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

Pacers/NJ postgame thread

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

  • #61
    Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

    Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
    He needs to engage it in the first half.
    Exactly. It's not "clutch" to stop shooting 1-8 and drifting way too far away from your man on defense. It's called "finally doing your job".

    Danny has been a great player in prior seasons and at times has been great this year. I don't dislike him, but he did earn his new contract for a reason. The bar for Danny's play is set at where he's been and how he's paid. He's past learning how to play.

    This is the dude that didn't miss one single second after having his teeth slammed out when his face hit the floor. So we know the will is in there somewhere and certainly the skill is too.

    He needs to get back to being that guy for a lot more than just part of the 2nd half.

    We've got a lot of young kids learning how to play which makes them inconsistant. Danny doesn't have an excuse for inconstancy.

    Having ranted about Danny a bit I will add this - summer Team USA work might be wearing him down when paired with poor coaching and a lot of losing.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

      It does wonders when teammates are able to get him the ball deep in the post.
      It also does wonders when Lopez overplays and ends up fronting Roy by mistake.

      I like the general talent of Brook, but man is his defensive position play pretty poor. Just what the doctor ordered to get Roy back on track, like some FTAs for a shooter that's gone cold.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

        Originally posted by Sookie View Post
        And I think Obie's offense was too complicated.
        It required reads to know when/where to move away from the ball. It's one thing to run a play that has 2-3 options as it progresses, as in "PnR high, PG to the lane, if cutoff by Big help then dump back to big, if defense has overplayed the help defense from the weakside then kick to the SG waiting in the corner".

        From that you could make an adjustment that might be as simple as "let's got PnPop for a little bit since they are dropping to the lane so hard" or "they feint the help and then jump back to cover the corner, so SG goes to the top wing and then cuts that weakside lane for the pass while already driving".

        Everyone still knows the play. The PG has to know if he's cutoff and maybe if his pass is to the Big or the SG, but reps in practice give him a sense of that.


        Now with JOB it's more like each other guy has to read and decide if it's a good time to cut, come set a pick, when to set a shooting screen away from the ball, etc. If you are a vet team that knows each other well (ie, Pacers of the late 90's) then this is fine. Dale would know where Reggie wanted a screen, when he was looking for it, when he need to stay out of Rik's way because he'd seen it all before.

        How the F can Tyler or Paul have any sense of what Roy or Rush or Josh are wanting to do at this point?

        The ONLY motion chemistry I saw this year was between Josh and Dunleavy.

        Everyone else stands and tries to figure out what to do. They don't move because they don't want to get in someone else's way and they are all waiting for someone else to make a move for them to play off of.


        IMO you start simple with a group of guys and then as they tighten up those plays and get to know each other THEN you start to expand it and/or free them up to decide when to take certain actions.




        None of this is Vogel's fault. He did a great job to kill the bombs away game. Went back through his bigs, lots of attacking, FTAs went up. The problem is that he hasn't (and won't) had the time to develop a proper full playbook for that style of play.

        And this doesn't mean you bring him back regardless. It's possible that he's a better analyst than play designer. I have no idea.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post

          The ONLY motion chemistry I saw this year was between Josh and Dunleavy.

          Everyone else stands and tries to figure out what to do. They don't move because they don't want to get in someone else's way and they are all waiting for someone else to make a move for them to play off of.
          The thing is, this is still a major problem.

          Everyone has been giving DC crap for a long time. Well, it's darn near impossible to run any sort of offense, other than calling a big over for a PnR, when EVERYONE simply sits and stares at you.

          Roy..will try and post up, but seeing as no one else moves no other defender moves, so Roy is posting up..and no one is in a position to get him the ball.

          Once again, I look at Danny here. He's the vet..I expect PG to be a bit confused..but Danny..come on..he knows how basketball should work.

          I agree with you, JOB's offense is probably fine (although the stretch 4 bothers me..but..that's certainly not necessary in a motion offense) with a vet group that's been running it for a few years..this group..um no..

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

            Even with an offense lacking motion, we could still use some swinging around the perimeter to create opportunities. I stopped counting how many times the ball stays on one side of the floor during a possession. I think that's worse than no movement.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

              JOB's motion offense had some nice moments. I'll give him props for that.

              The problem, as Seth pointed out, was that JOB had made a strategic choice to go with perimeter offense rather than force feed the post. (He talked differently and had times of forcing it into the post, but quickly would lose resolve. Unlike Vogel, JOB just never really did believe in Roy or Tyler.)

              So, yes, we are better off right now with a more sluggish offense that starts things inside out and provides more shots in the paint for more FTA. Yes, it would be nice to see more plays run, more movement allowing better looks, but I can live with waiting until next year. Vogel has made the better strategic decision.
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                Probably not the correct thread for this, but there is one thing I will probably never understand. What happened between O'Brien and Tyler. From all evidence Jim loved Tyler his rookie year. Jim played him as many minutes as the doctors allowed, and only stopped playing him when Tyler could not play anymore.

                Move on to this season, Tyler was brought along slowly during training camp and preseason. We heard a few comments from JOB about Tyler not knowing the offense, but I don't think that explains why Hansbrough didn't play more - until he was moved into the starting lineup against the Spurs.

                Were there any doctors restrictions placed on Tyler at the beginning of the season?

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  Probably not the correct thread for this, but there is one thing I will probably never understand. What happened between O'Brien and Tyler. From all evidence Jim loved Tyler his rookie year. Jim played him as many minutes as the doctors allowed, and only stopped playing him when Tyler could not play anymore.

                  Move on to this season, Tyler was brought along slowly during training camp and preseason. We heard a few comments from JOB about Tyler not knowing the offense, but I don't think that explains why Hansbrough didn't play more - until he was moved into the starting lineup against the Spurs.

                  Were there any doctors restrictions placed on Tyler at the beginning of the season?
                  I know, it never made sense to me what was going on, here.

                  I thought maybe it was the options at PF he had available last year vs this year, but really it couldn't be that. If anything with Murphy gone, you should have had more minutes available at that spot for Tyler.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                    Sookie proffered an interesting theory a while back: JOB always wanted to have at least one vet at every position. That's why TJ kept weirdly replacing AJ. That's partly why Murph got so much time.

                    This year, it explains the craziness of giving Posey so much time. So, factor that in, along with Tyler missing defensive assignments and Josh doing really well, and JOB had to choose Tyler as the bench warmer for the 4 spot.
                    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                      Sookie proffered an interesting theory a while back: JOB always wanted to have at least one vet at every position. That's why TJ kept weirdly replacing AJ. That's partly why Murph got so much time.

                      This year, it explains the craziness of giving Posey so much time. So, factor that in, along with Tyler missing defensive assignments and Josh doing really well, and JOB had to choose Tyler as the bench warmer for the 4 spot.
                      I still really think that. And if our vets weren't bad (or being played out of position) then it would make sense. It also explains why when JOB was told to start Tyler, Josh went from starter to inactive.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        Probably not the correct thread for this, but there is one thing I will probably never understand. What happened between O'Brien and Tyler. From all evidence Jim loved Tyler his rookie year. Jim played him as many minutes as the doctors allowed, and only stopped playing him when Tyler could not play anymore.

                        Move on to this season, Tyler was brought along slowly during training camp and preseason. We heard a few comments from JOB about Tyler not knowing the offense, but I don't think that explains why Hansbrough didn't play more - until he was moved into the starting lineup against the Spurs.

                        Were there any doctors restrictions placed on Tyler at the beginning of the season?
                        What I'm about to type will come across as an attack against Tyler Hansbrough but it is not intended to be that.

                        IMO why Tyler & Jim never got along is probably the same reason Tyler would not get along with a Mike D'Antoni, Phil Jackson or any other coach who has a rigourus offensive system that they run.

                        Tyler only really knows one way to play basketball, now it has proven over the course of his life to be a winning way but he is always going to be the proverbial round peg while structured offenses that rely on ball movement will be the square hole.

                        He will pass and look to pass when he is at the top of the key, but once he gets the ball in the paint area unless he is triple teamed (and sometimes even then) he is going to go up with a shot.

                        It's not that he couldn't hit a three or that there were veterans in front of him, simply put he did not fit into Jim's offensive scheme of ball movement. Same reason why Dahntay Jones never played, these are players who actually tend to stop ball movement not facilitate it.

                        If you really want a mystery you should wonder why Jim did not like Josh more than he did because in all honesty he really was about perfect for what he wanted other than being a dead eye three point shooter.

                        I'll let you in on another of my personal opinions as well. I don't think Danny really likes playing with Tyler all that much because he is not a facilitator of offense and Danny is not a good enough ball handler to run PnR's with Tyler although if they could ever get that going they would be a killer combo on the offensive end.

                        AGAIN, this is not an attack on Tyler. I much prefer him to anything Jim O'Brien did, I'm just saying that my opinion is that Jim wanted read and react and ball movement while Tyler's game is that of a Bull dancing the ballet.

                        Just two different world views, no one really at fault.


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

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                          Originally posted by Peck View Post
                          I don't think Danny really likes playing with Tyler all that much because he is not a facilitator of offense and Danny is not a good enough ball handler to run PnR's with Tyler although if they could ever get that going they would be a killer combo on the offensive end.
                          I've thought this too. I think Danny has eluded to as much with some of the things he's said before.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                            Originally posted by Speed View Post
                            I've thought this too. I think Danny has eluded to as much with some of the things he's said before.
                            Wouldn't it be great if those two stuck around in the summer to work with each other? We know Roy and Paul will be here working. Those are the types of things that could really bring this young team together and make us a lot better.
                            Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                              I'm really excited to see Paul George's improvement next year.


                              And Roy, for that matter.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X