Tweet
Originally posted by Peck
View Post
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.
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
-
even if it's not explicit orders from high, it's got to be clear to Nate that it's not a good idea to bench his boss' "prize offseason acquisition," at least not yet
-
My Thoughts on Tonight: (I apologize for the crudness ahead of time)
Oladipo is phenomenal.
Sabonis > Embiid
Myles has never seen a shot fake that he didn't jump at. Please stop jumping when contesting jump shots more than 5ft away from the basket.
Thad has been horrible so far this season, he's had his moments, but if this is what he is from now on he should have gone into free agency. We really need him to wake up and start playing.
Nate needs to **** off. This dip**** says all the right things in the pre-game interviews, then it never ****ing shows up in games. You don't want to be calling plays? If you are the team is playing too slow, then why the **** do we have one of the slowest teams in the league? Why are you always saying play faster and move the ball in these pre-game interviews and then we have one of the slowest teams that doesn't pass the ball? There is a huge ****ing disconnect between what you are saying and what I am seeing. Oh, and how many times does this starting line-up have to get down by 10+ points in the first quarter until you change it up. Last year this was a constant issue the whole season, and again this year it has been a constant ****ing issue. Even worse, why in the hell is the CoJo, Evans, McDermott, Bogdanovic, and Sabonis lineup still getting minutes? Going into tonight it was the 4th most played lineup this season, with a per 100 possession +/- of -22.2. Then it loses the game for us tonight. What kind of sane basketball coach would still play this lineup for extended minutes by choice? It is pretty damn clear this line-up is bad. It is just down right ****ing bad. Any good stretches you get out of it is an anomaly. There is no way around this, yet you Nate insists on trotting it out there at the end of the 3rd and beginning of the 4th ****ing quarter, letting the other team build a 17 point lead and gaining all the ****ing momentum. Oh, and by the way, the other version of this line-up, just switch Bogdanovic with Thad has been pretty damn good at +39.8.
It is a testament to the quality of players we have on this team that they are good enough to overcome such a bad coach to make it a close game.
Comment
-
We really put Nate in a bind by giving Myles that contract before next summer. Now he has to cater to Myles' ego and equity. I really think we can chalk 2 Ls this year to babysitting Myles' feelings.
Start Sabo. #SaboBrosInSolidarityComment
-
so what is the problem with turner? low bball iq? condition? mental? or is he just not talented enough?Comment
-
Same here.Originally posted by Peck View Post
if you remember correctly, Peck, at the last PD get-together, during our round table questioning, when asked about how any of us felt about the off-season, I was up in the air. Then, you reminded me that we signed McDermott to a contract, and I changed my answer to “I’m disappointed with what we did”. When everyone was gushing about him, I kept thinking that maybe they were seeing something that I wasn’t seeing. But how he’s been so far, is exactly what I saw “every” game I’ve watched of him. He’s borderline garbage IMO.
One other thing I will say, is if we don’t get our **** together in the next couple of weeks, there better be lineup changes. Sorry but waiting until December to try to fix this problem is ludicrous. Right now, we look like a potential “we got schooled in the second round” playoff team to me. I really want to eat crow by seasons end for saying this, but until something, anything, changes, I’ll feel this wayComment
-
-
Yea I remember. I also was upset (to say the least) with the off season. O'Quinn was about the only one I was happy with and for whatever reason Nate just will not play him.Originally posted by pogi View Post
Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13Comment
-
I'm definitely in the minority in here when it comes to Myles but allow me to answer.Originally posted by xtacy View Post
On his basketball IQ: It's average. He isn't a basketball savant like Jokić and Domas. He is no JR Smith either, though. Yes, it takes him about half a second to survey the situation and make the right call. He doesn't know the game as well as a vet which is something you'd expect from a 22 year old guy. And before someone mentions Domas, I'll say it again. Domas is unique. He has the best basketball smarts on the team (yes, even better than Dipo). There are only a handful of bigs who have a better basketball IQ than Domas (Jokić, Horford, one or both Gasol brother and maybe Gobert). So, we shouldn't be surprised that Domas has better basketball smarts than Myles. It would be like being surprised that Joel Embiid is bigger than Nate Robinson. It's just a fact of life. Anyway, returning to Myles' BBIQ. It's what you'd expect of a big his age. We saw Embiid tonight. Embiid is a phenomenal talent. Much more talented than Myles. But did you see his decision making at times? 5 turnovers. Ill-advised and rushed 3s. Embiid has the talent so he tries to do way too much, way too quickly. Myles definitely doesn't have Embiid's talent. So, he mostly plays within his strengths (or what his coach considers his strengths, we'll get to that later) but since he doesn't know the game as well as a vet there is that hesitation that some people consider lack of basketball IQ or lack of aggressiveness.
On his conditioning: He probably had such issues in the past but those no longer exist. His conditioning is great right now.
On the mental aspect of the game: My personal opinion is that it's a pretty normal for a young big his age. He needs to get touches to get in a rhythm like most bigs. He'll get frustrated if he's pulled but will go right back to cheering his teammates within a play or two.
On whether he's talented enough or not: It depends. As I said above, he's nowhere as talented as Embiid but that's something we all knew. What we kinda forgot about was that Myles was supposed to be a project when we drafted him. He was supposed to be raw. We kinda forgot about that because he played quite well early on but that never stopped being the case. He has offensive talent. He hasn't been able to put it all together yet but he has a great jump-shot, good handles for his size and he has shown improvements as a post scorer and passer. He also has defensive talent. He has honed that more than he has honed his offensive talent. He came into the league as someone with bad defensive fundamentals who could block some shots and has developed into a dependable defensive anchor. He protects the rim, defends the PnR well and has improved as a post defender. He has also shown the ability this season to do a decent job on switches against smaller players. What Myles doesn't have is rebounding talent. He lacks rebounding instincts. He doesn't have a nose for the ball. If we want him to help our team rebounding then we need him to be boxing out and to his credit that's what he's doing this season. His individual rebounding numbers will never be great but if he focuses on boxing out then he won't hurt you either. He'll be a net neutral and your team will be kinda average at it (like we are right now).
As for what's up, here's what I'd answer. Some of it is our system, some of it is on our expectations, some of it is on him.
I don't think that Nate is using him correctly. He seems to be utilized more on the block this season as opposed to in Pick and Pops. He doesn't face-up to the basket as much as he used. A fellow PDer also reported earlier in the season that Nate always yelled at Myles last season to "take it closer to the basket" and shoot a long 2 every time he took a 3 last season. That has made him tentative to take 3s and when coupled with his natural tendency to think before he acts, it takes him out of his rhythm.
In general, I have a lot of issues with how Nate is using some of our players this season. He is misusing our shooters. He doesn't run plays for them when they're in the court. The only one I've seen is having Doug curl off a screen on the elbow 3 about once per game. Sometimes, Domas gets that play too. Heck, he doesn't even run Pick and Pops with TJ Leaf. Why is Leaf in the corner instead of screening? Leaf literally only has 1 screen assist so far into the season. And it's not just that. He is also doing something even worse. He is playing them together. Both Peck and Eleazar talked about it but any (and I mean any) combination of Doug with either Bojan or Leaf isn't going to work. It's something that doesn't work defensively for obvious reasons and if you're not getting them shots on the other end then why are you even playing them like that? What's the point? Yeah, they do add spacing to the Reke/Domas PnR but Doug/Leaf aren't scoring then they aren't doing anything (Bojan can do some other things but not as a PF). I just cannot really comprehend this lineup at all. He also insists to play slow despite the fact that DC is still an extremely fast PG. Granted, this could be DC's fault since he has looked pretty lethargic so far (save from one or two good games) but whatever the reason it doesn't seem correct. In general, only two players seem to have played well in most games. Oladipo and Domas. And unsurprisingly, they are our two best players.
Now, on to the expectations part. As I said earlier, we all knew that Myles was supposed to be a raw project. I mean, before he was drafted scouts even doubted his ability to run correctly and examined his gait. He was never supposed to be good right of the gate. But he did play pretty darn well in his rookie and especially his sophomore season. That made us forgot that he was raw and he still had a long way to go. And yeah, I also fell into this trap. Myles still has the talent to become an All-Star one day but his improvements are far more gradual than they were early on in his career.
As for some of it being on him, I think it's obvious. He can do better. He can have less mediocre games (like the one last night) and more good games (like the one against the Bulls). I think that asking for better consistency is fair.Originally posted by IrishPacer
Empty vessels make the most noise.Comment
-
Some new pieces, pieces that aren't playing so well. I think they look pretty okay for now.Originally posted by the_real_lg33 View PostComment
-
-
I'll repeat it for clarity; if you don't run plays for Reggie he won't score.
Now I'm not comparing him to Doug and Bojan, but let's be fair, these guys are rhythm shooters, they excel coming of screen and catch&shoot, making their contribution "free flowing" isn't going to work, I mean how can you come of staggered screens if none of them are practised and executed as expected, P&P and P&R you can do at any moment with two players who understand each other, or if you use Domas, since he will be able to adjust on the fly.
In short coach is setting Doug and Bojan and a lesser extend Darren up for failure, of course that is handy because he can say "MY SHOOTERS ARE JUST NOT HITTING ANYTHING ATM" which of course is
but hey, someone will believe him.
How is it possible that Doug for Rick worked like a charm but he comes here and he is crap? I suggest we trade Nate for Rick and heck throw in Tyreke if we must! (though i still think he can be more useful!)
Sabonis has one year less in this league than Myles, was supposed to be less talented is the same age, yet he plays like a big man, that rebound with 3 sixers on the same ball and he just ripped it from them? I swear that got the Dale Davis seal of approval! and Dale saw Domas playing and sat back, sure his work was done.
Our problem is not KP being involved with who plays and who doesn't but I'm sure I still see some remnants of a bird around there, he decided Myles (and Lance) were the talents on this team.
Myles is worth his contract in today's league but he can earn it by coming of the bench just as well. (just saying)
Oh and please stop saying Myles is a good defender, talk to me again when he can keep someone in front of him and not goes for a fake. outside his shot blocking his defense is atrocious and absolutely incomparable with Domas.So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.
If you've done 6 impossible things today?
Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!
Comment
-
Looking at our schedule I predict 6-4 over the next 10, next two games being losses. So we might hit 7-7 before things get better.Lifelong pacers fanComment
-
All of the above honestly. He's just not very good. Not a cornerstone piece anyway.Originally posted by xtacy View PostLifelong pacers fanComment
-
We have talent on this team. Nate just needs to step up. When you have decent players who aren't performing up to their level that's all on coaching. We're a better team when everyone is involved and not just standing around watching sabonis and Oladipo.Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 11-08-2018, 08:58 AM.There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.Comment
-
Too much talent on this this roster for these kind of offensive struggles.
Name-calling signature removedComment
Comment