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

Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

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

  • #16
    Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

    -Roy has bad balance so his shot is easy to throw off for a strong defender with height.

    -He doesn't have great hands so you can't throw it to him consistently on a roll to the rim.

    Not really sure how you could fix either of those, which means he has to work way too hard to get buckets. He doesn't have the body type or athleticism to be a great, consistent post player. He's got a nice enough touch to score against smaller centers like Chris Anderson, and when he slows down and takes his time in the post he's actually pretty agile.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

      Its all about matchups in the NBA. Roy is a great match up against alot of teams. His time will come, he just has to understand its not going to be consistent offensive production for him. Great thing about defense is that it doesn't have an off night. Everything this team does on that end is predicated on him. That's a pretty big deal. I hope he re realizes that.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

        Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
        The way some people act around here they would be ok if we traded Roy in the offseason.

        Roy's primary job is to protect the paint, which he does an outstanding job at. Roy's job is not to make shots, or get 10 rebounds a game, it is to contest shots. Would I like Roy to hit more of his attempts, sure. Would I like George Hill to get more dunks? Sure. The fact is though, as long as Roy is protecting the rim I will be content with his play.
        If he needs to score he will, but he knows he doesn't have to be the main guy
        Smothered Chicken!

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

          Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
          If he needs to score he will, but he knows he doesn't have to be the main guy
          I'd buy into that if he was shooting > 46%.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

            Originally posted by bballpacen View Post
            Get out of here dude... There are indeed reasons that Roy does not get touches, and not because he does not get enough ORebs... First we dont have anyone who can feed the post which causes ball reversals putting Roy on the opposite side of the floor... Sure he does not demand the ball and that is a legitimate gripe, but you didn't list that... Roy is not a bad, he is simply OK offensively... but I would also say that we did MUCH better as a team earlier in the year when we fed Roy to begin games... No that we have gotten away from that, we have gotten away from being a dominant team... We did much better at the end of last year when we fed Roy... I contend that we will again be a much better team when they make the consious effort the feed the post...
            The fact that we don't feed him the ball is the #1 reason he's struggled on offense. I see plenty of times when he's open but either Lance or Paul chuck up a shot. Big men don't bring the ball up so if our guards don't try to get it to him he can't score. The difference in our offense now vs early in the year has been the way Vogel lets Paul and Lance dominate the ball. The Paul and Lance show isn't as good as the team ball we played earlier. Vogel has talked about making an effort to get Roy the ball in the paint but it usually last for 1 game then goes away. Most coaches would work their offense from the inside out if they had a player like Hibbert. I think Roy needs to be more aggressive in demanding the ball but that only goes so far if Lance thinks he controls the offense.
            Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

              Hibbert's last game was disturbing no matter how you try to dress it up. Frank even yanked him for it. That about says it all. Hope he gets it together from here.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

                PG is a TERRIBLE passer, we all know this so the whole PG/Hibbert inside out game that we should be watching every night is impossible because of that. Is that Roy's fault?

                If we had picked up Andre Miller or some other real PG Hibbert would be getting more touches.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

                  Originally posted by tadscout View Post
                  Quinn even pointed out in some cases the play is there for the Pacers, but it takes them 2 seconds too long to make the play, and by then the flow is off and the play isn't there. It affects everyone and probably why our offense as a whole has been a bit off lately.
                  This is huge.

                  The other thing that slows it down is that when Roy gets the ball he is usually not supposed to move until someone comes through on the baseline. That often also takes a long time to happen, further bogging down the offense. It is a play I really hate, but it is what is designed to happen.

                  I won't say Roy is capable of making lightning-fast decisions on offense, but I think the combination of slow decision-making from the wing and the way playes are set up makes him look worse than he is.
                  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


                  • #24
                    Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

                    Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
                    PG is a TERRIBLE passer, we all know this so the whole PG/Hibbert inside out game that we should be watching every night is impossible because of that. Is that Roy's fault?

                    If we had picked up Andre Miller or some other real PG Hibbert would be getting more touches.
                    No it is not Roy's fault PG is a terrible passer. Is it PG's fault though that Roy misses point blank shots at the rim? Even when Roy does get position he's so soft any respectable defender can knock him off balance because Roy has terrible control of his lower body. You can blame PG and the front office if you want to but any one with eyes to see can see Ian and Bynum are playing better than Hibbert.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

                      Originally posted by Magic P View Post
                      No it is not Roy's fault PG is a terrible passer. Is it PG's fault though that Roy misses point blank shots at the rim? Even when Roy does get position he's so soft any respectable defender can knock him off balance because Roy has terrible control of his lower body. You can blame PG and the front office if you want to but any one with eyes to see can see Ian and Bynum are playing better than Hibbert.
                      This is what I've been screaming for awhile. I even advocated that Lance and PG does get into hero ball sometimes, but Roy still gets pushed out by any player with girth and/or strength. There are even times West is only about 6 feet away from Roy, with the ball above his head looking right at him ready to pass, but he doesn't trust that Roy will cleanly catch the ball, so he goes to the rim or passes out to someone else.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

                        Hey Roy, learn to catch the ball and maybe you'll get the 15 shots a game that you want.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

                          I'm confused by the complaints about Roy's hands. I think he has really strong hands and catches just about everything within reach.

                          Bynum's had 0 problems getting passes from our players. At some point it's on Hibbert because he doesn't get good position and he doesn't demand the ball.

                          It looks to me like Roy's lost most of his offseason weight/muscle, and that's the main culprit of his struggles. That's the problem with offseason workouts. Roy works incredibly hard in the offseason..so hard that it's impossible for him to keep up with that routine during the regular season, so all of the extra weight/strength starts coming off. And then he loses his ability to gain position.

                          He seems to have a period of struggles every season, roughly around the same time (this season's has been later). I'm not worried until it carries into the playoffs.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

                            Roy's biggest problem is he has terrible balance. And because of that he gets pushed off the areas of the floor where he wants the ball, he gets easily pushed off balance when he gets the ball, he has trouble finishing in traffic. Look how many times he falls down during a game.

                            That is IMO the biggest reason why he isn't better low post player.

                            Unless Roy has a really favorable matchup (which is rare) he isn't one of our best offensive options. In fact as a primary offensive option meaning more or less getting him the ball directly he is 4th or 5th best offensive option among our starters.

                            He isn't bad as a release from around 12 feet. release meaning if a double is created and Roy is open for a spot up. Or he isn't bad in a high low with West when Roy get the ball from the top in the center of the lane.

                            Otherwise we have better offensive options.

                            He needs to work on getting his offense on offensive rebounds and early transition, but not as the primary option against a set defense.
                            Last edited by Unclebuck; 03-19-2014, 10:33 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

                              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                              Hibbert's biggest issue is when he gets down on himself. He's capable of playing better and IMO this is all mental.
                              I totally agree. He's playing so soft right now. When he gets the ball in position to dunk the ball, he's shying away from the contact and tossing up weak layups or getting blocked by 6'5" SGs like Tony Wroten. I don't think he deserves more shots. He needs to start hitting those bunnies he keeps missing. Once he starts hitting, his teammates keep looking for him.

                              On the defensive end, he's doing a good job defending and boxing out his man but he's not pursuing rebounds in the way Bynum, Mahinmi, and even Scola goes after them. He had at least 2 rebounds bounce off his hands against Philly because he didn't go after it with both hands.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Familiar Conundrum For Hibbert

                                Originally posted by Millertime3131 View Post
                                I know most of you are area 55ers and feel obligated to defend a grown man who makes more than anyone on the team...
                                As one of the actual few members of Area 55 who are actually are active members of PD, I would prefer that you not use something that we have put our time and energy into something we are proud to be part of to try and insult a wide swath of the forum.
                                "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

                                Working...
                                X