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

Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

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

  • #31
    Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

    Hibbert is going to start for us at some point this year. I'm high on him.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

      Anyone just notice that we drafted a big man who is excellent at setting picks and a sharpshooter who is great at working off the ball?

      Danny and Brandon and Mikey running through picks set by Roy, getting the ball pitched to them by Ford and Jack? We could do better, but that sounds a hell of a lot better than last year.
      You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

        Originally posted by SoupIsGood View Post
        Anyone just notice that we drafted a big man who is excellent at setting picks and a sharpshooter who is great at working off the ball?

        Danny and Brandon and Mikey running through picks set by Roy, getting the ball pitched to them by Ford and Jack? We could do better, but that sounds a hell of a lot better than last year.
        Very much so, maybe the trades will historically not be the best deal, but hell it makes some sense. More so than the last several years of garbage.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

          I trust TBird's analysis on Hibbert. Listening to many of the Post-Draft radio shows...many analyst think that he's underrated and a good Big Man pick at 17.

          For what Bird wants...players that will have an immediate impact...he's going to be solid. I think that he can do what Harrison was good at doing when he actually played.....hog up space in the paint, alter shots with his sheer size and length and provide some solid low-post defense while being an acceptable Low-Post scorer.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

            Hibbert hits game winning 3 point shot

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbbPeSoMJ3Y

            .
            .
            .
            .
            "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

              here is a real nice video on Roy

              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXqVThYIbDU


              I am getting hyped for this new year of Pacer's basketball..
              "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

                T-Bird,

                You said Roy was good at setting screens, and in your post on Rush you said, I quote; Rush is probably, from what I have seen, the best player in the draft at playing away from the ball offensively. He does many things from a fundamental perspective at a very advanced level, such as setting up cuts by faking away from the direction he is going to go to, and by cutting off screens low to the ground, so he is in shooting position with his knees flexed before he actually recieves the ball. In addition, Rush has a very impressive high release on his jump shot, which will help him be able to pretty much get his jump shot off whenever he wants at the NBA level. He wasn't asked to "read" screens often in the system at Kansas, but I believe his pedigree and skill levels tell you will do that well if asked.

                My question is do you think Bird is looking for his own Smits/Davis/Miller combo?

                Your posts gave me this idea, but it seems to me that if Roy can set picks like Dale Davis, and Brandon is good at getting off quick shots, that's a lot like Dale and Reggie, and if Roy's used to playing on the primeter maybe he could hit that deadly 15 footer like Rick Smits used to do.

                With Danny and Mike here too, all Roy would have to do is hit it enough that someone couldn't sag off of him.

                I'm not an x and o guy, or any sort of coach ,so this might be just dumb ideas.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

                  I hope Hibbert is as old-school of a rebounder as tbird says. I used to love when Dale would play the same way, engulfing one of the other team's big men and making rebounding much easier for the rest of the team.
                  You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert




                    Hoya Saxa!


                    .
                    And I won't be here to see the day
                    It all dries up and blows away
                    I'd hang around just to see
                    But they never had much use for me
                    In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

                      Sadly I'm not familiar with the player tbird went with as a comparison (before I started watching).

                      Am I the only one who sees a nifty jumpshot, passing skills, ability to work within the high post, good size, slow feet, and a number in the fifty-somethings and thinks of...

                      ...

                      ?
                      You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

                        Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
                        I wish he had a more aggressive, dominating, aggressive approach to rebounding. Hibbert may lack the super intense nature that will make him as dominant as his skills would otherwise allow him to. In theory, Hibbert should be a strong rebounder and outlet passer, but too often on tape he isn't that at all. Now, some of the issue is that Georgetwon often used him offensively away from the basket, putting him out of position for put back opportunities. But defensively as a rebounder, you don't see Hibbert always aggressivley "hunting" for the basketball like I prefer. He is more of an old school coaching product, being taught to "blockout" and hold position, then react to the ball coming off the rim. This is how he has been taught to play, so it is hard to criticize him for it, but doing it this way hurts him because he lacks the explosiveness and quick twitch athleticism to be the first to the ball doing it this way at the NBA level. It is easy for us to imagine a player like Jeff Foster, for instance, out rebounding Hibbert because he is quicker and more aggressive.

                        Whether or not you think coaching can improve this one glaring weakness for Hibbert at the next level probably determines whether you like him as an overall player. Of course, some coaches (and some of you) still prefer this style of rebounding anyway, so seeing him "find/pivot/blockout/react" as a rebounding style rather than see him watch the ball and read its flight before attacking it aggressively won't annoy you as much as it does me.
                        It's hard to believe people still teach "box out and wait." I thought Barkley would have ended all that.

                        Although even if he can't be "retaught" aggresiveness, as someone else says, it may help our overall team rebounding (meaning Jeff and Troy mainly) to be aggressive if they know they will have some "clear out space" underneath to race towards. And maybe it will prompt Danny to venture within 12 feet of the hoop on occasion.

                        But what you say about the screens is probably the most important skill of his that will translate into helping up immediately. John Thompson clearly taught him this in a very refined way and he sets hard, stationary, wide-bodied screens and holds them for the optimal time. Getting around a 7'2" guy is hard enough as is, but by screening the way he does, it really will free up Danny, MDJ and Rush to look a little more like Rip or Reggie out there.
                        Last edited by JayRedd; 06-27-2008, 01:13 PM.
                        Read my Pacers blog:
                        8points9seconds.com

                        Follow my twitter:

                        @8pts9secs

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

                          Originally posted by SoupIsGood View Post
                          Sadly I'm not familiar with the player tbird went with as a comparison (before I started watching).

                          Am I the only one who sees a nifty jumpshot, passing skills, ability to work within the high post, good size, slow feet, and a number in the fifty-somethings and thinks of...

                          ...

                          ?

                          Cartwright averaged 13.2 pts and 6.3 rebs on .525 shooting over a 15-year career. He was the starting C for the Bulls 1st three-peat.

                          Regarding the "Medical" Bill nickname, I remember that, and I remember it seeming very fitting at the time. However, here are some numbers about that:

                          Over 15 yrs, he averaged 64 games played per year, but that includes only 42 & 29 in his last two years, and I don't know how many DNP-CD's he earned.

                          In his first five years in the league, he missed only 15 games, playing all 82 in his first, second, and 4th year, 72 in his third year, and 77 in his fifth year.

                          He broke his foot in his sixth season and played only 5 games. The following season, he only played 58. There were serious concerns about his career.

                          However, over the next four seasons, he missed only a total of 18 games.

                          So, even "Medical Bill" appears to be reliably healthy, by Pacer standards.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

                            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpfRL...eature=related
                            Hibbert looks pretty smart, mature and realiable in this interview with Utah. Some Utah fans even coveted him and thought he should have been a top 3 pick in last year's draft. Im glad we drafted him. He's ready.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

                              I liked this post over on draftexpress by KennerLeague


                              http://www.draftexpress.com/forums/s...?t=6759&page=2


                              Originally posted by KennerLeague

                              I wanted Hibbert to go to Utah. But as I wrote earlier Larry Bird really liked him. When the Pacers were rumored to be trading Jermain and getting that 17the pick I knew Bird was going to get Roy (unless Sacramento took him).

                              There have been some interesting conversations on the sports radio stations in DC the past week with guys like David Falk (agent) and Hibbert being interviewed. Falk told the host about how Larry Bird told him if the combines and workouts were around when he was coming out of college he would have hurt his draft stock. He better than anyone else may understand that a good basketball player doesn't have to be a great leaper and extremely fast. Kevin Love is probably barely faster up and down the court than Roy but does anyone hold that against him as much as they do with Hibbert? And how did Andrew Bogut get drafted at #1 when he is slow of foot as well? Falk brought up the same point I've been making for years in that we have all of this talk about athletic talent but in the post season its all about guys who can play effectively in the halfcourt and have true skills.

                              Hibbert relayed a great story today about how when he went to Indiana for the workouts he excelled in all the physical activities they put him through as well as in the games with other players. Then the session closed with one-on-one matchups and Hibbert (who normaly doesn't brag or boast) admitted that he won every matchup thoroughly and that guys he played against were rated higher than him on mock draft sites. After it was done he went up to Bird and asked if that was all he got. Larry Bird burst out laughing. I'm sure Bird could appreciate that type of question because Bird would probably say/ask the same thing back in the day. I'm sure Roy meant to be more sincere than cocky but Bird was entertained by the comment nonetheless. When the two later talked in the office Larry, according to Roy, flat out told Hibbert that he treated those other players like children.

                              Obviously Roy and Larry hit off well. Reading Bird's recent comments you could tell he has had it up to here with knuckleheads, guys that don't want to work and freshmen and/or sophmores who are supposed to have all this upside but are years away from contributing. He wanted mature guys with a better work ethic. Will this backfire? Maybe. But a day or two before the draft Bird gave away his leanings when he told an Indy newspaper than Hibbert can contribute from "day one." That's a similiar consensus that NBA personnel who worked out Hibbert seemed to have come to.

                              Hibbert took some big hits from the media after the draft (especially some BRUTAL comments by online writers). But its interesting that no-nonsense guys like Bird, Larry Brown, Jerry Sloan, etc seemed high on his prospects. Then again he did do well in his workouts. His agent, Falk, said point-blank that Hibbert "crushed" guys like McGee and DeAndre Jordan. When reading numerous reports on his performances I noticed that GMs, coaches, players and reporters praised how hard he played in the workouts, that his listed height appeared legit, that he was in the best shape of his life and beating the more athletic prospects up the court, that his hands were great, that he displayed great ability to score with either hand when posting up, that he was very skilled, well-drilled and fundamentally sound, that he shot the ball (faceup jumper) extremely well and that he was impressive with his passing skills. Most of all he impressed everyone with his maturity and his business-like approach in conducting himself during the workouts and during the interview process.

                              Still the stigma about the lack of athleticism and his reputation for his lack of aggression has hurt him. Larry Bird pointed out to a journalist days ago that if Hibbert was selected by the Pacers he must be able to keep up in Jim O'Brien's ofense. Hibbert understands that he must keep improving his lateral quickness and stamina and that he must stay more aggressive. All reports indicate that he is indeed improving in all those areas. After being drafted last night he did not go out and celebrate until the break of dawn. He went to sleep early because he had to get up at 6 AM to continue his own privavte workouts that he's been doing non-stop since his college season came to an end in March. You think anyone else chosen in the first round would do something like that on the morning after being drafted? I don't think any second round pick likely did that either. Hibbert is planning on moving out to Indiana next week to start working with the Pacers staff in order to get a jump on other rookies in the league. Say what you want about him but the guy's work ethic is amazing.
                              Pacers!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Tbird draft analysis: Roy Hibbert

                                That article has me pumped up to see him wearing a Pacers jersey!

                                Makes me dream of him being what we hoped David Harrison could be back when David was a rookie, but never happened.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X