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

Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    There is a difference between being reasonably critical of a Pacer player and simply being wrong. Hibbert is extremely valuable against most teams in the NBA...and I am not to be confused with a homer.
    sure... he has value... but no way in hell does he offer $15M worth of value. I guess somehow I have not made that point very clear by the fact he gets abused by the elite

    Comment


    • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

      That's actually only about half the facts needed to make the conclusion you're making. You need to see which of those made fgs in the lane were with Roy actually on the floor. Unless we're supposed to believe that Roy also played all 48 mins, or that he should defend the rim from the bench.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

        Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
        We'll see how worthless Roy is this summer (or next) when other teams can offer him a contract. I bet there will be some big offers and they won't all be from Pacer homers.
        NBA depth charts for all 32 teams.

        http://www.rotoworld.com/teams/depth-charts/nba.aspx

        Adding Roy to the following teams would not be upgrade over the current center in place (unless the center can slide to PF maybe)

        Atl - horford
        Nets - brook
        celtics - Olynyk (dont see the C's ponying up 15M for Hibbert)
        hornets - al jeff
        bulls - noah
        cavs - mozgov
        mavs - chandler
        nuggets - Nurkic (possible but not likely)
        pistons - drummond
        warriors - bogut
        rockets - howard
        clippers - jordan
        lakers - ?????
        grizzlies - gasol
        heat - whiteside
        t wolves - peko/dieng
        bucks - maybe ???
        pelicans - asik
        knicks - doubtful but maybe
        thunder - kanter
        magic - vucevic
        76ers - no way they want to suck
        suns - len
        blazers - lopez (doubt they want roy now at 15 per)
        spurs - no way Popavich pays hibbs 15 per
        kings - DC
        raps - jonas
        jazz - gobert
        wiz - gortat



        There you have it. I got 6 potential teams for Hibbert to land. of which lakers, nuggets, knicks, 76ers are all rebuilding and have no purpose for roy. roy will never be option 1A even though he is paid like it

        that leaves blazers which are prioritizing Aldridge, doubt they allocate space for Roy... they only upped the ante to **** us over.

        Leaves one realistic fit. the Bucks. Thats it. No one will overpay for Roy, and that includes Bird. Cap escalation or not... not many teams are going to want Roy at 20% of the cap.

        Book it.


        * edit... Lake show has Jordan Hill (and Randle coming back PF/C). Not a likely destination.
        Last edited by PacersPride; 03-05-2015, 12:37 PM.

        Comment


        • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          That's actually only about half the facts needed to make the conclusion you're making. You need to see which of those made fgs in the lane were with Roy actually on the floor. Unless we're supposed to believe that Roy also played all 48 mins, or that he should defend the rim from the bench.
          I would presume if Wade is on the floor or James.. our $15M dollar center should be as well... dont ya think??? Honestly.... unless foul trouble im gonna assume Roy was not riding the pine...
          Last edited by PacersPride; 03-05-2015, 12:38 PM.

          Comment


          • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

            Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
            I would presume if Wade is on the floor or James.. our $15M dollar center should be as well... dont ya think??? Honestly.... unless foul trouble im gonna assume Roy was not riding the pine...
            Wade or James was almost always on the floor for Miami. I don't know the exact splits or care to look it up, but Spoelstra liked to have at least one of them on the court at any given time. Also, ya know, rotations--Roy can't play 40+ minutes per game, very few players can, certainly none as large as he.

            Comment


            • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

              Originally posted by cdash View Post
              Wade or James was almost always on the floor for Miami. I don't know the exact splits or care to look it up, but Spoelstra liked to have at least one of them on the court at any given time. Also, ya know, rotations--Roy can't play 40+ minutes per game, very few players can, certainly none as large as he.
              Either way... Wade was teardroppinjg over Roy like it was his god given birthright. I would bet my left n*tt on it. Remember it like it was yesterday.

              Wade was pumping em up over Roy right at the top of the lane. Hibbert was too slow to react and get up on wade at the top of the lane cause he was fearful of wade blow by's. so wade just owned him with pullups right at the sweet spot below the FT line. Roy had no chance.

              Some blame goes to Lance... but thats Roys job to protect the paint... not just stand under the rim and hope wade came to him... wade knew where to attack... if roy stepped up wade would blow by.

              thats a fact and anyone with it on dvr can back that up all day long. like i said... theres ways to beat roys rim protection and the elite know exactly how to do it. it will always be exposed in a 7 game series.. and when it does... whats roy got to fall back on... except the bench.

              huge waste of 20% cap and this window for championship contention. when its gone buh bye. **** it... roy aint gettin paid next go round and if he does... it wont be by Bird.


              ive made bold statements before.. and proven to be right. i was one of the few.. in fact the only i ever read "cautiously" suggest trading Lance last year at the all star break. i say cautiously because i adhere to the philosophy dont **** up a good thing.

              but i wanted return on Lance and in the grand scheme of things as i said then and will say now.. had this Franchise lifted one BANNER by now.. the best long term move was deal Lance and get a lottery pick back for him... or Affalo woulda been nice from orlando i think it was.

              either way.. i got **** on by several for even suggesting it. just like i got **** for stating Bird will win GM and lead this team to 50 wins for 5 seasons.

              now i get **** on for stating roy is overrated and overpaid. such is life i suppose on PD.

              Comment


              • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                I would presume if Wade is on the floor or James.. our $15M dollar center should be as well... dont ya think??? Honestly.... unless foul trouble im gonna assume Roy was not riding the pine...
                LeBron, yes. Vogel was subbing in Roy whenever LeBron was in the game. Wade, no.

                If you're going to talk about how Roy was getting abused by Wade, be sure that Roy was in the game. I don't think it's too much to ask.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

                  Man, you keep saying everyone is ******** on you. You're the one who keeps swearing and being unbelievably abrasive. You're the one ******** on everyone else.

                  It's like walking into a room where someone is yelling about how everyone is screaming at them meanwhile you're the loudest person in the room.

                  How do I even begin to respond to a post when half of it is edited out or just nonsensical. Meanwhile it follows up a post where you seem to suggest that the Warriors would choose Andrew Bogut over Roy Hibbert.
                  Last edited by Trader Joe; 03-05-2015, 12:58 PM.


                  Comment


                  • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

                    Also on this point, how often do you see LeBron or Wade resort to tear drops? The fact that they have to resort to a move mostly used by small guards to get shots in the lane, should be some evidence of how good Roy's rim protection is. Tear drops are used so shots aren't blocked. If Roy wasn't any good at protecting the rim, they wouldn't need to use a shot designed to go over shot blockers.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      LeBron, yes. Vogel was subbing in Roy whenever LeBron was in the game. Wade, no.

                      If you're going to talk about how Roy was getting abused by Wade, be sure that Roy was in the game. I don't think it's too much to ask.
                      no its not.. so like i said.. i would bet my left n*tt on it.. im that damn sure. Roy averaged 34 minutes that series. Game 3 was a blowout so his numbers are skewed. he played about 37 minutes a game approx.

                      http://espn.go.com/nba/player/gamelo...14/roy-hibbert


                      wade averaged 35
                      http://espn.go.com/nba/player/gamelo...14/dwyane-wade

                      bron averaged 35
                      http://espn.go.com/nba/player/gamelo...4/lebron-james

                      Comment


                      • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

                        Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                        no its not.. so like i said.. i would bet my left n*tt on it.. im that damn sure. Roy averaged 34 minutes that series. Game 3 was a blowout so his numbers are skewed. he played about 37 minutes a game approx.
                        If you're so sure, why not prove it?
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

                          read this thread tell me who got **** on. sure as **** wasnt me till the end after all the BS lame as* jokes..

                          http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...the-Year-Award


                          and i just did prove it... roy played 37, james / wade 35..

                          im done here. pointless as all get out when i present fact after fact after fact after fact and the roy worship on here is incredulously absurd in spite of the FRANCHISE.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

                            Roy worship? On this board? hahahaha


                            Comment


                            • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

                              Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                              and i just did prove it... roy played 37, james / wade 35..

                              im done here. pointless as all get out when i present fact after fact after fact after fact and the roy worship on here is incredulously absurd in spite of the FRANCHISE.
                              And yet here you are balking at providing relevant facts.

                              Giving me how much time they each played, doesn't tell me if Wade's shots in the lane came when Roy was on the floor.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Myth Buster: Is Roy Hibbert A Bad Rebounder?

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                Either way... Wade was teardroppinjg over Roy like it was his god given birthright. I would bet my left n*tt on it. Remember it like it was yesterday.

                                Wade was pumping em up over Roy right at the top of the lane. Hibbert was too slow to react and get up on wade at the top of the lane cause he was fearful of wade blow by's. so wade just owned him with pullups right at the sweet spot below the FT line. Roy had no chance.

                                Some blame goes to Lance... but thats Roys job to protect the paint... not just stand under the rim and hope wade came to him... wade knew where to attack... if roy stepped up wade would blow by.


                                thats a fact and anyone with it on dvr can back that up all day long. like i said... theres ways to beat roys rim protection and the elite know exactly how to do it. it will always be exposed in a 7 game series.. and when it does... whats roy got to fall back on... except the bench.
                                I'm not sure that this has been brought up before......but isn't our defense designed to protect the paint, protect the perimeter but leave the middle open ( which statistically is supposed to be the lowest percentage shot to take )?

                                In Vogel's defense, the Center....whether it be Hibbert or Mahinmi....isn't supposed to leave the paint. His job is to control the paint and create a wall to prevent the scorer from getting to and scoring in the paint ( a higher percentage shot ). Vogel INTENTIONALLY leaves the "Middle" open ( which only allows for lower percentage shot )....that's why so many Teams take so many shots in that area.

                                You are right, Hibbert can ( if he chooses to ) try to contest a shot below the FT Line....you're also right that he is too slow to recover if the Player decides to drive by him.

                                But it's not Hibbert's job to defend a tear drop shot by Wade or anyone else at or near the FT line....his job is to do what he has been told to do by Vogel and stay where he is, protect the paint and try to prevent the opposing Team from taking a higher percentage shot that is closer to the basket.
                                Last edited by CableKC; 03-05-2015, 02:24 PM.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X