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

  • #16
    Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

    Originally posted by J7F View Post
    PG is simply out of gas IMO

    I think the reasons are his youth, not enough strength and he has a troubled personal life.
    Plus trying to be the teams best defender and offensively player will take a toll also.
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

      I found this very interesting, it nicely illustrates the distribution of the ball within the starting 5 of every NBA team.
      It's further proof we need to involve Roy much more and get him more touches.

      Also, notice the Poor Hibbert - Lance connection.

      http://imgur.com/2dmVXGr

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
        Let's throw the guy who was our best player and most consistent last night right under the bus, seems like a good move.

        Roy needs to remove his head from his ***, I don't know when he got it lodged up there, but he has to be getting low on oxygen.
        Lance's "bad" shots are still much better than PG's "bad" shots. Lance creates space and only shoots when he is wide open. PG does this stupid off-balance fadeaway crap that never works. Also, whose idea was it that our end of quarter/half/game offense was to give PG the ball and everybody else get out of the way. It is beyond predictable that PG will dribble, dribble, shoot while defended, and miss
        Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

          Maybe Lance would throw Hibbert the ball more if Roy could catch. Guy has stone hands
          Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
            Let's throw the guy who was our best player and most consistent last night right under the bus, seems like a good move.

            Yeah, I'd prefer to throw him in the 4th row, just like his passes. Or maybe underneath his dribbling. That'll flatten him good.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

              Originally posted by DgR View Post
              I found this very interesting, it nicely illustrates the distribution of the ball within the starting 5 of every NBA team.
              It's further proof we need to involve Roy much more and get him more touches.

              Also, notice the Poor Hibbert - Lance connection.

              http://imgur.com/2dmVXGr
              Cool picture! Thanks!

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                Lance is an enigma. He gets credit for "saving" the game from some, yet his unpredictability when he has the ball is a huge part of why guys hesitate when moving through plays when he has the ball. He has no timing that works with the team - they don't know if or when he will pass it, where he will go when he drives it, and where the ball will go if he misses his shot. That makes him look really good when his big shots fall, but it disrupts the ability of the team to play as a unit.
                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.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • #23
                  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
                  Where is this coming from? When has Hibbert fumbled passes?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                    Lance had a good game last night but so it doesn't' seem fair to call him out for this one game. However, Lance has been close to a net negative since his name started coming up for a possible all star selection. He needs to take a lesser scoring role and become more of a distributor while Roy needs to take a bigger role. We just can't afford to have 2 wing players shooting 30+ jump shots per game. Paul has also fallen in love with the 3 way too much. The bottom line is our offense needs to go back to what worked for us at the beginning of the season. When we play the inside out game and focus on defense, we are by far the best team in the NBA.
                    Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                      So Roy has one good game and now he calls out his teammates on offense.....that's great.

                      Lance really has problems gaining respect. Look at the numbers. Lance leads the team in FG%, shooting 6% higher than Paul, but Paul has the green light and Hibbert's respect because he earned it.

                      All of the numbers point to Lance doing as well on offense as any Pacer, and he's leading the team in assists. And from the eye test, our starting offense runs better as soon as it's initiated through Lance. But his teammates complain more about him than any other player. Why?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                        Roy needs to own his part in this as well. Part of the issue with the ball stopping has been the perimeter guys waiting on him to establish position and present himself for the catch. Roy is not good at competing for post position and I'd get frustrated with him too. Couple that with the fact he can also be weak with the ball after the catch and it becomes tough to justify making him a big part of the offense as a traditional low box threat. Rik Smits circa 1994 was fricken Robert Parish compared to what Roy is bringing to the table in that area right now.

                        Disclaimer for the ones that need it: Roy is a top 3 defensive center and an underated rebounder. I love having Roy as a Pacer.

                        I also think a lot of this is on the coaches. They need to see Roy's limitations offensively and get him his low post looks off of motion and after setting screens for players moving through the lane. Make the guy defending Roy worry about other assignments during the play rather than just being able to focus on pushing him out of position. Would also help the fact that moving the ball in general is a huge issue for this team.

                        Lot's of people keep saying we need to play inside out. I agree but if that means moving three guys to one side of the floor and trying to let Hill, Lance or PG play catch with Hibbert like Magic & Kareem used to do then I'm out on that deal. 3/4 of those posessions will end up in a bad shot or a turnover.
                        Last edited by Downtown Bang!; 03-20-2014, 10:07 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                          Lance was our best player last night and has had many good games for us this year. I think that its slowly becoming obvious that Lance's game rubs some of the other players the wrong way. I could be wrong but does anyone else get the idea that maybe Lance doesn't exactly fit in with the rest of the team. Im obviously not in the locker room, but between these comments and the body language of some of the other starters, maybe they are a bit tired of Lance's act at the moment.

                          For those trying to compare Lance and Paul, Paul has earned a pass right now. Idk if that's okay or not, but the guy who was All NBA last year, and will probably be All NBA this year, he has proven himself a bit more than Lance has right now.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            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.

                            Idk if im in the minority or not, but our offense seems to be most stagnant when Lance initiates the offense. He pounds the air out of the rock, doing crossovers but not going anywhere. We normally end up being up against the shot clock as well.

                            Again maybe I'm in the minority but thats what I see. I feel this is why Lance isn't getting the ball nearly as much as earlier in the year.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                              Idk if im in the minority or not, but our offense seems to be most stagnant when Lance initiates the offense. He pounds the air out of the rock, doing crossovers but not going anywhere. We normally end up being up against the shot clock as well.

                              Again maybe I'm in the minority but thats what I see. I feel this is why Lance isn't getting the ball nearly as much as earlier in the year.
                              Lance has argued that the Knicks removed his passing lanes last night, so it's at least encouraging that he recognizes that he fell short in getting the ball to others.

                              I still think he's too quick to jump into iso mode vs. a focus on facilitation.
                              Last edited by docpaul; 03-20-2014, 10:27 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Roy Hibbert calls out Lance and maybe George Hill?

                                Originally posted by Romsey31 View Post
                                No he's not. He just takes too much threes Imo. And bad shots. I'm sure he takes more threes a game than reggae did.
                                Seems to me teams are giving him the three point shot, and cutting off his drives

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X