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

Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

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

  • #31
    Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

    Originally posted by count55 View Post
    Rush, to me, is exaggerating his actions.
    I feel like this same thing is happening to Jack. The few times that he's been asked to guard a guy straight up and not play within the system, I feel like he's done a pretty good job.

    (Say what you want about his defense on Kobe in the Lakers game, but he didn't let him drive and forced him into a contested free throw line jumper. It's not his fault that Kobe's 4 inches taller and more athletic than he is.)

    When he plays within the system, however, he overshades toward the middle to keep his guy out of the lane and doesn't keep his man in front of him as well as he's capable of. I think this is why he looked so bad against Deron Williams last night. He would bite hard on the fake to the inside and then Williams would cross him over and get about 5 feet of seperation.

    I got the Utah feed and before the game they interviewed one of their assistant coaches about how to guard Granger. His main point was that you have to keep him from driving to the right and you do that by playing defense with your right foot between his feet. This way you shade him to the right by about half a body. It seems like our players are shading guys a full body to force them out of the lane. This leads to penetration which leads to ball movement which leads to a wide open shot.
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post

      At some point it stops being bad luck, flukes and unfair and starts being who you are.
      You didn't have to type that long post. This is all you need to say.
      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

      ------

      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

        We gave up 50 points in the second half... Relatively speaking that might be good defense but realistically speaking, I don't see giving up 50 points in a half as indicative of good defense.

        And let's be honest, how many of those misses were due to defense anyway? Several of their shots just didn't drop but were wide open looks. It was more the law of averages coming around if anything.

        -Bball
        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

        ------

        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

        -John Wooden

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

          Originally posted by Bball View Post
          And let's be honest, how many of those misses were due to defense anyway? Several of their shots just didn't drop but were wide open looks. It was more the law of averages coming around if anything.
          There is no law of averages. The probability of any shot is independent of other. Making several in a row doesn't "come around" to making future shots less likely.
          And I won't be here to see the day
          It all dries up and blows away
          I'd hang around just to see
          But they never had much use for me
          In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

            IIRC there was a really long stretch where Utah was stuck at 96 points. Like 9 minutes game time or something. I thought that was a nice defensive stretch. We were down 20 and got within 4 points or something

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

              I am pretty sure that we aren't the only team in the entire league ( nor in the history of the NBA ) that has a pretty unathletic team with little to no Interior defensive post presense.

              So, I have a simple question for all of you......given the type of players that we have....not real athletic, defenders at the wing and even slower but smart players in the PF/C positions with ( at most ) average to slightly above average defensive skills....and the pace at which our offense runs ( which involves many 3pt jumpshots and frequent FGA running up and down the court ), what type of defense do you think would be suited for our team?

              Like most of the posts in this thread.....I'm not trying to be a smart*ss here........but I'm trying to figure what would work given the situation ( one that won't likely change in the next 2 seasons ) that we are in now....since it appears that some of us have come to the conclusion that the present defensive scheme is not working.

              Don't tell me that you want to implement the same defensive system that the Cavs or Celtics use simply cuz it works....when it's obvious that we don't have the necessary players to fit such a defense, I'm simply trying to figure out what works with the existing set of player that we have that won't likely be moved ( given their contracts ). There must be a defense that can be implemented that makes sense given the players that we have.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

                Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                There is no law of averages. The probability of any shot is independent of other. Making several in a row doesn't "come around" to making future shots less likely.
                No way I buy that. A career 30% shooter that hits 7 in a row will eventually fall right back in line with his 30% shooting (or whatever number you want to choose as the baseline). To do that, he has to have a streak of misses or a streak where he shoots considerably under his average.. or even back at his average. It all evens out...
                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                ------

                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

                  Originally posted by Bball View Post
                  No way I buy that. A career 30% shooter that hits 7 in a row will eventually fall right back in line with his 30% shooting (or whatever number you want to choose as the baseline). To do that, he has to have a streak of misses or a streak where he shoots considerably under his average.. or even back at his average. It all evens out...


                  OK.
                  And I won't be here to see the day
                  It all dries up and blows away
                  I'd hang around just to see
                  But they never had much use for me
                  In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

                    Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                    OK.
                    Darn it... I wanted you to convince me where I was wrong.

                    -Bball
                    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                    ------

                    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                    -John Wooden

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

                      Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                      I feel like this same thing is happening to Jack. The few times that he's been asked to guard a guy straight up and not play within the system, I feel like he's done a pretty good job.

                      (Say what you want about his defense on Kobe in the Lakers game, but he didn't let him drive and forced him into a contested free throw line jumper. It's not his fault that Kobe's 4 inches taller and more athletic than he is.)

                      When he plays within the system, however, he overshades toward the middle to keep his guy out of the lane and doesn't keep his man in front of him as well as he's capable of. I think this is why he looked so bad against Deron Williams last night. He would bite hard on the fake to the inside and then Williams would cross him over and get about 5 feet of seperation.

                      I got the Utah feed and before the game they interviewed one of their assistant coaches about how to guard Granger. His main point was that you have to keep him from driving to the right and you do that by playing defense with your right foot between his feet. This way you shade him to the right by about half a body. It seems like our players are shading guys a full body to force them out of the lane. This leads to penetration which leads to ball movement which leads to a wide open shot.
                      This is an excellent point. We shade too much. By shading all the way in one direction we are expecting help and by asking for this help on a consistent basis we're leaving ourselves open in other areas, like you said. For example, if Jack shades his man to the middle expecting help from a big, all the ball handler has to do is drive the lane and hit the open man while the big is rotating. Any team with decent passing can break us down like butter.

                      I agree with many of you who said we should just do man on man defense. We don't have the best on-ball defenders in the league but it's probably better than leaving ourselves open to anything from the word go.
                      2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        I'm nominating this for post of the year - I agree with you 100%. Great post.
                        Um.....

                        While I agree with you that his post was outstanding you do realize that he said this?

                        However, this issue has reached the point in the last couple of weeks where I consider Obie to be hurting the team.

                        So from you 100% agreement with his post I am now taking it that you feel that JOB is now hurting the team?


                        Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

                          BTW, there have been some outstanding reply's to this and I want to thank those of you that so far have given answers. I will wait till later to see what others have to say before I ask some more questions and see if we have any conclusions.


                          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

                            Ok, the Pacers allowed Utah 39% FG shooting in the 2nd half, but for 6 minutes when the Jazz went scoreless was that b/c of the Pacers playing "D" or the Jazz just hit a cold spell in the game? In the last 5 games played the Pacers have given up 606 points which averages out to 121 points a game by the opposition. How can TPTB, including O'Brien, not see this style of play isn't working?

                            For those who are slamming Harter for the lack of "D", it was brought to light last week in another thread that Harter isn't running the "D" this year. Lester Conner and another coach is. Maybe Harter should go back to being the defensive coach. My guess is that the Pacers are giving up more points the 1st 38 games this year compared to the 1st 38 games last year when he was the defensive coach. We are giving up 114.5 points per game in the 1st 38 games this year. What was the average per game given up last year in the 1st 38 games, anyone know?

                            Since the Pacers were 5-5, the Pacers are giving up an average is 120 per game. In the 1st 10 game the Pacers only gave up an average of 99.8 points. In the last 28 games, the Pacers are giving up 20 points more per game to the opposition. It's pretty obvious that O'Brien's system is failing. Something has to be changed and quickly or losing will start wearing on the players destroying the team chemistry. I see Foster constantly complaining about foul calls, and in the last few games I'm seeing Granger getting chippy with opposing players. TPTB can not allow this to happen. Bird needs to step in and do whatever is necessary to right the ship before it becomes too late. The season is almost half over, and Bird has had plenty of time to observe what's going on in order to make a change/changes. It's all Bird's watch now, so it's time to DO SOMETHING besides hope things will work themselves out on their own.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

                              Originally posted by Peck View Post
                              Um.....

                              While I agree with you that his post was outstanding you do realize that he said this?

                              However, this issue has reached the point in the last couple of weeks where I consider Obie to be hurting the team.

                              So from you 100% agreement with his post I am now taking it that you feel that JOB is now hurting the team?
                              Well, I didn't want to nitpick - I guess I don't agree 100% - but it was still an excellent post. No I don't feel OB is now hurting the team. I think he's doing an excellent job keeping them together. We'll lose 3 out of the next 4 and then if the team is still "together" I think they will begin to win some games - at a greater clip then they have been. If you look at the rest of their schedule - after next Tuesday - it really isn't too tough the rest of the way. Besides 2 games at Orlando, and at Boston - the pacers don't play any elite teams on the road - it is rather shocking to look at their schedule - just shows how tough it has been and it is through next Tuesday.
                              Last edited by Unclebuck; 01-13-2009, 03:40 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Ok, I've been banging my head against the tv

                                I think everyone should read UB's post #12. It IS the answer to the Pacers' defensive woes. Now, I posted this in the Pacers/Jazz post-game thread and will repeat myself here for those who haven't read it:

                                I think JOB should use the game film as a traing video to show how teams should defend the PnR. I haven't seen a team defend it as well as the Jazz do. To be effective defensively against the PnR, all 5 players MUST trust each other and, as UB said, move as if everyone were tethered to each other. For years, I've complained that guys like Foster, for example - and there are others among our bigs who also do it - will shag off the ball handers on high screens or PnR plays immediately after rotating defensively to the ball handler. What they really should do is stand firm long enough to disrupt the passing lanes or force the ball handler to put the ball on the floor. Too often, the ball hander sees that opening as the rotating defender shags off and takes advantage of it.

                                As to those who continue to rag on Jared Jack for his defense, IMO he does well for the most part, but he tends to give up too much space. I know that in backing off his man just alittle (2-3 ft), he's trying to stop dribble penetration, but I'd rather see him step into the ball handler and force him to dribble around me than to give up too much ground and allow him to take a 3-pt shot. Another problem is both Jack and Ford will reach for the ball right in front of the ball handler. Once they do, a good PG will know he has the advantage because he has spacing between himself and his defender. But if our PGs would close that spacing just alittle, they'd most likely negate alot of what the opposing PGs are doing to us.
                                Last edited by NuffSaid; 01-13-2009, 03:52 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X