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 Peck View Post
    I have removed the initial part of his post. That one just slipped past me to be honest.

    However I'm letting the rest of it stand because IMO it is about the subject matter.
    Fair enough.
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


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

      I don't ever remember us struggling to get the ball to D. west.

      Comment


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

        Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
        Basically you slam Vogel here by saying he was unable to scheme a way to get the ball fed to the post. Slam Bird for not having the "correct personal," yet you have went out of your way to esteem "smashmouth" basketball, but here are critical of that philosophy due to spacing. Slam Hill, PG, and Lance for not delivering to the post in a timely manner.
        I'm not slamming anyone. I'm simply defending our players, past and present.
        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 PacersPride View Post
          "No-brainer" would be giving back half his salary for 2014's seasons collapse. whats hibbert do, gives the lakers 3 m ill in cash for giving the bum a chance. what player does that??


          This is the type of thing that really frustrates me. You're using a statistic that was either after or during the Atlanta series to make your case, but if one were to look up Hibbert's PER for the entire playoffs that year, it was at 12.1 (which is significantly higher).

          Did he have a legendary horrendous performance during the Atlanta series? You sure as heck bet he did. Was he horrendous for the entire playoffs? Definitely not if he was able to bring his PER up from a miserable 0.8 to a 12.1 in the next two series.

          I don't understand why you believe it's a fairer assessment to recognize him at his worst moments without recognizing anything positive or something on a larger scale.

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
            I don't ever remember us struggling to get the ball to D. west.
            We kinda did, though.

            Here's David West's 11-12 shot chart: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...shooting/2012/

            We can see that the area in which he attempted the most shots from is the 3 to 10 ft area. That's the area that encompasses most of the low post area. He attempted 285 shots from that area. At the rim and 16 ft to 3pt were tied at #2 with 194 shots. So, David West played a lot on the inside in 11-12.

            Here's his 12-13 shot chart: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...shooting/2013/

            The 3 to 10 ft area is still his favorite area. He attempted 412 shots from that area. 16ft to 3pt was his 2nd favorite area. He attempted 292 shots from there. At the rim was 3rd with 288 attempts. So, West was still primarily an inside player in 12-13.

            Here's his 13-14 shot chart: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...shooting/2014/

            And here's the big change. The 3 to 10 ft area is no longer David's #1 range. It got replaced by the 16 to 3pt area. David attempted 375 shots from that area while his 3 to 10 ft shot attempts fell to 338. At the rim was still 3rd with 229 attempts but 10 to 16 ft is getting really close to it with 217 attempts. David West was clearly beggining to play more outside in 13-14. He traded his low post touches with PnP touches and he also begun to operate in the high post more.

            Here's his 14-15 shot chart: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...shooting/2015/

            313 attempts from the 16 ft to 3pt area. 136 attempts from the 3 to 10 ft area. 109 attempts from the at the rim area and 108 attempts from the 10 to 16 ft area. The difference between 16 ft to 3pt and all the rest is huge. David was clearly an outside player in 14-15.

            We can clearly see a pattern here. David West played less and less in the post every single year. There is a reason for that. The George Hill-David West PnP was one of our best plays and resulted in a lot of shots in the 16 ft to 3pt area for David. So, he obviously gravitated towards that play and that area. We didn't have the same amount of good plays that could get him a good post shot. And we didn't have that because none of our players was a particularly good post feeder.
            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 BenR1990 View Post
              This is the type of thing that really frustrates me. You're using a statistic that was either after or during the Atlanta series to make your case, but if one were to look up Hibbert's PER for the entire playoffs that year, it was at 12.1 (which is significantly higher).

              Did he have a legendary horrendous performance during the Atlanta series? You sure as heck bet he did. Was he horrendous for the entire playoffs? Definitely not if he was able to bring his PER up from a miserable 0.8 to a 12.1 in the next two series.

              I don't understand why you believe it's a fairer assessment to recognize him at his worst moments without recognizing anything positive or something on a larger scale.
              I get that. I believe many on the other side of the fence echo the same sentiments. We see rim protection fg% hammered again and agin to justify roy as an elite defensive presence. I have spoken on that stat in detail once already. If you review it, you will see approximately 10 of the 24 players on that list are from the same teams. For example, Dwight Howard, Josh Smith, Terrence Jones. Not all three of those guys are elite rim protectors. Same goes with Mahinmi, who is ranked top 10, only a few spots behind roy. Its a team based stats that skews numbers. Not a reason to declare Roy as an elite (overall) defender.

              You are pessimistic of my stats reference but what about the ones from HibbertNation. For example, ones only a few pages back stating Hibberts performances have been in line with his overall career average.

              Thats not true of his postseason stats. Review them at your convenience but you will see a significant decline in overall performance.

              http://espn.go.com/nba/player/stats/.../3/roy-hibbert

              His points and rebounds almost cut in half. From 17 to 9 ppg and 9.9 to 5.5 in rebounds. Blocks also declined. There is no other way to say it but that his performances in the playoffs stunk. He had some good games only to turn around the next game and vanish.

              As highlighted below, the ECF vs the Heat the same season he averaged 10 pts and 7.5 boards vs subpar talent in haslem and birdman. Those are players roy should dominate. This is the series I am recognizing. When pacers needed Roy to step it up, after coddling him for half a season, letting him rest, even in the playoffs, he did not show up and produce.

              That is the basis of "assessment." Which do you feel is more "fair" recognizing Roys rim protection fg% or his numbers in the ECF when it counted. I do not have insider for advanced stats but my guess would be under evaluation Roys rim fg% significantly declined during that postseason run as well.

              I have evaluated roys entire game. this was the conclusion reached way before Bird's press conference. Roy has struggled mightily over the last 2 seasons counting the playoffs.

              The guy should be in his prime. Yet clearly regressing in performance. What is the larger scale you would like him to be recognized by. The same one used by Larry?? Or do you got a better one in mind?

              Comment


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

                IMO, if we start out the new season feeding the post the same way with Turner and/or J. Hill then standing in one place waiting for them to make a move, we will create the same nonsense we had with Roy. Roy could not establish and hold position for any length of time, so the feeder needed to be moving from the time he passed the ball.Like a pick and roll with Roy dropping the ball to a cutting wing. we didn't. Dont want to think about feeding Ian the ball at the foul line extended and expecting him to do anything at all with it. Turner can maybe learn to look for an open man before making some silly dribble move. Or maybe he can actually make a meaningful move with the ball after he catches it?

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by Cousy47 View Post
                  IMO, if we start out the new season feeding the post the same way with Turner and/or J. Hill then standing in one place waiting for them to make a move, we will create the same nonsense we had with Roy. Roy could not establish and hold position for any length of time, so the feeder needed to be moving from the time he passed the ball.Like a pick and roll with Roy dropping the ball to a cutting wing. we didn't. Dont want to think about feeding Ian the ball at the foul line extended and expecting him to do anything at all with it. Turner can maybe learn to look for an open man before making some silly dribble move. Or maybe he can actually make a meaningful move with the ball after he catches it?
                  I think Turner is going to be way better with the ball than Roy. And I mean by a lot! He has much better passing skills than Roy and he can put the ball on the floor rather well. He also has a good looking turn and fade. But I don't expect our offense to look much like last year. Roy never had much of a chance to show his passing skills. Once the NBA figured out if you pressure Roy he will loose the ball. That locked him in. He was a marked man from that point.
                  I think much of Roy had to do with great scouting by other teams. Once teams knew that you could pressure Roy with dang near any player on your team. He would cough up the ball or take a very bad shot. One of the two. He wasn't gonna pass the ball once he had it because he knew it would get stolen. So really, feeding Roy the ball hurt the team and Roy.


                  "Pacers will win 50 games this season" 07-16-2015
                  "Ian will average 10-10 this season" 10-21-15

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                    I don't ever remember us struggling to get the ball to D. west.
                    What are we talking about? We didn't try all that much because West isn't a post threat. Hibbert was supposed to be a post threat but he wasn't because he couldn't maintain balance well enough to shoot for a percentage becoming of a big.

                    In any event, West and Lance had pretty good chemistry on the court and Lance never had a problem feeding the ball to West. Lance didn't feed it to Hibbert because he didn't believe Roy would convert. Paul could feed the post ok but not as good. Still what we find at every turn excuses for Roy's game. Excuses that the market for his services could see right through.

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      What are we talking about? We didn't try all that much because West isn't a post threat. Hibbert was supposed to be a post threat but he wasn't because he couldn't maintain balance well enough to shoot for a percentage becoming of a big.

                      In any event, West and Lance had pretty good chemistry on the court and Lance never had a problem feeding the ball to West. Lance didn't feed it to Hibbert because he didn't believe Roy would convert. Paul could feed the post ok but not as good. Still what we find at every turn excuses for Roy's game. Excuses that the market for his services could see right through.
                      Actually most say both were a problem.

                      Our team has lacked post threats and post feeders for years now. And each make the other problem worse.

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                        Actually most say both were a problem.

                        Our team has lacked post threats and post feeders for years now. And each make the other problem worse.
                        Not to mention bogging the offense down, dissuading any real ball movement, and the telegraphed passes ended in a lot of turnovers.

                        Comment


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

                          Originally posted by cdash View Post
                          Not to mention bogging the offense down, dissuading any real ball movement, and the telegraphed passes ended in a lot of turnovers.
                          Boy you got that right. What I said about teams scouting Hibbert can be said about our entire team.


                          "Pacers will win 50 games this season" 07-16-2015
                          "Ian will average 10-10 this season" 10-21-15

                          Comment


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

                            I must be in the minority. I felt that we had good to descent post feeders. I always felt that Hibbert was the problem in the post. The man couldn't hold his position for nothing, and missed way too many bunnies for my taste. I don't need stats to tell me what I can see with my own eyes.

                            I can't tell you how many times I would get frustrated when the perimeter would try to feed him the ball, and he's getting folded over at the waist by his defender. I can't tell you how many times that I would get upset when he FINALLY gets the ball, and he decides he wants to take his sweet time. Personally. I'm basing my opinion on him after the ball is in his hands.

                            I'm not going to dispute his defensive presence, but you're going have a hard time convincing me the team AND coach will forget how to play defense because Roy left. They won't be "elite", but we're not going to be bottom feeders either. We have Vogel who constructed the defense in the first place. Roy didn't come here with some master plan to how to play defense. That was on Vogel. Period.

                            If you want the honest to God truth, I'm rather disgusted that he went the Lakers and NOW he decides he wants to focus on defense and rebounding and any points he gets are bonus. WTF? That's what I wanted from him while he was here, but nooooooooo...Hibbert wanted to be a scoring center too, and Vogel tried to cater to him like a fool. Between Hill, Stephenson, West, and George, we had enough players in the starting 5 to put points on the board.

                            Last year was a fluke due to the injuries, but I was REALLY expecting Hibbert to step up and show his worth. He disappointed me, and I'm not too broken up that he's gone now. The team is going a new direction, and he's no longer part of that plan. I expect Indiana to be a playoff team this season...nothing more, nothing less, so I'm not too caught up in this whole regaining our "elite defense" overnight.

                            Like last season, I'm going to watch the games with no real high expectations. If we make noise by concidence, then just consider me pleasantly surprised.
                            Last edited by ksuttonjr76; 07-27-2015, 10:54 AM.


                            Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers Knock Out game: Round 3

                              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson
                              He was just an AS in 2014, mainly because of his defense.
                              Roy was nowhere near an all star level player the second half of 2014. Why even pretend to portray it any differently. There's a thread for hibbert dialogue so no reason to go into great detail about it here. But I believe anyone willing to discuss the facts will recognize this is the Roy of 2014 when it mattered most.




                              Comment


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

                                (( Pulled from the Knock-out thread))

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                Roy was nowhere near an all star level player the second half of 2014. Why even pretend to portray it any differently. There's a thread for hibbert dialogue so no reason to go into great detail about it here. But I believe anyone willing to discuss the facts will recognize this is the Roy of 2014 when it mattered most.




                                Even if what you said were true, it doesn't change the fact that he was named an All Star during the first half of 2014. You're original quote said that he hadn't been good defensively in 3 years. 2014 was just last year.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X