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

Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

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

  • #46
    Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

    Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
    No Ray Allen cannot shoot better than C.J. Miles, look at the numbers:

    Ray Allen: .375% from 3, on 4.2 attempts per game

    C.J. Miles: .393% from 3, on 4.1 attempts per game

    So from deep, Allen was actually worse than Miles was this past season. C.J. Miles is also no slouch around the basket, and is a good one-two dribble drive players, which is also what Allen is when driving now, and similar to Ray Allen, Miles is no slouch on defense either. Just look at their overall numbers. One big difference as well.... One player was playing off LeBron James... The other wasn't.

    C.J. Miles: 9.9 ppg 1.0 apg 2.0 rpg .435% FG 19.3 MPG

    Ray Allen: 9.6 ppg 2.0 apg 2.8 rpg .444% FG 26.4 mpg


    Notice how Miles score more, and averaged just one assist and less than one rebound less than Allen in over 7 MPG less? Miles is younger, can play more, and is capable of doing just about everything Allen can do on offense. At worst, they are similar caliber of players, and Allen is certainly not significantly better, but just from a pure production stand-point, Miles is the better player IMO, and the better overall player.
    Mike Dunleavy and Troy Murphy put up numbers on a bad Pacer team too. That doesn't make them Ray Allen. The fact is, CJ Miles isn't as good as Mike Dunleavy either. People need to wake up and face the fact our back court is George Hill and CJ Miles. No offense to Hill who is not a bad player...but anyone who thinks CJ Miles, a career backup, is as good as Ray Allen pre-40 years old is drinking the juice.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      Mike Dunleavy and Troy Murphy put up numbers on a bad Pacer team too. That doesn't make them Ray Allen. The fact is, CJ Miles isn't as good as Mike Dunleavy either. People need to wake up and face the fact our back court is George Hill and CJ Miles. No offense to Hill who is not a bad player...but anyone who thinks CJ Miles, a career backup, is as good as Ray Allen pre-40 years old is drinking the juice.
      So Miles only makes threes because he is on a bad team? I don't understand how Allen is so obviously better. What can he do so much better than Miles? Because shooting isn't one of them.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
        People need to wake up and face the fact our back court is George Hill and CJ Miles.
        What makes you think GHill and CJ Miles will be our starting back court? Rodney Stuckey was the starting PG in Detroit for several years. We could just as easily have a starting back court of Stuckey and GHill.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

          Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
          So Miles only makes threes because he is on a bad team? I don't understand how Allen is so obviously better. What can he do so much better than Miles? Because shooting isn't one of them.
          I will repeat myself only once. Shoot while playing on a contender against stout defense.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
            I will repeat myself only once. Shoot while playing on a contender against stout defense.
            They played the same teams.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

              Originally posted by sav View Post
              What makes you think GHill and CJ Miles will be our starting back court? Rodney Stuckey was the starting PG in Detroit for several years. We could just as easily have a starting back court of Stuckey and GHill.
              Their salaries. The Pacers threw some cash at CJ Miles. I think they clearly are looking for a perimeter threat to add to the starting lineup...to help Roy Hibbert of course. I just disagree that he will come in and shoot 38-39% as a starter on a contender. He has never played more than 25 minutes a game and only played 19 minutes a game last year. He was only a full time starter in 2008. Since that time, he has come off the bench and averaged under 20mpg. He did start in 34 games last year as a starter and went down to an injury after 51 games. All I am saying is that his resume' is that of a journeyman backup. I know people want him to come in and be the savior but I don't think that's what we will see.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

                Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                If this is true, it seems to put more of the blame on Vogel and his ability to adjust. I hope this is an area where he can grow as a coach.
                Ding, ding, DING! Frank has issues but Roy needs to shoulder his woes on his own. He's mentally and physically soft with a side of casperisim. When he's good he's good but when he'd bad, well you know. He is what he is, at this point I just don't see him changing all that much

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

                  Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                  Their salaries. The Pacers threw some cash at CJ Miles.
                  I agree the Pacers paid Miles more, but 4.5 million per year is usually not a starter's salary. Barring any more moves, I think the 5th starting spot is pretty much up for grabs between, Miles, Stuckey and maybe even Solo.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

                    Originally posted by sav View Post
                    I agree the Pacers paid Miles more, but 4.5 million per year is usually not a starter's salary. Barring any more moves, I think the 5th starting spot is pretty much up for grabs between, Miles, Stuckey and maybe even Solo.
                    Agreed. We might find that Stuckey is the better starter with George Hill playing SG. Also, as you say, we could see Solo starting and we can only hope he has mastered the 3. He would be a huge relief to Paul George on the wing!

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      Agreed. We might find that Stuckey is the better starter with George Hill playing SG. Also, as you say, we could see Solo starting and we can only hope he has mastered the 3. He would be a huge relief to Paul George on the wing!
                      Solo did work with a shooting coach that many other NBA players have worked with, so there is that. Though a Stuckey/Hill/George/West/Hibbert line-up would be interesting for sure... Though I think I prefer Miles starting for his range.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        I will repeat myself only once. Shoot while playing on a contender against stout defense.
                        I just don't understand the reasoning, if anything, a spot up shooter should have an easier time playing on a contender because better talent helps create more shot opportunities. Miles doing it on a bad team is more impressive.

                        This isn't a guy who was dominating the ball and scoring because nobody else on the team could, he's just a role player who performed his role extremely well.
                        "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                        - ilive4sports

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

                          Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                          I just don't understand the reasoning, if anything, a spot up shooter should have an easier time playing on a contender because better talent helps create more shot opportunities. Miles doing it on a bad team is more impressive.

                          This isn't a guy who was dominating the ball and scoring because nobody else on the team could, he's just a role player who performed his role extremely well.
                          Not only would having more talent help a role player like you said, Allen was playing with LeBron James, there isn't a better talent anywhere in the world than him, he instantly makes his team mates better.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

                            Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                            I just don't understand the reasoning, if anything, a spot up shooter should have an easier time playing on a contender because better talent helps create more shot opportunities. Miles doing it on a bad team is more impressive.

                            This isn't a guy who was dominating the ball and scoring because nobody else on the team could, he's just a role player who performed his role extremely well.
                            This may sound silly, but I feel some teams play down to their competition throughout the season. For example, the Bucks. Do you honestly believe every team put 100% effort every time they played them?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

                              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                              They started out the season 33-7. Nobody was pointing out flaws in the structure of the roster then. Let's not revise history and pretend that the team badly needed a role playing floor spacer instead of the league leader in triple doubles and they would have been fine. A lot of guys quit, for whatever reason. Obviously Lance played a role in the downfall of team chemistry, but how he functioned as a player was not really a factor as much as the other players rolling their eyes and pouting over it.
                              Paul George and Lance Stephenson were playing out of their minds before the all star break, though. Lance especially started off very hot from 3. So part of the reason that we were playing so well in the beginning of the season was that we had Lance's ballhandling along with good floor spacing.

                              I'm not going to get into the chemistry aspect of it, but in the first half of the season we had three guys playing like all stars (PG, Lance, Hibbert). Post all star break we had 1 borderline all-star level player and nobody on the team was shooting as well.
                              Time for a new sig.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Lets talk about Roy Hibbert

                                Originally posted by pogi View Post
                                This may sound silly, but I feel some teams play down to their competition throughout the season. For example, the Bucks. Do you honestly believe every team put 100% effort every time they played them?
                                Yes, it's an 82 game season. Just think back a few years when Mike Dunleavy and Troy Murphy used to launch 3's for the lowly Pacers hitting close to 40%. If you recall, teams would clamp down in the 4th quarter and things would quickly fall apart. The fact is, teams were playing down to us 75% of the time on a regular basis, inflating the heck out of our offensive numbers.

                                No offense to the players. They simply cannot be up AND focused for so many games so they will take a night off against bad teams. But you can bet that Miami got some of the best efforts because otherwise teams could get embarrassed and guys have pride in their game.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X