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

The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

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

  • #16
    Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

    Tyler off the bench for a scoring punch. Definitely a good fit because he can dominate their bench and they may be forced to keep their starter in to contend with him. Let the dude wear'em out.

    McBob does complement our starting unit much better and should be the starter going forward...or until we get a dominant 4.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
      I hear people saying that Tyler should start because they like him more than Josh as a player, but what I'm not hearing is how he fits with the starting unit.

      To me, having Tyler off the bench is an absolutely perfect use of his skills.
      Exactly. He can score against other teams' scrubs. Let him. It's the same as the Rush argument. Granger, Collison, and Hibbert are going to take most of the shots anyway. All Hansbrough can really do is score. Let's put him where that is needed. Off the bench.
      "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

      -Lance Stephenson

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

        Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
        Tyler/McRoberts/Magnum
        Hibbert/Foster/Magnum

        IMHO, Tyler is looking more and more like the player we expected when Indiana drafted him. Let's not forget his ability to get to the line.
        I think there was a big belief that Tyler got bailed out by refs a lot in college and people doubted that would translate to the NBA. That's starting to look like bunk. NBA refs have no reason to give him anything and he's still getting to the line.
        Last edited by travmil; 10-15-2010, 10:43 PM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

          Originally posted by travmil View Post
          I think there was a big belief that Tyler got bailed out by refs a lot in college and people doubted that would translate to the NBA. That's starting to look like bunk. NBA refs have no reason to give him anything and he's still getting to the line.
          His shot selection looks to have already improved quite a bit since last season, which was my major knock on him. He actually appears to have an effective back to the basket game.

          His shot still looks like it gets off low to me, however... I think he is ideally suited as an off the bench player where he will have a better chance of dominating against other team's second unit bigs.
          "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

          - ilive4sports

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

            Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
            I hope McRoberts is ready to play about 40 a night because Foster can't play. Solo is a much better option at this point. But Josh has to start at 4 and backup 5.
            This is my worry. The reason I was mad about Josh's PT the last 2 years was because I was thinking of NOW. You needed to be bringing up his conditioning and overall game back then so he'd be more ready for the every night heavy load it looks like they will need from him.

            I'm no Tyler believer of course, but given the depth chart I'm forced to be counting on him to come through and prove me wrong as a solid 20 mpg backup.

            And this doesn't even get into Roy's foul issues.



            BTW, this isn't the intention of the original question, but one thing I like about Josh next to Roy is how aggressive Josh is with his OUTLET PASSING. This is why I wanted Love as a Pacer so much. A good outlet is as much a fastbreak creator as a steal.

            At one point tonight Josh threw a one handed zip to Collison around midcourt before he'd even hit the floor off a rebound jump.

            Of all the areas that Troy hurt the team, outlet passing from all his defensive boards had to be the biggest. I have a lot more confidence in the passing of both Roy and Josh. As bigs go, those 2 probably rank as some of the (potentially) best in the game. This is why I like to see the ball touch their hands in as many possessions as possible.



            While Josh can swing to the 5 it's not a strong point for him. Ditto Tyler. I think if the team is forced to use either as a 5 for more than a couple of minutes they are going to have trouble. A big part of what broke down Foster was all the time moved over the 5. You could see Josh getting bent back last year when facing solid, strong 5s.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

              I think people get too caught up in draft position.

              "Tyler was a lottery pick so he should start."

              "McRoberts was a 2nd round pick, he's only good as an energy big off the bench."

              The fact is McRoberts is a better player starting for this team. He makes the other 4 guys on the court better. He does everything.

              Tyler doesn't do that. He's going to muscle his way into the paint and force up shots. Several of them are going to go in and he'll get his points, but he's not going to make anybody else better. That attitude makes him an ideal scoring punch off the bench, not as a high volume, low percentage shooter with the starters. He won't be able to rebound at the same rate as McRoberts nor he is nearly as good of a defender.

              Leave the Duke/UNC biases in the ACC, this is the NBA.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                This is my worry. The reason I was mad about Josh's PT the last 2 years was because I was thinking of NOW. You needed to be bringing up his conditioning and overall game back then so he'd be more ready for the every night heavy load it looks like they will need from him.

                I'm no Tyler believer of course, but given the depth chart I'm forced to be counting on him to come through and prove me wrong as a solid 20 mpg backup.

                And this doesn't even get into Roy's foul issues.



                BTW, this isn't the intention of the original question, but one thing I like about Josh next to Roy is how aggressive Josh is with his OUTLET PASSING. This is why I wanted Love as a Pacer so much. A good outlet is as much a fastbreak creator as a steal.At one point tonight Josh threw a one handed zip to Collison around midcourt before he'd even hit the floor off a rebound jump.

                Of all the areas that Troy hurt the team, outlet passing from all his defensive boards had to be the biggest. I have a lot more confidence in the passing of both Roy and Josh. As bigs go, those 2 probably rank as some of the (potentially) best in the game. This is why I like to see the ball touch their hands in as many possessions as possible.



                While Josh can swing to the 5 it's not a strong point for him. Ditto Tyler. I think if the team is forced to use either as a 5 for more than a couple of minutes they are going to have trouble. A big part of what broke down Foster was all the time moved over the 5. You could see Josh getting bent back last year when facing solid, strong 5s.
                That is why i love Jmac he is a beast at throwing a good outlet pass. That is why he should start and play almost all the time when DC is on the floor.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

                  Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                  I think people get too caught up in draft position.

                  "Tyler was a lottery pick so he should start."

                  "McRoberts was a 2nd round pick, he's only good as an energy big off the bench."

                  The fact is McRoberts is a better player starting for this team. He makes the other 4 guys on the court better. He does everything.

                  Tyler doesn't do that. He's going to muscle his way into the paint and force up shots. Several of them are going to go in and he'll get his points, but he's not going to make anybody else better. That attitude makes him an ideal scoring punch off the bench, not as a high volume, low percentage shooter with the starters. He won't be able to rebound at the same rate as McRoberts nor he is nearly as good of a defender.

                  Leave the Duke/UNC biases in the ACC, this is the NBA.
                  I don't know if I've EVER read those "quotes" before, much less in this thread.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

                    Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                    Tyler/McRoberts/Magnum
                    Hibbert/Foster/Magnum

                    IMHO, Tyler is looking more and more like the player we expected when Indiana drafted him. Let's not forget his ability to get to the line.
                    He can't rebound which is what we need most out of the 4 spot. That and he doesn't have the ability to make his teammates around him better, both things Josh can do. Wait until he goes up against an actual starter in this league and you'll understand.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

                      Originally posted by ChristianDudley View Post
                      These are how I'd rate our big men:

                      1. Hibbert
                      2. Hansbrough
                      3. McRoberts
                      4. Magnum Rolle
                      5. Jeff Foster
                      6. Solomon Jones
                      7. Lance Allred (I'll throw him a bone and put him in here for now)

                      And I'd make this our rotation:

                      Center: Hibbert/Hansbrough/Foster/Solo
                      Power Forward: Hansbrough/McRoberts/Rolle/Allred

                      We all know that Allred won't make the roster and Solo is on his way out most likely, but I'll leave him in the following discussion:

                      Hibbert is obviously our starting C, no doubts there. Personally I'd like to have Hansbrough start and have Josh and his crazy "hyper" energy come off the bench, but really he and Hansbrough could switch starting and coming off the bench whenever depending on matchups. I'm not sure if Rolle could handle centers, so for now I'd play him at PF. Foster and Solo get any few minutes left over if there are any...Foster is getting old as we all know, but he can still do a few of the little things, such as keeping the ball alive, that can help us out when he's on the court.
                      Did I read this correctly? You would have Hansbrough as our backup center? He can hardly play PF, where do you see in his game he would be capable going up against ANY other starting center in this league? And Rolle we have hardly seen/heard anything. What's the deal with this guy getting so much love? We have hardly seen him play.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

                        Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                        You really think Hansbrough should backup the center spot? You must really want to see him fail.
                        He's the got mass and strength over McRoberts. Jeff Foster certainly couldn't do any better in more than 10 minutes a game than Hansbrough could do.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

                          Originally posted by Hibbert View Post
                          Did I read this correctly? You would have Hansbrough as our backup center? He can hardly play PF, where do you see in his game he would be capable going up against ANY other starting center in this league? And Rolle we have hardly seen/heard anything. What's the deal with this guy getting so much love? We have hardly seen him play.
                          Then who do you suggest being the backup center right now??? Freaking McRoberts??? lmmfao

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

                            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                            I hear people saying that Tyler should start because they like him more than Josh as a player, but what I'm not hearing is how he fits with the starting unit.

                            To me, having Tyler off the bench is an absolutely perfect use of his skills.
                            I like the way things are right now, but here are a couple of reasons why he would match up well with Roy:

                            1) Tyler brings a more physical presence down low next to a skilled and long, but not muscular, Hibbert. Josh does a lot of things well, but he is not pushing folks around the paint.

                            2) Tyler's ability to draw fouls is best used on starters.

                            3) Roy is defending the rim pretty well, getting blocks. Josh's ability to do the same might be more valuable when Roy is sitting.

                            4) Roy and Tyler also had great chemistry in meaningless games in Summer League '09 (like Roy/Josh '10).

                            I do not find these things persuasive given where the team is right now. Quite frankly nobody knows what we have in either player since neither one has spent quality time against starters in meaningful games. We will be in a better position to comment after some real games get played.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

                              Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                              I hope McRoberts is ready to play about 40 a night because Foster can't play. Solo is a much better option at this point. But Josh has to start at 4 and backup 5.
                              At this point in time, I would agree that McRoberts can play PF and C.

                              Like you, I have not yet been impressed with Foster, but I suppose he will have situations where his experience might prove useful defensively. I would NOT play Foster at PF, but would only use him off the bench at C.

                              It was easy to be impressed with Hansbrough tonight. From my perspective, a combination of Hibbert / McRoberts performs a little better than Hibbert / Hansbrough since a lot of Hansbrough's utility is down low.

                              That being said, I still think I might be tempted to start the pair of Hibbert / Hansbrough. My reason is that I would shorten the playing rotations in the front-court, using primarily three players (Hibbert, McRoberts, Hansbrough). Since McRoberts is capable of playing both PF and C, whereas Hansbrough is not, it only makes sense that McRoberts would be the first big off the bench.

                              We have 96 minutes available in the front-court. Without trading for a new player, I would play the three primary players at least 27 minutes each, limiting Foster to no more than 15 minutes.

                              In light of another thread, it probably surprises everyone that I propose playing two youngsters ahead of more experienced players, but my opinion is that both players are playing much better than any of the available experienced players. I think Rolle and SJones can get their opportunities in games where one or more of the three primary players get into foul trouble.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: The Big Man Rotation... what do you like?

                                Originally posted by ChristianDudley View Post
                                Then who do you suggest being the backup center right now??? Freaking McRoberts??? lmmfao
                                Yes I do, with Foster in the mix. Hansbrough is already undersized as a 4 and who cares about how big his muscles are and how strong he is, he will still get pushed around going up against any starting 4, at center I would feel sorry for him. He is not tall enough, short arms, can't jump. Tyler isn't in Carolina anymore toto. This is the NBA.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X