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?

    I'm not confused, at all. The argument you responded to, was that Roy sacrifices his individual rebounding numbers, by boxing out his man and allowing the guards to swoop in for rebounds, for the greater good of the team. You asked for a quote from the coaches, where they said that's what the rebounding scheme was.

    And that's why you need to understand the arguments you're trying to rebut, instead of twisting other people's opinions, and dismissing their factual evidence, simply because it contradicts your opinion.
    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
      im doggin on roy cause he makes way too much money for his production.
      Not all production can be measured by RPG.

      Comment


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

        I don't understand what salary has to do with Rebounding.

        Does anybody really think Roy is paid 15 million for his rebounding?!?

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by kent beckley View Post
          I don't understand what salary has to do with Rebounding.

          Does anybody really think Roy is paid 15 million for his rebounding?!?
          I think that it is somewhat valid to expect X, Y and Z from a Player that is making more than everyone else. The problem is defining what X, Y and Z should be.

          For PacersPride, he expects that a Center paid that much should rebound at a high rate.

          But, like all things, opinions differ on what one expects Hibbert to contribute to the Team.

          Because I think that he is a slightly below average rebounder ( that is more than capable of being a much better rebounder given the situation and role that he plays ) and that he was paid for his defense and what he brings to the table on that end. I do not expect Hibbert ( a Player that is paid $15 mil a year ) to be an elite rebounder but an elite defensive deterrent inside the paint through his mere presence inside the paint and his elite level shotblocking. I want him to be a much better rebounder and think that he can be one ( since he did a much better job 2-3 seasons ago ).....but I understand that he has a specific role on this Team and as long as he fulfills that role on the defensive end.

          That doesn't mean that I am okay with him being paid $15 mil especially for him being inconsistent from season to season.....but at the time of the signing.....quality Starting Centers were and will always continue to be overpaid. I am fine with what he does and doesn't do.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


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

            Not all production is measured by PPG, RPG and FG%, but Roy had better improve A LOT on his 10.8ppg on 43% shooting (wow that is an embarrassment for a C) and 6.6 boards...and decreasing ability to protect the rim as players took him outside. Let's just say his work is cut out this coming year.

            Comment


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

              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
              Not all production is measured by PPG, RPG and FG%, but Roy had better improve A LOT on his 10.8ppg on 43% shooting (wow that is an embarrassment for a C) and 6.6 boards...and decreasing ability to protect the rim as players took him outside. Let's just say his work is cut out this coming year.
              Ugh. This again. The legacy of that Atlanta series is going to linger on this board like a stale fart for a long, long time.

              Comment


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

                My two cents and I'm out: If you are asking Roy Hibbert to actually corral the rebounds, then he is a poor rebounder. If you are asking Roy to create rebounding opportunities for his teammates by blocking out and being in the correct position to eliminate a potential defensive rebounder from the other team, then he is very, very good. So basically, I co-sign Since86's posts.

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                  nuntius...

                  i dont follow your logic that the reason hibbert sucked at rebouding this season is due to him being "instructed" to block out. im sorry friend, but that makes absolutely no bleeping sense whatsoever.


                  my friend, i have dominated rebounds in college against guys with a significant height and size advantage against me. so i do believe i know just a tad bit more when it comes to rebounding than most.


                  please inform me if i am mistaken... but isnt BLOCKING OUT a part of the rebounding process every bleeeping time.???? so roy actually had to be instructed per your words... "just BLOCK OUT Roy.. dont rebound the ball"??????

                  im sorry but very confused. defensively speaking only... anytime a shot goes up... you find somebody to put your *** on and you lay the bleeping wood on em... ie block out. you move thier *** outta the lane.. esp if the dude is known for reboudning. you find him specifically, whereas vs average rebouders you just take up their rebouding space.

                  in elementary terms however... in no capacity EVER!!!!!!!!! is blocking out not a part of the equation on defensive rebounding. the ferocity of blocking out player X is determined by his said players skillset. ie...

                  if your playing Joahkim Noah that night.. you find him every time the shot goes up and if he is even near you then yes you take yourself outta the rebound by cancelling him out. i believe thats what you mean precisely.. but even that is absurd cause not every night do you play guys like Joahkim Noah... or dude like Jeff Foster was who you made a point that he was not getting the rebound,,, even if it meant it took you out of the rebound zone... no bleeping matter what you dont let a Noah or a Fiesty Foster get that damn ball.

                  however, against a team like the Heat.. no thats not a bleeping excuse. again.. the art of defensive rebouding is find whoever is in your zone as soon as the shot goes up.. and BLOCK EM out. thats elementary 101 fundamentals.


                  Roys not being asked to do anything special unless its against the elite rebounders such as Noah. other than that.. you knock the rebounding defender on their *** or outta the way.. but thats it.. then you go pursue the damn basketball with a vengence. you dont just sit back after blocking out and continue to take yourself out of the play for a rebound.

                  now maybe the coaches did instruct roy to "only block out" but i highly doubt that comment was ever made. if it was Vogel should be fired. moreover, with big Roy whose basketball IQ is average.. then that would be a huge mistake to instruct him that way. to put it bluntly.. Vogel would be advocating Roy to be LAZY.

                  as sooon as that shot hits rim.. and your man is blocked out.. you go get the bleeping basketball. Pacers are not asking roy to do any less on that i would absolutely gaurantee you on that.


                  as soon as ball hits rim.. you dont continue blocking out you attack.. reading the angle the ball is likely to bounce is an instinct some have and others do not. cant really fault roy on that.. its simply where basketball iq comes into play.

                  and quite honestly roy lacks in that department when it comes to positioning and leverage esp in regards to defensive rebounding.
                  My friend, you're not following my logic because you don't seem to understand what I'm trying to say.

                  I never, EVER said the bolded part of your quote. I never said that the coaches told Roy to not rebound. The coaches simply instructed him to prioritize blocking out the opponent's best offensive rebounder and that's exactly what he did.

                  And no, blocking out isn't a part of the rebounding process every bleeping time. Wings do not rebound by blocking out. Wings rebound by attacking the ball from the perimeter or the weakside. Lance very rarely attempted to block out. He was instructed to attack the ball with reckless abandon and that's exactly what he did.

                  Players do what they are instructed to do. Roy was instructed to take out the opposition's best rebounder and clear out space for our wings. If a rebound came in his general vicinity then he could grab it but if it didn't then he was supposed to allow our wings to take the rebound and run offensively. Our wings were instructed to not leak out on the break and grab the defensive rebound and then run offensively. Lance was great at grabbing a rebound and going coast to coast, for example. We generated several easy scoring opportunities that way.

                  Obviously, I expect this scheme to change this season. CJ Miles and Stuckey are not as dynamic as Paul and Lance so our bigs will be tasked to rebound more than their did last season.

                  Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                  how bout some of you "eagle eyes" riddle me this. if roys job was to exclusively block out.. then why the bleep did Marcin Gortat light his *** up in the playoffs. seems to me there is a contradiction to the BS strategy hype excuse for Roys lack of rebouding #s that series. Gortat dominated the glass.. if roys only job was to block him out he failed that round.


                  gortat averaged 10 boards a game that series. roy a staggerring 5.5.


                  so not only do roy not rebound.. he sucked *** at blocking out as well.
                  Because Roy was responsible for guarding Nenê in that series. Do you remember Nenê? He is the player who dominated your boy and last year's DPOY, Joakim Noah. He averaged 17.8 PPG on 54.8% shooting against Noah in the first round.

                  That's why Vogel decided to put Roy on Nenê for that series. He knew that Nenê was a much bigger offensive thread than Gortat and that we would able to advance if Roy could stop Nenê. And it worked. Roy was able to stop Nenê. Nenê averaged 11 PPG on 39.5% shooting against us and we won the series.
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                    No wonder your confused... the thread title is not are the pacers a good rebounding team. It asks if Hibbert is a bad rebounder. In which my response was he is below average to average at best.
                    And the person who started the thread presented an article that answered the initial question. The article's response was that "yes, it's a myth that Roy Hibbert is a bad rebounder". That was the conclusion of the article. Roy certainly posts average rebounding numbers but his presence helps his team's rebounding.

                    And yes, rebounding is not about the individual player. It's a team scheme.

                    Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                    Unless you consider 6.6 rebounds a game good or great.. im not sure what point your trying to make.
                    Is 6.6 rebounds what Roy gives you on average? Not really. This last season was a clear anomaly for Roy's rebounding.

                    Roy averaged 8.2 RPG between the 10-11 and the 12-13 seasons and that's a lot closer to his real rebounding numbers than last season was.
                    Originally posted by IrishPacer
                    Empty vessels make the most noise.

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by cdash View Post
                      My two cents and I'm out: If you are asking Roy Hibbert to actually corral the rebounds, then he is a poor rebounder. If you are asking Roy to create rebounding opportunities for his teammates by blocking out and being in the correct position to eliminate a potential defensive rebounder from the other team, then he is very, very good. So basically, I co-sign Since86's posts.
                      15M/yr for someone who blocks out well? Shoots 43% from the floor as a big man?

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        15M/yr for someone who blocks out well? Shoots 43% from the floor as a big man?
                        I am not high on Roy at all, but lets tell the whole story. His primary job is to protect the rim, not rebound or shoot well from the field.

                        Comment


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

                          $15 Million for the Elite rim protector in the league. Roy's rebounding numers were below the norm for him. He averaged close to or over 8 per game the three previous years.

                          He has his limitations, but is good for our defensive system and his presence is one of the reasons we have been one of the top rebounding and defensive teams in the league recently
                          Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 08-27-2014, 07:13 PM.

                          Comment


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

                            Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
                            I am not high on Roy at all, but lets tell the whole story. His primary job is to protect the rim, not rebound or shoot well from the field.
                            Well, to be fair and more accurate.....his primary job is to protect the rim....but that doesn't mean that he shouldn't be able to pull down rebounds and shoot well from the field.

                            If he doesn't pull down rebounds or shoot great from the field.....I will be disappointed while seriously questioning why a 7'2" Center can't pull down more rebounds . But that's okay....I expect him to protect the rim while hope that he can pull down rebounds and shoot well from the field. If he doesn't protect the rim.....then I will really start complaining ( hence why I am ok with him not venturing too far from the paint and minimizing the time that he is pulled to the perimeter ).
                            Last edited by CableKC; 08-27-2014, 08:29 PM.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


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

                              This is fun. I'll also dump my opinion and then go back to watching the madness.

                              To me, Roy isn't a good rebounder at all for his size. He is, however, good at helping the team rebound. Which is all that matters, he's helping the team rebound the ball more often. Basically they are saying if Roy boxes out the opposing center or another good rebounder, then we like our chances for our wings to get boards over whoever else is going after them.

                              $15 mil for 6.6 boards is bad if he got paid because of his rebounding, but I don't think we need to go any more into how asinine that argument was.

                              Roy isn't a great rebounder on his own, but he plays a large role in helping the Pacers be a great rebounding team.

                              Comment


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

                                Roy's rim protection is not only elite, it's best in the league level. Somebody went and quantified it. Link here:

                                http://nyloncalculus.com/2014/07/22/...im-protection/

                                I'm not going to post the whole thing because it's full of charts. But here's the key takeaway.

                                So, leaving Brook Lopez (he of the tiny 17 game sample size) aside, Hibbert was the best rim defender by an enormous margin, with a bigger gap between himself and Bogut than there was between Bogut and #35 on the list (Paul Millsap).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X