Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
            If we can continue to play this well and make the playoffs, great. Doesn't mean I want him back next year.
            I agree because I think everyone buying into the current system is the ceiling for JOB. To go to the next level I think we will need a different coach.
            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


            • #66
              Re: A question for the OB haters

              Originally posted by cordobes View Post
              I'm certainly not operating under that general notion.

              To me the Pacers over-performed in every season under O'Brien except in the last one (+ Boston and Philly overperformed in every season with him as coach).
              I see, in that case I missunderstood your point.
              I pretty much agree with what you say now. Personally, I can't say I was ever extremely dissappointed or surprised with season results, - only with the highs and lows of several few-month stretches.

              That said, I often didn't like in-game decisions he made or rotations he used, or the effort he pushed out of players.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: A question for the OB haters

                Cordobes:
                Like most NBA coaches, O'Brien coaches the players he has on the roster...

                ...But you can't do omelettes without eggs. Hibbert used to struggle to stay on the court for more than half a quarter in his rookie season, with fouls and conditioning issue... how can you build your offense around his low post game, which is still a work in progress?
                There are so many things going on in the post for our team. The presence of Hansbrough and McRoberts to help out much better on defense has probably helped minimize the number of fouls on Hibbert, as has better perimeter defense, team defense and Hibbert's conditioning itself.

                Unclebuck:
                they didn't play like this last year

                there is a lot more going on with this team besides just not having Murphy
                I totally agree that we are playing much better than last season, and that there is much more going on besides Murphy's absence. But rather than calling it "Murphy's absence", I do think that good things are happening due to other players' presence (Collison, Posey) and the fact that other players who have taken Murphy's place on the court (McRoberts, Hansbough) work much better in combination with Hibbert to provide interior defense.

                Peck:
                Indeed, however I do believe that it is the single biggest thing going on with this team this season.

                I can take you back to the Utah game at the end of last year and tell you that we saw what we could be. Give Roy & Danny an athletic player at the four who will defend and rebound and score when he can and you will see two different players & that is what is going on right now.
                Your post, along with Bball's is what really caused me to delve deeper into Unclebuck's post regarding Murphy.

                I think I've come to believe that our better defensive improvement has come about for several reasons.

                Certainly McRoberts and Hansbrough being used more has helped our interior defense over what Murphy provided and have also taken a load off of Hibbert. They are both just scrappy buggers. Hansbrough just always seems to be around the ball when it is in the paint, and McRoberts, well I suppose he would go through a brick wall in trying to get to the ball.

                Making the US team was quite an accomplishment for Danny, but it was tempered by his disappointment of not getting any minutes due to his lesser defensive abilities. Introspection is difficult for most people, but to his credit Danny has come out the other side of that process with a totally renewed interest in being "the complete player". It always helps when your on court leader buys into both ends of the court. And, I think it helps a coach sell his defensive philosopy to all other players as well.

                Collison and TJ push the pace on both ends of the floor has a bearing on the success of our defense as well. We have always wanted our defense to be initiated at the point and for the most part, it now is.

                Bball:
                You know... I was going to 'thank' you for this post and then I thought about it...

                Being that basketball is a team game I wonder how many things that are happening right now ARE because Murphy is gone? Obviously, DC at the point has a direct connection to Murphy being gone. How much is Hibbert helped by having McRoberts playing alongside him instead of Murphy? How much has our offense changed not having Murphy taking large slices of time as a 'stretch 4'?

                How much of Danny's renewed interest in defense is contagious and doesn't have cold water thrown on it by Murphy's poor defense?...
                As stated above, I have come to believe that the single most important factor for improved defense is that Murphy is no longer with the team. It has forced the use of other players at the 4 without missing Murphy's long range shooting due to the better health/"rebirth" of Dunleavy, the presence of Posey, the emergence of Rush and timely contributions from Collison/Ford.

                Granger's re-focus on defense would be minimized without a "system" in which it can be deployed. I suppose we have to accept that that system has been provided by the coaches. With better defense a the point and on the wings, along with a more athletic Hibbert being helped by McRoberts and Hansbrough, there is no doubt that our defense is significantly improved. If nothing else, I feel compelled to give JOB credit for his utilizaiton of his players within his system to accomplish the improvement.

                I have not been a fan of JOB's.... at all. Earlier I said that I would continue to give JOB a reprieve for 20 games or so. But despite my criticism of him his first three seasons here, I also have to state that he has his team is moving the ball to get excellent quality shots better than they ever have on offense and is getting more out of this team defensively than I would have expected, especially for so early in the season.

                With continued success through consistently playing the systems defined by the coach, it will difficult for TPTB to go away from JOB at season's end.
                Last edited by beast23; 11-24-2010, 11:40 AM.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: A question for the OB haters

                  Originally posted by ballism View Post
                  Well possibly there are very experienced people posting here / reading this. I don't work in basketball field, but I wouldn't 'state with certainty' that noone is. This board does seem to have quite a number of very knowledgeable people posting, compared to most boards.
                  I don't wish to diminish the quality of this board because comparatively it is a knowlegeable group. However, NBA coaches get jobs for a reason and it's not because of how much time they spend on a message board.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: A question for the OB haters

                    Originally posted by MLB007 View Post
                    Don't think there's much doubt they would be playing better.
                    Added Darren (big)
                    TJ is playing well (big)
                    Danny is playing D and sharing the ball (HUGE)
                    Roy is vastly improved.
                    Brandon is looking scary good at times.
                    I agree, of course, but you left out the huge breakthrough of Josh McRoberts, and the health and significant contributions of Tyler Hansbrough and James Posey. Paul George has big big upside, but right now he's where he needs to be - mostly watching and learning.

                    As a team, they're challenging more shots; but the big breakthrough on defense is their defensive rebounding. Roy and Josh both remade themselves as defensive rebounding machines over the summer. Now that they're getting better ball pressure at the point in the last couple of games, it looks like the sky is the limit for Indiana as a defensive squad.


                    .
                    :

                    "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


                    • #70
                      Re: A question for the OB haters

                      Originally posted by Part Timer View Post
                      I don't wish to diminish the quality of this board because comparatively it is a knowlegeable group. However, NBA coaches get jobs for a reason and it's not because of how much time they spend on a message board.
                      Allright. I don't see this going anywhere of value. I don't really want to spend so much time discussing difference between 'probably' and 'certainly' in a sentence of little importance to the thread.

                      English is not my first languague, not even second, so sometimes I use a word that isn't necessary to make my point. As long as people understand my main point, I'm cool. And in that case the post wasn't about what forums NBA coaches read. Lets just leave it at that.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: A question for the OB haters

                        Originally posted by MLB007 View Post
                        If all the maladies of this team are due to the coach,
                        what say you now?

                        No one ever said we were world champions if only we had a different coach. This team has had many areas in need of improvement, one of which is Jim O'Brien.

                        Going 7-6 into Thanksgiving this year doesn't cause me to forget the horrible years he's coached the team. The team is starting to move in the right direction. One of the next big steps facing our ownership is getting the right coach for our team.

                        I am a man of science, and if I am presented with sufficient evidence to the contrary, my view on JOB will change. I haven't seen it, and it will take far more than a 2 game win streak to convince me.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: A question for the OB haters

                          Originally posted by maragin View Post
                          No one ever said we were world champions if only we had a different coach. This team has had many areas in need of improvement, one of which is Jim O'Brien.

                          Going 7-6 into Thanksgiving this year doesn't cause me to forget the horrible years he's coached the team. The team is starting to move in the right direction. One of the next big steps facing our ownership is getting the right coach for our team.

                          I am a man of science, and if I am presented with sufficient evidence to the contrary, my view on JOB will change. I haven't seen it, and it will take far more than a 2 game win streak to convince me.

                          The team has played well in all but one game this year. A man of science would't discount that. A man who cherry picks aurguments to suit there needs is not thinking scientifically. A man of science considers every possible variable. If you honestly think optimism is only due to 2 games you need to open your eyes a bit more.
                          Last edited by spazzxb; 11-24-2010, 02:39 PM. Reason: spelling

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: A question for the OB haters

                            Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
                            The team has played well in all but one game this year. A man of science would't discount that. A man who cherry picks aurguments to suit there needs is not thinking scientifically. A man of science considers every possible variable. If you honestly thing optimism is only due to 2 games you need to open your eyes a bit more.
                            The "open your eyes" comment is unnecessary.

                            I'm not cherry picking arguments. Quite the opposite. I'm looking at Jim's entire body of work. The team has played reasonably well through 13 games. The team has not been good enough in the previous 246 games. To say that is due to Jim O'Brien alone would be incorrect. To completely discount his role would also be foolish.

                            There's not enough evidence, for me, to overturn the years of data we have. This season will be a fine test of what he can accomplish.

                            To another point, I'm not knocking Pacers optimism. I think we as fans have a lot to be excited about, though some of us are a bit more cautious with said optimism. Personally, I take inventory of the team at the 20 game mark, and then at the All-Star break.

                            Now if we win against the Lakers Sunday...

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: A question for the OB haters

                              Originally posted by maragin View Post
                              Now if we win against the Lakers Sunday...
                              As long as NOT winning against the Lakers isn't taken as a sign that JOB still sucks. That'd be a lot to ask of almost any coach in this league.
                              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


                              • #75
                                Re: A question for the OB haters

                                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                                As long as NOT winning against the Lakers isn't taken as a sign that JOB still sucks. That'd be a lot to ask of almost any coach in this league.
                                Pat Riley would win it!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X