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

Areas of Improvement from Within

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

  • Areas of Improvement from Within

    I was looking through some stats, and there were a few things that really stood at to me.


    1. Ian Mahinmi had a FG% of 55.6% with Dallas, and 48.8% from 10 to 16 ft. He did this while taking a greater percentage of shots from that range, and his FGA have not increased by a huge amount while with the Pacers (2.9 vs 3.3). Another thing stood out the percentage of shots he takes from 16 to 3Pt was 30% in 12-13, luckily though that dropped back down to a more normal average for him of only 11.6% of his shots. I think Vogel needs to take a good hard long look at what Dallas did to allow him to shoot 48.8% from 10 to 16ft compared to an abysmal 27.8% with the Pacers while taking roughly the same amount of shots. If we can find a way to make Ian efficient again, it will be a huge boost to the offense when the back-ups are on the court.


    2. In George Hill's last season with the Spurs for every 100 shots he took, he also had 42.7 FTA. This is kind of an absurd rate. For comparison, Wade's career rate is 46.9 and Lebron's is 43. Hill also had a rate of 39.2 his rookie season, so this doesn't appear to have been a fluke season. Meanwhile with the Pacers it has been 27.1, 10 points below Hill's rate for all three seasons with the Spurs. Last year, if you don't take into consideration hack-an-Ian, Roy led the Pacers at 35.7, which is lower than Hill's three seasons with the Spurs combined. At the same time Hill's 3PA has gone from 26.7% of his shots to 40.7% of his shots. Minus his rookie season, he has been doing all this while taking roughly the same amount of shots in SA as Indy. Like Ian, Vogel needs to take a long look at how SA used Hill, and try to incorporate some of that into our offense.

    By the way, you don't put up those kinds of free throw rates without being aggressive. Most of the evidence continues to point towards Hill's passiveness being an issue of what the coaches are asking of him, not of him choosing to be passive.



    P.S. Please no Lance talk. This isn't about Lance.
    Last edited by Eleazar; 07-22-2014, 12:35 PM.

  • #2
    Re: Areas of Improvement from Within

    You are the anti-Grimp


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Areas of Improvement from Within

      Don't be absurd. Everyone knows that now there is no one on the team that can create their own shot, or create space, or draw fouls that everyone on the team will be worse. Nevermind any of those silly stats like the pacers having a top 10 offense and then declining to a bottom 10 offense with Stephenson. That just doesn't pass the eye test.
      "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Areas of Improvement from Within

        I have always liked both of these guys for what they are and think the Pacers can win with them in appropriate roles. Trouble is they both were playing with (and off of) better and more efficient offensive stars in Texas. They were also playing in better more sophisticated offensive systems.

        Hibbert is a huge wild card and West is battling time so any real sustained offensive upside is likely up to Paul George continuing to ascend & on Bird and the staff doing something to get more out of the system.

        Truthfully. As long as the Pacers stand pat at the 4 & 5 I think this team mostly is who it is. Short of George taking that one last huge step as a player the one internal indicator that will dictate the level of success in 2015 is if they get back to playing defense like they did during the 2nd half of 2013 & the first half of 2014.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Areas of Improvement from Within

          When I think of impvement I think of Paul George. I think he has just scratched the surface. And yes I know he'll have to do more without Lance, and that might hurt his game, he might get worn down, but also sometimes when more is expected, more is given.

          Without Lance PG might become a true NBA superstar sooner


          general comment: I would love to know what the players and coaches are really saying about losing Lance
          Last edited by Unclebuck; 07-22-2014, 11:24 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Areas of Improvement from Within

            I'll add on to what UB is saying with an example of Dale Davis. I felt like his best season was the year after Antonio got traded. DD had to carry more of the load and did. I see the same idea with PG and Lance.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Areas of Improvement from Within

              PG - ball handling/passing/decision making/shot selection & overall FG% (wants to be considered a superstar, now he's really got to put his money where his mouth is by improving in these foundational areas)

              Roy - overcome mental midget syndrome, in other words increase mental toughness, improve rebounding #s, accept you are not an leading offensive cog and focus on your strength (defense)

              GH - consistently play with purpose and passion, also stop the whiny **** (boo-hoo the fans booed us type stuff)

              Frank Vogel - get an improved offensive system, use the bench effectively, use players' talents more effectively

              D West - better defense & rebounding more consistently (but hopefully minutes will be reduced during regular season)

              Bench will have to wait for a later post.
              I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

              -Emiliano Zapata

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Areas of Improvement from Within

                I think a huge area of improvement will come from Vogel realizing just how versatile our roster is and actually utilizing it. I love Frank's confidence in his guys, but being able to plug in different guys in different situations is really important.

                Also Roy needs to work on his hand strength. No more getting blocked by Korver and Chalmers, man, come on. If he stays the same in all other areas but improves that, he'll be okay.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Areas of Improvement from Within

                  We need to improve passing. I like George Hill, but he can really struggle with initiating an offense and making quality passes against tough defenses. PG can be downright putrid at passing and often makes dumb decisions with bad fundamentals.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Areas of Improvement from Within

                    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                    We need to improve passing. I like George Hill, but he can really struggle with initiating an offense and making quality passes against tough defenses. PG can be downright putrid at passing and often makes dumb decisions with bad fundamentals.
                    I think if we could have players moving off the ball, this would help big time for both. Instead we have a guy standing in the corner, a guy on the wing, a guy in the post, and another guy coming to set a screen for the ball handler. If those other players would move with a purpose (coaches speak) we would be a lot better in this area.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Areas of Improvement from Within

                      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                      I was looking through some stats, and there were a few things that really stood at to me.


                      1. Ian Mahinmi had a FG% of 55.6% with Dallas, and 48.8% from 10 to 16 ft. He did this while taking a greater percentage of shots from that range, and his FGA have not increased by a huge amount while with the Pacers (2.9 vs 3.3). Another thing stood out the percentage of shots he takes from 16 to 3Pt was 30% in 12-13, luckily though that dropped back down to a more normal average for him of only 11.6% of his shots. I think Vogel needs to take a good hard long look at what Dallas did to allow him to shoot 48.8% from 10 to 16ft compared to an abysmal 27.8% with the Pacers while taking roughly the same amount of shots. If we can find a way to make Ian efficient again, it will be a huge boost to the offense when the back-ups are on the court.


                      2. In George Hill's last season with the Spurs for every 100 shots he took, he also had 42.7 FTA. This is kind of an absurd rate. For comparison, Wade's career rate is 46.9 and Lebron's is 43. Hill also had a rate of 39.2 his rookie season, so this doesn't appear to have been a fluke season. Meanwhile with the Pacers it has been 27.1, 10 points below Hill's rate for all three seasons with the Spurs. Last year, if you don't take into consideration hack-an-Ian, Roy led the Pacers at 35.7, which is lower than Hill's three seasons with the Spurs combined. At the same time Hill's 3PA has gone from 26.7% of his shots to 40.7% of his shots. Minus his rookie season, he has been doing all this while taking roughly the same amount of shots in SA as Indy. Like Ian, Vogel needs to take a long look at how SA used Hill, and try to incorporate some of that into our offense.

                      By the way, you don't put up those kinds of free throw rates without being aggressive. Most of the evidence continues to point towards Hill's passiveness being an issue of what the coaches are asking of him, not of him choosing to be passive.



                      P.S. Please no Lance talk. This isn't about Lance.

                      Great stuff. I get we are not talking about Lance, but if I may reference I do need to reference him. Without him on the team I do suspect the ball will move more like others have speculated. When this occurs players move, driving lanes are created and we can attack the basket.

                      With less 1 on 1 ball I believe a lot of those red flags you posted on will be in better shape.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Areas of Improvement from Within

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        When I think of impvement I think of Paul George. I think he has just scratched the surface. And yes I know he'll have to do more without Lance, and that might hurt his game, he might get worn down, but also sometimes when more is expected, more is given.

                        Without Lance PG might become a true NBA superstar sooner


                        general comment: I would love to know what the players and coaches are really saying about losing Lance
                        I think this is true not just for PG but Roy, Hill, CJ (Watson and Miles), Stuckey, Luis (if he's still here), Cope, maybe even Solo. We've got lots of guys who have the opportunity to basically do what Lance did: step into a void and become an integral part.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Areas of Improvement from Within

                          Originally posted by 5_7_Clash View Post
                          I think this is true not just for PG but Roy, Hill, CJ (Watson and Miles), Stuckey, Luis (if he's still here), Cope, maybe even Solo. We've got lots of guys who have the opportunity to basically do what Lance did: step into a void and become an integral part.
                          I agree with this for the lesser players, but I think Roy is what he is, and I think PG just isn't a superstar. He's a very good two way player and a definite star in the league. I know a lot of people on here believe his offense will go to the next level, but I don't think he'll ever be elite (to be fair, how many elite players are there right now, maybe 3 or 4?).

                          I do think the change in roles could provide a big opportunity for Hill (I don't think he'll take. Not because I don't think he's good enough, but because I don't think he's good enough at the role the team is asking him to play). I think Scope, CJ, and even Ian could get a real chance to step up this year, and I would like to see Solo get some real burn too.
                          Danger Zone

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Areas of Improvement from Within

                            I want to see what we have in Rudez and Copeland and Solomon Hill. Ian can be traded and the team would be better instantly. Allen gets to play then.
                            {o,o}
                            |)__)
                            -"-"-

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Areas of Improvement from Within

                              Originally posted by owl View Post
                              I want to see what we have in Rudez and Copeland and Solomon Hill. Ian can be traded and the team would be better instantly. Allen gets to play then.
                              No way do we get better instantly if we move Ian. He was our best center for 30% off the season and was only making 4 million bucks.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X