Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Hansbrough's Jumper

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

  • Hansbrough's Jumper

    Can some one explain where Tyler's open jump shot went awry? I seem to remember that shot as being money for the first season and 1/2, now suddenly he cannot buy one. I'm not referring to forced, defended shots, just the wide open PnP from the free throw line and circle. Mystery to me, but I'm not an expert on shooting. Can Keller not help him with his shot?

  • #2
    Re: Hansbrough's Jumper

    It's been erratic for most of his career. He had one good stretch in Mar/April 2011, but other than that it's been unreliable.

    Part of it is decisiveness. He is much more effective when he just catches and shoots. When he dithers, it exaggerates his mechanical flaws.

    The mechanical flaw is that his release is disconnected from his motion. He puts a lot - too much - jump in to his jump shot. Perversely, he gets almost no legs into his release. He catches, turns, jumps really high (for a jump shot form), but his elbows are up and bent as he does this. When he reaches the top of his jump, he shoots almost entirely from his elbows and wrists. It's as if he can only move one half of his body at a time. The first half of the shot is all legs, the second half all arms.

    It's like he's trying to time the shot release in a video game. The big jump does nothing for the power of the shot, so he has to put more through the arms. As a result, the entire platform is less stable, and he doesn't consistently convert on his jumpers.

    Edit: As to Keller helping him, I assume he works with him. I also think that this is something Tyler has been doing for a very long time, and Tyler isn't a guy that seems long on the ability to break well-entrenched bad habits.
    Last edited by count55; 11-24-2012, 11:37 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Hansbrough's Jumper

      Do you then think he might eventually improve if he converted that into a set shot?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Hansbrough's Jumper

        Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
        Do you then think he might eventually improve if he converted that into a set shot?
        Maybe not a set shot.

        Last year, I would go out a couple hours before the games, and watch guys shoot. Lance was somebody who was out there a lot, and he actually would hit his threes and jumpers pretty consistently. Then in the games, he would put about 6 inches more hop into his shots, and couldn't hit the broadside of a barn. He's settled that down, but that was a situational mechanical glitch, as opposed to a foundational one.

        Tyler doesn't necessarily have to take jump out, but he does need to work the timing better. Will he ever do it? Maybe, but I doubt it. I think Tyler is just Tyler.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Hansbrough's Jumper

          Yeah i have noticed that too.It's not only off but most of the time waaaaaaay off.He has been very good in other departments though this season.
          Never forget

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Hansbrough's Jumper

            The entire basic shot form is bad, even when he has time he rushes the shot and doesn't follow thru correctly its never been a fluid shot. With Keller in practice he may do everything right but in games he reverts to old habits. We'll never see a consistant 15-18 foot shot from Tyler, he'll have his on nights but he'll have his 1 for 9 nights too often too. He is what he is an under 40% shooter from outside 7 feet.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Hansbrough's Jumper

              It is strange for him to shoot free throws as well as he does and struggle with open looks on jumpers. His form is the same which is actually pretty good... The only difference is the big jump.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Hansbrough's Jumper

                The thing that sucks about Hans is he's either a player that scores and doesn't defend or rebound, or a player that defends or rebounds, but can't score. If he could ever do all three consistently, he would be a great bench player because the energy and effort is there every game.

                I remember the days where that pick and pop between Tyler and DC was a money play. Man that seems so long ago lol

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Hansbrough's Jumper

                  Originally posted by count55 View Post
                  Maybe not a set shot.

                  Last year, I would go out a couple hours before the games, and watch guys shoot. Lance was somebody who was out there a lot, and he actually would hit his threes and jumpers pretty consistently. Then in the games, he would put about 6 inches more hop into his shots, and couldn't hit the broadside of a barn. He's settled that down, but that was a situational mechanical glitch, as opposed to a foundational one.

                  Tyler doesn't necessarily have to take jump out, but he does need to work the timing better. Will he ever do it? Maybe, but I doubt it. I think Tyler is just Tyler.
                  I noticed that about Lance too. I never understood why in shootaround he would shoot almost a set shot and in the game he would jump so much on his j. It almost seemed counter productive to pratice if you don't pratice like you play. I haven't watched him in pee game shootaround since last year. But his in game shots he doesn't jump like he use to except for pull ups. Which is probablly why his jumper is do much better.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Hansbrough's Jumper

                    Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                    I haven't watched him in pee game shootaround since last year.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Hansbrough's Jumper

                      Originally posted by JEM View Post
                      It is strange for him to shoot free throws as well as he does and struggle with open looks on jumpers. His form is the same which is actually pretty good... The only difference is the big jump.
                      That's about what I was thinking when I started this thread. Tyler's form and delivery on his free throw is pretty, about a 88 percent shooter. Why he would feel it necessary to use a huge jump on an open shot is strange. If the set shot goes in, it's the same 2 points. Somebody tweet the boy! What's the worst thing that could happen? Miss the shot?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Hansbrough's Jumper

                        Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
                        Now we know where that restraining order for P4E came from.....
                        "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                        "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Hansbrough's Jumper

                          Is broken.
                          Follow me at @Bluejbgold

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Hansbrough's Jumper

                            I'm cynical that a guy over 25 can really improve his shot all that much.

                            Also, how the heck did he score so much in college with that shot? Surely he must have shot a better percentage in college.
                            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Hansbrough's Jumper

                              He is what he is an under 40% shooter from outside 7 feet.
                              And inside 7 feet too, and that's not all that sarcastic.

                              First off he doesn't shoot mostly jumpers, he's 50-50 with inside scoring and jumpers. If it were not for the dunks he would be at 44% on "inside" shooting. 82Games has him taking 51% of his shots at jumpers, 49% inside.

                              His eFG%
                              Jumpers 31.3% (seriously, unacceptable)
                              Close 45.0%
                              Dunk 83.3% (dunks at 83%...the other 17% - BLOCKED DUNKS)
                              Tips 40% (there's your offensive rebounding at work)


                              Also, how the heck did he score so much in college with that shot? Surely he must have shot a better percentage in college.
                              He averaged about 7 points a game from the FT line (34% of total points), a far higher PCT than any other traditional NCAA PotY type of frontline player. Duncan, for example, only scored 24.5% of his NCAA points from the FT Line. Larry Bird score 19% of his points from the line, and he was known as a great FT shooter and for being crafty at drawing fouls. Barkley was an undersized PF and put up 21% of his points from the line.

                              So all the ways in which you'd look at Tyler, keeping him in the company of elite NCAA frontline scorers that were big, undersized, fundamental, whatever, none of those comparisons shows the reliance on the FT line that Tyler did.

                              I made this point around the draft, the point that Tyler did not show a great arsenal of scoring moves at UNC and that he relied on the FT line. He did then what he does now, bulled around and got fouls or ugly scores AND often got scores very early in the possession because UNC loved to push it up and put the ball in his hands in the low post before the other team had gotten back. This led to lots of And-1 scores at the rim.


                              Where I was really wrong about Tyler was that I predicted he would not be able to draw fouls in the NBA the way he did in college, but he obviously does that just as well as he always did. In fact in nearly every way Tyler looks identical to his final 3 years at UNC.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X