Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Up till this point.....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Up till this point.....

    How do you think we've look this season?


    Some will agree with me, others will not about our team, but here is my takeaway from the season to date as we venture into the unknown.

    I think we have a very talented starting 5, over this last stretch I think Sabonis & Turner have proven they can coexist extremely well. Oladipo is slowly coming right, those numbers he is putting up are in 27mpg so if he gets 100% healthy & increase that number by 5 or so you are at least back to season 2 Oladipo.

    I still see 1 HUGE fatal floor in our roster & that is our lack of 3pt shooting outside of Holiday (25mpg)& McDermott (20mpg) who are both bench guys. Now they both have their limitations & I can understand why they aren't starting or getting more minutes, but out starting line-up really needs more shooting. Our bench takes 12 attempts per game (18th amongst benches), shooting 39.5% (2nd best in the league). If our team as a whole could creep into that top 20 on attempts (5 more a game) I think we really put ourselves in the top of the East.
    Now here is the thing, our starting line-up outside of potentially Oladipo are not volume 3pt shooters. Sabonis puts up 1 a game & that's fine because he is our big guy inside. Turner puts up a good amount for a big man at over 4 attempts a game, just needs to get a little more accurate. Now to Warren & Brogdon, I like both these guys as players & Warren is probably higher on my list. Warren is taking 3 attempts a game, last year he took 4.2 this would be the first place to start for me. He is a very good shooter & this is on Nate to get him looks, but he is really creative offensively I'm sure he could create an attempt or 2 himself a game. Brogdon has been poor this season after a hot start, he has really taken a hit in confidence from outside still shooting 4 a game though & man he is terrible shooting off the dribble from outside, he almost always misses.


    So how do we fix it? Well short term is to give McDermott & Holiday a little more court time, but even then they are guys that generally score out of the offense than create there own opportunities.
    Long-term I feel that one of Brogdon or Warren should be moved for a guy who can create his own 3pt looks & shoot a reasonable clip on 6/7 attempts a game. Who is that guy, I'm not sure but it's not a coincidence that a lot of times our bench comes in with McDermott & Holiday spacing the floor we catch up to teams once the starters have failed to fire early. We play a lot of catch up basketball, Boston is the perfect example & it was Oladipo's 3pt shooting that got us back into that game.

    The thing is the names that keep coming up for me are SG's which would push Oladipo to PG, which I'm not opposed to but I think he is better not having to run the offense. We do have an ace in the hole so to speak with Sabonis though, who once the ball is up the court the offense is run through him.
    I know a lot of people won't like my idea, but Buddy Hield is on similar money to Brogdon (we could add in Leaf), he has consistently voiced his displeasure about his situation & he can shoot the lights out at nearly 40% on 10 attempts a game. (He is also the same age as Brogdon so fits the timeline)

    Anyway, that's my rant over.
    Last edited by festar35; 03-12-2020, 07:02 AM.

  • #2
    If you would have asked this before the All-Star break I would have said to use Turner, Lamb, and Brogdon as trade bait this offseason. Now that Lamb is out with a potentially career altering injury and Myles seemingly playing like a different player just before the season being suspended I'm not sure what to do.

    I'm not really worried about 3 point shots at all with the starters. The issue here is primarily Brogdon just having a down season. His career average is 38.5%, and he is shooting 31.3%. I think he has to have been playing injured for a long time. Then combine that with Lamb who is a career 33% shooter from 3, and it isn't going to look good. Warren and Brogdon have both proven capable of shooting 40+% from 3, while Vic has proven to be a respectable shooter from distance. So I see no long term issue with the players, especially as Oladipo takes on more ball handling duties. I think a bigger issue is Nate's offense, or lack there of. We just do not run any plays designed to get easy shots for our guys. If a high pick doesn't get you an easy 3, then it really just comes down to someone having to make a play in order to get a good shot. That just isn't conducive to an efficient offense.

    I do know, the sooner we move on from Nate the better this team will be.

    Comment


    • #3
      We have a contender of a team. We should keep our core and will see how far can we get. Twin Towers Forever....#TTF

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm not sold on Brogdon/Oladipo backcourt. It's not an ideal fit. We don't seem to have tried Brogdon off the ball at all. Victor has to have the ball in his hands.

        That combined with Turner/Sabonis front court equals a talented team, but the pieces don't fit together right. We're good enough for 50 wins, but maybe could be better with adjustments.

        Sent from my LG-LS998 using Tapatalk


        Last edited by pacers_heath; 03-12-2020, 09:37 AM.
        Lifelong pacers fan

        Comment


        • #5
          I'm sure this is not going to be popular, either, but here's my take.

          You need...NEED...the guy in Turner's spot to be at least a competent shooter. He's currently at 30% on the season from 3. It's now reached a point where he's not even classifiable as a streaky shooter. He's just poor.

          Otherwise, his recent resurgence in other areas have driven his value back up. Team's know what he can do & will want to use him in a role that doesn't force him to be camped on the perimeter. In other words teams not trying to start two bigs. It's possible his value will never be higher than it will this off-season.

          Malcolm's value however has crashed and burned. You're not going to get a Buddy Hield, or anyone who plays a similar position and role bc why would anyone?

          You therefore might be wise to shop Turner to a team that needs a big & has a PG or even a SG to trade. Likewise with Brogdon and try to get back a shooting 4 type. Shopping both guys gives you more flexibility than shopping just one & both are needs IMO. It appears both are suffering from being poor fits, are proven to have more talent & upside than they're displaying, and can fetch value from teams who believe they can use them more effectively. It may hurt but it's better to do something this off-season vs wait.
          Last edited by OneMoreYear; 03-12-2020, 11:36 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by OneMoreYear View Post
            I'm sure this is not going to be popular, either, but here's my take.

            You need...NEED...the guy in Turner's spot to be at least a competent shooter. He's currently at 30% on the season from 3. It's now reached a point where he's not even classifiable as a streaky shooter. He's just poor.

            Otherwise, his recent resurgence in other areas have driven his value back up. Team's know what he can do & will want to use him in a role that doesn't force him to be camped on the perimeter. In other words teams not trying to start two bigs. It's possible his value will never be higher than it will this off-season.

            Malcolm's value however has crashed and burned. You're not going to get a Buddy Hield, or anyone who plays a similar position and role bc why would anyone?

            You therefore might be wise to shop Turner to a team that needs a big & has a PG or even a SG to trade. Likewise with Brogdon and try to get back a shooting 4 type. Shopping both guys gives you more flexibility than shopping just one & both are needs IMO. It appears both are suffering from being poor fits, are proven to have more talent & upside than they're displaying, and can fetch value from teams who believe they can use them more effectively. It may hurt but it's better to do something this off-season vs wait.
            Definitely understand what you are saying here. I really want to give Myles the Summer & the first half of next season to see if he can improve that shot to say 35% at least. He worked last Summer with Kevin McHale which is great, but now he needs to go see a shooting coach & get a lot of shots up.

            Comment


            • #7
              I just don't get what the huge difference between 30% and 35% is.

              Out of 100 shots - it's making 5 more. Say he shoots 5 a game. Over 20 games, he makes 5 more and all of a sudden - he's a much better shooter ?? Does it REALLY make that much of a difference ??

              The team that makes the most (Houston - 15 1/2 a game) shoots the 23rd percentage in the league. They take 44 a game. Pacers take 27. So even tho the Pacers hit at a higher %, the Rockets volume is the difference.

              Just have everyone start chucking it. It's what the league has turned into.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                I just don't get what the huge difference between 30% and 35% is.

                Out of 100 shots - it's making 5 more. Say he shoots 5 a game. Over 20 games, he makes 5 more and all of a sudden - he's a much better shooter ?? Does it REALLY make that much of a difference ??

                The team that makes the most (Houston - 15 1/2 a game) shoots the 23rd percentage in the league. They take 44 a game. Pacers take 27. So even tho the Pacers hit at a higher %, the Rockets volume is the difference.

                Just have everyone start chucking it. It's what the league has turned into.
                the difference 30=bad 35=average 40=good 44=Doug.

                Comment


                • #9
                  And Doug's 44% gets the Pacers about 6 points a game. Shoots 4.3, makes 1.9. Different story if he put up 8 or 10 a game.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by OneMoreYear View Post
                    I'm sure this is not going to be popular, either, but here's my take.

                    You need...NEED...the guy in Turner's spot to be at least a competent shooter. He's currently at 30% on the season from 3. It's now reached a point where he's not even classifiable as a streaky shooter. He's just poor.

                    Otherwise, his recent resurgence in other areas have driven his value back up. Team's know what he can do & will want to use him in a role that doesn't force him to be camped on the perimeter. In other words teams not trying to start two bigs. It's possible his value will never be higher than it will this off-season.

                    Malcolm's value however has crashed and burned. You're not going to get a Buddy Hield, or anyone who plays a similar position and role bc why would anyone?

                    You therefore might be wise to shop Turner to a team that needs a big & has a PG or even a SG to trade. Likewise with Brogdon and try to get back a shooting 4 type. Shopping both guys gives you more flexibility than shopping just one & both are needs IMO. It appears both are suffering from being poor fits, are proven to have more talent & upside than they're displaying, and can fetch value from teams who believe they can use them more effectively. It may hurt but it's better to do something this off-season vs wait.
                    Myles is a career 35.4% shooter from 3.

                    He has shot 34.8%; 35.7% and 38.8% his last 3 seasons. He is currently at 33.6%. He is just having an off season from 3.

                    If he works on his shot this summer, there is no reason why he can't hit 36-38% from 3 for the rest of his career...heck, with work maybe he can hit 40%.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                      I just don't get what the huge difference between 30% and 35% is.

                      Out of 100 shots - it's making 5 more. Say he shoots 5 a game. Over 20 games, he makes 5 more and all of a sudden - he's a much better shooter ?? Does it REALLY make that much of a difference ??

                      The team that makes the most (Houston - 15 1/2 a game) shoots the 23rd percentage in the league. They take 44 a game. Pacers take 27. So even tho the Pacers hit at a higher %, the Rockets volume is the difference.

                      Just have everyone start chucking it. It's what the league has turned into.
                      The problem here is you are trying to look at it in a vacuum. In a vacuum no there isn't much of a difference. The thing is these percentages are only meaningful within the context of how other players shoot. When most players shoot between 30% and 40% then those small differences can become big differences.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Eleazar View Post

                        The problem here is you are trying to look at it in a vacuum. In a vacuum no there isn't much of a difference. The thing is these percentages are only meaningful within the context of how other players shoot. When most players shoot between 30% and 40% then those small differences can become big differences.
                        No. There is a huge difference.

                        Essentially it comes down to game planning. While it may not seem like much that one opponent shots 32% and another 38%, what you're really taking about is this.

                        As long as the opponents percentage stays at that 32%, you actually WANT them to shoot that 3. At some point in the mid 30s, a team scores less points per possession for each shot that's taken outside the arc. The more they shoot from there, the worse their scoring outcome.

                        Hence, there's a sharp & definitive point where not only is it unnecessary to commit defenders to the 3pt, it's actually good to watch them fire away. Coaches know exactly where that line of demarcation is, and also that as percentage rises above it, the extra point involved makes the shots value increase quickly.

                        100 possessions a game means a large enough sample that a team which would've shot 48% on 100 close range shots would score 96. For every 10 shots that are 3pt instead, at 32%, you're losing 1 pt. And that's not even getting into the loss of foul shots, which at 12-18 attempts per game are important considering that very, very few 3pt attempts will get fouled.

                        This distinction allows a coach to commit extra defenders and attention to drivers or bigs given that they actually want to see those 3pt shots go up, and like a football team that's one dimensional, you know exactly where to attack. Hence a very high volume 3pt team that shoots 32% is going to get absolutely murdered by a similar team that shoots 38%, bc I'll bet that 2nd team also gets easy shots down low & goes to the line more.

                        Strangely, that seems to be the no man's land our starters are in, although not high volume they shoot the long ball badly enough that it's actually detrimental that they're doing so. This has become magnitudes worse in the last couple months as Turner, Brog & our starting SG position have all seen steep declines in 3pt%.
                        Last edited by OneMoreYear; 03-12-2020, 06:16 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by OneMoreYear View Post

                          No. There is a huge difference.
                          I'm not sure what you are saying no to me?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                            The thing is these percentages are only meaningful within the context of how other players shoot. .
                            Which is part of my point. The Pacers are 12th in team %. 1% away from being 3rd in the league. The Rockets are 23rd. It's the volume they shoot.

                            And if Myles hits at that magical 35% mark, that means he makes 3 more 3s this season. 3. If you want him shooting 38%, he'd hit 8 more. Over the 55 games he's played, I'm not sure it makes that much of a difference. 1 more every 6 or 7 games ?? Insignificant.

                            BUT - if the Pacers took the league average # of 3s - or about 7 more and hit them at their current rate - that's about 500 more points over 65 games. 7.7 points a game. Sure - some of those 3s would come at the expense of a higher % 2, but the 3ball also increases the pace of the game, so I think that's a wash. Even so - 5 more points a game would be huge. I think that's where the problem lies. Not that Myles is shooting 33.6%. It's that the Pacers as a team don't shoot enough of them.
                            Last edited by PacerDude; 03-12-2020, 07:39 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The entire Pacer season comes down to how many threes we shoot and at what percentage. I hate the new NBA.
                              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X