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

Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

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

  • #76
    Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

    Originally posted by imawhat View Post
    Perfect? He's a ball dominant guard: the worst trait any O'Brien player can have. Ball dominance has never worked in O'Brien's system; look at the list of casualties: Tinsley, Ford, Dahntay, Luther Head, Diogu, Stephen Graham, etc. etc. etc.

    Anyone who thinks Collison is going to work under O'Brien's current system is going to be sorely disappointed. It won't be a failure, but it certainly won't be a big success.
    Heh, those guys didn't fail for their ball-hogging - at least it wasn't the primary factor, even if it was a contributing one. For some it wasn't a factor at all.

    Allen Iverson was the prototypical ball-dominant guard and he had one of the best years of his career under O'Brien. Lead the league in PPG, had his career high in APG and assist rate, and an above average efficiency (relatively to his career average). Pierce had All-NBA seasons under O'Brien wasting lots of possessions all by himself and combining insanely high usage rates with good scoring efficiency. Of course, if a guy like Jones who suffers from severe tunnel vision is going to stop the ball every time he touches it and go for a clearout when he's not even a scorer, or a guy like Ford will nonchalantly bounce it around for 10 seconds with everybody standing and watching O'Brien won't like it. Neither would I or anyone else.

    Anyway more to the point, I don't think O'Brien will give Collison the same type of freedom those guys had or allow him to play the same way he was used in New Orleans (and, to a certain extent, in college). And that's probably good for Collison, he'll be used more in cuts and take more standstill 3s, something he does very efficiently. But he'll give him plenty of opportunities to create plays for his teammates to finish. If the bigs do a good job as screeners, he'll have plenty of screenball action. The Pacers don't really have many quality screeners, but he's used to New Orleans lousy screeners, who would take an eternity to set the pick and more often than not wouldn't even bother to finalize the movement and get wide, forcing their guards to play the pick with no proper pick there, so it'll always be an improvement for him.

    Difficult to say how well he'll fit without seeing it (and Collison is still a work in progress as a player), but I wouldn't say it's a bad fit a priori.
    Last edited by cordobes; 08-12-2010, 08:07 AM.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

      Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
      Actually, I almost like a Collison Price backcourt more than a Collison Stephenson one for this year. Price can move well without the ball and sets up nicely for a 3 when Collison passes out of penetration.

      Until Lance shows he can play without the ball in his hands, I think it'd be best limiting his time with a ball dominant point.

      Collison Price, sure, in very limited minutes
      Price Stephenson, seems to emphasize both player's attributes
      Collison Stephenson, ....we'll see

      EDIT: Though I want to mention....if Stephenson proves he can make a difference away from the ball and shows an ability to make plays OFF of what a point creates (Say Collison hits a cutting Stephenson, Stephenson is cut off and quickly lobs it to McRoberts for a jam) then it could work.
      I don't think Collison and Stephenson will work too well together. It's almost like putting TJ and Stephenson together.

      Collison and Price, actually their skills together should work out. Too bad that they are a combined 100 lbs.

      My issue with Collison and Obrien's offense is simple. O'brien's offense eccentuates all of the negatives in Collison's game. O'brien took a PG in Price, who to be honest, was relatively gun shy at Uconn (shot less compared to what he should have..) and made him look like a pure combo guard. (Price always had the skills to be a combo guard, and played both positions his entire career, but his mentality was always get others involved first, not so clearly..SCORE SO AH CAN STAY IN GAME) Collison is a score first PG. He's ball dominant. He's got the potential to look like a mini Iverson in this offense..which I don't like, personally.
      Last edited by Sookie; 08-12-2010, 08:08 AM.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

        I fully expect Jim O'Brien to adapt his offense to accomadate Collison. Not as much as he would have had the Pacers acquired Chris Paul. But I expect to see Collison run a lot of pick and rolls. You cannot run pick and rolls effectively if the point guard cannot shot (outside of 18 ft, Ford, Watson) Collison is an excellent shooter, so we'll see a lot of pick and rolls with Collison. (Although we don't have a big that is great in the pick and roll)

        But we'll see some of the same offense as last season. of course when I say that some of you think, oh great, 1 pass a jack up a three. But IMO that isn't the offense. if you go back in prior years under O'Brien the pacers were one of the leaders in assists, which means they pass the ball.

        Another thing: some of you are suggesting Collison won't fit in and you reference his stats. I don't care what he averages, I just care how he plays

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

          Originally posted by Sookie View Post

          My issue with Collison and Obrien's offense is simple. O'brien's offense eccentuates all of the negatives in Collison's game. O'brien took a PG in Price, who to be honest, was relatively gun shy at Uconn (shot less compared to what he should have..) and made him look like a pure combo guard. (Price always had the skills to be a combo guard, and played both positions his entire career, but his mentality was always get others involved first, not so clearly..SCORE SO AH CAN STAY IN GAME) Collison is a score first PG. He's ball dominant. He's got the potential to look like a mini Iverson in this offense..which I don't like, personally.
          he was a pass first point guard in college. I heard a sportscaster out of NO last night say that Collison is a pure point guard, always looking to get his teammates involved.

          I guess we'll see

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

            Originally posted by imawhat View Post
            Perfect? He's a ball dominant guard: the worst trait any O'Brien player can have. Ball dominance has never worked in O'Brien's system; look at the list of casualties: Tinsley, Ford, Dahntay, Luther Head, Diogu, Stephen Graham, etc. etc. etc.

            Anyone who thinks Collison is going to work under O'Brien's current system is going to be sorely disappointed. It won't be a failure, but it certainly won't be a big success.
            Alright now your just looking for things to complain about. Did Jarret Jack suck to you?

            The big difference between Jack and Ford is that Jack could finish around the basket. IMO the same will be said about Collison.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

              Originally posted by nyballer31 View Post
              I agree.He has the quickness to stop the quickest pg's in the league.He will have problems against the bigger pg's because he's a small guy but I'm willing to live with that.This guy can come in tomorrow and average 16pts 8 assists a game , with a good FG%.I think he will be in that second tier of pg's.
              With today's NBA (which I'm not a big fan of), it is pretty imperative to have a point guard who can defend all those quickies out there: Parker, Brooks, etc. If they get posted down low, at least help defense can arrive as a solution. When a quick guy like Parker gets around a point guard at the top of the key, it all happens too fast for the help defense.

              So, I'll take Collison's defensive skill set over, say, a Kirk Hinrich.
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

                Originally posted by DrFife View Post
                So creative, so random, so hilarious. Well done, Putty!
                Reminds me of Putnam's Ode to Roy a couple years ago. He had us all writing verse for a few days.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

                  Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post

                  So, I'll take Collison's defensive skill set over, say, a Kirk Hinrich.
                  Interesting. I think Kirk is one of the best guard defenders in the NBA, he can guard most point guards and most shooting guards. he does have problems with the really quick small points and some of the really big shooting guards.

                  Collison is going to have some trouble with the bigger point guards.

                  Just depends on what you think is more important. I worry less about a big point guard posting Collison up then a do with a quick point beating Kirk off the dribble.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

                    Originally posted by cordobes View Post
                    a priori.
                    Give that man a cookie.
                    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

                      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                      That's a terrible combination. Collison and Lance. Too much alike in their game. You need to pair either Price or Rush with each of them.
                      I think this is over thinking it. Reminds me of a MLB manager putting in a left handed batter at the end of the game because of a right handed pitcher, but he replaced your guy who is really clutch. Over analysis.

                      Collison and Lance are both gamers (at least it seems that way). Lance looked phenomenal at seeing and understanding what was happening on the court and where people needed to be. He'll figure out how to work it best with Collison at point.

                      They have the right mindset. They'll figure out who should get the ball and how the team should score. I'm sorry, but Brandon Rush does not have the same savvy, mental toughness, and creative abilities.
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        he was a pass first point guard in college
                        He was more of a dribble-first PG at UCLA, actually. He held onto the ball for long stretches trying to decide what he would do with it, often to the detriment of the team and individual players (see: Holiday, Jrue). I imagine it was probably maddening to Bruin fans.

                        Going into last year's draft, I thought he'd make it as a backup in the league (similar to the careers of Jacques Vaughn and Travis Best) but last season showed his game may have adapted much better to the Association than I expected. So we'll see how this whole thing plays out.
                        This is the darkest timeline.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

                          "In Collison, Bird got one of the league's most promising young lead guards only one year into his rookie-scale contract. Collison isn't a sure bet--his top comp in SCHOENE is Ford--and while he put up excellent superficial numbers when filling in for Chris Paul in New Orleans last season, the Hornets didn't exactly excel with him running the show. His unsightly turnover rate could become a big problem playing in Jim O'Brien's high-risk, high-reward system. Nevertheless, Bird was able to get a lottery-caliber player for Murphy, who had no future in Indianapolis. It's hard to imagine that Bird would have gotten a better return for Murphy's expiring deal down the line had he waited to move the blue-collar veteran."

                          http://www.basketballprospectus.com/...articleid=1194

                          This scared me when I first read it, but I remember thinking Ford was a great and promising player when he was young. What is different between them? Is it mainly shooting ability?

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

                            Originally posted by kidneypuncher View Post
                            "In Collison, Bird got one of the league's most promising young lead guards only one year into his rookie-scale contract. Collison isn't a sure bet--his top comp in SCHOENE is Ford--and while he put up excellent superficial numbers when filling in for Chris Paul in New Orleans last season, the Hornets didn't exactly excel with him running the show. His unsightly turnover rate could become a big problem playing in Jim O'Brien's high-risk, high-reward system. Nevertheless, Bird was able to get a lottery-caliber player for Murphy, who had no future in Indianapolis. It's hard to imagine that Bird would have gotten a better return for Murphy's expiring deal down the line had he waited to move the blue-collar veteran."

                            http://www.basketballprospectus.com/...articleid=1194

                            This scared me when I first read it, but I remember thinking Ford was a great and promising player when he was young. What is different between them? Is it mainly shooting ability?
                            Basketball I.Q.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

                              Originally posted by kidneypuncher View Post
                              "In Collison, Bird got one of the league's most promising young lead guards only one year into his rookie-scale contract. Collison isn't a sure bet--his top comp in SCHOENE is Ford--and while he put up excellent superficial numbers when filling in for Chris Paul in New Orleans last season, the Hornets didn't exactly excel with him running the show. His unsightly turnover rate could become a big problem playing in Jim O'Brien's high-risk, high-reward system. Nevertheless, Bird was able to get a lottery-caliber player for Murphy, who had no future in Indianapolis. It's hard to imagine that Bird would have gotten a better return for Murphy's expiring deal down the line had he waited to move the blue-collar veteran."

                              http://www.basketballprospectus.com/...articleid=1194

                              This scared me when I first read it, but I remember thinking Ford was a great and promising player when he was young. What is different between them? Is it mainly shooting ability?
                              Collison is an inch taller, which helps a little, but shooting is the main skill difference (offensively), and that shouldn't be underestimated. Shooting is, IMO, the single most important basketball skill, and the difference between Collison's ability to shoot and Ford's will make a huge difference both in the way Collison can be effective and in the way defenses have to play him.

                              Collison is no sure thing, but he is a pretty good prospect.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Prediction time: How good will Collison be in two years

                                I think it is going to depend on JOBs offense and if he can taylor it to make him shine or not.

                                He was able to step right into a offense designed for chris paul and look like a super star. Will he be able to do the same thing in a offense designed for quick shots and open threes?

                                Will he be able to make hibbert a better player? We need someone that can get him the ball in the low post. This is harder than it sounds. You have to be able to set your guy up for the easy score.



                                The thing that I am most afraid of is JOB ruining him. Watching a few games last season you could tell he was something special. but we have had bad luck with point guards and JOB. He seems to ruin careers.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X