Tweet
Originally posted by Pacerized
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
-
Actually I find it quite interesting that Myles complained about his touches tonight. When you take a couple extra games off cuz you don’t feel completely 100%. You essentially force the coach staff to re-evaluate your usage because they are now having to Plan a lot more games with out you. Domas sprains am ankle misses like 3 games. Turner misses 8, it’s a big difference to game planning and all the adjustments and things they run in practices.You can't get champagne from a garden hose. -
The fact we were playing good and playing against such a good team gave me the strength and the will to last the whole game ( up until 5:00 am over here ). What I loved the most from the game is that we didn't lose our **** when they had their run and Bogdanovic got hot from the perimeter. We responded perfectly.
We are deep this year in terms of personnel, bench is actually helping, the ceiling is higher that last season's team, we are getting better and more exciting by each game and there is the small thing of Victor coming back to look forward to. Yeah, things are rosy right now.
PS: Brogdon is such a complete and such a good player.Comment
-
Yes. I believe that this sacrifice is necessary since it allows the team to operate at the highest possible level but it's still definitely a sacrifice.Originally posted by croz24 View Post
I use stats and videos from nba.com because I want to be as objective as possible. The eye test is never objective. It always succumbs to our biases. We see what we want to see and we remember what we want to remember. If we like a player, we will forget his bad plays and highlight his good plays. If we dislike a player, we will forget his good plays and highlight his bad plays.Originally posted by croz24 View Post
Introducing statistics, video evidence and all kinds of data is how you can analyze the game from as an objective point of view as is possible (you will never be 100% objective but you can at least try). The eye test is still used and it definitely has its place but you can't rely on it alone. It's insufficient.
I'd say that Myles has had at least two better games earlier this season where he was involved more offensively. I'm talking about the first Detroit game and the Milwaukee game. Myles has definitely fulfilled his role very well in the past two games but he can do more than that and he has proved it a number of times, both this season and in seasons past.Originally posted by croz24 View Post
Unfortunately, I didn't watch the first half of last night's game. I didn't hear my alarm clock ring so I didn't wake up in time (the games are past midnight in my time zone and since I'm working in the mornings I have to sleep earlier than usual and then wake up at around 2 or 3 AM to watch them). I plan on watching the first half on replay later today. So, I can't talk about what happened in last night's game.Originally posted by croz24 View Post
I can talk about what happened in the Memphis game, though. Myles consistently got deep post position when Memphis went small but we only managed to get the ball to him once or twice. The other 6-7 times that it happened, our guards weren't able to make the pass. They opted to attack the mismatch they had (guard on big on the perimeter) instead. Do I believe that they should have passed to Myles more in the Grizzlies game? Absolutely. He did a great job establishing deep post position against mismatches and he made himself available a number of times. Unfortunately, we didn't get him the ball.
Turner doesn't crash the offensive glass, that's true. It isn't the Pacers fault and it isn't Turner sacrificing either. It is simply a function of his role as the rim protector and stretch big of the team. You know who crashes the offensive glass even less than Myles? Brook Lopez, Lauri Markkanen, Kevin Love, Kristaps Porziņģis and a number of others. Jaren Jackson Jr. crashes the offensive boards as much as Myles does. You know what all of these guys have in common? They are used as a stretch big for their teams. Their role is to space the floor and as a result they aren't close enough to the basket when a shot goes up to crash it often. Three of them (Brook Lopez, Kristaps Porziņģis and Jaren Jackson Jr.) are their team's rim protector as well, just like Myles, so the incentive to get back on defense is even stronger.Originally posted by croz24 View Post
Domas is free to pursue offensive rebounding opportunities (something that he is great at) exactly because he knows that Myles has his back and will get back on defense quickly in case he misses the offensive board.
Yes, Domas is better at the PnR than Myles. That much is true. The Pacers are definitely better served to run most PnR and DHO sets through Domas. What happens when Domas sits and Myles is still in the game, though? That's not an uncommon situation for us at all as Nate is trying to stagger the two as much as he can. I'd say that we play around 8-10 minutes per game when Myles is in the game and Domas isn't. In those minutes, we should absolutely be running PnPs for Myles. We did that earlier in the season. 7 of Myles' 15 shots in that first game came when Domas wasn't in the game and we run PnRs and PnPs for Myles. We haven't done that often in these past two games and it's a shame.Originally posted by croz24 View Post
Or we could simply have Myles take more 3 point shots. He took 3 in this game and 2 in the previous one. Myles should be averaging around 5-6 3s per game like the aforementioned Brook Lopez.
True, Turner is not a great rebounder. But he isn't a bad rebounder either. Turner is an above average rebounder that helps the team's overall rebounding by boxing out much more often than the average big. Rebounding has been a strength for us this season and when Turner is in the game we are consistently outrebounding our opposition. The bad rap that Turner's has gotten regarding his rebounding is undeserved and based on a cursory reading of box score stats, imo.Originally posted by croz24 View Post
I don't think that Myles has poor hands. Ian Mahinmi had poor hands. Myles is average to good when it comes to hands, in my opinion. But I won't contest that point a lot since it's eye test versus eye test. There are no statistics to back it up and procuring video for this particular point seems like a hassle.Originally posted by croz24 View Post
I will 100% disagree with the second part of your statement, though. Myles is good at boxing out. As I pointed out in that previous post, he is leading our team in defensive box outs. Last season, he was top 15 in the league in defensive box outs at 6 per game -> https://stats.nba.com/players/box-ou..._BOXOUTS&dir=1
Last year, Myles averaged the same amount of box outs that Al Horford did and a higher number than Rudy Gobert (despite playing fewer minutes than either of them). I'm sorry but saying that he isn't good at boxing out isn't supported by any kind of statistical data or video evidence. So, it's once again eye test vs eye test (our eye tests obviously disagree on this) but in this case I do have the statistical data to support my position.
Do you know why players care about their individual stats? It's because the team owners, the fans and the media all care about that crap. The players are paid according to their individual stats and their reputation because we care about all that. If we didn't care about that then the players wouldn't care either.Originally posted by croz24 View Post
It's in our hands to stop caring about individual stats. Box score stats are, quite often, meaningless for a number of reasons. We, as fans, should always dig deeper in an effort to understand the game better. We should seek out advanced statistics, especially the ones that are specialized on exactly what we want to be looking at. We should watch game tape. We should care about a player's impact on the game much more than we should care about their individual stats.
As long as we, as fans, keep caring about individual box scores stats and individual box score stats only then so will the players. Unfortunately, the vast majority of us only cares about meaningless box score stats. People will easily comment about a game even if they haven't watched a single minute of it. The result of this is that box score stats become much more important than they should be because that's what people see. They don't see what the player is actually doing on the court. They just see who has pretty-looking stats. Sadly, there are a lot of box score watchers and PD has no shortage of them.
Turner has proved time and time again that he is a capable scorer. He is a very good 3-point shooter, shooting 45.1% from 3 on the year in 4.1 attempts. He definitely needs to get more attempts from 3 than the 5 total he got in the last two games. He is also a very efficient scorer in the PnR/PnP. These are this year's data for this particular playtype for our team -> https://stats.nba.com/players/roll-m...gular%20SeasonOriginally posted by croz24 View Post
He is averaging 1.26 PPP (Points per Possession) as the Roll (or Pop) Man on a PnR/PnP. That number puts him on the 71.4 Percentile which is pretty damn good. His numbers are actually better than Domas but that's offset by Domas' ability to create for others on the short roll.
I'm not saying that we should post Myles up every trip down the floor. But he should definitely be shooting more 3s and he should definitely be involved in more PnRs/PnPs when Domas is off the floor. He has proved his capability so, yes, only taking 5 or 6 shots is definitely a sacrifice.Originally posted by IrishPacer
Empty vessels make the most noise.Comment
-
I don't disagree with that. What I disagree with is the notion is being "stroked" or "appeased". That somehow the team is bending over to accomodate Myles. That's what I disagree with.Originally posted by pacers_heath View PostOriginally posted by IrishPacer
Empty vessels make the most noise.Comment
-
Great win. With the Friday and Saturday back to back I want to see both won
My reverse jinx worked😁{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
-
Domas bruised his knee, there was no sprain or strain. Completely different injury, but yeah, missing three weeks when the initial diagnosis was two to four weeks is Myles being a pansy, smhOriginally posted by graphic-er View PostComment
-
First off, good win with lots of strong performances. However, I am to at all convinced the Jazz are a WC contender. There's not a lot of depth there and Connelly, while good, is over the hill. They can rack up 3s in bunches and good D. But I don't know. Feels like something's missing.
As to the Myles discussion, I'm not watching the video. There are clearly multiple interpretations of the same answers and body language. All I can say is every time I see Jeremy Lamb's comatose locker room interviews, I think if I were the interviewer I'd be offended at his apparent disinterest in answering and total ignorance of my being a human being a foot away from him. I just don't think you can take away major conclusion about the a player's mindset, personality, intentions, etc. from a single, brief locker room interview.
That said, I'm fully comfortable with what Myles's role appears to be transitioning into. I think it fits his skill set perfectly. His two primary responsibilities are his two biggest strengths - shot blocking/rim protection and three point shooting. I think if you can consistently get him 3 more attempts per game, mostly from 3, occasionally from FT line extended, that should do it.
As pointed out, as the stretch big on offense, he won't get a lot of boards there. I've consistently maintained he'll never be a post-up threat, even against smaller guys. Doesn't have the natural strength in the base and flexibility to "sit down" to gain and hold position. So not a big deal. Also won't be a massive rebound collector on defensive end, but does a reasonable job boxing out not to be a liability with other active rebounders.I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.
-Emiliano ZapataComment
-
T.J. McConnell just continues to define the work smart and efficient.
Good article in Star about him. His offensive game almost completely revolves
around the basket. Normally at his height that would not be the case
but he is such a threat to find the open player the defense leaves him
and he makes them pay. He needs to be a LONG term PacerLast edited by owl; 11-28-2019, 10:23 AM.{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
-
DeAndre Hunter for Myles makes too much sense not to happen, Atlanta get their rim protector and Indiana get their small forward of the future with star potential.Originally posted by festar35 View Post@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!
Comment
-
"While he wouldn’t bring the passing impact that Horford provided, Turner is a dynamic paint protector and can space the floor. For reference, Turner led the NBA in blocked shots while shooting 38.8 percent from beyond the arc in 2018-19. He also has greater offensive upside that has yet to be tapped into as a result of being held to a usage rate below 20% since his rookie year — at a career-low 18% in 2019-20.”Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
His trade value will never be higher."Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference
Comment
-
I saw someone say Even though Turner isn't a good rebounder, he isn't a bad rebounder either.
He isn't currently in the top 50 rebounders in the league on a per game basis and he's our starting center. He usually doesn't crack it either or barely does. That's pretty bad, let's be honest.
Sent from my LG-LS998 using Tapatalk
Lifelong pacers fanComment
-
Great all around win. I continue to get more and more excited as the early results seem to become more validated every game.
I hope all of our players recognize that sacrifice for the team is essential to contend. Every player can not score 30 points each game. Every player will not get interviewed after the game.
If the players can collectively buy into the team concept, and make real sacrifices, it is becoming more and more clear that we have the talent to compete sooner vs. later.
I still believe the offensive touches given this team makeup need to focused around Sabonis, Oladipo, and Warren... in that order.
Turner and Brogdon will have their games based upon matchups, but if we are playing to win... they need to facilitate the other three. Turner gave us all a clue when Brogdon alleyooped him. Hes got a lot of easy offense coming to him, between wide open threes and quick post stuff when smaller players are switched on him.
Sabonis is proving himself to be pretty much unstoppable in the paint. Its impressive. He has also shown a strong ability to know his own limitations from possession to possession and pass out of the block to perimeter players for easy threes. He rarely forces it.
Warren can create offense, even on broken plays. Thats also super impressive. Oladipo is Oladipo.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ProLast edited by docpaul; 11-28-2019, 09:22 AM.Comment
-
Our size is going to become our calling card. We will pummel most teams physically. I dont know how teams are going to defend us if we continue to play like this. 76ers will be true evaluation of this.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ProComment
-
Nice list. I think we can add Goga to it. The past few years of picks, not so much. But this one? Looking good so far.Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post"Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference
Comment
-
Ummm. The negotiating table is precisely the time and place that is appropriate for playing hardball. If Myles failed to do that, it just may reflect another aspect of softness. Domas has spoken his concerns once, at the appropriate time, directly to management, in his several years with the Pacers. Never in an interview during the season. Not in the locker room, as far as we know.Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
Also, perhaps Myles said nothing because he got a better deal than he deserved, and Domas barked because he wasn't being offered an appropriate amount. (Both theories are proving to be true.)Last edited by McKeyFan; 11-28-2019, 09:45 AM."Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference
Comment
Comment