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

Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

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

  • #61
    Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
    No, he's not. That's my point. When people talk themselves into being happy with a PF that shoots 38%, that's homerism. Period.

    Foster shot around that level ONE year and you still hear how terrible a shooter he is. PF that play at the rim tend to shoot 50%-60%, that's par for course. They don't make the 3 ball so they have to keep a FG% that high in order to keep pace with the guards and their Adjusted FG% levels.


    Tyler is not flopping and has finally had two games where he did not shoot terribly. He impacted the games positively and shot a nice elbow jumper.

    If that qualified as "this good so soon" then damn near every rookie fits that description. That's my point.

    Plus as I said he's a 24 year old player who had 4 full seasons at an NBA farm system college program. This is not "rough around the edges". Guys that mature are expected to be at a higher level than raw kids like Holliday or even Jennings.
    I dunno...I think he's playing well. Not great, but well.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      No, he's not. That's my point. When people talk themselves into being happy with a PF that shoots 38%, that's homerism. Period.

      Foster shot around that level ONE year and you still hear how terrible a shooter he is. PF that play at the rim tend to shoot 50%-60%, that's par for course. They don't make the 3 ball so they have to keep a FG% that high in order to keep pace with the guards and their Adjusted FG% levels.
      Tyler's 38% is admittedly horrible, but it comes with two big asterisks

      *Jumper is not falling. Since his jumper was solid out to 18 ft, and shot 84 FT% at UNC, we have reason to think that will improve.

      *He gets to the FT line a lot. He's in the top 15 in FT attempts per minute. Those are points that don't appear in his FG%.
      basketbawful.com- The best of the worst of professional basketball. And there's a lot of it.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

        Originally posted by Kstat View Post
        agreed on all counts.
        seconded... this is a bit out of control... did i read someone post starting pf of the future?!

        everyone needs to remember how excited they got when brandon rush had his good couple of weeks last year...

        that being said he is better than i thought he would be

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

          Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
          I dunno...I think he's playing well. Not great, but well.
          I agreed, maybe his numbers are not as good as Murphy, the thing is that Tyler makes this team better than when Murphy is playing and that does not show in the numbers
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            Who has a higher ceiling: Blair or Tyler?

            I think it's Tyler.
            Obviously I say Blair. Here's why:

            Blair is younger.

            Blair is physically stronger.

            Blair is a much more refined and savvy rebounder who is able to force people off their spot at either end in order to get a rebound.

            Blair has a longer reach which not only makes him "tall" but also makes him "wider".


            The most shots Blair has MISSED this year is 3. He just had a game a few weeks ago vs Boston where he went 9-11 from the field for 18 and 11 rebounds. He only missed 2 shots but got 5 offensive boards, so he wasn't just chasing down his own misses. He also had 2 blocks. And this was in 21 minutes. Only KG made as many FGs that night as Blair did. He led the Spurs in scoring. Only Duncan had more boards.

            If Tyler had that game he'd be headed to the all-star game around here. People here get lost inside the local team and forget that a lot of other people are seeing similar things or better with their own team.

            Sure a lot of them are being just as homerific, but I just like to be above that level. We are Indiana fans, we really know the game and should have awareness of the entire league, not just our team.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

              We all know what Tyler did in college.

              The concern was: can it translate into the NBA? I think the evidence is pretty strong that it does translate.

              That being the case, we are looking at someone who is a champion, has the mental toughness and confidence to make big plays down the stretch, whose willing to have the ball in his hands at the end and be "the man," and who could shoot 30 times in a game and score 30+ points on a semi-regular basis without batting an eye.

              Really. If his game really does translate, then we have all that stuff to look forward to.
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                Obviously I say Blair. Here's why:

                Blair is younger.

                Blair is physically stronger.

                Blair is a much more refined and savvy rebounder who is able to force people off their spot at either end in order to get a rebound.

                Blair has a longer reach which not only makes him "tall" but also makes him "wider".
                Blair is also undersized (6'7"), had documented knee problems, and suffered from chronic fatness in college. That sounds a lot like Sean May and Mike Sweetney, and that was enough to scare away almost everyone.
                basketbawful.com- The best of the worst of professional basketball. And there's a lot of it.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  I agreed, maybe his numbers are not as good as Murphy, the thing is that Tyler makes this team better than when Murphy is playing and that does not show in the numbers
                  Let's not mix debates.

                  1) Tyler is really surprisingly good so far - no

                  2) Tyler is a better fit for the team than Troy Murphy is, and also a much more competent defender - 100% yes


                  I want Tyler to play, I don't want Tyler to get stuffed at the rim a lot, and I want Tyler to get the ball early in transition rather that seeing people overlook when he's out ahead of the pack ready for a quick attack and probably a foul drawn.

                  I also want McBob to play because I think he also impacts games, and I'd play McBob over Troy TODAY. Raw, sure, but already close and within a year of game time he will be better than Troy.

                  I would also want to have Blair here and would play him rather than Troy, or Tyler.

                  I also think that the other option to Blair and Tyler, James Johnson, has done nothing impressive so far. Of course while Tbird and I liked him overall, we were/are both concerned with his desire to play more like a SF than a PF.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                    We all know what Tyler did in college.

                    The concern was: can it translate into the NBA? I think the evidence is pretty strong that it does translate.

                    That being the case, we are looking at someone who is a champion, has the mental toughness and confidence to make big plays down the stretch, whose willing to have the ball in his hands at the end and be "the man," and who could shoot 30 times in a game and score 30+ points on a semi-regular basis without batting an eye.

                    Really. If his game really does translate, then we have all that stuff to look forward to.
                    Yes, I will agree that his method of production on the court does seem similar to college. He's active, a bit offensively sloppy, but that combo seems to do the trick when it comes to drawing fouls. He was basically an 8 rpg college kid so it's not like he was showing an overwhelming ability to draw fouls.

                    His team won and his work ethic and drive certainly were a part of that. His best attribute right now is that like Rush and Roy, he has the team game drilled into him and is more comfortable playing that way.


                    But I also pointed out his struggles when facing NBA caliber prospects because they could play bigger than him and kill off his offense near the rim. I think we've seen decent players do that too him already.


                    People think of his college success as though he had a Duncan or Griffin or even Barkley caliber NCAA career. He didn't. He was not "unstoppable", certainly no more than Brandon Rush was. Both those teams knew how to win and did win the big game, but it was due to being well coached, disciplined basketball machines.

                    Again, this makes them well trained to be cogs in a machine, but that doesn't automatically also mean "great NBA athlete or star".

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                      Seth is implacable. It will never be enough until all of Tyler's averages are stellar. At least the arguments are changing. When it was a statistical argument, and all we had was college, it was anecdotes about what Tyler was incapable of doing at the next level. Now that he can, his statistical weakness is on display.

                      When people talk themselves into being happy with a PF that shoots 38%, that's homerism. Period.
                      Its a question of scope. When people talk themselves into disparaging a rookie that missed training camp, practice, and has minute caps despite the fact that he put up 20 in back to back games and almost single handedly brought a win over a vastly more talented team, that's haterism. Period.

                      To be honest, I'm surprised you're low on Singler. High on Henderson, low on Tyler and Lawson. High on McBob, and you probably though Grant Hill was going to be better than Jordan. Maybe its the Tar Heel in me, but it smells in here.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        No, he's not. That's my point. When people talk themselves into being happy with a PF that shoots 38%, that's homerism. Period.

                        Foster shot around that level ONE year and you still hear how terrible a shooter he is. PF that play at the rim tend to shoot 50%-60%, that's par for course. They don't make the 3 ball so they have to keep a FG% that high in order to keep pace with the guards and their Adjusted FG% levels.


                        Tyler is not flopping and has finally had two games where he did not shoot terribly. He impacted the games positively and shot a nice elbow jumper.

                        If that qualified as "this good so soon" then damn near every rookie fits that description. That's my point.

                        Plus as I said he's a 24 year old player who had 4 full seasons at an NBA farm system college program. This is not "rough around the edges". Guys that mature are expected to be at a higher level than raw kids like Holliday or even Jennings.
                        The difference between Foster and Hans shooting stroke is night and day. Their skill level is not remotely comparable. That's why you will see his FG% improve to something respectable.

                        A lot of what is going on is because he was not in game shape due to the shins. It takes awhile for a player to recover from leg injuries, particularly a player whose game is pure energy. But what we are now seeing is that improvement.

                        At one point, he was missing free throws. He's now 14-17 the last 3 games. At one point, every other shot was blocked. That's not happening now.

                        What you probably should expect going forward are an improved midrange and an improved ability to draw fouls...which if he does both...he will be extremely good. Just one, and he becomes clearly the best PF on this team...and the only one who can play both ends.

                        Anyway, at #13, I would say Foster would be a good pick....and I like Hans more than him.

                        Edit: BTW, Tyler's FG% is up to 40% now. Not stellar by any measure but it has been climbing since his second game.
                        Last edited by BlueNGold; 12-13-2009, 12:15 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          Let's not mix debates.

                          1) Tyler is really surprisingly good so far - no

                          2) Tyler is a better fit for the team than Troy Murphy is, and also a much more competent defender - 100% yes


                          I want Tyler to play, I don't want Tyler to get stuffed at the rim a lot, and I want Tyler to get the ball early in transition rather that seeing people overlook when he's out ahead of the pack ready for a quick attack and probably a foul drawn.

                          I also want McBob to play because I think he also impacts games, and I'd play McBob over Troy TODAY. Raw, sure, but already close and within a year of game time he will be better than Troy.

                          I would also want to have Blair here and would play him rather than Troy, or Tyler.

                          I also think that the other option to Blair and Tyler, James Johnson, has done nothing impressive so far. Of course while Tbird and I liked him overall, we were/are both concerned with his desire to play more like a SF than a PF.
                          I don't know. Sometimes I really think that you don't want these things so you can feel vindicated about your opinion. Lets not pretend you were leading the Blair bandwagon - because you weren't. You might have liked him more than Tyler but you weren't exactly thrilled with him as a prospect either.

                          Tyler has shot about 50% for the last two games by focusing on the things he can do effectively in the NBA. It took him about 10 games to figure out that he can't just crash into someone and flip the ball up and expect it not to get blocked. He is just now getting comfortable and it is showing.

                          His shooting percentage is not so much of a product of him as a player but just figuring out what he can and can't get away with in this league. Someone like T-Will, on the other hand, shoots a poor percentage because he was always a terrible shooter at Louisville and will remain so until he fixes his form.

                          How can anyone really be upset with Tyler at pick 14 in a relatively weak draft? Sure, Blair would be nice but 29 teams passed on him...some twice. Point being, that aside from Blair Tyler is outplaying nearly everyone that was projected around pick 14.
                          Last edited by Mr. Sobchak; 12-13-2009, 01:09 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                            Seth,

                            I don't think you'll be taken very seriously about wanting Tyler to do well as long as you continue to celebrate his nose being broken with that avatar and as long as you take more opportunities than anyone else on the board to point out what's wrong with him while often refusing to celebrate what he does right; spending about 20% of your words giving lukewarm acknowledgment to his positives, at best.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                              I'm not suprised.

                              Tyler was a fantastic college basketball player. He's been a fantastic basketball player at every level. Why would this be any different?

                              People are always way to concerned about athleticism and potential. Tyler's proved he's good, over and over again. He's also proved he's got the work ethic to get better.

                              Five years from now, people are gonna look back at this draft and say that Indiana, with Hans and Price, got away with robbery.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                                Seth respect your opinion and all but to be honest with you the Avatar is in poor taste IMO.

                                Hard to believe that you are a neutral observer with that up there in every post.


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

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X