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

Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

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

  • Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

    Before you think I am bashing O'Neal be aware that all below is statistical fact. This was not ment to be a bash fest, but to enlighten those that believe he should stay an Indiana Pacer.

    I for one think we held on to him two years to long.



    fficeffice" />>>
    The important stats other than Points per game, when you get the most touches you better score the most points. This year Jermaine shot the ball 1,141 times, 3rd highest in his career. The year he averaged 24 points a game (2004-2005) he only played in 44 games.

    >>
    Games played this season……………………69……fifth on the team
    Most ever in a season………………………..81 in the 2000-2001 season
    >>
    Minutes played per game…………………35.6……..Tied for first (w/ Dunleavy)
    Most ever in a season………………….…37.6 in the 2001-2002 season
    >>
    >>
    FG percentage…………………………….43 % ….Eleventh on the Pacers this year
    Best FG % as a Pacer…………………….48%…….in the 2002-2003 season
    >>
    More turnovers per game then blocked shots……..2.94 to 2.64
    Least Turnrover season was in 2000-2001………..1.99
    Best blocked shot avg . in a season, 2000-01……..2.8

    >>
    Only shot 447 Free throws this year at 76%
    This past season was his best career FT %
    O’Neal shot 510 Free throws in 2002-03 season while playing 37 minutes per game.

    >>
    >>
    Heres the point to all the stats.

    O’neals game is what it is. No matter who the coach was, he was going to cater to O’Neal for obvious reasons. Jermaine is not a plyer that is going to lead you to an NBA championship by himself. He simply does not make anyone else better on his teams. His best years were with Ron Artest and Reggie Miller…Those two made Jermaine a better player, now thatr he has to lead its very obvious that he can not carry the franchise as a franchise player should. Look up Kobe Bryant, Tim Duncan, Steve Nash, Kevin Garnett, Dwayne Wade, Shaq, Chauncey Billups…Those are actual Franchise players that step it up a level when their team needs it. Jermaine O’Neal has had two season to do that…He can’t, the wins and loses don't lie…plain and simple.
    >>
    So for all you "Jermaine is god" people…I hope that you enjoy rooting for him on his new team. I have grown tired of all of your excuses as to why he isn’t a better player. The one thing all of you do is complain about Murphy and Dunleavy and how bad they are, yet if O’Neal was the franchise player you think he is…they would be better players just because of him. The Pacers however do realize that they need to trade him now as his value is now diminishing. and the offers are going to be marginal just because of his numbers, especially the ones above. He can also opt out after next season.

    He's going to become Pacer History soon.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>

  • #2
    Re: Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

    Jermaine plays the way his coach asks him to play he is the consummate pro. Throwing him out because it took tptb this long to figure out Rick was not the right coach is not the thing to do

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

      It seems to me that JO announced after the 2005 season that he was going to work on his fade-away jump shot for the upcoming season. This was the same off-season that Foster announced that he was working on his short-range jumper. Seems to me, JO got his way with RC's blessing and Foster never received the opportunity. You may be laughing but Foster had actually honed a pretty decent 10' jump shot but after JO's proclamation, Foster ditched it. JO proved to be woefully inadequate at his fade-away jumper from 10-15'. He couldn't have hit much more than 25-30%. It took all his dinks and dunks to get his shooting pct. up to about 8-10% lower than a good post man.

      JO has never been a franchise player in the true sense of the meaning. He may have been our franchise player because of being the best player but he falls well short of the truly elite.

      I don't think we will ever climb the mountain again with him as our leader. We should trade him while his value is still reasonably high.
      .

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

        Originally posted by DaSMASH View Post
        Jermaine is not a player that is going to lead you to an NBA championship by himself....Look up Kobe Bryant, Tim Duncan, Steve Nash, Kevin Garnett, Dwayne Wade, Shaq, Chauncey Billups…Those are actual Franchise players that step it up a level when their team needs it.
        Which of those players can lead you to a championship by themselves?

        Every single one of those players won championships with other all Stars--Kobe/Shaq, Shaq/Wade, Duncan/Robinson/Parker/Manu, Billups/Wallace/Wallace/Hamilton.

        Garnett missed the playoffs and hasn't sniffed a championship.

        Nash hasn't won either and if they do this year it will be with two other all stars on his team.

        I get that you think JO is overrated and will be traded.
        "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

        "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

          Originally posted by Arcadian View Post
          Which of those players can lead you to a championship by themselves?

          Every single one of those players won championships with other all Stars--Kobe/Shaq, Shaq/Wade, Duncan/Robinson/Parker/Manu, Billups/Wallace/Wallace/Hamilton.

          Garnett missed the playoffs and hasn't sniffed a championship.

          Nash hasn't won either and if they do this year it will be with two other all stars on his team.

          I get that you think JO is overrated and will be traded.
          Thank you!

          You could replace JO w/ Kobe, and if our team didn't win the championship year after year, DaSMASH would be on here every day telling us how Kobe is too selfish to ever be a true franchise player.

          Fact is no one can do it by themselves. AND JO is a great player when he's healthy - a good-to-very-good rebounder and scorer, and great defender. Now, if you want to say he's not healthy enough, that's cool I guess - but then I'm going to remind you that neither is Baron Davis. Like Jay always says, it's about being healthy at the right time (heading into the playoffs).

          Keep JO.
          You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

            How many players in the league average more blocks than turnovers? Tim Duncan didn't (2.4/2.8). Elton Brand didn't (2.2/2.5).

            EDIT: Ben Wallace did, but he is basically banned from dribbling the basketball.
            The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
            http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
            RSS Feed
            Subscribe via iTunes

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

              Smash, what's your point? Are you advocating that the Pacers are better off just getting rid of O'neal no matter the compensation? I believe most here would accept a deal for O'neal as long as we don't get fleeced in the deal.

              I'm just not convinced that the Pacers are working that hard to move him despite what some of you think. I truely believe if Carlisle would have survived this season...J.O. would be as good as traded, but since Rick is not part of the equation...I can see managment standing pat on Jermaine.
              ...Still "flying casual"
              @roaminggnome74

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

                I would have to say JO is the PACERS franchise player. But through my definition of what a franchise player should be - no he isn't.
                The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

                  Top 10 Block leaders for 2006-2007

                  Marcus Camby 3.3blks : 1.74TOs
                  Josh Smith 2.88blks : 3.15 TOs
                  JO 2.64blks : 2.94 TOs
                  Emeka Okafor 2.57blks : 1.66 TOs
                  TD 2.4blks : 2.8 TOs
                  Alonzo Mourning 2.31blks : 1.68 TOs
                  Elton Brand 2.24blks : 2.53 TOs
                  Pau Gasol 2.14blks : 2.75 TOs
                  AK47 2.06blks : 1.93 TOs
                  Ben Wallace 2.03 blks : 1.31 TOs

                  http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/statis...ll&season=2007

                  It's split half and half for the top ten, I would think that the % for having more blocks than TOs a game would start dropping there after.

                  I fail to see the point though. Care to enlighten?

                  EDIT: Nevermind, I missed DaSmash's line about it until SIG pointed it out.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

                    JO is a very good player. He is not a put a team on his back franchise player. Never will be.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

                      On top of that, the guys that did have more blocks than turnovers per game were players that really don't have much of a role in their teams' offense. For as much as Jermaine has the ball in his hands, I'm not too upset with his turnovers. More often than not, he makes up for it on the defensive side of the ball.

                      Back to the original argument. No, JO is not a guy that will carry a team single-handedly. But as we saw when he played with RonRon and Reg, he can be a big piece of the puzzle to a very good team. Over the past couple weeks I've been thinking about whether or not we should rebuild, or just retool. With Walsh and Bird at the helm, the chances are we will just be retooling (especially with the addition of a new coach).

                      I would like to see us try to put a package together that would pair up JO and someone like Pierce. Together, those two would give us a lot of what we've lacked the last couple years. Pierce can hit the outside shot, create, and defend the opposing teams best perimeter player at the same time. Not to mention both these guys are hungry. They're in the middle of their prime and they are starting to realize that winning is what's important. If you take those two, and put a formidable cast around them, they could take you a long way.

                      After the season ended, I was all for throwing in the towel and starting over, but if we can bring in a big-time player to play with Jermaine, I think we should give it another shot.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

                        About this:

                        Originally posted by DaSMASH View Post
                        >>
                        More turnovers per game then blocked shots??..2.94 to 2.64
                        >>
                        >>
                        This season, Jermaine was #3 in BPG and #19 in TOPG - which means that the numbers aren't lying, but also aren't helping to prove DaSMASH's point in this case.
                        You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

                          Not that it adds to the discussion but I really like the phrase "statistical fact."
                          "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                          "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

                            43 % ...Eleventh on the Pacers this year
                            Make all the excuses you want, that's just pitiful.
                            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Jermaine O’Neal, Is he a franchise player? Do the numbers lie???

                              Well when the other team doesn't have to guard anyone else, it's pretty believable...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X