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

Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

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

  • #61
    Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
    Sure you can. Watch and see how well the following goes over...


    I really think Tyler has shot the ball extremely well lately and has been playing some of his best basketball yet - Nap.

    WHAT MORE DO I NEED TO DO TO PLEASE YOU PEOPLE THAT THINK I HATE HIM?!?



    (cue hypocrisy now)
    IF you didn't LOVE Duke so much then you would realize how good Tyler really is?!?!?!

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

      I like Tyler a lot. I love his combination of grit, energy and skill. I'm very happy with his play as of late and his development over what has basically been his rookie season. I think I'm going to snag a #50 jersey soon. I'm excited to see how he develops.

      That doesn't mean I am ready to say Tyler is the answer for starting power forward forever and ever, amen. There are a small handful of people who hate Tyler and/or North Carolina around here, but many of us are just in cautiously optimistic mode. 10 or so games is too small of a sample size to anoint him. If you know anything about statistical probability what we're concerned about here is regression to the mean. Tyler is good, but it's too early to know how good yet. I don't so much doubt him as I am enjoying the ride while waiting to put every single one of my eggs in his basket. Wait, that sounded weird. But you know what I mean.

      Besides which, as has been pointed out, we will have relatively few players under contract at the end of this year. We will need to sign more big guys regardless of how Tyler plays. I'd guess that our front office is waiting to see how the rest of the season and post season plays out before deciding if we need to be targeting a starting PF or a backup PF (or C or a guy capable of going PF/C). That is as it should be, imo.
      Last edited by gummy; 03-24-2011, 02:40 PM.
      "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

      "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

      "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

        So the idea is 10 games isn't enough to be sold on him, and I would agree.

        Then my question is: How many games is enough? 20? 30? 50? 100? Never?

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
          So the idea is 10 games isn't enough to be sold on him, and I would agree.

          Then my question is: How many games is enough? 20? 30? 50? 100? Never?
          about 100 maybe more. I would say 2 seasons

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
            So the idea is 10 games isn't enough to be sold on him, and I would agree.

            Then my question is: How many games is enough? 20? 30? 50? 100? Never?
            I think a full season is reasonable. I mean how many players fall completely off the map after a productive season? IMO probably very few.

            After going through these type of discussions with Rush the last 3 years I guess I might be more skeptical.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
              So the idea is 10 games isn't enough to be sold on him, and I would agree.

              Then my question is: How many games is enough? 20? 30? 50? 100? Never?
              Not sure its an amount of games.

              For one, I want to confirm what he's doing that he can do consistently, which I think he's broke through with that recently.

              THEN, I want to see the league adjust to him, what he's doing sucessfully right now. Then see him counter. It's just like Roy, for me.

              I remember Ramone Sessions absolutely killing it the end of the year, recently. It was fools gold for the most part because teams realized he didn't have range and would play off him, plus he was a minus defender. He's playing better now, but at the time, he looked like an Allstar with the numbers he was putting up in Milwaukee. I guess I think its a process and depends on who it is as for how long it takes.

              If I had to put a number on it, I'd say one off season after the league has your initial success figured out, then what you look like that following season.
              Last edited by Speed; 03-24-2011, 02:56 PM.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                I think a full season is reasonable. I mean how many players fall completely off the map after a productive season? IMO probably very few.

                After going through these type of discussions with Rush the last 3 years I guess I might be more skeptical.
                I wouldn't compare it with the Rush situation, really. Tyler will never be at risk to 'disappearing' in a game. His risks are injury (concussion) and not having enough dimensions to his game.

                I'm hopeful, but like the rest of you I want to see how it plays out over a longer stretch of time.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  I wouldn't compare it with the Rush situation, really. Tyler will never be at risk to 'disappearing' in a game. His risks are injury (concussion) and not having enough dimensions to his game.

                  I'm hopeful, but like the rest of you I want to see how it plays out over a longer stretch of time.
                  Whether your limitations are do to mental toughness or physical abilites they are still limitations in my book.

                  I agree though that Rush isn't like Tyler. My point was simply that Rush has turned me off from putting my hope into one players development.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

                    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                    So the idea is 10 games isn't enough to be sold on him, and I would agree.

                    Then my question is: How many games is enough? 20? 30? 50? 100? Never?
                    Depends on what your asking as far as the expectations. As a 20pt scorer, or thereabout, I would say another 20 games. So 30.

                    But I think we have enough evidence that he has the ability to be a 12-14pt scorer, regardless of his role. To be honest, I thought that was going to be his ceiling. I viewed him as a good backup 4, who could carry you at times when the offense was struggling or when he just got it going. I didn't expect to see his jumper, and especially his baseline turn-around jumper to be so consistent.

                    I think we all knew he was going to put in the time and effort to become a better player. I thought he'd have the ability to knock down those shots, but I didn't think he had the ability to be able to get that shot within the offense, whenever he wanted too.

                    I think the biggest factor in his developlement, is his ability to stay out of foul trouble while defending at a pretty good level. That's the shocker. I didn't think his defense was going to be good enough to warrant starter minutes.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

                      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                      Who cares if Josh makes Roy better? I think Roy's made a pretty clear this year through his play that he might be a solid center who will have some good stretches, but he is not the long term corner stone of your team. Basically, you don't decide who else to start based on Roy Hibbert.

                      Tyler has helped the Pacers win more. Roy and Danny are like yo-yos. Their stats in wins and losses are polar opposites. Tyler doesn't see nearly as much variation...in other words, he's actually been much more consistent.
                      I actually like Tyler and Hibbert together. It seems like Roy, lately at least, has been more focused on rebounding and defense then offense. I think it helps Roy to not have to carry a large offensive load.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

                        Originally posted by Speed View Post
                        Not sure its an amount of games.

                        For one, I want to confirm what he's doing that he can do consistently, which I think he's broke through with that recently.

                        THEN, I want to see the league adjust to him, what he's doing sucessfully right now. Then see him counter. It's just like Roy, for me.

                        If I had to put a number on it, I'd say one off season after the league has your initial success figured out, then what you look like that following season.
                        I don't think it takes the NBA that long to figure players out. They don't need a whole offseason.

                        Roy started off the season playing really well, and then teams adjusted after the first month. If Tyler can string together two whole months of this, I think it's a safe assumption that he can continue it into next season as well.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

                          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                          So the idea is 10 games isn't enough to be sold on him, and I would agree.

                          Then my question is: How many games is enough? 20? 30? 50? 100? Never?
                          Just did a back of the envelope statistical calculation. If all other factors were going to stay the same I'd say about 25 games of consistent production (that is, looking at his personal averages over that stretch of time, plus team statistics, plus the important but ambiguous eye test) would make me fairly confident about Tyler owning the PF spot going forward. This doesn't mean I would say no to a clear upgrade, but it might be pretty hard to judge what an upgrade would look like.

                          Of course, things won't stay the same - teams will adjust and start playing Tyler differently. Tyler will respond and he will develop his game outside of the context of adjustments as well. Those things are very hard to quantify. I don't know when they will happen or exactly what will happen.

                          So acknowledging that this is part art and part science I'd go with something like 40 games as my "could be wrong but I'm more than comfortable enough to go with him anyway as my starting PF," and about 70-80 games before I hit "are you kidding me, this isn't even a question anymore," stage.

                          I will also say that at this time what I am most concerned about is his defense. It has gotten better, but being undersized seems to be more of a problem for him on the defensive end than it is on the offensive end.
                          Last edited by gummy; 03-24-2011, 03:14 PM.
                          "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

                          "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

                          "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

                            I've found the Pacers need a PF idea gathered momentum awhile ago and for some reason, dispite tons of evidence to the contrary, people still think it's our biggest need.

                            This is what I think this team needs, in order:

                            1.) A point guard. Bigger, better defender, better passer.
                            2.) A shooting guard who can create for himself
                            3.) Backup center to replace Foster
                            Danger Zone

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

                              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                              I agree with that if you're talking about players who you are acquiring from different teams and are now hoping they can play together. But these three are all doing this together now, so if you like their stats that they are producing while on the same team, then I think that says they fit well enough. At least when it comes to offense.
                              The issue with that is that the offense has not been better when those three are together. By any stretch. It has actually been poorer with Tyler starting than with him off the bench.

                              This is not an indictment of Tyler. It is a fact. He puts up numbers. That is a good thing. But he doesn't improve the offense. He just changes it.

                              The Pacers average 98.6 points per game in the 19 Tyler starts. They average 101.8 in the others.

                              Roy averages 8.8 points per game in the 19 Tyler starts. He averages 13.9 in the others.

                              The question shouldn't be whether you are okay with Tyler getting 21, Danny getting 20, and Roy getting 15.

                              The question should be if you are okay with Tyler getting 16, Danny getting 20, and Roy getting 9. Because those are their averages when Tyler starts.

                              This is why the thread that was started that about Tyler or Roy makes sense. They don't seem to be a very good combo. I would lean towards picking Tyler because you know what you will get from him most nights but I can see both arguments.
                              Last edited by BRushWithDeath; 03-24-2011, 03:47 PM.
                              "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                              -Lance Stephenson

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Hansbrough - What Does It Take To Please

                                Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                                about 100 maybe more. I would say 2 seasons
                                Well then how do you explain the *****s on this board for Paul George?


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X