Tweet
Ja reminds me of an unselfish Allen Iverson.
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
-
-
I know you hate Myles and that you think you are the greatest basketball expert in the known world and that if you don't love someone they are trash and suck and should be playing pickup ball in Oregon, but I am really sick and tired of you imputing your attitude to every player you hate.Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
Myles has been nothing but supportive and energized and willing to do whatever he is asked to do to play within the system. He wasn't mooted for DPOY by fanboys on PD but by actual sports writers who actually know stuff and it is neither stupid, conceited, or unreasonable for him to have been disappointed.
You have no respect for these players. You spell their names wrong or give them demeaning nicknames from your high-and-mighty bully pulpit and then expand your contempt to everyone who thinks of them as people or even dares to disagree with your perfect opinion.
I don't know why you think players have as sh177y an attitude about the team as you do, but it has to stop. Not everyone in the NBA can hope to aspire to the inspirational level of a$$4ole you embody.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
BillS
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...Comment
-
I’m pretty sure you said the same thing to me about PG,West, Hill and others.Originally posted by BillS View Post
I was proven 100% right and never got my apology
Pretending the NBA is not a business is a naive way of looking at things but go ahead and do you nobody is stopping you my guy
@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!
Comment
-
I wouldn't be mad at how Myles been playing defensively if he just REBOUND. A 7 foot dude should not be averaging around 5 rebounds when he could EASILY get like 10+ if he tried. How many times I gotta see Myles fake attempt for a rebound only to see one of our guards snatch it or the opposing team get a wide open offensive rebound right in front of Myles?Comment
-
It was good to see McConnell take that 3 and knock it down after Crowder backed away from him in the corner. Teams are gonna play him like that until he proves he can hit it. The 3 ball is really the only weakness in this guys game so I hope he keeps working on it.
The bench dominated again. This is probably the bench rotation going forward until Vic’s back. TJL’s out, and Goga’s probably relegated to 5-10 minutes depending on matchups. I just hope Goga isn’t one of the guys cut from the rotation when Vic gets back. Please don’t do it Nate.Comment
-
Sabonis played bad. He needs to improve scoring (twice) - there is a threat to our tickets...I'm really sorry because of my english (which is my 3-4 language) and I really appreciate Your patience. I hope this board will make me better
Comment
-
May I suggest you ignore him? And by that I mean add him to your ignore list in your account settings so his posts just don't show up anymore? It makes life so much easier, give it a tryOriginally posted by BillS View Post
Comment
-
Again I didn't really watch the game, but Sabonis & Brogdon both kind of put up numbers I expect of them once Victor is back.....maybe a couple more points for each of them.
I mean if Sabonis puts up 15ppg/13rpg/5apg that is still All-Star numbers in my book given how much he influences the results.
Brogdon I kind of expect around 16ppg/4rpg/8-10apg (he is a far superior passer than I thought)
Kind of leave the scoring to Oladipo & Warren on the consistent basis.
Genuinely feel that Turner's involvement has slowly decreased since he has come back & I'm not sure it's going to get much bigger. A real dirty work, defensive player would kind of work well within our starting unit, which Turner is not. Not saying he isn't effective at what he does, but given his skillset & build up of being a key franchise piece with Oladipo & Brogdon it might wear on him a bit, not being in a position to succeed or be used more regularly. Still can't argue with today's result, hopefully Turner remains an awesome teammate & accepts whatever role he is given.Comment
-
I agree with a lot of what you're saying but I don't think consistent and Warren will ever go together. He's a very streaky playerOriginally posted by festar35 View PostWhy do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.Comment
-
Pacers outrebounded the Grizz 47-41. This isn’t even a problem from the team perspective. Myles also gave you 5 blocks, he’s out here being amongst the best in the NBA at the one thing Sabonis is absolutely weakest at as a big.Originally posted by 31Since1990 View Post
Myles is giving you about 12 and 7 at 50/40 and being in the conversation for leading the league in blocks again. If the Pacers are a top team later in the season and Myles is leading the league in blocks he’ll be in the DPOY conversation again.
I just don’t understand what y’all want from the guy? Force his offense? Pad for meaningless rebounds ala Troy Murphy? Dudes doing exactly what he’s supposed to out there. Him and Sabonis fit like a glove, been saying it since the freaking trade. Each one compliments the others weaknesses nicely.
"As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."
- ilive4sportsComment
-
And for all myles haters. Ja Morant was afraid going to the rim when myles was in, and he was unstopable when there was just Sabonis. Teams are changing there offence with him on the court and if that doesnt tell how important he is for our D I dont know what isOriginally posted by Infinite MAN_force View PostComment
-
There’s really no point to him padding his rebound totals anyway, you’re better off letting a guard initiate the break. Guy just needs to box out (he does). Considering some people around here always pushing the “blocks are overrated” narrative then harping on this most meaningless of individual counting stats is silly.
Sabonis is better at it, he should be the one angling for the boards and he’s putting up historic numbers for the team, talk about a non-existent problem.
Brook Lopez went 30 minutes without a rebound for the Bucks the other night, he’s still a hugely important piece to what the Bucks do, and Myles is a younger superior player doing a similar role for this team. Unless the team is losing the boards battle harping on his rebound totals is desperate and flat out meaningless.Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 11-26-2019, 06:24 AM."As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."
- ilive4sportsComment
-
That was a very nice win. Memphis isn't a playoff team but they are no pushovers either. In their last game they went down to the wire and only lost by a point to the 15-2 Lakers. They have some great young pieces in Ja Morant, Jaren Jackson Jr and Brandon Clarke.
A few quick notes about the game. The game was indeed played at a very fast pace but it wasn't so much due to turnovers. In fact, Memphis only turned the ball over 8 times which is surprising given their youth and the pace of the game. We also won the rebounding team which is something I always like to see even if it's not entirely necessary these days. Neither team played a lot of defense. I'd say that this was a game where defense was mostly played individually and not as a team. Our offense certainly looked great but as already noted, Memphis didn't play a lot of defense. Still, it was great to see us attempt 33 3s. That's a big improvement from the 26.5 3s that we're averaging so far into the season. 33 3s per game would have us at exactly 15th in 3-point attempts per game while our current numbers places us at 29th. It's not the style I personally prefer but it is what we have to do if we want to be an efficient offensive team in this league. We have the shooters to do it.
Now, let's talk about our players a bit.
Domas: He didn't need to take a lot of shots tonight but the ones he did take, he made. He was still a vital point of our offense with his playmaking ability and, of course, secured rebounds as usual. 13 points, 13 boards, 6 assists and 2 steals was his final statline. His personal opponents (Jaren Jackson Jr. and, at times, Brandon Clarke) did score on him but as noted above, not a lot of defense was played in that game so I'm not going to knocking him for it. What I will point out is that he did a great job at hitting mid-range jumpers last night, canning all 3 of the looks he got from that range. That's very important for him. Every NBA team has realized by now that Domas is an absolute elite roll man and that he's a huge threat on the PnR. On top of it, Brogdon has proved to be both an elite finisher at the rim and a very capable distributor. So, when a team faces a Brogdon/Domas PnR their primary objective is to wall off the interior. They can't allow either of them to get in the paint. This means that they have to give up mid-range shots. If Domas hits those shots like he did tonight then there's really no way to stop the Brogdon/Domas PnR. Domas definitely has the ability to hit that shot and if can do it consistently then watch out.
Warren: 26 points on 15 shots? Yes please. He also had a 3 taken off so he could have easily had a 30-point night. Warren was coming off a 2-point performance which wasn't entirely his fault (he only took 4 shots in that game after all) so it's nice to see him bouncing back. He once again showed his ability to score in a variety of ways and from all over the floor. I liked seeing him score in broken-down plays. Converting a broken-down play into points is pretty damn important. Warren is here to score and that's exactly what he's doing so far. He also grabbed 4 boards.
Myles: 7 points, 5 blocks, 4 boards and 2 assists may not be a great statline (well, other than the blocks) but make no mistake, he had a big impact on the game, especially on the defensive end. If you don't believe me, ask Ja Morant. Morant had a rather inefficient night for his standards (shot 40%, he's at 47.2% for the season) and a lot of it was due to not being able to score over Myles at the rim. Myles was one of the few players who played good defense, imo. And it wasn't just his rim protection. Myles is often knocked for his personal defense (incorrectly, imo) but tonight he did a pretty good job against Valančiūnas. I know that the box score says that Valančiūnas scored 14 points but 8 of those 14 points came in garbage time (less than 5 minutes of a game where we had a 20-point lead). Myles has struggled against Valančiūnas in the past (especially in his first playoff series where Val dominated him) but Val was no threat tonight.
Brogdon: 14 points, 8 assists, 6 boards and 1 steal. Welcome back, Malcolm. He was a bit rusty which showed in some of the shots he missed and in some uncharacteristic turnovers but that's to be expected. I don't think that it's a coincidence that our offense looked so good in the first game of his return. Brogdon is just great and I'm very glad that he's a Pacer.
Lamb: 19 points, 4 boards, 4 assists and 1 steal. What I like about Lamb is that he has an all-around game. He is a scorer first and foremost but he can also facilitate a bit, grab boards and play defense. He is comfortable with the ball in his hands and he is comfortable in an off-ball role as well. He has shown the ability to run the PnR. He can be a good running mate for Brogdon/Dipo and he can also be good in a scorer off the bench role. To put it simply, he is a good player and he is on a team-friendly deal to boot.
Justin: 9 points, 2 boards and 2 assists. Another very solid game by Justin Holiday who has found a very nice role with us. He is a versatile wing that will play and defend 2 to 4. Is he Nate's new security blanket? Yes, he is. But as long as he is effective in his role (which is to defend and hit 3s) I'm fine with it. He is a winning player and I'm sure that he's a positive influence on his little brother.
Doug: 7 points, 4 boards. Not a great game for Doug but not a horrible one either. He played just fine. He scored on good efficiency and grabbed some boards.
Goga: 4 points, 1 board and 1 block. Unfortunately, he only played 7 minutes. This is a mistake, imo. Goga needs to get more run. We have enough minutes in the big man rotation for Goga to get at least 15-20 minutes (especially now that Leaf and Simon are out of the rotation) but Nate opted to go small against Memphis for an extended period of time (Domas, Myles and Goga combined for 70 minutes, we had 3 minutes of garbage time for Leaf and Alize, which means that we spent around 23 minutes with one of Justin Holiday, TJ Warren or Doug McDermott at PF). I guess that Nate went away from Goga because he got two quick fouls in the second quarter but that's not a good enough reason, imo. Young guys need to play through their mistakes and we have another young player in the rotation that is living proof of that (Aaron Holiday). Nate should know better and get over his hesitance to play big. In any case, I don't want to rag on Nate too much as I feel that he coached a good game tonight. I just want to see Goga play more. I think he has earned it and his play in those 7 minutes was good enough to warrant more time.
McConnell: What can one say about McConnell? He has simply been a revelation. I knew he could play but he has exceeded my expectations so far. 11 points, 6 assists and 5 boards (2 of them offensive!) was his statline. He is very crafty around the rim and can score from unexpected angles. He even hit a 3 tonight which was exciting since that's his main weakness. But his scoring isn't what makes McConnell valuable to us. What makes him so valuable to us is his ability to run the offense of our second unit. No matter who you put next to him, he is able to get them going and there's no Pacer for whom this is more true than Doug McDermott. Doug has been playing better this year and a lot of it has to do with McConnell. Doug is a player that needs to get involved in the offense to produce and McConnell is doing exactly that. Doug attempted 5.5 shots per game last year and he is at 7.9 shots per game right now. Some of it is due to increased minutes (from 17.4 MPG to 21.6 MPG) but most of it is due to McConnell actively looking for Doug (something that Tyreke Evans didn't do). And Doug is simply an example. McConnell has that effect to every other player he plays with which is why our second unit is looking like a point of strength.
Aaron: As I said earlier, he is the living proof that you have to allow a young player to prove through their mistakes. Aaron struggled early on in the season but lately he's simply looking like the real deal. 16 points (on 4/6 3-point shooting), 3 boards, 2 steals and 1 assist. He was part of the lineup that helped us explode our lead early in the 4th and we never really looked back from it. He mostly played as the off-guard tonight and he showed that he can be very effective on that role as well. He is averaging 11.9 PPG, 4 APG, 3.3 RPG and 1.2 SPG while shooting 44.4% from 3 in November. Those are pretty good numbers. He definitely looks like a rotation player and he even filled in very nicely as a starter when needed. I really hope that he retains his spot in the rotation even after Oladipo returns.
All in all, I've been very pleased with our team so far. We are sitting very comfortably at 10-6 despite the significant roster turnover and the amount of injuries we've faced so far. Yes, our schedule has been very easy so far but let's not sell ourselves short. Philly (who has a much more stacked roster than us and hasn't faced as many injuries as we have) is only half a game above us and they have dropped games to Orlando and OKC, two teams that we have beat.
So, things are looking pretty damn good in Pacerland. Let's rejoice
Originally posted by IrishPacer
Empty vessels make the most noise.Comment
-
Well, this week was a light one so they probably were able to actually practice a few times.Originally posted by imawhat View Post"man, PG has been really good."Comment
-
Exactly. Just to further illustrate your point, we are currently #6 in the NBA in Rebound Percentage at 51.4% -> https://stats.nba.com/teams/advanced...REB_PCT&dir=-1Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
This means that we are grabbing 51.4% of the available misses.
We are also tied for 7th in Opponent 2nd Chance Points at 11.9 per game -> https://stats.nba.com/teams/misc/?so..._CHANCE&dir=-1
This statistic currently ranges from 10.1 (Philly) to 16.3 (Portland) so we are much close to #1 than we are to #30.
It's still early in the season but rebounding has been a strength so far. It is pretty much the definition of a non-existent problem.Originally posted by IrishPacer
Empty vessels make the most noise.Comment
Comment