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

Hollinger breaks down our Roster

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

  • #16
    Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

    Originally posted by clownskull View Post
    he calls hibbert a mediocre rebounder? 9 boards in 30 minutes is not mediocre.
    roy wasn't particularly good at it when he came in the league. however, he has gotten much better since.
    last season, he was pretty damn good. and i think all the strength training really paid off and it showed up everywhere, especially in the boards.
    i suspect roy will be getting about 9-10 this year.
    no reason another off-season of strength and conditioning couldn't make that happen.
    Yeah, 10.6 per 36 isn't bad at all, he's not a good defensive rebounder, but he's a very good offensive rebounder, which is arguably more useful anyhow. I wouldn't be suprised to see Hibbert average a double double next season. 1 more step up in his game and a bit more usage and he's golden and will be right back in the ASG.
    Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

      It's weird how he doesn't even acknowledge West's post skills/game.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

        If Hollinger is right, which seems to be approximately 60% of the time, Augustin will be the focus of lots of angst for us here. If he can't shoot or defend, and with our overall offensive scheme not designed to flow from the point guard initiating the offense, what can Augustin possibly do for us that will be of any value? He appears to be an even smaller version of TJ Ford according to this description for the most part.

        Plainly, Hollinger has mostly seen Paul George in highlight reels and little more. To judge Paul as anything less than excellent as an on the ball defender is uninformed, at best. Paul may need some work within the team defensive concept due to his over reliance on his athleticism which allows him to take chances and then quickly cover for his mistakes, but overall he is a driven and very competent defender who will soon be elite, especially if the team continues to focus on defense as a high priority.

        The last time that Hollinger watched Hansborough must have been against the Bulls in the 2011 playoffs.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

          Yeah his analysis on Paul George isn't the greatest.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

            Originally posted by PGisthefuture View Post
            Yeah his analysis on Paul George isn't the greatest.
            Yeah, he has a couple of misses here, for sure. But he provides a different perspective and the guy cannot watch/study/critique all 30 NBA teams the way us fans do with our favorite teams. He watches more basketball than most people on PD give him credit for, but he will make mistakes, as will everyone. His statistician background leads people to believe he just crunches numbers all day, but he definitely watches the games. His cerebral approach to analyzing it is what is so off-putting to most people here. We see something and run with what we saw and what our gut tells us. Hollinger sees something and looks at statistics to either confirm or deny what he saw. More often than not, he will rely on the numbers above subjective viewing, which is why I am always interested in his perspective, whether I agree with it or not.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

              I actually thought it was a pretty good analysis. He probably doesn't see the Pacers as much as a lot of the die hard fans that post here, but there's definitely some truth to every one of his assessments.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

                I think Hollinger's analysis is pretty accurate. Some good stuff in there.
                First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

                  My biggest thing with Hibbert's rebounding is that he was the best at rebounding during the playoffs. The kid stepped his game up big time in the playoffs and was winning rebounds he let others normally have. Love seeing that.
                  "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

                    Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                    I think Hollinger's analysis is pretty accurate. Some good stuff in there.
                    Or his ghostwriter. I think he got "help". This was an outlier in the statistical babble and crap that usually gets Hollinger's byline. For once, I'm glad I ignored the "HOLLINGER!! READ AT OWN RISK" warning.
                    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                    And life itself, rushing over me
                    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

                      I didn't know where to put this, but on the Dan Dakich show Paul George just said his main focus was ball handling this offseason and that he's hired a ball handling coach this summer that's even here on Indy with him.

                      So people can stop freaking out that he's tweeting pictures.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

                        I think overall this was a mostly accurate take on our players. There are a few head scratcher moments, but you can't expect a national writer to know you team as well as you do. They probably don't even watch half as many of the teams games as we do, and that is probably true for every team, fan base, and national sports reporter.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

                          Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                          I didn't know where to put this, but on the Dan Dakich show Paul George just said his main focus was ball handling this offseason and that he's hired a ball handling coach this summer that's even here on Indy with him.

                          So people can stop freaking out that he's tweeting pictures.
                          I just wish Paul George would stop appearing on talk shows and work on his handles.
                          BillS

                          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

                            Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                            I didn't know where to put this, but on the Dan Dakich show Paul George just said his main focus was ball handling this offseason and that he's hired a ball handling coach this summer that's even here on Indy with him.

                            So people can stop freaking out that he's tweeting pictures.
                            Amazing news

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

                              First of all, that's the best set of Pacers analysis I can remember ever seeing, just brilliant work by Hollinger that puts it in the face of people that think he only does data. He watches and then backs up opinion with data that verifies it.


                              And for Sam Young I've been saying the following since he was at Pitt
                              Awesome shot fake off the catch. No 3s, but good midrange J.
                              That's his game. His fake is about the longest extension I can recall seeing, like Globetrotter ball-on-string kinda up-fake, and it works.

                              If something isn't wrong with him behind the scenes he's going to be a great addition for super cheap.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Hollinger breaks down our Roster

                                Does David West "Loves going between his legs"? I need to watch closer or maybe that kind of thing doesn't matter to me.
                                At the Houston game last year, where some of you may recall I was upset watching Lance brag to some fan on the baseline about what final regulation play we were about to run and how it was going to be money, Lance was showing the guy the between leg crossover to fade jumper. He was telling the guy "here it comes, West is about to do this".

                                West then did just that and missed, making Lance look silly for talking pre-play trash to a fan on the road.

                                But it struck me that I normally don't think of that being West's game, but there it was.



                                Also I'm certain that Hollinger uses Synergy to watch play after play of a player before doing his assessment. Seeing every single fade or post or whatever that a guy did all year rattled off one after the other can really bring some trends to light that otherwise get lost.


                                And as for "He missed on Paul" I guess my question is "how?" Do we not think Paul reads potential steals great but gets out of position on defense overall? I read it here all the time. I felt like every pro and con for PG was something I'd seen discussed at Digest.

                                IMO Paul has CONCENTRATION issues which is what hurts his team defense and his handles. When he gets dialed in due to emotion or whatever he can go on tears, but sometimes things will get rolling and he'll get cocky and less attentive and that's when disaster strikes.

                                Ha! He used the phrases "natural scoring instincts" and "can handle" to describe Paul George
                                A 6'8" wing/big with handles is what he meant. Paul is trying to get the handles of a 6'4" guard since the Pacers have him at SG. His actual moves while paying full attention are better than Danny, and he 100% has natural scoring instincts. Almost all his offense comes from broken or one on one situations where he goes into instinctive scoring mode. He spaces transition with good instinct and has natural moves into shots.

                                What he lacks is protecting the ball while doing these things (again, staying focused on his man and where the ball is at risk) and the instincts to use his teammates to improve his scoring opportunities. He doesn't show a good sense for the 2-3 man game on offense, he's not a PnR master or great at using picks/screens.
                                Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 09-20-2012, 03:54 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X