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:
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

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

Why The NBA Abandoned Roy Hibbert

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

  • Why The NBA Abandoned Roy Hibbert

    INDIANAPOLIS — Five years ago tonight, the Pacers needed a hero.

    It was Game 6 of the Eastern Conference semifinals against the Knicks — a game Indiana needed to avoid a trip back to Madison Square Garden for a treacherous Game 7 — and New York was nursing a 92-90 lead over Indiana with five minutes left. The torrid Carmelo Anthony, who would finish the night with 39 points, received a post entry and spun left on a gambling Paul George before racing to the basket for what would be a massive tomahawk jam. Only it wouldn’t be.

    Just before Anthony’s dunk could find the bottom of the cup, 26-year-old defensive stud Roy Hibbert, Indiana’s 7-foot-2 tree of a center, managed to get his outstretched left arm between Anthony and the rim. The rejection, Hibbert’s fifth of the evening, sent the once-nervous Bankers Life Fieldhouse crowd into a tizzy and led to a Lance Stephenson bucket on the other end — the beginning of a tide-turning, 9-0 Indiana run that would seal both the game and the series for the Pacers. The block instantly became the defining play of Hibbert’s career — one he was so proud of that he made a point of placing not one but two posters of it on his man-cave wall.

    Yet five years later, Hibbert, one of the best rim protectors in basketball, is out of the league.

    How does that happen? How does a former All-Star and recent defensive player of the year runner-up — who’s 31, presumably still physically healthy and still has an elite skill that is always in demand at this level — find himself nudged out of the NBA in such quick fashion?

    The league learned new tricks, and Hibbert didn’t.

    “It’s surprising to me. I’ve talked to Roy about this, but he could still be playing in the league right now,” said Frank Vogel, Hibbert’s former coach in Indiana, who was recently let go by the Magic. “But the league has adapted, both big picture and in terms of what he was doing for us in Indiana. There’s been a severe evolution in how the league plays, and he’s been a victim of it.”

    To fully understand Hibbert’s fall, you have to grasp what made him special in the first place. Hibbert, who declined an interview request for this article, could score — he averaged 22 points in the 2013 conference finals against Miami, for example — but Hibbert’s real value was in his defense around the basket, where he was a master of playing within the NBA’s rules on verticality, in which a player looking to block a shot is only legally allowed to jump straight up and down with his arms extended. Hibbert was so good at doing this that LeBron James, seemingly frustrated with Hibbert and what he perceived to be uncalled fouls against the big man, once referred to it as “his verticality rule,” saying that officials allowed him to make use of it more than other players.

    His ability to jump straight up and rarely be whistled for fouls allowed Indiana to play an extremely aggressive style of defense, in which the Pacers played out on the perimeter to eliminate 3-point shots without really worrying whether an opposing player might get a path to the basket. If that happened, Hibbert would be there to clean up the mess.

    With that Hibbert-centric scheme, the Pacers led the league in defensive efficiency in 2012-13 and 2013-14, according to NBA Advanced Stats. They held opponents to a meager 97 points per 100 possessions each season while making back-to-back conference-finals trips in the process. The big man finished among the league’s top five in blocks and defensive win shares both years, while holding close-range shooters1 almost 16 percentage pointsbeneath their average field goal percentage in 2013-14, a rate that easily led the NBA that season.2

    Yet as Hibbert continued to protect the rim well, that skill by itself became less valuable in a changing NBA. Take, for example, the Pacers’ 2014 playoff series against No. 8 seed Atlanta, in which the Hawks surprisingly took top-seeded Indiana to seven games.

    Atlanta, which would go on to win 60 games the following season, exposed the Pacers’ defensive scheme (and thus Hibbert’s shortcomings) by playing lineups in which all five players could shoot from the perimeter. Much like a dog who’s bound by the constraints of an electric fence, Hibbert opts to stay tethered beneath the free-throw line on defense when he can, both so he can shut down shots at the rim and because his mobility isn’t good enough to defend in open space. The Hawks nearly stole a series because of it.

    This lack of athleticism is part of the reason that Larry Bird, the Pacers’ president during Hibbert’s tenure with the team, applied blunt, public pressure to Hibbert, saying he wasn’t sure whether the slow-footed center fit the plan to play a more uptempo style going into the 2015-16 season.

    Hibbert spent just over 71 percent of his time on defense beneath the free-throw line on defense from 2013-14 through 2015-16, the third-highest rate in the league over that span, according to data tracked by ESPN Analytics and NBA Advanced Stats. It’s almost certainly not a coincidence that the two players ahead of him on that list — Tristan Thompson and Timofey Mozgov — have seen their on-court value diminish in the same time frame. (Nor is it surprising that other players on the list are all better offensive players, justifying their minutes.) NBA big men who hang back on the defense most

    Players by share of time beneath the free throw line on defense, 2013-16
    Tristan Thompson 75.7%
    Timofey Mozgov 72.3
    Roy Hibbert 71.3
    DeAndre Jordan 70.4
    Enes Kanter 67.4
    Steven Adams 67.0
    Kosta Koufos 66.9
    Zach Randolph 66.8
    Tim Duncan 65.7
    Andre Drummond 65.2
    Includes only power forwards and centers with a minimum of 2,000 minutes total from 2013 to 2016.

    “It just sucks,” said George, now with the Oklahoma City Thunder, when I asked him about Hibbert. “I guess that’s the direction of the league right now: Faster, more quick up-and-down pace, to where I don’t know if teams will gamble on that sort of big that can’t move as well. But then you see a guy like (Boban) Marjanovic, who’s the biggest guy in the league, and he has a job. So I’m not really sure. But I think Roy is still ideal for a team that needs a rim protector.”

    At the same time that Hibbert was struggling to have the same impact defensively, other players — ones with more mobility and better foot speed — began learning how to perfect the notion of verticality. “It’s been mimicked and copied all over,” Vogel said. “You see Rudy Gobert and Joel Embiid and think about them, but even at other positions. Wings have to learn it so they can guard someone like James Harden without fouling and without bringing your arms down.”

    In a way, Hibbert’s downfall just came down to awful timing. The NBA has become far more reliant on 3-point shots from everyone on the court, big men included. Players 6-foot-11 or taller now take more than twice3 as many threes as they did five years ago, according to ESPN’s Stats & Information Group. On top of that, players of that height are now on the cusp of matching the league’s average shooting percentage from long range, making 35.1 percent in 2017-18 — only a shade beneath the leaguewide mark of 36.2. The tallest players aren’t shy about taking threes anymore

    Total number of 3-point shots and share of shots that are 3-pointers for players 6 feet 11 inches and taller
    2017-18 5,709 16.7%
    2016-17 4,901 13.7
    2015-16 2,931 8.3
    2014-15 2,548 7.2
    2013-14 2,573 7.7
    Of course, these aren’t the only reasons why Hibbert is no longer in basketball. After spending years playing alongside George on defense, he had to navigate the vast majority of the 2014-15 season without the premier wing stopper, who’d broken his leg in gruesome fashion during a USA Basketball scrimmage the previous summer. Beyond that, ex-Pacers teammate David West, who now plays for the Warriors, suggested that Hibbert’s confidence took a hit when the team signed Andrew Bynum ahead of its 2014 playoff run.

    “It messed things up,” West said. “It was a distraction. Not because (Bynum) is a bad guy. But anytime you bring in a 7-foot-1, 320-pound man, it’s going to create a presence.”

    Hibbert’s shift from the East to the West for a one-year stint with the Lakers in 2015-16 also didn’t help. The young Lakers ranked dead-last in defensethat season, a display that likely didn’t do much to help market Hibbert’s skills. At the same time, he went from ranking first and fourth in rim protection in 2013-14 and 2014-15, respectively (among players who logged at least 45 games and defended at least three close-range shots per game) to 63rd in that category in 2015-16, according to NBA Advanced Stats.

    “The thing is, in Indy, we had concepts. We normally weren’t hurt all that much by the things he couldn’t do because we wanted to force teams to drive on us,” West said of Hibbert. “What hurt him — and what was out of his control — was leaving Indiana and going to the West, where everything is wide open, and it’s a totally different ballgame.”

    Sure enough, Hibbert’s defensive numbers looked more normal again — arguably elite, even — when he moved back East in his last season, 2016-17, spending most of the year with the Charlotte Hornets.4 He held opponents to a field goal percentage 12 points below their average around the basket, third-best in the league.5

    It was yet another indication that Hibbert’s game and skill set hadn’t changed all that much since his glory days with Indiana. Instead, it was the rapidly changing NBA that seemed to chug right along without him.

    Check out our latest NBA predictions.

    CORRECTION (May 18, 5:00 p.m. EDT): An earlier version of this article misattributed data on the NBA big men who hang back on defense the most. The data came from ESPN Analytics and NBA Advanced Stats, not Second Spectrum.
    The former Indiana All-Star is still just 31, and he boasts one of basketball's most coveted skills. But that isn't enough in today's ever-changing league.
    Sittin on top of the world!

  • #2
    This has already been posted.

    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13