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

O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

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

  • O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

    http://http://www.indystar.com/artic...-chat-about-3s

    (Mike Wells)
    Indiana Pacers coach Jim O'Brien likes the 3-point shot, but even he realizes Danny Granger is too enamored with 3s.

    O'Brien recently addressed the issue with his forward.

    Granger went into Monday's game against the Toronto Raptors with 166 3-pointers attempted, which represents nearly half his shots (357) this season. He went 9-of-19 against the Raptors from the field, including 2-of-7 3s.

    "Now we're playing with groups that are going to space the court, and as a result, when the ball goes to Danny and somebody is closing out on him, there's no reason for him to settle for a challenged 3 because the court is wide open now," O'Brien said.

    Granger attempted 20 3-pointers, making seven, in his first two games back from a torn right plantar fascia.

    Oklahoma City Thunder forward Kevin Durant mixed 3-point shooting and driving to the basket Saturday against the Pacers.

    Durant scored 40 points on 12-of-18 shooting, including 2-of-2 on 3-pointers.

    "(Granger) has to take advantage of more one-on-one situations," O'Brien said. "So we've had that discussion, and I don't mind 3s, but I'd like for him to mix it up and get to the foul line."

    Not going there
    O'Brien had no comment on whether players should be able to gamble on team flights.

    The Washington Wizards and New Jersey Nets have banned gambling on team planes in the wake of the locker room incident involving Wizards guard Gilbert Arenas and guns. The incident reportedly began over a card game on a team flight.

    "That's not something I'm going to discuss," O'Brien said.

    Pacers front office officials have yet to discuss whether they should stop gambling on their plane.

    "It wouldn't be good if it happened to us," point guard Travis Diener said. "It's something we do to pass the time. A bunch of guys play.

    "We've never really had anything close to an argument. We're not playing for a lot of money. It's there for entertainment and to kill time."


    Jones out of rotation

    Dahntay Jones has gone from being a key rotation player to out of it.

    Jones got his first DNP-CD of the season Monday.

    "Dahntay is a great guy to have on the team. What I try to do, and it's nothing against Dahntay right now, I try to put guys on the court that can space the court," O'Brien said. "This basketball team needs to be a real threat on the perimeter in order to open the inside.

    "Dahntay is a very tenacious player, but we struggle to space the court when he's out there. It doesn't mean the coaches decision not to play him is permanent."

    Jones is more of a driver than a shooter. He is 13 percent (3-of-23) on 3-point attempts this season.

    Etc.
    Rookie F Tyler Hansbrough returned to the lineup after missing the previous seven games with an inner ear infection. He had four points and seven rebounds. . . . Benched PG T.J. Ford was on the active roster a game after being inactive for one game.

  • #2
    Re: O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

    That stinks for d.jones. He was a bright spot early in the season. I did not realize he was shooting that poorly from outside. Funny the DNP's are the ones that cannot shoot the three.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

      "Space the court" must be another way to say "Lose the game"

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

        Originally posted by Shawne#4 View Post
        "Space the court" must be another way to say "Lose the game"
        Yeah, because it certainly didn't help us last night
        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


        • #5
          Re: O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

          Originally posted by Shawne#4 View Post
          "Space the court" must be another way to say "Lose the game"
          No. It is another way of saying SPACE THE COURT.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

            Originally posted by BillS View Post
            Yeah, because it certainly didn't help us last night
            how many times can a beat up dog cross a interstate? It may happen a few times out of a 100.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

              I realize there is a lot of joking going on in this thread, but I hope some of you aren't suggesting that "spacing the court" is some almost science fiction pie in the sky theory that Jim O'Brien has chosen to thrust upon on Pacers fans.

              Spacing the court is one of the very basic and most important principles in any halfcourt offense. Rick Carlisle believes in it as much as anyone as do all coaches for that matter. It ranks right up there with ball movement and player movement
              Last edited by Unclebuck; 01-12-2010, 03:30 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

                Isn't spacing the court and perimeter shooting supposed to open up the low post? What does it matter if Roy is on the bench?
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

                  Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                  Isn't spacing the court and perimeter shooting supposed to open up the low post? What does it matter if Roy is on the bench?
                  Yes that is true a good low post player helps open the outside, and good outside shooting can open up inside as teams will be less likely to double down low, and teams will stay attached to good outside shooters. But spacing the court is important whether you have a low post threat or not. it is important in the passing game, in pick and rolls in any type of play with any type of personnel you might have.
                  Last edited by Unclebuck; 01-12-2010, 04:00 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

                    I don't know about you.....but I'm sick of all this spacing cr*p that JO'B talks about....as if this is a reason to not play one of our best defenders and efficient scoring wing Players on the floor. Having a "drive and attack" wingman with a crappy 3pt shooting % didn't stop JO'B from playing Marquis last season....why would it stop with Inferno?

                    I really wonder if there is something else is going on. For all this +/- and spacing concerns that JO'B brings up.....there doesn't appear to be any logic, rhyme or reason as to why he plays certain players and not others....other then the fact that he will always default to players that he's most comfortable with.

                    To UBs point about Spacing the Court.....I get that it's a fundamental part of Basketball...but do you think that Inferno being a poor 3pt shooter is a sufficient reason to not play him? Sure, he can't help by making the 3pt shot....but let's completely ignore that he's a capable defender and has a willingness to drive to the basket to score in other ways. Believe me, I hate that he has tunnel vision at times....but I'd live with this if it meant that we'd actually have a solid perimeter and aggressive defender on the floor.
                    Last edited by CableKC; 01-12-2010, 03:42 PM.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

                      I like Dahntay, but let's not act like he's a good fit in this offense. He had a lot of success early in the season, but it quickly became apparent that if you had to rely on him for any kind of scoring you were going to lose.

                      He stops the ball and player movement nearly as much as Ford does. He brings a lot more to the table on the defensive end, which earns him some minutes, but ultimately he's bad for the team offensively.

                      http://www.82games.com/0910/0910IND1.HTM

                      Check it out. The only players who make us worse offensively than D. Jones are Ford, Murphy, and S. Jones.
                      "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                      - Salman Rushdie

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

                        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                        I don't know about you.....but I'm sick of all this spacing cr*p that JO'B talks about....as if this is a reason to not play one of our best defenders and efficient scoring wing Players on the floor. Having a "drive and attack" wingman with a crappy 3pt shooting % didn't stop JO'B from playing Marquis last season....why would it stop with Inferno?

                        I really wonder if there is something else is going on. For all this +/- and spacing concerns that JO'B brings up.....there doesn't appear to be any logic, rhyme or reason as to why he plays certain players and not others....other then the fact that he will always default to players that he's most comfortable with.

                        To UBs point about Spacing the Court.....I get that it's a fundamental part of Basketball...but do you think that Inferno being a poor 3pt shooter is a sufficient reason to not play him? Sure, he can't help by making the 3pt shot....but let's completely ignore that he's a capable defender and has a willingness to drive to the basket to score in other ways. Believe me, I hate that he has tunnel vision at times....but I'd live with this if it meant that we'd actually have a solid perimeter and aggressive defender on the floor.
                        I'm not going to disagree with you. However it did get TJ Ford benched, so it isn't an alltogether terrible thing.

                        Overall I like D. Jones mainly for the intangibles that he brings. Toughness, leadership.... but he does hold the ball too long and I know that drove the coaching staff nuts as he was taken out many times because he didn't move the ball or missed wide open players.

                        Plus wasn't there a lot of discussion that maybe Jones was perhaps, maybe one of the reasons why the player chemistry is poor this season. Maybe, perhaps Ford and Jones were the chemistry problems and maybe we have a happier group of players now that they are both sitting.

                        Disclaimer: This is all theory by me, just throwing it out there, and I don't mean to imply that Ford and Jones have the same impact on the team
                        Last edited by Unclebuck; 01-12-2010, 04:05 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                          I don't know about you.....but I'm sick of all this spacing cr*p that JO'B talks about....as if this is a reason to not play one of our best defenders and efficient scoring wing Players on the floor. Having a "drive and attack" wingman with a crappy 3pt shooting % didn't stop JO'B from playing Marquis last season....why would it stop with Inferno?

                          I really wonder if there is something else is going on. For all this +/- and spacing concerns that JO'B brings up.....there doesn't appear to be any logic, rhyme or reason as to why he plays certain players and not others....other then the fact that he will always default to players that he's most comfortable with.

                          To UBs point about Spacing the Court.....I get that it's a fundamental part of Basketball...but do you think that Inferno being a poor 3pt shooter is a sufficient reason to not play him? Sure, he can't help by making the 3pt shot....but let's completely ignore that he's a capable defender and has a willingness to drive to the basket to score in other ways. Believe me, I hate that he has tunnel vision at times....but I'd live with this if it meant that we'd actually have a solid perimeter and aggressive defender on the floor.
                          I'm not going to disagree with you. However it did get TJ Ford benched, so it isn't a terible thing

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

                            Originally posted by BillS View Post
                            Yeah, because it certainly didn't help us last night
                            I'm all for spacing the court if it leads to opening up the low post game and creating a good mix of plays within the offense. But the O'Brien system just frustrates me. Our form of "spacing the court" just seems to create more separation around the perimeter and allow more space to jack up some threes.

                            I'm firmly against the strategy of not playing your best players, as JOB did last night by giving Roy only 7 minutes and handing Jones and DNP. Sure, it'll work on some nights when the team is shooting well, but more often than not, I believe they will get beat with it. If the Pacers are going to space the court, I wish they would at least balance the threes with an inside game, much like we did in the Orlando game.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: O'Brien, Granger chat about 3s/DJones status

                              Without ball and player movement with purpose, which is an aberration to O'B, the only way to space the court is with 3's. To compare what Carlisle believes and coaches regarding spacing, no matter where he has coached, to what O'B believes is laughable on O'B's best day.

                              Obviously, the better coached teams teach that spacing is achieved through ball movement and players moving without the ball with a purpose, that purpose being to get opposing defenses to commit and make mistakes and leave players unguarded for quality looks, whether those looks are at the rim or 25 feet away, within the flow of an offense that takes care of the ball, and generally is predicated on working the ball inside to the low post occasionally, and making the extra pass that generally is the one that produces the best quality look during a possession.

                              The "Quick" (yes I am aware that O'B does not call his the "Quick", Isiah did, but O'B infuriates me, especially when he demonstrates his ignorance by blaming DJones for the spacing problems when, in fact, his second favorite thing for players to do is to do what he has now told Danny to do and what Dahntay did offensively which is to make freelance drives into the lane to mix things up, which will produce more of the same standing around that failed earlier in the year) fails because it does not ever break the defense down. Ever. It only beats it to a given spot, and doesn't do so with regularity unless it is an All Star game.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X