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

Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

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

  • #16
    Re: Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

    Originally posted by ChicagoPacer View Post
    If you're looking for stats that predict winning and losing, an NBA statistical consultant for different franchises over the last few years has come up with four of them.

    Dean Oliver's Four Factors:

    -Effective FG% (fg% adjusted for 3pt shots). Teams that shoot well score more.
    -Rebounding (measured as % of available rebounds your team grabs). Teams that rebound well on the offensive end get lots of second chances. Teams that do the same on the defensive end eliminate their opponents' second chances.
    -Free Throws (measured by your tendency to get to the line and make FTs: FTM/FGA). Free throws are generally a more effective way to score than FGs.
    -Turnovers (measured by the % of your teams offensive trips down the floor that end in a TO). Turning the ball over guarantees zero points/poss.

    You can synthesize all of these items together to come up with efficiency ratings for both teams in a game. Team A's Eff rating is basically pts per trip down the floor.

    If you want proof it works, take a look at this link:

    http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball.../profile/08/11

    The Pacers are 18-1 when they win the efficiency battle and 1-22 when they lose it. The four factors tell you where the Pacers either won or lost the efficiency battle.

    By the way, that stat is phenominal. The accuracy is unbelievable.
    The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
    http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
    RSS Feed
    Subscribe via iTunes

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

      Originally posted by Putnam View Post
      Shouldn't these sum to 1.00?
      I'll show you why they won't. Take a team that's 10-20 (.333). They go 8-2 when a stat is in their favor (.800). That means they must go 2-18 when it isn't (.100).

      % of games in your favor (.333)* win pct in favor (0.800)+ % of games not in favor (.667)* win pct not (.100) = your win pct. (.333)

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

        Assists, 3 points made, rebounding, and turnovers.

        We need assists. Shows there is good ball movement.

        You live by the 3 and you die by the 3. Like it or not the Pacers do. To live you gotta make em.

        Need to rebound both on offense and defense. Especially when you shoot a high volume of 3s offensive rebounds are big, = second chance points.

        Then there are turnovers. Need to force turnovers and get easy baskets.

        I think when you live and die by the 3 and don't get to the line a lot offensive rebounds and turnovers, fast break chances, become especially important.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

          Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
          By the way, that stat is phenominal. The accuracy is unbelievable.
          It has to be. The guys on the thread making jokes about scoring more points might even like this explanation.

          Efficiency is pts per possession. And a possession is time you have the ball until the time the other team gets it. It's basically a trip down the floor. Basketball is back and forth, so teams have almost the same number of possessions in a game. The only time you might get an extra one is because a quarter must end some time, so a team might have 1 extra chance per quarter. These generally even out over 4 quarters. If possessions are the same for both teams, then all you're really measuring are points--exactly what the guys taking cracks earlier want you to measure (and they're right). What Oliver does is figure out why team A scored more than B. He summarizes them into the things that can happen every time a team has the ball:

          1-made FG (FG%)
          2-made FT (Free Throws per FGA)
          3-Turnover
          4-offensive rebounds - you can miss a shot and it gets rebounded by the other team. Possession over. Or you get the reb, keep possession, "erase a mistake" and can get another chance.

          Compare the two teams playing and these 4 things will tell you why a team won or lost based upon these 4 things. But they won't tell you how you won or lost. Enter UB with a good observation about why the Pacers shoot better than the other team (they're good at getting easy transition buckets).

          This guy does a really great job of laying out a bunch of important stat concepts used by teams today (including this one). A quick 2 page read:

          http://www.knickerblogger.net/index....ba-statistics/

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

            Originally posted by ChicagoPacer View Post
            I'll show you why they won't. Take a team that's 10-20 (.333). They go 8-2 when a stat is in their favor (.800). That means they must go 2-18 when it isn't (.100).

            % of games in your favor (.333)* win pct in favor (0.800)+ % of games not in favor (.667)* win pct not (.100) = your win pct. (.333)

            Yeah, I knew why they didn't. I asked "Shouldn't they?" I present a lot of statistical data to non-experts, and I always find it is clearer and better accepted when you use a common baseline (which would sum to 1.00) rather than what you show.


            Also, why do you illustrate your points with contrived examples, when we have the actual Pacers data before us?
            And I won't be here to see the day
            It all dries up and blows away
            I'd hang around just to see
            But they never had much use for me
            In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

              Originally posted by FlavaDave
              By the way, that stat is phenominal. The accuracy is unbelievable.
              Originally posted by ChicagoPacer
              It has to be.
              In other words, it is tautological.

              When a statistical measure is too good, it is because it is measuring the same thing by two different names. Everybody knows that the team that scores the most points wins the game, and what ChicagoPacers has shown us is a detailed formula for determining which team scores the most points by the combination of field goals, free throws, and extra chances from steals and rebounds.

              I like the formula. But I'm not sure it tells us more about the Pacers. The formula asserts (quite reasonably) that both FG% and rebounds are import to winning. But then how come the Pacers own data confirms this in the case of FG% (they are .833 in games when they exceed their opponent in that) but not in the case of rebounds?
              Last edited by Putnam; 01-23-2008, 12:52 PM.
              And I won't be here to see the day
              It all dries up and blows away
              I'd hang around just to see
              But they never had much use for me
              In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

                Originally posted by Bball View Post
                I always look at the final score for an important stat. If the Pacers outscore their opponent, they've never lost a game. Can't argue with that stat!

                -Bball
                I often see comments like these and about wins and losses, and I get annoyed because of course those are the end-game, but it doesn't tell you jack about HOW TO DO IT. That's why the other stats come into play. Now I could easily be taking this too seriously, but I see it so often over the years I really wonder.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

                  Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
                  By the way, that stat is phenomenal. The accuracy is unbelievable.
                  No kidding. That accuracy has me hooked on that stat right now.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

                    Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                    I like the formula. But I'm not sure it tells us more about the Pacers. The formula asserts (quite reasonably) that both FG% and rebounds are import to winning. But then how come the Pacers own data confirms this in the case of FG% (they are .833 in games when they exceed their opponent in that) but not in the case of rebounds?
                    I'll use the Pacers as an actual example here this time. The short answer on the issue of rebounds is that not all things in the analysis can be weighted equally.

                    Possession per game for the Pacers and opposition: 98.6 and 98.4
                    This makes sense, because the game is back and forth so possessions should be equal. The Pacers get avg an extra possession at end of quarter 1 time in every 5 games. Pretty equal.

                    What is the disribution of those possessions (Pacers first, then opp)?

                    Field Goals: 85.9 vs. 81.9
                    Free Throws: 9.7 vs. 12.6
                    Turnovers: 16.2 vs. 15.8
                    These total more than 94-95, but offensive rebounds are "mistake erasers", so they're negative. They give you another chance to get a FT, FG, or commit a turnover.

                    Off Reb: -13.1 vs. -12.0

                    Net the Pacers higher turnovers with "mistake erasers" and the Pacers have a 0.7 net turnover advantage per game. That's not a lot. Its a net impact of less than 1 pt per game for Indy.

                    If you were to isolate this, it would be the equivalent of the other team throwing the ball into the stands once at the beginning of most games. For the rest of the game, neither team commits any turnovers and everyone boxes out perfectly so no offensive rebounds occur. All you're left with is field goals and free throws. This is where the real difference is.

                    Field Goal possessions favor the Pacers (85.9 to 81.9) and they also shoot better, so they get more pts per possession here: .99 pts vs. .97 pts. It's not huge difference in FG%, but it is significant when you consider how many time attempts happen per game.

                    Free throw possessions do not favor the Pacers (9.7 vs. 12.6). Only The critical thing here is that these 3 extra opponent possessions are really easy scores. The Pacers get 1.88 pts/FT possession and the other team gets 1.94. These numbers seem high. If it were limited to 2 shot fouls, a team shooting 75% would be expected to walk away with 1.5 pts on average. You must factor in the ability of both teams to get "and one" situations, which don't really take a possession. Free points.

                    The difference between this Pacers team and their opponents is ability to get to the line. 3 times a game, the Pacers work hard for field goals, some of which miss. After each time, they surrender easy foul shots.

                    It's a difference of 2-3 pts a game that can mean the difference between the current team and +.500 team.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

                      I seem to recall a post-game interview with Bobby Knight years ago in which he kind of erupted (nothing unusual there) at a question concerning the importance of getting more offensive rebounds. The nearest I can come to recalling the quote is, "Hell, that just means you're missing more shots."


                      [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

                        I have Oliver's book and I've only been able to get to a small portion of it so far. But let me just say that he makes endless attempts to quantify everything. None of this is cavalier stat posturing, he's really trying to cross check any conclusions a stat comes up with.

                        People just brush stuff like that off way too easily, as if a pro isn't considering all the various other viewpoints and is utterly unaware of the limits of numbers.

                        I'd say it's quite the opposite, it's the non-stats people that are too quick to dismiss the points of view stats can provide. No stat person ever ignores the views of anecdotal analysis, not if they are any good at their work at least. In fact what they are trying to do is find ways to measure those views with the possibility of verifying them.

                        Buck says "defense wins games". Oliver says "what is 'defense' and can we measure it?"
                        To me that's a very valid question. You are taking the ambiguous and making it tangible, and therefore applicable to future efforts. It forces Buck to consider what he means and to define it. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist or that he's wrong for saying it, and in fact by the time the process is over it could be that Oliver will have some great measures that back Buck's newly defined viewpoint.

                        Who the heck ever won games by "just playing better" or "just trying harder". That's not coaching or teaching, that's John Edwards Crossing Over crap.
                        Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 01-24-2008, 04:18 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          I have Oliver's book and I've only been able to get to a small portion of it so far. But let me just say that he makes endless attempts to quantify everything. None of this is cavalier stat posturing, he's really trying to cross check any conclusions a stat comes up with.

                          People just brush stuff like that off way too easily, as if a pro isn't considering all the various other viewpoints and is utterly unaware of the limits of numbers.

                          I'd say it's quite the opposite, it's the non-stats people that are too quick to dismiss the points of view stats can provide. No stat person ever ignores the views of anecdotal analysis, not if they are any good at their work at least. In fact what they are trying to do is find ways to measure those views with the possibility of verifying them.

                          Buck says "defense wins games". Oliver says "what is 'defense' and can we measure it?"
                          To me that's a very valid question. You are taking the ambiguous and making it tangible, and therefore applicable to future efforts. It forces Buck to consider what he means and to define it. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist or that he's wrong for saying it, and in fact by the time the process is over it could be that Oliver will have some great measures that back Buck's newly defined viewpoint.

                          Who the heck ever won games by "just playing better" or "just trying harder". That's not coaching or teaching, that's John Edwards Crossing Over crap.

                          Tinsley?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            Buck says "defense wins games". Oliver says "what is 'defense' and can we measure it?"
                            To me that's a very valid question. You are taking the ambiguous and making it tangible, and therefore applicable to future efforts. It forces Buck to consider what he means and to define it. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist or that he's wrong for saying it, and in fact by the time the process is over it could be that Oliver will have some great measures that back Buck's newly defined viewpoint.
                            Couldn't agree more. There is a lot of good stuff coming from guys like Pelton, Rosenbaum, etc in addition to others. UB says deflections are important because they enable the Pacers to get out on the run, where they are effective, and 82games has the data to support his point:

                            Shot Clock Usage
                            Offense
                            Defense
                            Secs.
                            Att.
                            eFG%
                            Ast
                            Pts
                            Att.
                            eFG%
                            Ast
                            Pts
                            0-10
                            44% .536 59% 41.2 37% .512 55% 31.6
                            11-15
                            30% .463 62% 24.0 27% .503 66% 22.6
                            16-20
                            18% .479 62% 14.6 22% .476 62% 17.1
                            21+
                            8% .398 61% 5.4 14% .405 61% 9.1


                            44% of our offense comes in the first 10 seconds of the shot clock. More than our opponents. We also happen to shoot much better earlier in the clock due to this transition game.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Which stats matter? (another thread about data)

                              Originally posted by Elgin56 View Post
                              Tinsley?
                              I was thinking of that horse (whose name escapes me) from the book "Animal Farm".

                              *edit* Boxer, that's it. I believe he ends up at the glue factory.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X