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

For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

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

  • For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

    I can't help but agree with the writer of this piece. Smith, when he's dialed in, can literally do EVERYTHING on the basketball court and do it all very well. Not having him on our team to see on a regular basis makes people rave about how much they want him. But if we had him, how long would it be until those same people would be demanding that he be traded because of his inconsistent play?

    For all this talent, Smith is a big disappointment
    by Gregg Doyel

    CHICAGO -- Josh Smith is one of the nicest, one of the most infuriating, one of the most disappointing players in the NBA. That's a complicated combination, because tearing into Josh Smith doesn't come easy. He's a sweetheart of a guy, humble, helpful. You want others in the NBA to be like him, off the court.

    On the court? You want nobody to be like him on the court. Because on it, he's maddening. He's frustrating. Watching Josh Smith now is like watching Vince Carter back when Carter was one of the most talented players in the world, but a guy who just didn't give a crap.

    This story isn't about Vince Carter, which is too bad because I'd love to tear into that guy. Carter should have been a Hall of Famer, and maybe he will be in spite of himself -- in spite of his passionless, ring-less, pointless career. Well, his career wasn't entirely pointless. Vince Carter has managed to score 20,050 of them, but he should have done more than score a lot and win a little. He should have been an all-time great, not a more acrobatic World B. Free.

    That's where Josh Smith is headed. He's headed toward Vince-ville. Not because he's a one-dimensional scorer like Vince Carter, but because he's an all-world talent who doesn't maximize his potential for greatness.

    Here I am in Chicago, writing about the Eastern Conference semifinals between the Bulls and Hawks, watching league MVPDerrick Rose play at or close to that level every night. And I'm watching the second most talented player in this series -- Josh Smith -- not play to that level for more than a few minutes at a time. Six such minutes came at the start of Game 4, when Smith stayed close to the basket and was clearly the best player on his team. Then he left with two fouls, and the moment was gone.

    Smith should routinely be the Hawks' best player, but he's not. Joe Johnson is that guy. Smith might not even be No. 2 on the Hawks, given the persistence of Jamal Crawford. He might not be third, given the emergence of Jeff Teague. Hell, some could argue that Smith is behind even Al Horford. There's an argument to be made that Josh Smith is the fifth-best player on the Hawks, and that's obscene.

    So is this fact, a fact I stumbled onto only because I'm covering this playoff series. If I weren't here, delving into each player beyond the numbers in the box scores, I never would have known this statistic.

    The number: zero.

    As in, the number of All-Star games in the career of Josh Smith.

    Zero.

    That's absurd. Twenty-four players make the All-Star team each year, but no Josh Smith? Ever? That's beyond comprehension given that Josh Smith, at his best, is one of the 20 most talented players in today's NBA. And that's me being conservative. If I had any guts at all, I'd declare Smith one of the 10 most talented guys in the league. I've talked to one front-office guy, one scout and two national NBA writers, and I've given them that theory -- There aren't 10 guys in the NBA with more talent than Josh Smith -- and not one of them told me I'm nuts. All said a variation of the following, that judging talent over results is a subjective thing and therefore impossible to prove, but not one called my theory insane, incorrect or even exaggerated. Two of them flat-out agreed.

    At his best, Josh Smith is good enough to be in that conversation. Look at what he produces. Even though he disappears for minutes at a time, sometimes games at a time, Smith has had season averages of 17.2 points, 8.7 rebounds, 4.2 assists, 2.9 blocked shots and 1.6 steals per game.

    Do you know how many active NBA players have reached those marks in a given season?

    One.

    Only Josh Smith.

    He should be soaring to greatness, but he long ago attached a cinder block to his shoes, and everyone knows the cinder block in question. It's his perimeter shooting. For some reason Smith is intent on proving to someone, maybe just himself, that he can score from the outside. And given his insistence on shooting from out there, he can. It's a volume thing -- shoot enough from 18 feet, from 20 feet, even from beyond the 3-point arc, and a few shots will fall. That's the statistical lie that emboldens Smith to keep firing from the perimeter:

    I don't miss every time.

    Better if he did. If Smith stopped hitting even 28.2 percent of his 3-pointers -- his career number -- he might come to terms with the reality that he's a low-post player, one who converts nearly 67 percent of his shots when he attacks the rim, compared to roughly 31 percent from mid-range and beyond.

    The problem is, nobody has ever told Smith he's a low-post player. When he was in high school and AAU ball, his coaches allowed him to play on the wing. He played on the same AAU team as Dwight Howard and Randolph Morris, so there really was no room for him in the lane. He hovered around the perimeter, going inside whenever he wanted to dunk on somebody, but staying outside whenever he wanted to prove to himself that he didn't miss every time.

    When Smith chose Indiana, then-Hoosiers coach Mike Davis told me that Smith would revolutionize the wing position in college -- and maybe he was right, if by revolutionize the wing position he meant that Smith would be a wing who couldn't score outside of 10 feet. We never saw it, because Smith entered the 2004 NBA Draft out of high school and went 17th overall.

    A 6-foot-9 pogo stick who can run like a guard? Look, a guy like this doesn't come along all that often. The only active NBA players with a more shocking combination of size, explosion and agility are LeBron James and Dwight Howard. Those are also two of the few players that I'm sure are more talented than Josh Smith. Other names on that list are Dwyane Wade, Kobe Bryant, Dirk Nowitzki, Derrick Rose, Chris Paul and Kevin Durant.

    Carmelo Anthony probably belongs on that list, but I'm not sure. Amar'e Stoudemire? Maybe. Paul Pierce, Russell Westbrook, Blake Griffin, Deron Williams, Kevin Love. Those are more maybes. But maybe not.

    The difference in those guys and Smith is that those guys know who they are. Stoudemire, Love and Griffin are low-post players. They don't pretend otherwise. They get the most out of their ability because they play where they should play.

    Smith plays where he wants to play, and he wants to play on the wing. And he'll never have the Basketball Hall of Fame plaque to show for it.

  • #2
    Re: For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

    Maybe you're right, that I only have a high opinion of him because I don't see him often enough. I think this writer is just looking to rip on him, though. Should he play inside more? Well, yeah. But, he's still young and he's going to have to learn that. Are Hawks coaches clamoring that he doesn't do what they ask and play within the offense? If Smith plays away from the basket too much, who is really to blame for that? Last I checked, no one in Atlanta was benching him for it.


    Name-calling signature removed

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

      Originally posted by Banta View Post
      Maybe you're right, that I only have a high opinion of him because I don't see him often enough. I think this writer is just looking to rip on him, though. Should he play inside more? Well, yeah. But, he's still young and he's going to have to learn that. Are Hawks coaches clamoring that he doesn't do what they ask and play within the offense? If Smith plays away from the basket too much, who is really to blame for that? Last I checked, no one in Atlanta was benching him for it.
      He's young in terms of years, but he's not exactly fresh to the NBA. He's finishing up his 6th season as a pro and hasn't quite put it all together yet. After 6 seasons in the league, you expect to know what you're going to get out of a player on a nightly basis. As for placing the blame for his play on him or the coaches, Mike Woodson had multiple issues with Smith before he was let go as the team's head coach. Since Larry Drew took over, he too has made it public that he's been unhappy with Smith's shot selection, and HAS benched him for it.
      http://www.ajc.com/sports/atlanta-ha...at-767124.html
      Problem is, with a player as talented as Smith, it's hard for a coach to just bench him and take the lumps when that coach knows that the player could be a difference maker in the game.
      Last edited by SMosley21; 05-12-2011, 03:58 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

        Originally posted by SMosley21 View Post
        He's young in terms of years, but he's not exactly fresh to the NBA. He's finishing up his 6th season as a pro and hasn't quite put it all together yet. After 6 seasons in the league, you expect to know what you're going to get out of a player on a nightly basis. As for placing the blame for his play on him or the coaches, Mike Woodson had multiple issues with Smith before he was let go as the team's head coach. Since Larry Drew took over, he too has made it public that he's been unhappy with Smith's shot selection, and HAS benched him for it.
        http://www.ajc.com/sports/atlanta-ha...at-767124.html
        Problem is, with a player as talented as Smith, it's hard for a coach to just bench him and take the lumps when that coach knows that the player could be a difference maker in the game.


        I don't put much into the incident you cited in your link. Lots and lots of player can draw the ire of the coach at times during their career, but I'm not aware of longstanding issues like that with Smith. And he seemed to recover from it well, as noted by Drew. I'll hedge some and say that there may be more things like this that have happened and I'm just not aware of them. As I said previously, I may have a misconception about him just because I don't see enough of him. Seems like a solid player to me.


        Name-calling signature removed

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

          I 100% agree with the article. Josh Smith has unwordly talent, but for some reason rarely puts it all together. With all that said, he's an impact player as is. It's scary though to think how much better he could be if he ever "gets it".

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

            Maybe Vogel can get him to reach his potential here?
            A healthy man takes a crap every day. A smart man does it on company time.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

              He is a low energy player who often sulks. He takes bad shots, and it doesn't matter who the coach is.

              But he does have unbelievable talent. Derrick Coleman? If you watched game #4 of the series against the Bulls you saw a completely unique player who I now believe is the X factor for the Hawks and the reason why they are often really, really hgood and ofgten really bad.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

                So, basically, he's this generation's Rasheed Wallace.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

                  He'd be the 7th big here. Behind Hibby, Hansbro, Foster, JMac, Solo and Magnum Rolle once he is resigned.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

                    He's an incredible talent, not many guys can do the things he can. The things he does really well are also some of the things that we really lack, so he'd be a good fit.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

                      Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                      He's an incredible talent, not many guys can do the things he can. The things he does really well are also some of the things that we really lack, so he'd be a good fit.


                      He's an awesome talent. I'd honestly trade any 3 of our FC guys for him in a nano second.

                      I think its funny that people are trying to run him down, when you consider what we have in our FC?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

                        99.9 percent of people on PD would trade any of our FC players for Josh Smith.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

                          Yeah, I'd trade Roy for him. However, ideally, I'd like to pair him with Roy.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

                            Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                            Yeah, I'd trade Roy for him. However, ideally, I'd like to pair him with Roy.

                            I'd trade Tyler and Roy for him. Then sign a defensive presence like Oden to anchor the interior.

                            Then deal the 1st for Mayo and PRESTO. You got a 50 win squad.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: For all this talent, Josh Smith a big disappointment

                              Originally posted by aaronb View Post
                              I'd trade Tyler and Roy for him. Then sign a defensive presence like Oden to anchor the interior.

                              Then deal the 1st for Mayo and PRESTO. You got a 50 win squad.
                              50 wins? Greg Oden wont be able to stay healthy. This scenerio has to many what ifs.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X