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

So what do you think of CJ MIles now

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

  • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

    Originally posted by Grimp View Post
    Turner was a shooting guard/forward. He played point because we went through a stretch where Hill and Watson were both hurt. I also think Lance rubbed Turner the wrong way much like he did Roy. Er go Turner had two good weeks here and just fell apart after that.
    Doesn't matter what position he played. There wasn't enough basketball to go around. Changing his position to PG, doesn't change the reality that a ball dominate player hurts the Pacers. You can have one, in a spread system, and two if they don't play together. Which is what screwed the Pacers. They could get PG on the floor with Lance, keeping Lance's role relatively small. But when Lance's role started growing towards having the ball more, it disrupted the flow with the starters. Then they added a third ball dominate player, which made them have two on the floor pretty much at all times. It didn't work.


    When you get two players taking up about 50% (which is what would happen with a ball dominate player along side PG, considering PG's usage was 28.5%) of the posessions, it gets really tough.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

      Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
      I will never understand your love affairs with Turner, Jodie Meeks and Nick Young coupled with your strong desire to get rid of David West and Roy Hibbert
      Are you not paying attention?

      Turner, Meeks and Young are all offensive threats ( while Meeks and Young are athletic ) that scored 30+ points in a single game and are considered ( to him ) to be a uber scorers....even if it just happened once a few years ago.

      As for West....he's old and isn't part of the future ( which I agree with ) and Hibbert is unathletic, can't jump out of the arena and isn't some uber low post scorer ( the former, I could care less about but can't disagree with the latter ).
      Last edited by CableKC; 12-30-2014, 03:14 PM.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
        Other ball dominant players that didn't play well here: DJ Augustin, Gerald Green, and to a much lesser extent--Leandro Barbosa. Our offensive pace, emphasis on both the high and low post, and system in general is not condusive to ball dominant players. PGs or wings.

        Unless we changed our system, those same guys (Dragic or Jackson) would have the same issues here that everyone else does.
        Although Dragic and RJ can be considered Ball-dominant PGs......I thought that they were considered capable Off-The-Ball PGs since they play next to "as dominant" or "far more dominant" Guards.

        Do PGs that are capable of playing Off-the-ball fit into our system as well?
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
          Although Dragic and RJ can be considered Ball-dominant PGs......I thought that they were considered capable Off-The-Ball PGs since they play next to "as dominant" or "far more dominant" Guards.

          Do PGs that are capable of playing Off-the-ball fit into our system as well?
          They definitely do. In fact I think our offense is built more for PG's that would play off the ball as much as they would on the ball. But we dont play an up tempo, spread type of offensive system that those two particular guys are used to playing. Idk if they're able to be as effective in a slower tempo offense where there are typically one or two bigs in/near the lane.

          I'm not saying its impossible, but the two types of systems are extremely different. This is why so many others have come here and struggled, but have looked better elsewhere.

          Comment


          • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

            Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
            I will never understand your love affairs with Turner, Jodie Meeks and Nick Young coupled with your strong desire to get rid of David West and Roy Hibbert
            Turner was good the first two weeks he got here. Had a strong showing versus the Lakers but with Lance being as much of a morale killer as he was I can't help but think what if any effect he had on Evan. Especially because Evan was new. Meeks is still one of the best 2nd tier guards in the NBA when healthy. Nick Young has a competitive spirit, on the court demeanor, and bravado that I think would really excite the fan base. Kind of like a version of Lance who smiles more as opposed to pouting all the time. Plus he's a major scoring threat. Because of his offensive prowess, he fits next to Paul as a second threat. If this were the 90's I'd say stick with West and Roy, but it isn't. Teams now are running more, and building stealth and sleek rosters.

            Centers must be highly athletic or highly offensively-skilled. Can't not be one or the other. Power Forwards now a days must be very skilled offensively, past the 3pt line. Or must be high level rebounders along with being athletic as hell. Blake Griffin when he first arrived couldn't shoot to save his life, but the guy could jump over almost anything and dunk the ball and he could run the floor with ease in the fast break. The athleticism was there. It's a different game now gentlemen.

            Deandre Jordan is paid a fortune because he's huge, can block shots, and is an athletic freak. This is a player who back in the old days, because he shoots free throws like crap and has little to no offensive game would've been on the bench most of the time. But in todays zoom-zoom game of NBA basketball, men like him stand to make millions. I certainly am not suggesting we get someone like him for our team but making this team more athletic is a great idea. We'd just have to search for players with DJ's athleticism but who can also do everything he can't do.
            Last edited by Grimp; 12-30-2014, 03:46 PM.

            Comment


            • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

              I just read that Jodi Meeks is one of the best 2nd tier SGs in the NBA.......

              Comment


              • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

                Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                I just read that Jodi Meeks is one of the best 2nd tier SGs in the NBA.......
                I got to watch a lot of Laker games in that season Kobe was down for most of it. What sold me on Meeks was the game he had versus OKC on Christmas day I think. Dropped like 40+ or something. That was back when they had Seflosha too, who was supposed to be their defensive stopper.

                Comment


                • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

                  Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                  I got to watch a lot of Laker games in that season Kobe was down for most of it. What sold me on Meeks was the game he had versus OKC on Christmas day I think. Dropped like 40+ or something. That was back when they had Seflosha too, who was supposed to be their defensive stopper.
                  The Lakers are my other favorite team aside from the Pacers, so I'm sure I've watched more Meeks than anyone on this board. He's a very good shooter, and underrated crafty scorer. I was sad to see him go. But he's probably not even in the top 15-20 2guards in the league right now. His lack of defense or anything else really aside from scoring can render him unproductive when he's not scoring

                  Comment


                  • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

                    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                    The Lakers are my other favorite team aside from the Pacers, so I'm sure I've watched more Meeks than anyone on this board. He's a very good shooter, and underrated crafty scorer. I was sad to see him go. But he's probably not even in the top 15-20 2guards in the league right now. His lack of defense or anything else really aside from scoring can render him unproductive when he's not scoring
                    He was in that D'Antoni system though. I know there are NBA Players who just don't try on defense but when you're playing for D'Antoni defense isn't part of the requirements. And if coaches don't preach or teach defense players won't bother.... truth.

                    Comment


                    • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

                      Unfortunately, I think I was actually correct in my initial evaluation where I called CJ Miles a cab driver. He can get hot some games, but so can every other player in the NBA. He shoots this off-balance, quick release 3 point shot that never seems to go in. As much as we all bag on Gerald Green, CJ Miles looks like a worse version of Green
                      Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                      Comment


                      • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

                        CJ's biggest problems lately has been shot selection. When he gets his feet set he is usually pretty accurate. Lately it seems as if they have ran him off screens and had him shoot on the run, which does not play into his strengths IMO. He is best served as a catch and shoot guy.

                        Comment


                        • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

                          Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                          Other ball dominant players that didn't play well here: DJ Augustin, Gerald Green, and to a much lesser extent--Leandro Barbosa. Our offensive pace, emphasis on both the high and low post, and system in general is not condusive to ball dominant players. PGs or wings.

                          Unless we changed our system, those same guys (Dragic or Jackson) would have the same issues here that everyone else does.
                          So now are we going to call all creators ball dominant as if that is a bad thing. A creator needs the ball in his hands to create ala Steve Nash. You take the ball out of Nash's hands in his prime and all you got is a shooter not an NBA MVP. You want the ball in their hands because they make other people better. But I agree that you can't have too many in the lineup at once as Charlotte does right now. In no way is Green or Barbosa ball dominant players, they spend more time working off the ball than with it. Augustine does need the ball to play at his best and that is exactly why he wasn't a good fit here. So with our style why did we even sign him? That is what baffles me.

                          Comment


                          • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

                            Ball dominate doesn't necessarily mean that they have to have the ball in their hands, at all times. It means they need the ball a lot in order to produce, or another term that's commonly used, a chucker. A player like Rudy Gay is of that description. Doesn't dribble the ball a whole lot, just shoots the ball when he gets it. He dominates the ball, by shooting it so often.

                            Gerald Green is another example of that type of dominating the ball. His usage% this season is 28.4! For reference, PG's usage% last year was 28.3. Per36, Green would average 19shots per game. That's Kobe's career per36 shot attempts level.

                            Ball dominate players aren't "bad." It just depends how effective they are doing it. Nash, was extremely ball dominate. Then again, when you shoot 50% from the field, and 40+% from 3, and average double digit assists, you WANT that type of player to dominate the ball because all your other options are worse. (Nash's highest usage% was 24.4 btw)
                            Last edited by Since86; 01-19-2015, 11:30 AM.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

                              Originally posted by Since86 View Post

                              Ball dominate players aren't "bad." It just depends how effective they are doing it. Nash, was extremely ball dominate. Then again, when you shoot 50% from the field, and 40+% from 3, and average double digit assists, you WANT that type of player to dominate the ball because all your other options are worse. (Nash's highest usage% was 24.4 btw)
                              Agreed. But too many ball dominant players on one team does not work.

                              Also, let's set aside the phrase ball dominant and instead look at the actual problem. The problem is that some players dribble the ball and stop the offensive flow. DWest doesn't do that. He normally gets the ball and shoots it. Guys like Lance, Paul, Kemba and Al Jeff (to some extent as he posts up)...pound the air out of the ball and stop the passing game from working.

                              Going further, George Hill isn't ball dominant because he normally just moves around quite a bit. He does pound the rock but because he's passive a lot he's not looking to score like those guys...so he simply hands it off and then starts running...which works fine even though it's a net zero.

                              Hibbert doesn't back guys down either for the most part because he's ineffective posting up. He's normally making his points trying to hurry up a shot because guys body him up. So, he's not pounding the air out of the ball either.

                              So...the Hornets have three guys pounding the air out. The Pacers only had two last year. That's probably one of the reasons Lance excelled in Indy last year.

                              Comment


                              • Re: So what do you think of CJ MIles now

                                Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
                                CJ's biggest problems lately has been shot selection. When he gets his feet set he is usually pretty accurate. Lately it seems as if they have ran him off screens and had him shoot on the run, which does not play into his strengths IMO. He is best served as a catch and shoot guy.
                                Yeah, I've noticed the same.....like he's trying to do his best impression of Kobe. Right now, he and everyone else is asked to do far more than they are capable of and we are seeing the result.

                                I have no problem with the minutes and that he takes 12+ FGA a game, I just have a problem with Vogel letting him shoot like this ( without addressing it ) and Miles getting the notion that he can take these type of shots ( see bad shot selection ) when he's not that great at doing it ( he needs to un-think this and simply stick more to what he is good at doing ).
                                Last edited by CableKC; 01-19-2015, 01:57 PM.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X