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

A tough, defensive big man - Chuck Hayes thread

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

  • A tough, defensive big man - Chuck Hayes thread

    Since it looks like nearly every free agent big man in the league is getting his own thread, I thought I'd put up one for one of my favorites as well

    The guy I have in mind is the starting center of a Western Conference team, but I think he'll be able to play PF just fine. He's routinely regarded as one of best low post defenders in the league, perhaps even second best behind Dwight Howard. At the same time, he's quick enough to go out and guard players on the perimeter. He's a leader, rising from the ranks as an undrafted rookie to being named team captain. And there's no question that he's a tough player, as Roy Hibbert could perhaps attest to.

    I'm talking about Chuck Hayes, the undersized big man with an oversized heart. A six year veteran at 27 years of age, he's probably the closest thing to a Dale Davis in the league right now. We keep talking about the need for toughness and defense in the interior, well Chuck is one of the best candidates for providing both. As an unrestricted free agent who made $2.3m last year, he's also a guy who's not likely to break the bank.

    His name has come up a few times on this forum, and the comments are generally along the lines of, yeah he'd be a great backup to replace Foster. With all due respect to Foster, I think Hayes could fill a bigger role than that. In fact, I'm starting to think that Hayes could be a great fit for our starting PF spot alongside Hibbert.

    Consider: what are Hibbert's biggest weaknesses? He's slow, not that strong, not that tough, and a mediocre rebounder. Hayes' strengths pretty much cancel out those weaknesses. On the flipside, Hayes' weak points are his lack of height/shotblocking and lack of scoring, both of which Hibbert can provide.

    Hayes has the reputation of being poor on offense, but even his scoring has improved. Hayes' free throws used to be the stuff of legends (search Youtube for Chuck Hayes free throws) but his form has improved and he shot a career high 66% from the line last season. In fact he averaged 7.9 pts 8.1 reb 2.7 ast in 28 min, all career highs, with the season highlight being a triple-double (13 pts 14 reb 11 ast) in a victory over the Warriors.

    And yeah, he's a good passer for a big man. About as good as McBob is, I think. The stats last year showed that our starting lineup benefited a lot from the presence of a low usage, high IQ player in McBob. Now imagine McBob being replaced by a tougher, better defending version.

    And lastly, Hayes can play some backup C for us. At 6'6'' he's undersized, but on the other hand he's handled opposing centers pretty well while starting for two seasons at the pivot for the Rockets. This positional versatility could be important for us.

    The Rockets have said they want to keep Hayes, but their problem is that they have too many other players at PF, and they want a taller guy to start at C. It seems to me that it should be fairly easy to outbid the Rockets for Hayes.

    In summary, Hayes is a guy whose age and skills fits strongly into one of our weakest areas. Another plus is that we probably won't have to overpay too much to get him. And lastly, should we be fortunate enough to get a better PF in the future (e.g., Tyler turns into a star), Hayes can easily move down to a backup position.

    All aboard the Chuckwagon?
    Last edited by wintermute; 06-30-2011, 01:04 AM. Reason: clarified title

  • #2
    Re: A tough, defensive big man

    http://offthedribble.blogs.nytimes.c...f-chuck-hayes/

    The Curious Case of Chuck Hayes
    By JOHN KROLIK
    March 24, 2011

    Of all the triple-doubles that have been recorded this season, Houston forward Chuck Hayes’s has to be considered one of the most unlikely. Hayes recorded 14 rebounds and a stunning 11 assists against the notoriously defense-adverse Golden State Warriors, and he sealed the triple-double with a jumper in the fourth quarter.

    The triple-double was more of an amusing outlier than a true signature performance for Hayes; after all, the Warriors do allow the highest ratio of assisted baskets in the league, and they have the worst rebounding rate in the league, so racking up rebounds and assists against the Warriors is not a particularly difficult challenge. But the triple-double does draw attention to the fact that Hayes has quietly turned himself into a respectable offensive player.

    Chuck Hayes has long been a subject of fascination for both scouts and the statistically inclined. When Hayes first began playing for the Rockets during the 2005-6 season, the 6-foot-6 center was regarded as an oddity whose amazing prowess for grabbing rebounds allowed him to be a rotation player.

    Over time, people began to realize that Hayes was more than just a rebounder and energy player — he was one of the best defenders in the league. Despite his size, opposing players found it almost impossible to get post position against Hayes, and he bottled up much larger centers and power forwards on a nightly basis.

    Coming into this season, Hayes was viewed as the kind of player than only a nuanced fan of the game could love. He was the shortest center in the league, wasn’t the kind of shot-blocker that Joel Anthony or Ben Wallace is, and didn’t even have Leon Powe’s ability to score around the basket.

    Hayes was a player for fans who appreciated the fight for low-post position more than a shot swatted into the third row, a good off-ball screen more than a swished fade-away jump shot, and a tough rebound in traffic more than an ankle-breaking crossover. While seeming to be nothing more than a player half a foot shorter than the players he was supposed to be guarding and the owner of one of the worst free-throw strokes in N.B.A. history, Hayes was out there doing the little things to help his team win.

    Hayes still does the little things, but this season he has added a new wrinkle to his game: he’s suddenly producing offense like a legitimate N.B.A. center, and a fairly good one at that. Hayes is scoring 7.6 points per game this season, which represents both a career high for him and a 3.2 point boost from his 2009-10 scoring average in only five more minutes per game. He’s averaging 2.5 assists per game, which is the fourth-highest mark for any center in the league and a career high.

    And while Hayes’s scoring volume has gone up, his efficiency hasn’t suffered at all. His true shooting percentage is the highest it has been since the 2006-7 season, and his turnover rate is as low as it has been since his rookie year. Hayes has really come on in the new year: he averaged 9.5 points on 50 percent shooting in January, 9.3 points on 59.3 percent shooting in February, and has averaged 8.4 points on 60.9 percent shooting in March. Believe it or not, Hayes is now a solid offensive center.

    Every part of Hayes’s offensive game has improved. He’s much more confident as a scorer in the low post, and has become an excellent passer from the low block. He’s no longer afraid of the free throw line — after converting 7 of the 18 free throws he took over the course of the entire 08-09 season, Hayes has already made 77 of the 116 free throws he has taken this season. (Perhaps there is hope for Andris Biedrins yet.)

    While Hayes still does most of his scoring off of offensive rebounds and off-ball cuts, he is now a player who can be trusted with the ball in his hands anywhere in the general area of the hoop.

    Teams are generally willing to be patient with talented, physically gifted players, especially ones who can score. Even if they don’t seem to grasp defensive rotations, don’t share the ball particularly well, take ill-advised shots, and don’t play with much effort, teams are generally willing to take risks on them, because it’s easy to picture a talented scorer “getting it” one day and becoming one of the best player in the league.

    It’s much harder to picture an undersized, graceless forward who earns minutes because of his hustle and basketball IQ developing into a legitimate offensive threat, but Hayes has proved that it can happen. For years, Hayes has rewarded everybody willing to pay close attention to the things he does on the floor. This season, the things he does have become impossible to ignore.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: A tough, defensive big man

      How many big men threads are there? Lol.

      I really like Chuck Hayes though. I think he would be an excellent addition to the Pacers. He isn't the long term answer as the Pacers need some scoring there but I would love to add Chuck to the team. He would fit in nice with the rest of the team.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: A tough, defensive big man

        To be honest I totally forgot that he was a free agent i'd be done for signing him but i'd refuse to pay arms and legs and I think that Landry will be a better fit on the offensive end but what Chuck brings on defense is undeniable sign me up

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: A tough, defensive big man

          How many Block shots does he average?
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: A tough, defensive big man

            I tried to make an overall back up big man thread, but I guess it didn't take.
            You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: A tough, defensive big man

              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
              How many Block shots does he average?
              Hayes isn't a shotblocker. Averaged 0.7 bpg. In comparison, Hibbert averaged 1.8 bpg, McBob 0.8 bpg, and Hans 0.2 bpg.

              Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
              I tried to make an overall back up big man thread, but I guess it didn't take.
              That was a good effort, and I posted on that thread too. The point of this thread though, is that I think Hayes could start at PF for us.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: A tough, defensive big man

                Sign me up for the ChuckWagon. I love his defense and rebounding and dual purpose.
                Can be had for a fair price and will fit in well in the locker room
                Last edited by owl; 06-29-2011, 10:01 PM.
                {o,o}
                |)__)
                -"-"-

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: A tough, defensive big man

                  Yummy, crunchy morsels of beef flavored nuggets that, when water is added, end up covered in a delicious beef flavored gravy that your dog is guaranteed to love? Sign me up!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: A tough, defensive big man

                    Did you copy/paste the title of this thread from the title of your eharmony profile?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: A tough, defensive big man

                      I like Chuck Hayes, but I'll say this:

                      We need a solution, not more stop gap players. If all we want is a stop gap, we're fine just the way we are.

                      That's not a knock on Hayes at all, he's one of my favorite players. But we need more than just a stop gap player, which is all Hayes would be.
                      Stop quoting people I have on ignore!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: A tough, defensive big man

                        Originally posted by Psyren View Post
                        I like Chuck Hayes, but I'll say this:

                        We need a solution, not more stop gap players. If all we want is a stop gap, we're fine just the way we are.

                        That's not a knock on Hayes at all, he's one of my favorite players. But we need more than just a stop gap player, which is all Hayes would be.
                        I get what you are saying about stop gap players. My only question would be is that a fair assessment of Hayes. I think you are a little to critical of him and here is why: He would be another needed piece just like Hill was. He supplies what this team really needs - energy, size, defensive presence in the paint. Is he a franchise changer = no! But he is the type of player who could really help this team out a lot.
                        Going this route would also leave the Pacers a ton of money to spend on other parts and resign our own core and keep them together for the long haul.
                        Just an observation. If we can find another player who is better at D than Hayes, and is affordable - sign me up!!!!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: A tough, defensive big man

                          Originally posted by Psyren View Post
                          I like Chuck Hayes, but I'll say this:

                          We need a solution, not more stop gap players. If all we want is a stop gap, we're fine just the way we are.

                          That's not a knock on Hayes at all, he's one of my favorite players. But we need more than just a stop gap player, which is all Hayes would be.
                          Stop gap? I don't believe he's a stop gap at all. He's better than many of other team's starting centers. And good centers nowadays are pretty hard to find. Plus he can play PF too. He'll be the best replacement to Jeff Foster once he retires or decides to move to other teams.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: A tough, defensive big man

                            I'll be honest I had now idea that he had as many assists as he did. 2.7 per game for a player like this is damn impressive IMO.

                            having said that, I think there are better options but if all else falls through he's at least intriguing.

                            Oh but the Dale Davis stuff is a bit hysterical. 6-6 238 and 6-11 252 with an even MORE chiseled frame do not equate buddy.

                            Sorry.
                            I don't want to sound condescending, which means to talk down to you by the way

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: A tough, defensive big man

                              Originally posted by Haywoode Workman View Post
                              Did you copy/paste the title of this thread from the title of your eharmony profile?


                              Ok, I'll change the title. It seemed a good idea at the time.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X