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

Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

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

  • #61
    Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

    Originally posted by d_c View Post
    I think he's good as a big body to throw up against the Howards and Bynums of the world, but right now he's pretty useless against teams that play smaller lineups. Until/unless he can learn to punish smaller players consistently in the post, that's going to be the case.
    This is extremely astute. Thanks for saying succintly what I would have wasted 483 paragraphs on.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

      ALso something I have noticed.. is JOB seems to always play small ball lineups to match other teams... I say Let's MAKE these other teams have to match up against us...
      "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


      • #63
        Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

        Not always. He played Rasho against Atlanta. I also recall us staying big vs. Houston even when Yao was sitting.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
          We're 6-10 and likely on our way to 6-16. We aren't exactly a contender or even particuarly close to being a 0.500 team.

          That time to work through his mistakes should be right now. I'm not asking for 30 mpg. Let Rasho start and let Hibbert get his minutes against the second unit. I am asking for 24 mpg, unless he fouls out (WITH 6 FOULS, NOT FOUR) sooner. More minutes when we play a legit bigman because he has looked really good (for a #17 pick rookie) against them.
          Based on a few key factors, new players, schedule, youth... Im still holding an expectation of a roughly .500 season or better from this team. I think the comparisons to that 94 team holds some water... im not expecting an ECF run or anything, but I think this team goes on a run of wins to close the seasons and sneaks into the playoffs... rush and hibbert contributing more, granger becoming more comfortable in his go to guy role, possible return of dunleavy, general cohesion of playing together... all factors that lead me to believe this team will improve. Not to mention the schedule has been brutal thus far, and these pacers have hung close with a lot of really good teams.

          That being said, I don't disagree with you. I want to see more Roy. Mistakes or now, his presence both offensively and defensively fills a big need for this team. I have seen how Obie brought Rush along slowly and he has really cemented his spot in the rotation, notice you are seeing him out there to finish games now. Now it looks like Hibbert may be given the same chance as he has been more productive lately.
          "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

          - ilive4sports

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

            Originally posted by Kemo View Post
            ALso something I have noticed.. is JOB seems to always play small ball lineups to match other teams... I say Let's MAKE these other teams have to match up against us...
            I think JO'B just looks for advantages. He played Rasho a ton against Atlanta because Rasho knows how to punish smaller defenders in the post and Atlanta wasn't out-running us down the floor on every possession. Rasho also knows how to defend smaller players without fouling. I have yet to see that Roy knows how to do either of those things.

            Also, I'm pretty sure that going small maximizes the amount of talent we have on the floor. Hibbert is really our 9th most effective player. There's not really an advantage to playing him over someone like Rush or Jack, which is the choice you'd be making if you choose not to play small ball.
            "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

            - Salman Rushdie

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

              Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
              -snip- but I think this team goes on a run of wins to close the seasons and sneaks into the playoffs... rush and hibbert contributing more, granger becoming more comfortable in his go to guy role...
              I think we generally agree, though. I'll add this: Jack as the closing PG as well. Because the only way this team recovers and gets back toward 0.500 in March or April is because Rush and Hibbert have grown into bigger roles and Daniels, Rasho, and Foster get the pleasure of watching them from the sidelines (or better yet for the Pacers future, another city.)

              But that won't happen at the flip of a switch. If you want them to be useful then you have live with thier mistakes now. We've got a pretty good chance of being 6-16 or 7-15 soon - might as well let the young players develop chemistry and work through the rookie learning curve instead of waste time developing chemistry with guys that aren't part of the long-term plans.
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

                Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                Not always. He played Rasho against Atlanta. I also recall us staying big vs. Houston even when Yao was sitting.
                Yes but in the last 4 minutes we went small and caused Adelman to take Yao out.

                My point is going small often times makes the other team match up with you - in this case Yao couldn't guard Murphy 23 ft from the basket

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

                  Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                  We're 6-10 and likely on our way to 6-16. We aren't exactly a contender or even particularly close to being a 0.500 team.
                  But we were in with a chance to win all but 2 or 3 of those games. Are we still able to say that if Hibbert is playing 24 minutes?

                  Yes, I know, "real" fans are willing to spend money to watch a team hopelessly losing because they know it will make a better team next year.

                  However, those couple thousand "real" fans probably aren't willing to pay $200 apiece for their seats so the team can survive until then.

                  For the rest, the excitement being generated by a team that is making a game out of it nearly every time they step on the court is starting to have an effect on the community and the attendance.

                  And, compared to the time Rush and Hibbert would be getting under either of the Larry Bs, I think we should be glad we have a coach who respects Rookie skills even if he doesn't use a 12-man rotation in order to force them on the floor.
                  BillS

                  A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                  Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

                    In general terms, I reject the whole notion that the rookies should be playing heavy minutes or 24 minutes per game (Rush has often played in that range) because this team isn't going to win anything this season anyway.

                    Is that fair to the other players on the team. Players earn their minutes and if a coach ever awards minutes to players who haven't earned their minutes than the coach immediately loses the respect he might have had with the other players on the team.

                    Overall I think O'Brien has done a great job in bringing Roy and Rush along. Allowing Roy to pick up 6 fouls and foul out in 10 minutes does nothing but frustrate the player and hurt the team's chances to win.

                    Also a rookie especailly learns a lot through practice, through film sessions, through mentoring, through learning to deal with the travel, learning to deal with games almost everday. It is very rare for any rookies to be just thrown to the wolves (successfully) - only on really bad teams or only for the occasionally great player - Lebron James, Duncan, Shaq. I think for example Kevin Durant would have been better served to have been brought along more slowly - he has IMO developed a lot of bad habbits and bad shot selection. He would be a better player right now if he hadn't been thrown to the wolves last season
                    Last edited by Unclebuck; 12-02-2008, 11:25 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      Yes but in the last 4 minutes we went small and caused Adelman to take Yao out.

                      My point is going small often times makes the other team match up with you - in this case Yao couldn't guard Murphy 23 ft from the basket
                      Yao was in at the end of the game.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        Yao was in at the end of the game.
                        He was in on the last play - and Adelman was trying to have him in on offense and take him out for defense. But there were a couple of times when timeouts or dead balls didn't occur where Yao couldn't get back in on offense

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

                          There are valid arguments on both sides of "play the rookies" discussion. I believe, broadly, in a meritocracy. However, I think there are limits.

                          I don't think you can assign playing time based solely on how "somebody's playing today". I think you need to be able to look at what a player can do in the time and with the mistakes. If you look at our two rookies, I think it's clear to see why Rush plays, and Roy hasn't earned regular time yet.

                          Brandon's biggest shortcoming this season, IMO, has been his shooting. He has missed a lot of shots that you'd normally expect him to make. However, he has been surprisingly consistent in all other aspects of his floor game, especially his defense. As a result, there hasn't been a huge number of "rookie mistakes" that have hurt the team and the other players. O'Brien has shown an advanced (and growing) level of trust in Rush for, I think, good reason.

                          Hibbert, on the other hand, has been plagued by dumb mistakes, especially on the defensive end. His offense is well ahead of his defense, but he still makes a disproportionate amount of turnovers and bad fouls. Because his shortcomings are more disruptive to the team as a whole, and there seems to be a repetitive pattern to them, I think he doesn't deserve a lot of minutes, yet.

                          However, I do think we'd be somewhat better served letting him see a relatively steady 8-12 minutes, as opposed to the yo-yo effect we have right now. I think that he can (and will) learn in practice, but the steady time and expectations can help make the game slow down for him sooner. As long as the time is pretty tight, it will limit the damage his "learning curve" would have on the team.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

                            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                            Yao was in at the end of the game.
                            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                            He was in on the last play - and Adelman was trying to have him in on offense and take him out for defense. But there were a couple of times when timeouts or dead balls didn't occur where Yao couldn't get back in on offense
                            Yeah, I went back to check the play-by-play, because I was thinking the same thing as Hicks. It's clear that Adelman was trying to do an offense/defense thing with Scola and Yao.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              In general terms, I reject the whole notion that the rookies should be playing heavy minutes or 24 minutes per game (Rush has often played in that range) because this team isn't going to win anything this season anyway.

                              Is that fair to the other players on the team. Players earn their minutes and if a coach ever awards minutes to players who haven't earned their minutes than the coach immediately loses the respect he might have had with the other players on the team.

                              Overall I think O'Brien has done a great job in bringing Roy and Rush along. Allowing Roy to pick up 6 fouls and foul out in 10 minutes does nothing but frustrate the player and hurt the team's chances to win.
                              Also a rookie especailly learns a lot through practice, through film sessions, through mentoring, through learning to deal with the travel, learning to deal with games almost everday. It is very rare for any rookies to be just thrown to the wolves (successfully) - only on really bad teams or only for the occasionally great player - Lebron James, Duncan, Shaq. I think for example Kevin Durant would have been better served to have been brought along more slowly - he has IMO developed a lot of bad habbits and bad shot selection. He would be a better player right now if he hadn't been thrown to the wolves last season
                              I'm not sure if it is any better or worse though than Roy fouling out with 2-3 fouls and then being benched for the next game.

                              I'll just say this about O'Brien.

                              He seems to have two habbits.

                              1. He does allow a player to play himself into and out of the lineup. This is a good thing IMO.

                              2. When it gets tough he runs home to Moma and goes with small ball. I just think at the end of the day he is more comfortable with a faster more athletic lineup. (which coach isn't?) But the case for him can be made that we do not have any big player that he can force down in the post on the other team.

                              Other than that I will state that I also believe that we are far better served with Roy having consistant min. a game and not 14 min. one game DNP the next two.


                              Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Let's Discuss Roy Hibbert!

                                I don't care if O'Brien pisses off Rasho and Foster or even Murphy because he plays a rookie and plays for the future. Those guys aren't part of the long terms plans. Ditto for benching Daniels if Dunleavy comes back at any point this season.

                                There is more to success in the NBA than pulling out all the stops in effort to win every single regular season game.

                                If you want a player to contribute in the future, you have to prepare him with game time BEFORE you need him to contribute. Its not a like a few extra losses in November or December are going to take away our home court advantage in the ECFs. The W/L outcome of these games this season mean nothing.

                                IMO, Bird should come out and say that "as long as Jimmy plays Brandon and Roy reguarly and they make the improvements we expect them to make, his job is secure not just for this season but also next season." Then everyone will know where things stand. Some guys will ask for a ticket out of town. But again, they weren't part of the long term plan anyway.

                                By the way, Tinsley did a pretty good job of being thrown to the wolves.

                                (As did the Rifleman, Mark Jackson, and countless others.)

                                (Being thrown into the fire certainly did not stunt Smit's development, and if anything got him ready to actually contribute sooner. Rik might not have ever figured out how to stay out of foul trouble if Stipo didn't have his freak injury.)
                                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                                And life itself, rushing over me
                                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X