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

Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

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

  • #16
    Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

    Originally posted by Kemo View Post

    .
    I know McRoberts could reach averages of
    14-16 points , 10-12 Rebounds 4.7 assists and maybe a steal and a block per game


    That's absolutely unrealistic!

    How many PF's are averaging those stats right now? What other teams could McBob be starting for besides the Pacers? Josh has some nice skillsets, but let's not embellish them to the point of fantasy.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

      McBob has looked nice of late.He and Tyler make a good duo.

      At the risk of causing an outrage, Josh's overall game is reminiscent of Josh Smith. They have quite similar skillsets.

      McBob's production per-36 vs. a 23-year old Smith's production per-36...



      Kind of fascinating.

      I'd say his upside, per-36 minutes, would be around 13-15 ppg, 9 rpg, 3-4 apg and 1-1.5 bpg. Basically, what he's doing now with a little more scoring. He has the makings of an excellent jack-of-all-trades role player.
      Last edited by Jared Sullinger; 02-17-2011, 07:57 AM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

        Originally posted by Jared Sullinger View Post
        ............ jack-of-all-trades role player.
        This is what he is. Appreciate him for what he does. Don't set the bar too high for him and then start bashing him when he doesn't reach it.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

          With Josh the question is what do you value in a power forward. I you want a Dale Davis type (and who doesn't), then Josh isn't your guy.

          Do you think Josh could be a top ten Power forward. Again it depends on what you value. He will never be a Kevin Mchale, with the great post moves and low post scoring nor will he be a david west, with the great mid range game. He does have a unique skill set that could make him a top ten forward, when you consider his passing, dunking, ball handling in the open court. I think he just needs to continue to improve on the things he does and he may not need to be Dale, Kevin or David. We may be happy with him being Josh.
          Good is the enemy of Great


          We're changing the identity of our basketball team -- dramatically. We're a power post team -- a blood-and-guts, old-school, smash-mouth team that plays with size, strength, speed and athleticism. We attack the basket. . . . This is the new identity of our team. It was a great effort. I'm very proud of our guys."
          -- Frank Vogel.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

            Josh dribbles that ball up at this chin no matter where he is on the court. It's why you can't ISO him anywhere near the hoop, he's a turnover waiting to happen. It's fine when he runs the break off a rebound, but it's a disaster in half court sets.


            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

              Originally posted by Peck View Post
              I think it's due to the fact that he dribbles high and away from his body a lot of times. Works great in the open court, not so much in traffic.
              I noticed this a LOT against Detroit because I was looking for why we kept getting the ball taken away. To Josh's credit he didn't give it up like I thought that dribble would because he is very aware of who is around him, but it scared the doodoo out of me a couple of times.
              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


              • #22
                Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

                Originally posted by colts19 View Post
                Do you think Josh could be a top ten Power forward.
                No.

                He can be a damn good role player. 15-20 minutes a nite - preferably off the bench.

                When we start bringing him off the bench, that means we have 'true' PF starting. The team will be a lot better at that point.

                I like the kid. I like his energy. Energy only goes so far in the NBA. Talent is the important tning. He has some, but not enough to even sniff being a top 10 in the league.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

                  Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                  No.

                  He can be a damn good role player. 15-20 minutes a nite - preferably off the bench.

                  When we start bringing him off the bench, that means we have 'true' PF starting. The team will be a lot better at that point.

                  I like the kid. I like his energy. Energy only goes so far in the NBA. Talent is the important tning. He has some, but not enough to even sniff being a top 10 in the league.
                  I would like to see someone make a list of the top ten power forwards in the league along with their ages and see how far Josh is off from being one of them. I just don't see that many great PF in the league.
                  Good is the enemy of Great


                  We're changing the identity of our basketball team -- dramatically. We're a power post team -- a blood-and-guts, old-school, smash-mouth team that plays with size, strength, speed and athleticism. We attack the basket. . . . This is the new identity of our team. It was a great effort. I'm very proud of our guys."
                  -- Frank Vogel.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    I think he already does this way more than the normal PF. Every defensive board has him quickly looking for the long pass, and if that's not there he's more than willing to push it up court himself. If anything he F'd that up vs Miami once where he dribbled himself into trouble.
                    I agree with this, but I do not recall anyone being critical of his defensive passing or ability to get the ball up the court. These are his strengths.


                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    As for aggression to the rim, he's regularly getting power dunks taking his man off the dribble, maybe once every 2 games, so I don't think he's got any problem with that.
                    This is where we disagree a bit. Many times Josh has his man beaten off the dribble & has the ability to take it strong & way too often either passes off despite his advantage, or he hesitates or does not go up as strong as he is capable of because his eyes are in the paint & not on the rim. Josh has the athleticism & skill to beat guys off his dribble & take it hard to the rim much more then "maybe once every 2 games", thus the question from the OP. While Josh is no Blake Griffen, he could use some of Blakes aggression & attitude. Josh has the skill set to do similar things, & be on the radar as someone our opponents need to watch, but he thinks pass first more then any PG on our roster. While I'm not complaining about his passing, he's awsome, I do think he should be more selfish, especially when he has his man beat.

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    If by "aggression" you mean taken a FG every 2 minutes of court time ala Tyler, I'm going to have to pass on that.

                    I actually think the balance right now is working extremely well and I don't see a major need to "fix" the PF spot.
                    Agree & Agree!!!
                    "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
                    (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

                      February numbers per game for Josh. 25mins, 6.7 shots, 63%fg, 2.3orb, 4.3dr, 6.7 tot reb, 9.8pts.

                      So you got a guy who just turned 24, who is getting 10pt off of 7 shots, 1/3 of his rebounds are offensive, is shooting a high percentage, and is a great passer for his position. But a lot of people here say he has no chance to be a top ten PF. Plus the guy plays pretty good defense.

                      I think a lot of people here overrate the other PF in the league.
                      Good is the enemy of Great


                      We're changing the identity of our basketball team -- dramatically. We're a power post team -- a blood-and-guts, old-school, smash-mouth team that plays with size, strength, speed and athleticism. We attack the basket. . . . This is the new identity of our team. It was a great effort. I'm very proud of our guys."
                      -- Frank Vogel.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

                        Originally posted by colts19 View Post
                        I would like to see someone make a list of the top ten power forwards in the league along with their ages and see how far Josh is off from being one of them. I just don't see that many great PF in the league.
                        http://bleacherreport.com/articles/5...ba-team/page/1

                        I know everyone hates Bleacher Report, but this guy made a list to work with anyway. I don't happen to agree with the rankings much at all.

                        It's from early January, so it might be a little dated. I already see that Detroit is listed as Charlie Villanueva, but Greg Monroe is now starting there.

                        I actually believe that power forward is the deepest position in the NBA. Several people here have stated that Josh is the "worst starting power forward in the league."

                        30. Channing Frye (PHX) 27 years old
                        29. Jeff Green (OKC) 24 years old
                        28. Greg Monroe (DET) 20 years old
                        27. Kenyon Martin (DEN) 33 years old
                        26. Jason Thompson (SAC) 24 years old
                        25. Antawn Jamison (CLE) 34 years old
                        24. Andray Blatche (WAS) 24 years old
                        23. Ersan Ilyasova (MIL) 23 years old
                        22. Josh McRoberts (IND) 23 years old
                        21. Boris Diaw (CHA) 28 years old
                        20. Amir Johnson (TOR) 23 years old
                        19. Brandon Bass (ORL) 25 years old
                        18. Kris Humphries (NJN) 26 years old
                        17. David Lee (GSW) 27 years old
                        16. Luis Scola (HOU) 30 years old
                        15. Paul Millsap (UTH) 26 years old
                        14. Elton Brand (PHL) 31 years old
                        13. LaMarcus Aldridge (POR) 25 years old
                        12. David West (NOH) 30 years old
                        11. Chris Bosh (MIA) 26 years old
                        10. Amar'e Stoudamire (NYK) 28 years old
                        9. Zach Randolph (MEM) 29 years old
                        8. Dirk Nowitzki (DAL) 32 years old
                        7. Josh Smith (ATL) 25 years old
                        6. Tim Duncan (SAS) 34 years old
                        5. Kevin Garnett (BOS) 34 years old
                        4. Carlos Boozer (CHI) 29 years old
                        3. Kevin Love (MIN) 22 years old
                        2. Blake Griffin (LAC) 21 years old
                        1. Pau Gasol (LAL) 30 years old

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

                          This thread is dumb. Josh doesn't have any NBA talent, let alone being in the top half of the starting PFs. /green
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            I'm not really sure how I want to word this, but I feel as if Josh McRoberts has an extremely unique skill set for someone of his size. It's probably why there was so much hype around the guy in high school and college (cdash for king of the obvious). But here's my question: Should we start trying to utilize more of this guy's skill set? Maybe let him handle the ball and try to take it to bigger, slower guys who can't stay with them. He looks to pass a little too often, I think he should be more aggressive around the rim. It's not like he has no post moves, it's just that he never uses them. He could draw a lot of fouls if he went at guys a little more. Basically, I think he is being underutilized on offense. What sort of things do you guys think he is capable of that might be a benefit to this team down the stretch?
                            http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...t=61436&page=3

                            Originally posted by cdash
                            I have some questions regarding Josh for anyone and everyone:

                            How high is this guy's ceiling? We need he's an athletic freak but how much better can he get defensively and offensively? Does he develop a three point shot? Add some sort of legitimate post moves besides dunking? I know he's only 23 and he's really athletic, but when I watch that guy play, I don't sit there and think he's got a wealth of untapped potential. That's not to say he doesn't have potential, but I just don't know how much better the guy is going to get, and I would be extremely hesitant to roll the dice on a 4 or 5 year deal starting at the MLE to find out.
                            I find it interesting that these posts were made within the span of a week.

                            I don't think they are really saying different things entirely, just think it's interesting.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

                              Originally posted by cdash View Post
                              I'm not advocating a fix or Josh emulating Tyler (Tyler's game is something that can't be replicated unless you are an animal to begin with).

                              Josh does these things, but I want to see if we can't maximize the guy's unique talents. I don't want him to force shots, but I think sometimes he passes when he could easily score a basket or get to the free throw line.

                              I mean, I hear you and Mackey and others talk about how much potential this guy has, I am looking for ideas on how we can let loose some of that potential or else I fear that is all it will ever be. How can we maximize this skill set of his?
                              I agree that he tends to pass out of chances to score too often. I think he is unselfish to a fault. I like him because I think he plays the right way, but sometimes you have to be a little bit more aggressive in regards to getting yourself buckets.

                              I don't think that comes naturally to him. He's a very gifted passer, and I think sometimes he gets too caught up in showing that off.

                              There is really no reason to even compare Josh and Tyler. Tyler thinks, "score, score, score, score, score, score, fight, score, score, score." It seems like he has been playing that kind of game his whole life and he just doesn't know any differently. I don't think Josh and Tyler are really even playing the same game. He has probably always been the best player on whatever team he played on since he was in grade school, and so his role has always been to be the primary scorer. He plays the same role now. Josh tries to create for his teammates first, and then tries to create for himself second.

                              I don't think that Tyler has the same kind of potential as Josh, because he lacks the length and athleticism that Josh has. They both have a place in the NBA and on this team, but it will be in completely different roles.

                              It's Josh's God-given natural athletic ability, combined with his superior skill as a passer and ball handler that sets him apart from most guys his age. Usually if a guy is as good of an athlete as Josh is, that's all he is. I don't think that is the case with Josh. He lacks the mindset of a scorer, but the ability is there I believe. He is quick enough to go around guys, and he can jump over guys if he needs to. I think it is just a matter of him figuring out that he has the ability as much as anything. I believe it's a confidence issue.

                              As far as unlocking his potential, I think having Vogel in charge is really going to help him. It's the first time he's had an NBA coach believe that he has a place in the league. Since Vogel took over, we have run a couple set plays for him to get a back screen and get a lob by the rim. That is a couple more than we ever ran for him before. I'd like to see more of that.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Should we "uncork" McRoberts?

                                Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                                I know everyone hates Bleacher Report, but this guy made a list to work with anyway.
                                I could argue a few of these rankings, but it's not that bad of a list. Josh has a looooooong way to go to sniff the top 10.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X