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

Pacers sign CJ Miles

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

  • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
    Lol no matter how you guys spin it, Kuq is going to make it into a negative. He thinks its a bad signing, only time will tell.
    I'm really not trying to "make it into a negative." It just doesn't make much sense to me. He supposed to be a 3 & D guy, but he plays defense on par with Kyle Korver. Then he's supposed to be versatile but half of his shots are from three. He's inconsistent and streaky, yet we give him 18 million over four years. I'm just trying to understand why Bird felt like he absolutely HAD to get this guy.
    2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

      Miles was assisted on 80% of his baskets last season. Let that sink in. So we run one of the most stagnant and ball movement-less offenses in the league, and we added a guy who needs to be spoon fed baskets? For four years? At $4.5 million + a year?

      believe in bird believe in bird believe in bird believe in bird

      At least he can drain corner 3s though. We didn't have a knockdown guy we could put in the corner to punish defenses, now we do. But I am not thrilled by Miles. I wish him the best

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

        Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
        I'm really not trying to "make it into a negative." It just doesn't make much sense to me. He supposed to be a 3 & D guy, but he plays defense on par with Kyle Korver. Then he's supposed to be versatile but half of his shots are from three. He's inconsistent and streaky, yet we give him 18 million over four years. I'm just trying to understand why Bird felt like he absolutely HAD to get this guy.
        45% of the shots he made last season were from 3, for a 3 & D guy, yes it shouldn't be shocking he shoots a lot of 3's.... He is good at defense as well, I don't care what synergy stat you give me or something, I watched the guy last year and he did his job on defense, and Cavs fans even back that up. Numbers from synergy shouldn't be the end all be all here. As for the bolded part, well if he wasn't inconsistent and streaky he would be making a lot more money. I think Bird felt he wanted Miles here because he watched him play and studied him on film instead of just going to Synergy and deciding from there he doesn't like him.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

          Originally posted by lolwuttermelons View Post
          Miles was assisted on 80% of his baskets last season. Let that sink in. So we run one of the most stagnant and ball movement-less offenses in the league, and we added a guy who needs to be spoon fed baskets? For four years? At $4.5 million + a year?

          believe in bird believe in bird believe in bird believe in bird

          At least he can drain corner 3s though. We didn't have a knockdown guy we could put in the corner to punish defenses, now we do. But I am not thrilled by Miles. I wish him the best
          You are right, for the most part Miles isn't an iso one on one guy, he likes to come off screens and has very good off-ball movement. That shouldn't be too hard for Vogel to adjust.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

            Miles should at least help render a final verdict as to whether this system will ever be conducive to bench players. Regardless of what one thinks about the contract, I think we can all agree that he's a decent talent for a bench player. He's had six straight seasons of pretty adequate production. If he doesn't succeed here, then it will be another red flag.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
              To a Player, they could be considered the same....but to a Team.....there is a HUGE difference. Teams often uses the remaining Unguaranteed Salary from a Player's contract as bargaining chips for trades. Think of it.....a Player like Scola ( if let go ) can count as $2.9 mil in CapSpace at the end of the season if he is let go....but because his Contract is worth $4.9 mil....he can be used in a trade that can net a Player up to $6.15 mil. To a Team that is looking to clear Salary Cap....they can essentially trade for Scola and dump about $3.25 mil in Salary from their Salary Cap ( assuming that they just let his unguaranteed Salary go ).

              Ignoring that the Pacers can't really take that much Salary on anyway.....unguaranteed Salary like Scola could be used as a trading chip for Teams looking to clear Salary. Which...unfortunately, is why I think that Scola is going to be in a Pacer uniform until January 2015...at the earliest.
              I'm looking at TO and an unguaranteed year as a way to relieve a team of a contract. NOTHING MORE!! They have the same effect if you want to jettison a player. They are "both" safeguards and a means to insure a team they can get rid of a player and his contract.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

                Miles is far from streaky. 39% from 3 for a guy that shoots that many 3s is far from streaky. As we saw with Turner last year we definitely do not need another ball dominant player. Its not about having a guy who needs to be "spoon fed" shots, its about having a guy that spreads the floor and can knock down open 3s--which is something we struggle with mightily. Miles wasn't signed to be a savior but to be a role player that fills a role. He's averaged around double figures in a small amount of time for 6 seasons or so, so to say he isn't a scorer is incorrect as well imo.

                Defensively he's not an absolute train wreck like Turner either. He's played on solid defensive systems before (Utah) so hopefully he learns the system here. Miles is 27 yrs old so he's just entering his prime.

                If you think we gave him too much money or for too many years, I'd like to hear who you would have signed instead and why.
                Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 07-04-2014, 11:41 AM.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

                  Originally posted by lolwuttermelons View Post
                  At least he can drain corner 3s though. We didn't have a knockdown guy we could put in the corner to punish defenses, now we do. But I am not thrilled by Miles. I wish him the best
                  FWIW, according to Basketball Reference, CJ Miles shot 46.2% on corner 3's last year, while Paul G shot 49.0% and Lance shot 48.9%. Miles' volume was higher though, a lot higher than Lance and moderately higher than Paul. And presumably Miles' shots would be replacing those from Hill, Watson, or Turner, so you could be right.

                  Funny thing about Hill - his corner % was a lot higher in SA than after he came here. Agreed that the system matters a lot, and now that we have a ton of shooters I hope our offensive system takes advantage.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

                    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                    If you think we gave him too much money or for too many years, I'd like to hear who you would have signed instead and why.
                    In isolation, I don't think his contract is bad. But it limits future moves we can make, and IMO we should try to be more flexible with role players.

                    By definition, a role player is someone replaceable - i.e. they have a certain skill set, you just look for another (cheaper) guy with the same skill set and plug him in. So if you're a team on a budget, you earmark the big money for your stars (the hard to replace guys) and try to save money on role players by signing some overlooked guys, etc. The Spurs have been doing this for years.

                    Instead, we've decided to shell out lengthy contracts to maybe slightly above average role players, like Mahinmi and now Miles. I don't think Mahinmi's been terrible for us, but OTOH if we're looking to save money one just have to wonder whether a guy making half his money could replace 80% of what he gives you. I feel similarly about CJ Miles.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

                      Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
                      Where did you get that Miles is in that company? The only company he's in is that of Marco Belinelli, Terrence Ross and Kyle Korver, and this is only when it comes to defense.

                      Belinelli shot 43% from 3 in the regular season, 42% in the playoffs, avg 11 pts in the season. --- $2.8M next season.
                      Korver shot 47% from 3 in the regular season, 42% in the playoffs, avg 12 pts in the season --- $6.2M next season, but Korver is the best three point shooter in the league and he plays 34-35 min a game.
                      Ross shot 39% from 3 in the regular season, 16% in the playoffs, avg 11 pts in the season --- $2.7M next season, but still on his rookie deal.

                      So it seems to me that he's been overpaid by about $1.5-2M per year when we compare him to Belinelli, which is probably the most accurate comparison contract wise considering production. He's simply not an elite specialist like Korver who can demand $6M because of his consistency and durability. And he's not on a rookie deal like Ross. Now, does anyone view Belinelli, Korver and Terrence Ross as very good defenders? The reality is we overpaid, and we gave him too many years. I want to move his contract already.
                      Do you even know how his contract is set up other than the salary? Is it a 4 guaranteed year contract? Are there any TO or unguaranteed years?

                      Are you one of those "In Bird We Trust", if so then trust him. If not, then question his decision... only when you know for sure how the contract is set up.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

                        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                        Miles is far from streaky. 39% from 3 for a guy that shoots that many 3s is far from streaky. As we saw with Turner last year we definitely do not need another ball dominant player. Its not about having a guy who needs to be "spoon fed" shots, its about having a guy that spreads the floor and can knock down open 3s--which is something we struggle with mightily. Miles wasn't signed to be a savior but to be a role player that fills a role. He's averaged around double figures in a small amount of time for 6 seasons or so, so to say he isn't a scorer is incorrect as well imo.

                        Defensively he's not an absolute train wreck like Turner either. He's played on solid defensive systems before (Utah) so hopefully he learns the system here. Miles is 27 yrs old so he's just entering his prime.

                        If you think we gave him too much money or for too many years, I'd like to hear who you would have signed instead and why.
                        Yes, his last two years on a below .500 team he shot well. However, in a structured team offense for an above .500 Utah team (except one year) he shot 32.9% from deep. Was his shooting in CLE a product of teams not giving their all against a trash team? It's hard to say. He would be far from the first player to put up mediocre stats on a below .500 teams and then play terrible once he plays for a team that is competitive. But consistency is not something Miles is known for.
                        Last edited by lolwuttermelons; 07-04-2014, 11:54 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

                          Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                          Miles is far from streaky. 39% from 3 for a guy that shoots that many 3s is far from streaky. As we saw with Turner last year we definitely do not need another ball dominant player. Its not about having a guy who needs to be "spoon fed" shots, its about having a guy that spreads the floor and can knock down open 3s--which is something we struggle with mightily. Miles wasn't signed to be a savior but to be a role player that fills a role. He's averaged double figures in a small amount of time for 6 seasons or so, so to say he isn't a scorer is incorrect as well imo.

                          Defensively he's not an absolute train wreck like Turner either. He's played on solid defensive systems before (Utah) so hopefully he learns the system here. Miles is still only 26 so he's just entering his prime.

                          If you think we gave him too much money or for too many years, I'd like to hear who you would have signed instead and why.
                          How can you look at his average for the whole season to determine whether he's streaky or not? His season average doesn't show up and down fluctuations from game to game, it just draws a line between both extremes. Look at his game logs to see how erratic he is.

                          Free agency is littered with guys who can make threes that play defense on par or better than Kyle Korver. Morrow, Alan Anderson, Fredette, Mike Miller, PJ Tucker, Brandon Rush, Turkoglu. Even Rasual is still out there and he filled in admirably last season. My point is that the role CJ Miles fills could have been filled later, once the Lance situation has been resolved, and for a lesser price.
                          2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

                            Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
                            Kyle Korver took 609 shots last season, 392 were from three. = 64% of his shots.
                            Marco Belinelli took 695 shots last season, 293 were from three. = 42% of his shots.
                            CJ Miles took 409 shots last season, 211 were from three. = 51% of his shots.
                            Those 198 2 pt shots, any break down of the type and FG % of each? What was the FG% of his 2 pt shots?

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

                              Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
                              How can you look at his average for the whole season to determine whether he's streaky or not? His season average doesn't show up and down fluctuations from game to game, it just draws a line between both extremes. Look at his game logs to see how erratic he is.

                              Free agency is littered with guys who can make threes that play defense on par or better than Kyle Korver. Morrow, Alan Anderson, Fredette, Mike Miller, PJ Tucker, Brandon Rush, Turkoglu. Even Rasual is still out there and he filled in admirably last season. My point is that the role CJ Miles fills could have been filled later, once the Lance situation has been resolved, and for a lesser price.
                              CJ Miles is better than Morrow, Fredette, Miller, Tucker, Rush, and Turkoglu.... OKC wanted Miles at the exact same price as us, but since we gave him 4 years and OKC only 2 he chose us.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers sign CJ Miles

                                Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
                                Kyle Korver took 609 shots last season, 392 were from three. = 64% of his shots.
                                Marco Belinelli took 695 shots last season, 293 were from three. = 42% of his shots.
                                CJ Miles took 409 shots last season, 211 were from three. = 51% of his shots.
                                When I think of a one dimensional scorer, I think of Kyle Korver.... About 64% of his made shots came from 3, and only about 45% of Mile's made shots came from 3, that is a massive difference. The majority of the shots Miles made did not even come from 3.
                                Last edited by BlueCollarColts; 07-04-2014, 11:59 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X