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

Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

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

  • #16
    Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

    Originally posted by Foul on Smits View Post
    If you can hold teams to 90 points a game in this era of the NBA, you are a title contender.
    Not if you can't broach an average of 89 points of offense per game.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

      If I had to shut down a team from scoring, I would probably take the 2004 team. Recall that it was truly an elite team. Artest, JO and SJax were all very good, tough and mobile defenders. JO was a fantastic help defender and quick as a cat when he was younger. Artest was a better defender than anyone we have right now. Guys like Mello and LeBron overpower us...and they wouldn't with Artest. DWest, otoh, is not that good of a defender. George Hill is ok, but overrated coming in. Danny actually isn't that good defensively although he did get better last year. Paul George and Hibbert are both very good defenders but Hibbert can get physically dominated and taken out of the game by certain players.

      Edit: oh...and Reggie Miller improved quite a bit in his later years. Tinsley was the weak link, but even he wasn't terrible. He could steal you blind.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

        Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
        I think PG is ahead of Artest's defensive path thus far.
        Whew, I'm not sure about that. Possibly, but (taking the crazy stuff out of the equation) Artest was a beast on the defensive end of the floor. Paul is darn good though, so there's not that big a gap between them, but I think Ron-Ron would just edge PG at their defensive peak. Then again, Paul is not at his peak yet, so I'm fully aware there is room to eat these words.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

          How is our pick and roll defense this year compared to last year?

          We have the same starters....once Granger comes back. Has the team made adjustments in terms of what they are doing?
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
            If I had to shut down a team from scoring, I would probably take the 2004 team. Recall that it was truly an elite team. Artest, JO and SJax were all very good, tough and mobile defenders.
            Sjax wasn't on the 04 team that won 61 games and went to the Conference Finals. We still had Harrington that year. The next year we added SJax and the brawl happened. The JO-Artest-Sjax trio played a tiny amount of games together since Artest was suspended for most of 04-05 and asked for a trade early in 05-06.

            I agree that 04 was the best defensive team. Artest being sane for the entire season and playing at such a high level is what made us an elite team.
            Last edited by Sollozzo; 12-20-2012, 10:58 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

              Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
              I think PG is ahead of Artest's defensive path thus far. Artest was 25 in '04; PG is 22. He's damn close to Artest in individual defense right now as Artest was in his peak. The one thing PG still might trail him is in off-the-ball team defense. But PG is a ridiculous defender. He's longer and more athletic than Artest.
              I agree with you that PG might be ahead of Artest in terms of his progression to becoming a defensive star, but I would say that PG's off the ball defense is where George is better than where Artest was and ever was. It is his on the ball defense that must get better before I would be comfortable saying he is better than Artest. Artest in his prime was on of the best on the ball defenders I have ever seen. PG is way above average, but not at the level Artest was. PG's lack of strength is the only thing holding him back. PG gets his hands on so many balls every game it is insane. Help blocks, assisted steals. He literally can shut down a team's two man game by himself. He wants to do it too. Artest shut down his man, not the play. He does get himself in trouble trying to do too much, and I am willing to admit that Artest had a higher IQ than Paul does when pertaining to team defense, though not much higher. Experience will get PG there. He has more length, athleticism, intelligence and desire than Artest did. I really hope the Pacers can lock this dude up for years to come, for he is the catalyst to what makes the Pacers such a good defensive team.....Well that and a 7'2" blocking machine guarding the rim.....and, uh, a solid defender at the point.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                Roy is our best combination of shotblocker and basket protector we have had.
                I guess it depends on what a basket protector is, if you're just wanting someone to clog the paint and alter shots by sheer presence, yes. However, I think JO is right there in terms of shotblocking.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                  Originally posted by Noodle View Post
                  I agree with you that PG might be ahead of Artest in terms of his progression to becoming a defensive star, but I would say that PG's off the ball defense is where George is better than where Artest was and ever was. It is his on the ball defense that must get better before I would be comfortable saying he is better than Artest. Artest in his prime was on of the best on the ball defenders I have ever seen. PG is way above average, but not at the level Artest was. PG's lack of strength is the only thing holding him back. PG gets his hands on so many balls every game it is insane. Help blocks, assisted steals. He literally can shut down a team's two man game by himself. He wants to do it too. Artest shut down his man, not the play. He does get himself in trouble trying to do too much, and I am willing to admit that Artest had a higher IQ than Paul does when pertaining to team defense, though not much higher. Experience will get PG there. He has more length, athleticism, intelligence and desire than Artest did. I really hope the Pacers can lock this dude up for years to come, for he is the catalyst to what makes the Pacers such a good defensive team.....Well that and a 7'2" blocking machine guarding the rim.....and, uh, a solid defender at the point.
                  I don't remember how well Artest did running around screens, but Artest was (and is) great at getting in position to deny the ball. George still gets lost around screens, though he is MUCH better this year than last year so far.
                  Time for a new sig.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                    Is this the Pacers worst offensive team?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                      1994.

                      That team played some of the best playoff defense I have ever seen and they did it with a physicality & toughness. The ECF game at MSA where they held the Knicks to 68 was a clinic. They also just man handled and intimidated an under appreciated 57-win Hawks team for an entire series.

                      Very good bench defenders too with Scott, AD, Vern, Lasalle Thompson.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                        Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                        I don't remember how well Artest did running around screens, but Artest was (and is) great at getting in position to deny the ball. George still gets lost around screens, though he is MUCH better this year than last year so far.
                        Ball denial is right. But even in his prime, Artest was not great at getting around screens, it was the only part of his D that wasn't excellent.

                        Ball denial was where Artest really separated himself from other players. At his peak as a Pacer, Artest regularly outplayed the best small forwards in the game, guys with much bigger names than he had back then. He also intimidated his fair share of opponents in an era that allowed for more physicality.

                        What I like about PG is that he genuinely cares about his D. I've head the lip service about PG "wanting to be great" but so what... everyone wants that just like everyone likes to score. Paul puts out the effort on D.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                          Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                          I guess it depends on what a basket protector is, if you're just wanting someone to clog the paint and alter shots by sheer presence, yes. However, I think JO is right there in terms of shotblocking.
                          Blocked shots are the slam dunks of defense. Memorable, fun to watch, but no true indication of how good a player is on the offensive/defensive end. I would argue that denying access to the paint and altering shots is the ONLY way to measure a defensive anchor.

                          JO was good in that role. Second best Pacer paint defender other than Roy. But Roy has been otherworldly so far.

                          It makes me laugh to think about this: If Roy switched his skills this year (if he was a superstar offensively but his defense disappeared to below par), everyone would be elated about his max contract. But because it is the other way around, he generally gets grumbles.

                          I personally am excited about Roy's present and future. All he has to do is get a few of those shots to fall. Everything else about his game is awesome right now. I'm not worried about it. He won't ever be an 27 PPG Hakeem-type player, but he is the defensive Carmelo Anthony.
                          The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                          http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                          RSS Feed
                          Subscribe via iTunes

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                            The little bit we got to watch the 05-06 team! Artest was then a man among boys. JO was still in his prime. Foster was doing dirty work. Jackson was a strong athletic wing. That was the best defensive team even thought it was only for a short stretch. The thing that separates that squad from the current one. We had 4 players willing to knock a player to the ground and stare at them if they were getting hot and drove the basket. Intimidation is what they had and if it was not for events we do not speak of they would of been one of the best defensive teams of all time.
                            Last edited by dohman; 12-21-2012, 09:24 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                              Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
                              Blocked shots are the slam dunks of defense. Memorable, fun to watch, but no true indication of how good a player is on the offensive/defensive end. I would argue that denying access to the paint and altering shots is the ONLY way to measure a defensive anchor.
                              The same can be said about steals. It is sad that the only two aspects of defense that are easily accessible also tend to be the least representative of how good of a defender the player is.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Is this the Pacers best defensive team ever

                                2012 - Stats wise this is the best of the 4.
                                I don't think that's true, I think 2004 has the numbers. I think they are better at DEF FG% and Points/100. I was looking at this topic about 2 weeks ago and have checked from time to time in regards to all-time Pacers ranking because it certainly is a growing topic. So I'm going from memory of those checks at this point and could be wrong.


                                BTW, I would like to "Yeah, what he said" to all of Trader Joe's comments. I'm going to look at some numbers and check back at lunch I think.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X