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

The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

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

  • #61
    Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

    This is like arguing the sky hook is an inefficient shot, because league percentages have sucked since 1990.

    Watch Kobe play, and how much pressure he puts on a defense 12-15 feet from they basket. He's old and slow, but he's still among league leaders in free throws attempted, and he shoots a crazy percentage from the elbow and the baseline. It has nothing to do with athletic superiority anymore, and everything to do with dedication to his craft.
    Last edited by Kstat; 10-16-2013, 10:45 AM.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

      Luol Deng, Rose and Boozer take a lot of midrange jump shoots. That should scare Pacer fans. Because if we run them off the line and pack the lane I hope that we can bother them enough.

      Dirk is great. Bosh is the most efficient. I want to see Rondo's midrange percentages in the playoffs. When he was questionably the best player on the court against the Heat, was it because he was knocking down that midrange jumper?

      2012 Playoffs

      2011 Playoffs



      It should be save to say that the midrange game is in fact a game changer in todays NBA.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

        Originally posted by Kstat View Post
        This is like arguing the sky hook is an inefficient shot, because league percentages have sucked since 1990.

        Watch Kobe play, and how much pressure he puts on a defense 12-15 feet from they basket. He's old and slow, but he's still among league leaders in free throws attempted, and he shoots a crazy percentage from the elbow and the baseline. It has nothing to do with athletic superiority anymore, and everything to do with dedication to his craft.
        You would be an idiot to say that an elite sky hook shooter shouldn't shoot sky hooks. You would be an idiot to suggest that a terrible sky hook shooter should take more sky hook shots.

        Can you point out someone on this board or a national writer who is arguing that no mid range shots should be taken in the NBA? Can you point to someone who is saying that elite mid range shooters shouldn't take mid range shots? The same writers who advocate the "new thinking" that non-elite mid range shooters should carve that area out of their game will drool over the mid range game of Nash, Durant, Chris Paul, LeBron James, etc. Those guys are special BECAUSE of their elite mid range games, and the strategic advantage that skill brings.

        The point is that, on average, NBA players shoot 38.9% from mid range. Roughly only 50-60 players who played 25+ minutes per game shot above 40% from mid range, which roughly gives you two guys per 5-7 man "heavy minutes" rotation.

        We aren't talking about the elite shooters here. We are talking about the other 2/3rds of the league who can be logically criticized for taking a bad shot when it is from that range.
        The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
        http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
        RSS Feed
        Subscribe via iTunes

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

          That was kinda tl;dr. Here is a bite-sized thought:

          The old thinking was that only elite jump shooters should take 3's, and average jump shooters should stick to mid range shots. The new thinking is that only elite jump shooters should shoot from mid range, and average jump shooters should only shoot from three.
          The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
          http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
          RSS Feed
          Subscribe via iTunes

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

            Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
            That was kinda tl;dr. Here is a bite-sized thought:

            The old thinking was that only elite jump shooters should take 3's, and average jump shooters should stick to mid range shots. The new thinking is that only elite jump shooters should shoot from mid range, and average jump shooters should only shoot from three.
            And as a result, you get an offense that looks like JOb's wet dream. No thanks.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
              Except curry and Durant aren't 35 years old...

              The point was never that Jordan and Kobe were mid-range killers. The point was that as non-bigs, they were/are able to dominate games at an advanced age and an athletic disadvantage, because of their ability to use the midrange game and consistently draw fouls 8-12 feet from the rim, which is less a test of athleticism and more of a chess match.

              I can find a lot of scoring guards that make their living launching threes, albeit with varying degrees of success. Find me a lot of scorers that make their living in the post 8-12 feet from the rim. Show me the role player that can take his defender in the high post, back him in and shoot over the top. You can't. It's a specialized skill that's extremely hard to learn, but the guys that do are all-stars.
              And how does that tie in with your problem with the shot chart, again?

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                Not only can you look at individual players, but also the league as a whole. Scoring before the 3pt line was higher than it is now. They've not only added the 3pt line, and gotten less scoring, they've also tightened the rules against defenses to make scoring easier and scoring still went down.

                I agree with P4E that a lot of coaches don't like shooting midrange shots, and they discourage them. Look no further for reasons why percentages are down and midrange shots aren't efficient.
                Isn't this neglecting to mention how much better/smarter defense has gotten in the NBA?

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  And as a result, you get an offense that looks like JOb's wet dream. No thanks.
                  Explain. Because there's more to Jim O'Brien's philosophy than preferring 3's to long 2's.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                    And how does that tie in with your problem with the shot chart, again?
                    The shot chart implies that mid range shots are inefficient. They are not. The type of mid range shots and the players taking them are inefficient.

                    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                      Isn't this neglecting to mention how much better/smarter defense has gotten in the NBA?
                      Have they? Not being a sarcastic dick, but it's a serious question. We tend to believe that philosophies bouncing around are new, when they aren't. The complications of defenses arise when you talk about what defensive players switch, and which ones don't, and your team recognizing those. Or what offensive players you switch off of, and which ones you don't, etc.

                      Rotations are finite, there's only so many different rotational tactics you can have without repeating. I think emphasis on certain points of defense come and go, but I don't think there's anything "new" really going on.


                      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                      Explain. Because there's more to Jim O'Brien's philosophy than preferring 3's to long 2's.
                      There's not much more to it than that. Yes, I'm probably oversimplfying it a bit, but not much. Of course Jim understands, and supports, the idea of getting close shots at the rim but I bet when asked 10 times on whether or not he'd rather a player shoot a three or a midrange jumper he'll go with the three 10 out of 10 times.


                      EDIT: Or to sum up Antoine Walker when asked why he takes so many 3s (while being coached by JOb) "Because there aren't any fours."
                      Last edited by Since86; 10-16-2013, 12:38 PM.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        Isn't this neglecting to mention how much better/smarter defense has gotten in the NBA?
                        It is to an extent, but there's no evidence that says the 8-12 foot post game is no longer effective. It's just that nobody commits to using it anymore, except a handful of players, all of which are still highly effective scorers well into their 30's.

                        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                          This is faaaaaar from definitive. There are a million factors to consider (for example, quality of talent on roster, quality of opponents), but for the curious:

                          Top three 3's point shooting teams (in raw attempts, not FG%) / NBA offensive rank (points per 100 possessions):
                          1. Houston / 6
                          2. Knicks / 3
                          3. Lakers / 8

                          Top three mid range shooting teams (in raw attempts, not FG%) / NBA offensive rank (points per 100 possessions):
                          1. Philly / 26th
                          2. Phoenix / 29th
                          3. Washington / 30th

                          Defenses that allowed the most mid range shot attempts per game / NBA defensive rank (points per 100 possessions):
                          1. Indiana / 1st
                          2. Spurs / 4th
                          3. Washington / 8th

                          Defenses that allowed the most three point shot attempts per game / NBA defensive rank (points per 100 possessions):
                          1. Denver / 11th
                          2. Warriors / 13th
                          3. Bobcats / 30th
                          The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                          http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                          RSS Feed
                          Subscribe via iTunes

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                            I think what's true for star players isn't necessarily true for role players. Of the 5 guys on the floor, ideally you'd probably want 1 post up guy and 1 wing isolation scorer, but of the other 3 guys the best thing they could probably bring to the table is a 3 pt shot. So maybe for the star iso guy (Kobe, etc), playing the midrange game either is more efficient or generates more value for the team (hey, those 3 pt shooters have to play off someone, right?), but for the role players it doesn't seem optimal. They'd just crowd the space for your star iso guy if they're playing in the midrange.

                            FWIW, I think Spurs play this to perfection. They have efficient shooters like Green and Neal to play off stars Parker and Duncan. And that makes their offense extremely efficient.

                            Put another way, let's say Pacers decided to make Hibbert and George the focal points of the offense. Would we want Hill and Stephenson to develop their midrange game or their long game? Well, "both" would be great, but if they had to pick one probably the long game is more suited for their roles.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                              What a baby:

                              http://www.cbssports.com/nba/eye-on-...ire-his-number

                              Dwight Howard spent eight seasons in Orlando, going from franchise hero into one of the most reviled players in the league.

                              And for that, he thinks his No. 12 jersey should be in the rafters, evidently.

                              Sigh.

                              Via the Orlando Sentinel, Howard said he wasn't very happy when his former team allowed Tobias Harris to wear No. 12, which of course was his number in Orlando.

                              "I just think that despite whatever happened, there was a lot of things that I did and that we did as a team, and that number was special down there," Howard said. "And I was a little bit upset about that."

                              As the paper notes, Howard likely is unaware that Harris wears No. 12 to honor a friend to died of leukemia at 17 years old. Oof.

                              Basically, Howard thinks the Magic should retire his number. Again, he played eight seasons for the Magic and while he was unquestionably excellent, taking the team to the Finals one year before eventually turning the entire fanbase on him, I don't think he meets the typical criteria for having your number retired. Normally, the fans like you. That's probably step one. And Howard's not getting past that step.

                              So good luck with that, Dwight.
                              "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


                              • #75
                                Re: The 10th NBA Random Thoughts thread 2013-2014: Coveting Miami's Crown

                                Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                                Put another way, let's say Pacers decided to make Hibbert and George the focal points of the offense. Would we want Hill and Stephenson to develop their midrange game or their long game? Well, "both" would be great, but if they had to pick one probably the long game is more suited for their roles.
                                Would we want DWest to give up his midrange game, and put him out on the 3pt line? That's the real problem here. Different positions/players should have different roles and different places where they score from, instead of turning big men into little guys.

                                Players have the ability to become good shooters from both spots, and it should be encouraged, not just telling them to pick one and avoid the other.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X