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

Some thoughts about our low APG numbers

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

  • Some thoughts about our low APG numbers

    As most of you know the Pacers are last in the league in APG at a lowly 18.1.

    Some people attribute this to Darren Collison not having the court vision of a pass-first PG (he certainly tries to be pass-first, though). Others attribute to the simple offensive system that our 1st unit runs. Others attribute to a multitude of things (mainly on the lack of ball-handling skills in our team and on the fact that our starting front court is slow).

    But let me try to analyze this statistic.

    I'll start by a personal observation (and I'm sure that a lot of you have noticed this as well).

    When one of our players receives the ball, their first thought is to pass the ball unless they are wide open. And that's good because they do not force a shot early in the shot clock but instead get what the defense is giving them.

    Currently we only have 2 players in our roster that their first thought is to shoot the ball when they receive them. Those two are Lou Amundson (he will shoot it if he gets the ball within 10 feet) and Leandro Barbosa. Everyone else will look to find the open man first and when they don't (cause we are really bad in moving without the ball) they'll put the ball on the floor and try to create a shot (usually by getting the ball into the paint).

    Here's another interesting point. Post ups do not net assists most of the time. Wings that drive to the basket do not assists on a consistent basis either. What do they net? FTs.

    So, how do we rank in the FT statistics? We're in the top 3 in all FT statistics except for one (FT%) in which we are tied for the 5th place. Also, we are 1st in one of the most important FT statistics. What's this statistic? Percent of Points from Free Throws. We are first with 21.2% of our total points coming from the FT line. OKC is second with 20.6%.

    It is true that the Pacers do not move the ball well (we are capable of doing this as we proved in our last game in the play that led to a DC three) but they make up for it by going to the line and hitting their FTs.
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

  • #2
    Re: Some thoughts about our low APG numbers

    This is all true. Our big men are post up guys, we are an unselfish team by default, and we make up for our assist disparity in most cases by getting to the line. And Darren is a fine player. He is a good scorer, he's quick as hell, and he doesn't turn the ball over.

    However, if we had the flexibility to be able to run plays, as in having a point guard who could give us other options on offense, we would be much better off, and we wouldn't be last in the league.

    If we had a good distributor and passer at the 1, we could change the offense to not be so isolation heavy. We could run pick n rolls with David West, as DW is a guy who is known to stuff the stats of most starting point guards with his pick and pop/pick n roll ability. If we had a distributor at the 1, we could run Paul George and Danny Granger off of screens to get open shots, as they both have the ability to shoot off of screens (Now, it could be argued that Roy can't set a well enough pick to get them open, but David can, and I say that the main reason we can't run screens at all is because Darren can't find the man moving without the ball.)

    Not to even mention, with a passive point guard, our transition buckets wouldn't consist of 60% DC full speed lay-ups (Which admittedly is good when he is on, but when he's struggling the force-feeding offense is frustrating). If we had a guy who could see the open floor in transition we could have one to three more assists per game as a team.

    Our offense is simple, no doubt. It's either David or Roy posting up as the primary option, secondary a pick and roll, and third option an isolation. We would benefit from having a distributor because we could add many more dimensions to our game, thus improving ball movement, field goal percentage, and poise down the stretch.

    Now let me be clear, it's not all on Darren at all. When Tyler, Lou, Barbosa (His shooting is justified because that is his specific role and it does help offensive flow), or Roy (He is excusable too because he's good) get the ball, they are looking to shoot first and create off the dribble which is not helping offensive flow. Danny needs to cut hard to the basket and be a little bit quicker when moving without the ball, as he is never an option to pass to off of a cut. Paul George needs to be more assertive and have a little bit more 'Barbosa' in him, as his passive offensive play stagnates our flow at times.

    It's a collection of things, but with good coaching we can fix the small things in time. Regarding the starting point guard spot, we just disagree, but I see what you are saying and I agree with the gist of your point. I don't think that Darren Collison is the devil, he's frustrating, but he's a solid player. If we really want to take the next step forward, we have to find a different fit at the point guard spot.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Some thoughts about our low APG numbers

      I agree on most of your points. We would surely benefit with having a pure distributor in the point. Our offense looked quite good when AJ was out there and played as a pure distributor. Although, this could happen because the second unit moves better without the ball (Lou in particular is much better off the ball than Roy).

      Anyway, the point of the thread was not to make an argument in favor or against DC. My point was to highlight the way we run our offense and how this affects our APG and FGAs.

      I simply think that there is a direct correlation between our offensive plan, our APG and our FGAs.

      We would surely benefit from better ball movement and it would also improve our APG. However, we wouldn't benefit from shooting the ball upon reception. It would improve our APG but it would clearly hurt our chances of winning the game.
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Some thoughts about our low APG numbers

        Great post. I was just looking over the APG rankings yesterday. I didn't bother to look up FT%. That explains why they are still a team that is 10 games over .500.

        Joe Wolf and the play-by-play announcer (don't remember his name or care to look it up) for the Bucks game Saturday, made the comment of "how can a team with a record like Indiana's be last in the NBA?" He then went on to say that if they were in the middle of the pack they'd probably have one of the top 4 win/loss records in the NBA. They eventually settled that they Pacers must make up for it with their rebounding and defense so they missed the FT impact as well.

        The team has a lot length and size so rebounding, defense, and attacking the basket are essential for this Pacers squad because they don't have a true PG on the team and the passing abilities of most players on the team are average at best. Major props to Frank Vogel and his staff for coming up with a winning style of play based on the personnel of the team.

        With that said, the last 4 games the Pacers have improved their ball movement which is more important, IMO, for their style of offense. They're forcing the defense to react and in the process, they're getting better shots.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Some thoughts about our low APG numbers

          Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
          With that said, the last 4 games the Pacers have improved their ball movement which is more important, IMO, for their style of offense. They're forcing the defense to react and in the process, they're getting better shots.
          100% true.

          Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
          I didn't bother to look up FT%. That explains why they are still a team that is 10 games over .500.
          It's not only about FT%. There are a lot of FT statistical categories. Per teamrankings.com (which is the site I get most of the stats I use but I'm sure that there are other sites as well) there are 7 different statistical categories about FTs.

          I'll go ahead and name them:

          1) Percent of Points from Free Throws

          2) Free Throw %

          3) Free Throws Made per Game

          4) Free Throws Attempted per Game

          5) FTA per FGA

          6) FTM per 100 Possessions

          7) FTA per Offensive Play

          Let's see how the Pacers rank in each one of them:

          1) Percent of Points from Free Throws: 1st

          2) Free Throw %: 5th (tied with Boston)

          3) Free Throws Made per Game: 2nd (tied with Denver)

          4) Free Throws Attempted per Game: 3rd

          5) FTA per FGA: 3rd

          6) FTM per 100 Possessions: 2nd

          7) FTA per Offensive Play: 3rd

          When it comes to anything FT-related we're an elite team. This is why we have the record we have despite being last in APG.

          Ultimately, what Vogel said about smashmouth basketball is true. Offensively, we do not shy away from contact and go to the line a lot. Defensively, we're among the teams that commit the most fouls. We average 22.0 fouls per game (3rd in the league for most fouls commited), we foul in 23.1% of the opponent's possessions (tied for 2nd for most fouls commited again) and we foul in 20.6% of our defensive plays (tied for 3rd for most fouls commited again).

          To make a comparison between us and our likely opponents (Philly).

          The Sixers are dead last in 6 of those categories. In the only category in which they are not last, FT %, they are 23rd.

          Yeah, I like to harp on that
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Some thoughts about our low APG numbers

            Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
            We would surely benefit from better ball movement and it would also improve our APG. However, we wouldn't benefit from shooting the ball upon reception. It would improve our APG but it would clearly hurt our chances of winning the game.
            That would be true only for those assists that result from taking challenged jumpshots, for example.

            A really good passer would make a pass that would put the receiver in a good position to score, e.g. a layup or dunk or open jumper. In such a case, improving APG would definitely improve our offensive efficiency.

            And yes, the Pacers lack good passers. It's not all on Collison, as other key Pacers (notably Granger and Hans) are also below average passers. The blame just falls on him more since as the PG, he's expected to be a better passer.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Some thoughts about our low APG numbers

              Originally posted by wintermute View Post
              That would be true only for those assists that result from taking challenged jumpshots, for example.

              A really good passer would make a pass that would put the receiver in a good position to score, e.g. a layup or dunk or open jumper. In such a case, improving APG would definitely improve our offensive efficiency.

              And yes, the Pacers lack good passers. It's not all on Collison, as other key Pacers (notably Granger and Hans) are also below average passers. The blame just falls on him more since as the PG, he's expected to be a better passer.
              I'm not talking about assists resulting from challenged jumpshots.

              I'm talking about assists resulting from a shot-happy offensive system. The Warriors and the Sixers are prime examples of this. They'll happily shoot upon reception if they have a good look. They'll not take the ball inside and they'll not attack the rim. This will net them more assists than us but far fewer FTs than us.

              I'm not saying that we don't need a good passer. We certainly need one. But we have to keep our philosophy of attacking the rim and looking to get as good of a shot as possible instead of taking the first good look that we get.
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Some thoughts about our low APG numbers

                We'd see the PnR a lot more if we had players that ran it efficiently. There's a reason it's the best play in basketball. Vogel deserves credit for playing to his strengths, but if he had the personnel that could run a good PnR we'd see a different offense IMO. Of course we'd still throw it down to the big fellas, but we'd be a lot less predictable and harder to prepare for.

                All you got to do is re watch the Suns game to see what a good passer can do for your team. We shot the ball well, but we just couldn't keep up. All because of the most simple and effective play in the game.

                Having poor ball handlers on the wings and bad passers in the starting unit is the main reason our assist total is last in the league IMO. We rarely get an easy bucket off of a creative play, and we can't run the break very well. Because of these things, Frank is forced to play a plodding style of half court offense. A lot of dump downs and set plays.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Some thoughts about our low APG numbers

                  Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                  We'd see the PnR a lot more if we had players that ran it efficiently. There's a reason it's the best play in basketball. Vogel deserves credit for playing to his strengths, but if he had the personnel that could run a good PnR we'd see a different offense IMO. Of course we'd still throw it down to the big fellas, but we'd be a lot less predictable and harder to prepare for.

                  All you got to do is re watch the Suns game to see what a good passer can do for your team. We shot the ball well, but we just couldn't keep up. All because of the most simple and effective play in the game.
                  Believe me, I know that it is the best play in basketball. That's the reason that some clubs have dominated the Euroleague in the recent years (yeah, the NBA is differet but it still is basketball).

                  As you said, we don't have the personnel to do this. And it's not only on DC (although some of it is on DC as well). Hibbert is slow and this simply does not help. We run the PnR when Lou is in the game.

                  Actually, our first unit has replaced the PnR with a criss-cross play that creates similar weaknesses.

                  I'm talking about this play:

                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X