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

O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

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

  • O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

    Ok, so over the years the defenders of Jim have made the case that players learn by practice, sitting on the bench, working with trainers, reading play charts, doing calligraphy with the assistant coaches, etc.

    Of course they have said these things when someone either rationally or not has made the case that the young guys sitting and doing nothing but watching will not help the cause.

    Now in Jim O'Brien's own words, which is going to be a real conundrum for them, he is not only stating that they need to play learn but that only way for them to learn is by getting lot's of game experience.

    So I await to see the answer to this one.

    Was Jim wrong in the past for not playing the young players (I'm talking about the previous three seasons as well) or is he wrong now?

    Or will they rationalize it out so that he was right both times? My guess is the latter but it will be amusing to read.

    Let's hear it fellas
    .


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

  • #2
    Re: O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

    I don't know the answer, but it's not the first time he's said something completely contradictory to what he does.

    I guess, it just reminds of when Duke cornered him.

    'Its a measure, not the measure' type comment from him.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

      OH OH OH OH ..lemme try lemme try..

      Okay, this is just "coach's speak" we shouldn't pay attention to it. What he says doesn't matter, it's what he does.

      Actually, to be fair. I don't think JOB ever once said that he's trying to develope the younger guys from having them watch. It's completely possible, that he just didn't care about developing them. So that, his opinion is that they need to play in order to develope, but he just doesn't want to do that.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

        Well, I've never made the above statements, but why in the world would you cite the person you think has no idea what he's doing as support for your position? Haven't you spent the last few years ripping apart everything that comes out of this guy's mouth?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

          Originally posted by judicata View Post
          Well, I've never made the above statements, but why in the world would you cite the person you think has no idea what he's doing as support for your position? Haven't you spent the last few years ripping apart everything that comes out of this guy's mouth?
          Actually no I haven't.

          In fact I've made the statment several times that you can walk away from listening to him speak shaking your head in agreement going "yea, that makes sense".

          Now if you ask me if I've ripped him for what he does vs. what he say's then yes, you got me.

          Note: Also I won't pretend that I haven't every ripped him for something he has said, I certainly have. Josh McRoberts game being irrelevant immediately comes to mind.


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

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

            Originally posted by judicata View Post
            Well, I've never made the above statements, but why in the world would you cite the person you think has no idea what he's doing as support for your position? Haven't you spent the last few years ripping apart everything that comes out of this guy's mouth?
            Even a broken clock is right twice a day....
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."



              I saw what Jim said, but it doesn't change what I believe. You give guys floor time based on how they contribute now, not just based on how they will contribute in the future if they get experience. They don't "only" learn on the floor, they learn through the right combination of being on the floor and on the bench. I advocated more time for many of the young guys, just not major time. Therefore, I think JOB is being as hyperbolic in the "only way to learn" direction as he previously was in the "deserves no playing time at all" direction.

              The answer is in the middle ground

              The Required Rationalization, though, is that if a coach believes the young guys are the better players overall, he has to give them minutes to get the experience. Whether JOB believes because his heart grew three sizes or the Ghost of Coaches Yet To Come got to him or because the FO told him to believe it doesn't matter, the line is now that these guys have to be on the floor so of course the reason to leave them there is that it is the only way they will learn.
              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


              • #8
                Re: O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

                This isn't high school or college basketball. The NBA typically has a larger cycle than that.

                When you're not one of the better teams, you draft guys not because you think they're going to be better immediately than what you have (unless you're drafting a Carmelo Anthony), but because you think they're going to eventually be better than what you have. No one can argue that playing time isn't the best way to expedite the process.

                Combine that fact with another fact: We have been a bad team for years. Our future should be our priority over a mediocre-at-best present. Therefore, logically, the focus ought to be on expediting the development of the players you see as your brighter tomorrow. Tomorrow is eventually going to be 'now', so the question is: How soon do you want 'now' to get here?

                Personally, I want it (and have wanted it, for years now) ASAP.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  Therefore, logically, the focus ought to be on expediting the development of the players you see as your brighter tomorrow. Tomorrow is eventually going to be 'now', so the question is: How soon do you want 'now' to get here?
                  That's where the balance comes in.

                  You can't put all your eggs in one basket. If you have older players who are better than the young guys, they have to play, if nothing else to give the young guys something to shoot for.

                  We can disagree with a coach on whether the guys really playing ARE better, but that's different from playing certain guys due to criteria having nothing to do with how good they are. In some ways, making playing decisions solely on who is young is as bad as making decisions solely on who is a veteran.

                  You try to win every game, but you find ways to do that while giving your young guys as much experience as you can.

                  I'm not saying JOB is good at that in any way, because of his veteran blind spot and his consistency issues. I am saying, though, that while there are things you can learn best from being on the floor you can learn them from being schooled 5 minutes a game just as easily as you can learn by being schooled for 20 minutes a game. What value is that extra 15 minutes of embarrassment and bad habits going to do?
                  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


                  • #10
                    Re: O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

                    LOL

                    Oh that Jim, always stiring the pot.

                    He is probably being asked to play the youngins by somebody higher up

                    I will say this, not being funny, I think JOB would make a great radio host

                    He could bring up all the statistics, and would be very knowledgeable as a commentator as well
                    Sittin on top of the world!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

                      Pretty simple to explain this one guys. I don't even have to strain at all.

                      There are so many things young players need to learn about the NBA. Travel, lifestyle, new language of basketball from college to the NBA..........(I could list 100's of things, but you get my point)

                      So the basic answer is some thing you learn in practice, some things you learn film sessions, something you learn in shoot arounds, somethings you learn just by being around the team and yes it is true there are some things you can only learn by playing in an actual NBA game.

                      Now, if you go back to Jim's quote and put it into context you will see he was talking about.

                      http://www.indystar.com/article/2011...-now-s-defense
                      Anytime you go from a guy that has been in the league for a little bit to a (second-year player), rotations and the understanding of the defense is not there," O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."
                      it is obvious Jim was talking about defensive rotations and understanding defense and while practice can introduce those things to a young player, a game is where you get the experience in dealing with different rotations.

                      No one has ever suggested that practice is as good of a learning tool as a game. I've never suggested that, Bill has never suggested that nor has even the man himself Jim O'Brien. On the other hand a player does learn from practice also, practice is where a young player learns to crawl before he is able to walk. (get my analogy there learn to crawl in practice and then walk in a game)

                      see that isn't so difficult
                      Last edited by Unclebuck; 01-28-2011, 01:39 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

                        O'Brien is correct here. He was wrong before.

                        I think this fits well with the whole "being given new marching orders" thing.
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

                          Originally posted by BillS View Post
                          That's where the balance comes in.

                          You can't put all your eggs in one basket. If you have older players who are better than the young guys, they have to play, if nothing else to give the young guys something to shoot for.
                          They're better by technicality. The young guys are more talented, but they aren't mature/experienced enough yet. If the older players were contending, I would agree with you, but this isn't Al Harrington sitting on the bench in 1999-2000. This is, as of December, Paul George sitting on the bench in 2010-2011. There is a MASSIVE difference in the quality of THOSE veterans and our CURRENT veterans.

                          I completely disagree with your philosophy when we're discussing our current veterans. Again, I WOULD agree with you if we were talking about one of those really good teams, but we are not, and it's not even close.

                          In some ways, making playing decisions solely on who is young is as bad as making decisions solely on who is a veteran.

                          You try to win every game, but you find ways to do that while giving your young guys as much experience as you can.
                          If by "some ways" you mean "trying to win tonight's game at all cost," sure, that's quite possibly and often is the case. Once again, this would make sense if we were discussing a high-quality team, like the 2000 Pacers. This isn't even close to the 2000 Pacers. When your veterans aren't very good, winning each game at all costs is the wrong mentality. You have to shift your mindset 'try to win with your future talent at all costs'.

                          I'm not saying JOB is good at that in any way, because of his veteran blind spot and his consistency issues. I am saying, though, that while there are things you can learn best from being on the floor you can learn them from being schooled 5 minutes a game just as easily as you can learn by being schooled for 20 minutes a game. What value is that extra 15 minutes of embarrassment and bad habits going to do?
                          Not necessarily. There is something to be said, for young and old players, for having enough time on the floor to get 'into the flow of the game' for lack of a better expression. I think the vast majority of players are NOT 'microwave' players that can come in and give you a lot in short amounts of time. Most need to be out there for a while to really get their feet wet and to truly get going.

                          Once again, when dealing with veterans who can't take you very far, if anywhere at all, it's best to go ahead and give your youth a heavy dose of minutes because no matter how badly you may want to win each and every game, you simply will not be doing so that often no matter what you do, and therefore giving your youth a heavy amount of burn is the best way to get the most out of what you have (in the long run, and possibly in the short run depending on the player).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

                            I have a feeling that O'brien is going to pull an O'brien tonight and play the old guys until the end.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: O'Brien said. "The only way they're going to learn is by getting a lot of game experience."

                              Hicks you suggested this in another thread
                              I hope anyone who previously argued that a young guy sitting, watching, and practicing was as good as a young guy playing in games is reading this.
                              as you know i am someone who has often argued that young players should learn through practice, but I have never ever ever suiggested that "sitting, watching, and practicing was as good as a young guy playing in games" Never said it was as good.

                              But typically I was arguing against those suggesting just because a young player got very little time that the whole season was a waste. Look at Tyler - he actually practiced very little last season at all, but I think he is better this season just because he was around the team last season.

                              Discaimer: it is always better for a young players development that they actually get playing time in an actual game.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X