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

Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

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

  • #46
    Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

    Originally posted by Dece View Post
    He is a much better rebounder than Hibbert
    Career wise? Sure. This year? No.

    Originally posted by Dece View Post
    shoots 10-15% better from the floor
    That's not true. Gasol is shooting 52.7% in his career. Hibbert is shooting 47.3%. That's a 5.4% difference. Is Gasol more efficient from the field? Yes, he is. But the difference is much closer than what you implied.

    I'm guessing that you're letting Hibbert's performance this year to cloud your judgement over his career numbers?

    Roy's worse shooting year was 46.1%. At the moment, he is shooting 37.5%. That's almost 9% lower than his career low. It's a statistical outlier so far. I expect it to change and normalize at mid 40s (44-45%).

    Originally posted by Dece View Post
    and plays solid defense.
    And your point is? Hibbert is a better rim protector than Gasol. Yes, Gasol plays solid defense. That's true. But Hibbert just plays great defense.


    Originally posted by Dece View Post
    It isn't close.
    Let's take a look at their career numbers:

    Roy Hibbert: 11.0 PPG, 6.5 RPG, 1.7 BPG, 1.6 APG, 0.4 SPG. Also, 1.7 Turnovers and 3.2 Personal Fouls. In 24.7 MPG.

    Marc Gasol: 13.2 PPG, 8 RPG, 1.5 BPG, 2.5 APG, 0.9 SPG. Also, 1.9 Turnovers and 3.3 Personal Fouls. In 33.7 MPG.

    Marc has the advantage in every statistical category except for blocks. But he also plays 9 minutes more than Hibs. Should we take a look at their per 36 numbers and compare how they do when they get equal minutes?

    Per 36 career numbers:

    Roy Hibbert: 16.1 PPG, 9.5 RPG, 2.5 BPG, 2.3 APG, 0.6 SPG. Also, 2.6 Turnovers and 4.3 Personal Fouls.

    Marc Gasol: 14.2 PPG, 8.6 RPG, 1.6 BPG, 2.7 APG, 0.9 SPG. Also, 2.0 Turnovers and 3.5 Personal Fouls.

    This time Hibbert has the upper hand in every statistical category except assists and steals. However, he is also proved more turnover prone and more foul prone in higher usage. But he's still scoring, rebounding and blocking in higher volumes according to those numbers.

    I'm sure that few people are going to cringe in the usage of per 36 stats for Hibs as he doesn't play big minutes often (and has been cited to have asthma issues that could prevent him from playing big minutes).

    But that really is the only way to compare the two players in equal footing. Hibbert had to fight for his minutes here. He played 14.4 MPG in his rookie season and 25.1 in his second season. Marc didn't have to fight for his minutes. He played 30.7 MPG in his rookie season and 35.8 in his second season.

    Do you ask why? Well, simply put the Grizzlies had to play Marc. He was the most important asset that they received for Pau Gasol and thus he had to get major playing time. And it worked out great for them as Marc seems as the better Gasol at the moment. On the other hand, we didn't have to play Roy and we didn't. Therefore, a per 36 comparison is probably the fairest.
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

      Originally posted by Dece View Post
      Harden is 10 times the ball handler and passer that PG is
      Paul George is averaging 2.0 APG in his career in 26.9 MPG. Harden is averaging 2.7 APG in his career in 27.7 MPG.

      Per 36, Paul George is averaging 2.7 APG and Harden is averaging 3.5 APG.

      Those numbers prove Harden as a better playmaker and passer than PG. But the difference between the two is not as big as you seem to think. It certainly isn't "10 times better".
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

        Originally posted by Dece View Post
        3.5 assists for 2.5 turnovers is certainly not the numbers you'd look for to define a good passer
        While 5.4 assists and 4.2 turnovers are the numbers that define a good passer?
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

          So Nuntius... you want to use THIS year's numbers for rebounding, but CAREER number's for offensive production? Could you be anymore disingenuous? I mean, that's fine, cherry pick all day, but don't expect me to not roll my eyes and ignore you afterword. Per 36 numbers are pointless, Roy has shown he is not able to be on the floor that much. He simply doesn't have the conditioning. That's a valuable point, because a team wants their best players on the floor as much as possible in must win situations. Game 7 Marc can give you 40 quality minutes. Roy can only give you 32. This is a legitimate knock on him.

          The season is a quarter over, Hibbert is shooting 38%. A quarter season is not a slump. A quarter season is, "this is the player we have now."

          Memphis has played the 8th most difficult schedule. The Pacers have played the 29th most difficult schedule. They are 14-5 beating playoff teams, we are 11-11 beating bottom feeders. That's reality.

          I got my years backwards on Zbo and Gay, Gay only played 54 games 2 years ago, either way, they've missed him 40+ games in 2 years and been good anyway. Point stands.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

            Even if Gasol has a relative low average rebounds per game,he compensates that by being 4 and 5 times better than Hibbert on offense this year.The stats may not show that completely but it only takes once or twice to watch them this year to see the difference.Roy i think is better at D and more dominant but i would gladly have Gasol over Roy.Don't foget though it's only a 22 game slump.He is coming out of it any time now...It's ironic saying it(coming out of the slump) but i would give everything to actually see it.His latest offensive performance against Cleveland was almost despicable.
            Last edited by Johanvil; 12-14-2012, 09:32 AM.
            Never forget

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

              Originally posted by Dece View Post
              So Nuntius... you want to use THIS year's numbers for rebounding, but CAREER number's for offensive production?
              Nope. If I wanted that I wouldn't use his career numbers (both per game and per 36) when I was doing the head to head comparison between the two.

              I'll read the rest of your post and reply later but I just had to make sure that we got this thing clear.
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                Originally posted by Dece View Post
                Per 36 numbers are pointless, Roy has shown he is not able to be on the floor that much. He simply doesn't have the conditioning.
                So, you're saying that Hibbert played 14.4 MPG in his rookie year due to his conditioning? JOB misusing him wasn't a part of it? Meanwhile, Marc was playing 30.7 MPG in Memphis. That's a bit more than double Hibbert's minutes. Was it Marc's condition that much better? No. He was simply being used more by his team. And that's exactly why a comparison on career numbers is never going to be accurate when there's such a large MPG difference. That's exactly why teams use the per 36 stats. Usage does matter.

                On top of that, the reason that Hibbert does not usually play big minutes is due to athlete-induced asthma. It's not a matter of fittnes or conditioning. And there are drugs that can temporarily control this kind of asthma (follow this link for example -> http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/exe...ents-and-drugs).

                So, your premise is wrong. Game 7 Hibbert can give us 40 minutes. He gave us 43 minutes in a november game against Sacramento earlier this season. There's no reason to believe that he wouldn't be able to do it in a very important game. In fact, he did gave us nearly 40 minutes in game 6 against the Heat last season.
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                  I guess I misunderstood you when you said, "Career wise? Sure. This year? No." About rebounding and then went on to talk career for the rest of your post.

                  James Harden is a primary ball handler for an offense that scores 12 more PPG than our offense. The idea of Paul being our primary ball handler is nightmare worthy.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                    I don't understand how anyone who's seen all of the guys play could think that A.) PG is nearly as good as Harden or B.) Hibbert is anywhere close to Gasol. Just my personal opinion, but I think we'd be close to the top of the East right now (even without Danny) if we had Harden and Gasol on our squad.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                      Regardless of it being a medical condition limiting his conditioning or laziness, which I never suggested, the fact is his conditioning limits his minutes. Also, I watched both of those games. In both games he was sucking air and his effectiveness was reduced due to him not being able to maintain good production at those minute levels. I mean, you're citing a game we lost where he played 40 minutes but only managed 8 rebounds, and a game against a bad team we barely won, he played 43 minutes, and only had 12-10. By the way ALL of those Miami games Gasol would have played 36-40, Hibbert game 5: 28 minutes, Hibbert game 4: 32 minutes, Hibbert game 3: 33 minutes, Hibbert game 2: 33 minutes, Hibbert game 1: 29 minutes. SO he played 1 game more than 36 minutes in the entire playoff series, and failed to get double digit rebounds. Yea. That's not helping your argument.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                        Originally posted by spreedom View Post
                        I don't understand how anyone who's seen all of the guys play could think that A.) PG is nearly as good as Harden or B.) Hibbert is anywhere close to Gasol. Just my personal opinion, but I think we'd be close to the top of the East right now (even without Danny) if we had Harden and Gasol on our squad.
                        Somebody is going to accuse you of "looking at the green grass" just wait.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                          Originally posted by Dece View Post
                          The season is a quarter over, Hibbert is shooting 38%. A quarter season is not a slump. A quarter season is, "this is the player we have now."
                          Danny Granger was shooting 38.2% prior to the ASG break. Was that "the player we have now"? The sample size was bigger as well.

                          But Danny was not "the player we have now". He got out of his slump and shot 45% after the ASG.

                          So, no. 22 games are still too small of a sample size to overrule the previous 4 seasons. It is true that Hibbert is not a very efficient shooter. But he's not a 38% shooter either. He's closer to 47% (which is also his career average). Personally, I expect him to bounce back and eventually get his percentages back at 43 - 45%.

                          Originally posted by Dece View Post
                          Memphis has played the 8th most difficult schedule. The Pacers have played the 29th most difficult schedule. They are 14-5 beating playoff teams, we are 11-11 beating bottom feeders. That's reality.
                          The fact that SoS does not take into account back-to-backs and home/away games is also a reality

                          Plus, I'll remind you once again that the Grizzlies are not missing their best player atm

                          Originally posted by Dece View Post
                          I got my years backwards on Zbo and Gay, Gay only played 54 games 2 years ago, either way, they've missed him 40+ games in 2 years and been good anyway. Point stands.
                          Your point was that they remained competitive, right?

                          Take a look at their 2010-11 season:

                          http://www.basketball-reference.com/...011_games.html

                          In the first 22 games, they were 8 - 14. With Gay, Randolph and Gasol healthy.

                          The first time they hit .500 was at game 48, in the 29th of January against the Wizards. After that 24 - 24 they never fell below .500 again. Gay was injured in the 15th of February against the Sixers. The Grizzlies were 31 - 26 at the time (they won that game).

                          The Grizzlies finished with a 46 - 36 record, going 15 - 10 after Gay's injury, with Sam Young playing starter minutes and contributing 9.3 PPG, 3.8 RPG and 1.4 APG.

                          What I'm trying to say is simple. Were they competitive? They surely were. But they were the same kind of competitive that we are now. They were for a long time a sub .500 team with Gay but when they lost him they were an above .500 team that managed to stay afloat and even improve a bit.
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                            Originally posted by Dece View Post
                            I guess I misunderstood you when you said, "Career wise? Sure. This year? No." About rebounding and then went on to talk career for the rest of your post.
                            I did say that but I included career rebounding when I mentioned it afterwards
                            Last edited by Nuntius; 12-14-2012, 12:27 PM.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                              Originally posted by Dece View Post
                              James Harden is a primary ball handler for an offense that scores 12 more PPG than our offense. The idea of Paul being our primary ball handler is nightmare worthy.
                              I don't necessarily disagree with that. But the point still stands that 5.4 APG and 4.2 Turnover per Game is not indicative of a great playmaker and passer.

                              Is Harden a better ball handler than Paul George? He certainly is. But that doesn't necessarily translate to 10 times better playmaking and passing ability.
                              Originally posted by IrishPacer
                              Empty vessels make the most noise.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal

                                Originally posted by Johanvil View Post
                                Don't foget though it's only a 22 game slump.He is coming out of it any time now....
                                Well, Granger was in a 33 game shooting slump last season
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X