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

All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
    He got rid of our bigs without properly replacing them and then he went on and signed more wings than we ever needed. There is a clear roster imbalance. You have every right in the world to be fine with it. Personally, I'm not fine with it.
    We added Jordan Hill (unquestionably a better player than David West right now) and Turner (clearly belongs in this league and was showing some nice things before busting his digit). Mahinmi and Allen have stepped into larger roles. That is more than enough to replace a Hibbert/West duo that simply was not good last year. Most importantly, the four players I listed are very fairly paid, which has allowed flexibility in other areas. Conversely, Hibbert and West were weighing us down with their albatross contracts. To say that Hibbert and West haven't been properly replaced is just not giving any credit to the players who are helping the team win this season.

    Hibbert/West used to be a great duo, but you are forever living in 2013. They weren't good last year and we've easily moved on from what they are in the present. We did not lose 1985-86 Parrish and McHale.

    Also, you always put it all on Bird even though West *clearly* checked out on the franchise before last season even started.

    At the end of the day, you're judged by wins and losses. Bird's rebuilding plan been a success in the metric that matters above all else.

    Comment


    • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
      I've bolded the two biggest problem with your thinking here.

      First, during the Hibbert/West era the Pacers were the most unbalance team in the NBA. All defense and no offense. I don't care how many big you deem to be quality, a balanced NBA is good at both offense and defense. The Pacers, as currently constructed, can be elite defensively and above average or better offensively...that's balance.
      We obviously have a different approach to what balance is then. You seem to define it as being good at both defense and offense. That's not how I define it, though. I define it as having a team where the guard, the wing and the big spots are equally good. That's the kind of team that the 11-12 and the 12-13 teams exemplified (the 13-14 team failed in this aspect). And I adored those teams.

      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
      Second, why does Bird have to prove the old version is better than the new one?
      Bird doesn't have to prove that the old version is better than the new one. He has to prove the opposite or he has to restore the balance.

      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
      It's not Bird's fault West got old. It's not Bird's fault West didn't want to start anymore. It's not Bird's fault Hibbert declined and was bringing down morale in the locker room. Blaming a GM for a team rebuild and holding that GM up to the standard of the former team at it's peak, is like blaming Pat Riley for not having a replacement ready for Lebron to take the Heat back to the Finals.
      I agree that none of this is Bird's fault. I'm not blaming him for any of that (even though I do believe that he played a role in our so-called locker room issues). However, it was his job to restore the balance of the roster once those things happened and he failed to do it. Or he chose not do it because he thought it would be better off this way.

      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
      It's a real shame people are unhappy with the process, because to me, that's the most fun part. Watching how a team is put together and how young players end up contributing and growing is my favorite part. We're lucky Bird is good enough to do this on the fly, lucky to have Vogel, and extremely lucky to have PG. I would suggest getting happy with the process because this looks like Bird is building something special.
      The most fun part is watching the team grow. And believe me, you can do that even if you disagree with Bird's process. Because Bird isn't the team. He's just an executive. The heart and soul of the Pacers are the players and the coaches.
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

        I'm still confused as to why Bird has to prove that this team is better than the 12-13 one, when had we kept West/Hibbert we still wouldn't have been as good as the 12-13 team.

        Comment


        • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

          Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
          So do you think we'd be better with no Monta/JHill/Stuckey etc but kept Hibbert/West?
          No. That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that we'd better if our guards, wings and bigs were all equally good. Right now, we have a crapload of talent at the wings, great talent at guard and mediocre to good talent at the big man spots. I'd like that to be a little more balanced. That's my point.
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

            Earlier, some argued Roy was still elite defensively and just as, if not more efficient than Ian on offense. Here's a Lakers blog from today that articulates why that is not the case perfectly...

            Meanwhile, statues in space are increasingly unplayable. Small ball essentially turns Hibbert into a situational cog who, right now, just so happens to anchor one of the worst defenses in the league.

            You won’t find any of this context on his resume, or anything about his inability to punish those smaller lineups on the other end. According to NBA.com, the Lakers are the worst offensive rebounding team in basketball with Hibbert on the court.

            His usage percentage is unprecedentedly low, his turnover rate is at an all-time high and he currently averages fewer shots per 36 minutes than anyone on the team. Just over a quarter of Hibbert’s possessions are from post-ups, where, so far, he’s been one of the least efficient options in the league, per Synergy Sports.
            When asked if there was a correlation at all between post touches and defensive effort, Hibbert laughed: “No, I mean, would I like more [post touches]? Yeah. But, like I said, I know that’s not what they brought me in to do. I’m a professional and my job is defense, rebounding and making things tough for people. So post touches are a plus.”
            On Hibberts high TS%...

            In large part due to his low volume, careful shot selection (he's finishing around the rim and nailing open mid-range jumpers) and impressive free-throw rate, Hibbert has the league's fourth-highest True Shooting percentage (.636).
            In fairness, he also says that Hibbert is still really good and helps LA...

            It may not be the most en vogue quality right now, but Hibbert’s still as good as anyone at the one skill that makes him so appealing. And don't even try to imagine what the Lakers would look like if he wasn't their anchor.
            http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...bbert-obsolete

            I just don't understand why these same problems are missed. We're moving in the right direction.

            Comment


            • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

              Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
              I'm still confused as to why Bird has to prove that this team is better than the 12-13 one, when had we kept West/Hibbert we still wouldn't have been as good as the 12-13 team.
              Because I believe that if we hadn't altered our identity (note: that doesn't mean that we'd keep David/Roy, we could just as easily replace them without upsetting the team's balance) we would surpass the 12-13 team this season.
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                Because I believe that if we hadn't altered our identity (note: that doesn't mean that we'd keep David/Roy, we could just as easily replace them without upsetting the team's balance) we would surpass the 12-13 team this season.
                But with who? I've only seen RoLo and Amir Johnson type players. When healthy these replacements would not get minutes.

                Comment


                • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                  What would RoLo even add to this team? He's basically a Mahinmi esque player. Also how Amir Johnson or a player of his caliber would make us better than what Monta Ellis/Stuckey can make us I will never know.

                  Comment


                  • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                    To say that Hibbert and West haven't been properly replaced is just not giving any credit to the players who are helping the team win this season.

                    Hibbert/West used to be a great duo, but you are forever living in 2013. They weren't good last year and we've easily moved on from what they are in the present. We did not lose 1985-86 Parrish and McHale.

                    Also, you always put it all on Bird even though West *clearly* checked out on the franchise before last season even started.

                    At the end of the day, you're judged by wins and losses. Bird's rebuilding plan been a success in the metric that matters above all else.
                    No. To say that Hibbert and West haven't been properly replaced is refusing to blame those two particular players for all of the injuries we had last season. I'm sorry but I'm simply not going to judge any Pacer based on how they played in 14-15. The injuries to the team were too many and the lineup was never stable. As far as the Pacers are concerned, 14-15 was an asterisk year.
                    Originally posted by IrishPacer
                    Empty vessels make the most noise.

                    Comment


                    • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                      I've only seen RoLo and Amir Johnson type players. When healthy these replacements would not get minutes.
                      RoLo wouldn't get minutes when healthy? He would be our best big if he was a Pacer and only Myles could give him a run for his money.

                      Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                      What would RoLo even add to this team? He's basically a Mahinmi esque player.
                      No. RoLo is better than Ian. At least, he was when he was with the Blazers. I'd be lying if I said that I've watched this year's Knicks.

                      Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                      Also how Amir Johnson or a player of his caliber would make us better than what Monta Ellis/Stuckey can make us I will never know.
                      That's not what I said. I said equally good. Do you think that replacing Monta with Amir would make our bigs equally good with our wings? I certainly don't.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                        No. To say that Hibbert and West haven't been properly replaced is refusing to blame those two particular players for all of the injuries we had last season. I'm sorry but I'm simply not going to judge any Pacer based on how they played in 14-15. The injuries to the team were too many and the lineup was never stable. As far as the Pacers are concerned, 14-15 was an asterisk year.
                        If Hibbert was more than just a role player, and West was still a quality starter for a season, that would have been more than enough than to get us 39 wins to get to the playoffs.

                        Comment


                        • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                          RoLo wouldn't get minutes when healthy? He would be our best big if he was a Pacer and only Myles could give him a run for his money.



                          No. RoLo is better than Ian. At least, he was when he was with the Blazers. I'd be lying if I said that I've watched this year's Knicks.



                          That's not what I said. I said equally good. Do you think that replacing Monta with Amir would make our bigs equally good with our wings? I certainly don't.
                          RoLo has been very average with the Knicks, not a bad player at all but he is what he is. A decent role player. Basically Mahinmi give or take a little. Also what big was available that was equally good in comparison to Monta? I can't think of any.

                          Comment


                          • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                            Can anyone name me a contender who's bigs are equally good as their wings? Golden State? Nope. Cleveland? Maybe? I would say no. Clippers? Nope. OKC? Nope. San Antonio is the one team that comes to mind.

                            Comment


                            • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                              No. To say that Hibbert and West haven't been properly replaced is refusing to blame those two particular players for all of the injuries we had last season. I'm sorry but I'm simply not going to judge any Pacer based on how they played in 14-15. The injuries to the team were too many and the lineup was never stable. As far as the Pacers are concerned, 14-15 was an asterisk year.
                              Hibbert (76 games) and West (66 games) were relatively stable health-wise. Both severely underwhelmed. Now West is an old bench player in SA, and Hibbert isn't as good as he used to be here a couple of years ago. Last year was not some coincidence.

                              Would you not judge George Hill based on how he played in 14-15? Of course not because he played really good and deserved props, which I'm sure you've given.

                              Would you not judge Rodney Stuckey based on how he played in 14-15? Of course not because he too had a solid season.

                              Even in an erratic season like last year, you can still get a sense for how individuals are playing. Guys like Hill and Stuckey had good seasons. West and Hibbert OTOH severely overwhelmed as a duo based on their salaries and expectations. To not hold them accountable for their play because of someone else's injury is just making an excuse. The excuse for Hibbert in 2014 was that the ball-hogging wings were stealing his thunder. Then the excuse a year later was that there weren't enough good pieces around him because of injuries (the main injury being to a superstar who was once accused of dominating the ball too much). Wasn't Hibbert supposed to excel without those pests PG and Lance who hogged too much of the offense?
                              Last edited by Sollozzo; 11-23-2015, 11:24 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: All things Roy Hibbert for the next year or so....

                                Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                                Also what big was available that was equally good in comparison to Monta?
                                A number of them. The problem is that most (if not all) of them weren't interested in coming here.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X