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

Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

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

  • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

    Originally posted by Sookie View Post
    He is.
    He has a higher ceiling. But no, as a whole this year he is not better than Carmelo.

    Comment


    • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
      He is.
      While I agree, his defense alone makes him more valuable, but if he settles into this role as a chucker it won't matter either way as they will all be on the same tier.

      Its frustrating.

      Comment


      • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

        Originally posted by fwpacerfan View Post
        "I usually don't run the court like that but I said, if I have to be the first big guy down the court to get the ball, I'll start (running) to try and change it," Hibbert said. "Usually I'm not a sprinting type but tonight, I tried to do it."

        So basically Roy said that he doesn't usually hustle but since they were losing he decided to try that to spur the team? That speaks volumes imho. Hibbert has been a huge part of the problem lately, as has Lance and PG. Lance and PG try to do it themselves but they have had to at times because Hibbert is getting shoved out of the paint. Last night in the 2nd half Roy decided to put forth some effort and it got the team back in the game. The 1st half? Chandler was killing Hibbert, out rebounding him, keeping out of the paint.
        Yeah, that's more or less what he said. And it makes absolute sense. Roy cannot go all out on both ends of the floor in the RS. The strain is too much for his huge body and it can lead to injuries. That's why Roy has been told to give it his all in the defensive end, contesting shots and let the rest of the team handle everything else (from rebounding the ball when he's boxing out to scoring). Roy shouldn't do it all himself. No players should do it all himself. Everyone should do its share and Roy's share in the RS is to defend the rim.

        The playoffs are a different story, though. Roy will go all out in the playoffs on both ends. We saw that last year and we will see it again this year.

        Roy really shouldn't be the first one to run down the floor in order to touch the ball. Our guards could always set him up if they wanted to. They just prefer to take the shots themselves.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

          Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
          Maybe Lance would throw Hibbert the ball more if Roy could catch. Guy has stone hands
          I love Lance but the truth is that he is more inclined to pass the ball to Ian than he is to Roy. And we all know that Roy's hands are a lot better than Ian's. For whatever reason Lance does not have a good chemistry with Roy.
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            Lance needs to be our primary ball handler. Lance needs to run the offense. When he does, our offense does well. (Sure, he makes a mistake now and then, but the over is better than the under.) When Hill runs the offense, nothing happens. When PG runs it, it's either a nice shot, a bad percentage shot, or a turnover (more of the the last two than the first).

            If the players had more practice with Lance running the offense, they wouldn't be so unfamiliar with what's going to happen. (For instance, when Roy get's the ball from Lance in his hands, he would learn to squeeze--just kidding, couldn't resist.)

            This is a problem that will go from bad to worse unless Vogel steps in and does the obvious in terms of what's best for the offense. I have a feeling I know Bird's opinion.

            Another twist: If Lance isn't allowed to run the offense—the obvious best choice for this team—I don't see him wanting to come back next year. Some of you might like that idea, but it would be a disaster for the Pacers, imo.
            McKey, you know that I was with you from the start when it came to Lance having the ball in his hands. You know that I'm in the "give Lance as much money as he wants" camp as well.

            But I have an honest question.

            Do you really think that Lance is playing like he wants to be a part of this team? Ever since he didn't get the All-Star nod his attitude seems a bit weird.
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
              Lance had 3 turnovers last night. PG had 4. Lance was better in every way than Paul last night, yet Roy gives Paul a pass? How does this help the locker room at all?
              That's a good point but this isn't about the last game. Lance was our best player along with Roy yesterday, that's absolutely clear. PG obviously had a very bad game. I don't believe that PG should get a pass but I understand where Hibbert is coming from.

              I'll agree with the people that said that this seems like a clash of styles.
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
                What's this about?


                As for Roy, if he wants to look at trends, he should be objective. March stats:

                Paul George - 40% FG, 29% 3P
                Lance Stephenson - 47% FG, 33% 3P
                Roy Hibbert - 48% FG, 4.5 REB


                Come on, son. He was outplayed by Bynum and Mahinmi in consecutive nights. I know he wants to make it all about the offense, but his defense has slipped and his rebounding speaks for itself. It's almost unthinkably bad. I would have lost a substantial amount of money if someone asked me to bet whether an uninjured Hibbert would average under 5 boards per game for 3 weeks.
                His defense has not slipped at all. He remains rock solid defensively. His rebounding has slipped but we all know the reasons for that. Just look at Lance's rebounding numbers and you'll see what happens.
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                  Roy needs to ceck his self first
                  "His inability to switch and provide high-quality help defense has been quite problematic," B/R's Adam Fromal noted.

                  Since the All-Star break, Indiana has actually posted a better defensive rating when Hibbert is off the floor (101.8) than when he's on it (102.5), via NBA.com. On/off splits can be impacted by the other players on the floor, but Hibbert is the only Pacers starter who has helped this defense by grabbing a sideline seat.

                  He's also losing his impact on the glass. While never a particularly dominant rebounder, he did track down at least eight a night in each of the past two seasons. He's corralled just 5.2 over his last 16 games.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                    McKey, you know that I was with you from the start when it came to Lance having the ball in his hands. You know that I'm in the "give Lance as much money as he wants" camp as well.

                    But I have an honest question.

                    Do you really think that Lance is playing like he wants to be a part of this team? Ever since he didn't get the All-Star nod his attitude seems a bit weird.

                    I agree earlier in the season Lance was running the offense and G. Hill was playing spit up shooter.. We were blowing teams out we had rhythm the ball moved easily.... G hill is not a creator.. Nor can he penetrate and cause the defense to work...

                    Comment


                    • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                      I'm not saying Lance has been perfect (he hasn't), but blatantly calling him out while giving Paul a pass is utter ******** by Roy. He should be a better teammate than that, especially since he has been settling for his midrange jumper quite a bit prior to the 3rd quarter last night.
                      Ok, here is Hibbert's full statement:

                      "We've fallen in love with the jump shot for a while," Hibbert said. "People feel like they have it going and they want to do it themselves sometimes. That's just how it works. I feel like two guys that I have 100 percent trust in doing that is Paul and David. I feel like they should have carte blanche on whatever they want to do in terms of attacking the paint and (put) the ball's in their hands because they've earned my respect."

                      Hibbert continued.

                      "They're able to do it at a high level, even if they start off a little slow but I know they're going to bring it. Those guys have the green light whenever they have it, but other than that I think we should move the ball and get people involved."
                      He is simply calling out the team in general and says that they have fallen in love with the jump shot. That's absolutely true. Then he goes on saying that he has 100% trust in PG and David. That's something that makes sense since they are higher in the offensive hierarchy than him.

                      He isn't calling out anyone individually, my friend. All he said is that he thinks that we should move the ball more and get people involved. And he's right on that.

                      He isn't naming anyone and he isn't throwing anyone under the pass either. That's how I see it at least. I don't see him throwing any blame around with that statement.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                        I love Lance but the truth is that he is more inclined to pass the ball to Ian than he is to Roy. And we all know that Roy's hands are a lot better than Ian's. For whatever reason Lance does not have a good chemistry with Roy.
                        Maybe because Roy can move , catch passes, or finish at the rim... I would not want to pass him the ball either

                        Comment


                        • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                          Time for Larry to bring the hammer down. I feel like he is the only one that could throw his weight around a little bit and get the job done quickly. Ever since Danny was traded, the locker room has probably been a mess. That's a big power vacuum to fill because even though Danny wasn't the same on the court, he was still a leader.

                          Does the team feel they betrayed Granger and that has caused a big rift to form? From what I can guess Danny was probably asked about the trade and said he would do it because he knew Philly would buy him out to let him go back home and still contend. So this is simply a lack of leadership. PG and Lance are both too young to give you veteran leadership and their brains will still be developing at least until 25. Hibbert and West are both post players. What do they really know about playing wing? Hill isn't a leader like Granger I don't think.

                          Larry is the only one with the clout and the experience at wing to make Lance and George listen. They need to feed off of each other more. Too much ISO. When they feed off each other like early in the year the opportunities open up for the rest of the squad. While the Pacers never have an elite offense, when it is efficient it makes it a lot easier for the defense and we are the best in the league. When the offense is struggling it puts a lot of pressure on them defensively.
                          Last edited by Midcoasted; 03-21-2014, 02:07 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                            Originally posted by BillS View Post
                            Roy said he trusted PG and West. He didn't even say they always played well. He didn't say anyone not named Hibbert, West, or PGeorge was terrible. He phrased something focusing on the positive. We and the media have taken what he didn't say and made up words to fit it. Now all our criticism is based on those words that Roy never said - including being upset that he said what he didn't say.

                            Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk
                            Exactly. I think that this should be quoted in every single page of this thread in order to remind to people that Roy didn't actually blame anyone.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                              Yes, he can protect the rim but he's not rebounding well. Lance leads the team in assists, FG% and rebounds. Yes, more rebounds than our 7'2" center. Oh, I know his role is to protect the rim and let the guards clean up. Whateva...smh.
                              BnG, you know that I respect you a lot (even though we disagree on several issues) but I really cannot stand comments of this kind.

                              It's comment like these that make me wish that Roy lays out a really nasty elbow to the face of his next teammate that is going to fight him for a board. Just lay him down and let him bleed. I don't give a **** anymore. I'm tired of seeing people ******** on Roy because he does what Vogel has instructed him to do and allows the wings to rebound the ball while he is boxing out bigs.

                              I'm at a point in which I just want to see our bigs lay down our wings whenever they attempt to steal a board from them.
                              Originally posted by IrishPacer
                              Empty vessels make the most noise.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                                Originally posted by Millertime3131 View Post
                                Maybe because Roy can move , catch passes, or finish at the rim... I would not want to pass him the ball either
                                Did you actually say a positive thing about Roy or did you mix up the names?
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X