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

You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

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

  • You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

    It was a very good show and he goes into why he does certain things that he does, and frankly IMO the explanations are reasonable. Including the small ball.

    http://www.1070thefan.com/pacers/obrien.aspx

  • #2
    Re: You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

    1/2 way through it, this morning on the treadmill. He really does make some good points!

    One of the things I liked, was him talking about how Roy and small ball aren't mutually exclusive.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

      Originally posted by Speed View Post
      1/2 way through it, this morning on the treadmill. He really does make some good points!

      One of the things I liked, was him talking about how Roy and small ball aren't mutually exclusive.
      Appreciate the thread

      Obie is a smooth talker, and what he says makes sense, but

      He contridicts himself constantly and his "plan" is constinently moving in different directions. It is confusing as a fan, can only imagine how it is to play for him

      By the way I always thought Obie would make a great assistant coach in charge of the offense
      Sittin on top of the world!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

        If I didn't listen to Obie's weekly show, I think I'd want him out, now and vehemently so.

        Listening to him, though, I think he is the coach of a losing team who knows what he's doing and has limited resources to win. I'm not saying he's Larry Brown (coach I personally hold in the highest regard), but he is a good coach, I'm convinced.

        Is he the right guy to have here and keep through the rebuild? I'm not sure, but in spite of what many think of him, he knows basketball and I do think he's a good coach.

        Maybe, I'm drinking the koolaid and I believe what he's saying too much, but he's a no nonsense guy who isn't a crazy control freak (my preferred style) and he knows the game (he has good reasons he's doing the things he does and I've seen him manage situations in games very effectively (Danny back door inbound bucket in Cleveland after Lebrons inbound back door bucket last year, FTW)).

        Maybe not the answer here, but he is a good coach and should be coaching somewhere, imo.

        I can and do disagree with some things he does/doesn't do as a fan, but I do respect him and appreciate that he knows what he's doing. It's just not always right, but thats the nature of it and that is amplied by losing so much.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
          It was a very good show and he goes into why he does certain things that he does, and frankly IMO the explanations are reasonable. Including the small ball.

          http://www.1070thefan.com/pacers/obrien.aspx
          His explanation are always reasonable - his show is probably the best coaches show I have ever heard on a week in and week out basis

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

            I can't listen to it now while I'm at work, but I will say this.

            Communism when you talk about it sounds like a hell of an idea too. Putting it into practice is when it goes wrong.

            JOb can talk all he wants about why he does certain things, but we've seen what happens when they try them on the basketball court. Everything makes sense when you have the ability to talk through it and communicate what your thought process is.

            Not everyone has the ability to translate those thoughts into action. That's the problem. He can talk until he's blue in the face about why it's a good idea to do things a certain way. But we've seen the outcomes from it.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

              He sounds like a guy that thinks he's figured it out. Going by what he is saying, it sounds like he's done using Murphy and Hibbert together for longer stretches. He wants to put out a more athletic lineup.

              I'm okay with Price playing some SG - he's a combo guard. I'm happy to see Granger play power forward when Hibbert is in. I think defensively they fit together pretty well.

              There is still a long way to go through this season. We may see some very good things the rest of the way out.
              "man, PG has been really good."

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post

                Not everyone has the ability to translate those thoughts into action. That's the problem. He can talk until he's blue in the face about why it's a good idea to do things a certain way. But we've seen the outcomes from it.
                Have you ever played the game of "Yhatzee!"? I'm sure you do, but some here may not.

                What happens is that you get 5 dice. Like poker, you need to find the best combination of numbers on the 5 dice you can to fill a specific need. You get three chances to find that combination you want to work with. After that, you either get what you want, close to that, a chance or nothing at all. You forfeit your turn.

                Now what O'Brien has been doing is trying to find the same thing. But instead of just 3 chances he gets at least 82. That's an awful lot of chances.

                So far it looks like he's had to keep rolling the dice from the cup. (By the way, the cup is a metaphor for the roster.)

                What he also has to his advantage is that he gets to use his chance. Basically, after 82 games he adds up what production his final throw was, and that is our W-L ratio, compared to the total number on each of the 5 dice.

                Looking at it this way, he is in control, because it's still uncertain what all is in the cup. You may need three 5's, but you only were able to roll and get 2. That leaves you short. Still looking at it, developing the young players is trying to get a small or large straight. So far I think he's been given the decent rolls (forcing them to play due to injuries).

                I still feel that the coach is doing the best with what we've got. By no means is he going to get a Yhatzee with this group, but thinking by and large this current lineup may be on to something.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

                  I'll stick with your dice games. Crap. (I could go in multiple directions here!)

                  No, I'm specifically talking about Craps, the dice game. There are those that are really good at coming up with winning throws. They hold the dice the same way, throw it the same way, put the same speed on the throw, etc. And they win with that combination. They might not throw 7's every time, but they throw them more often than not.

                  JOb found that throwing technique, for some of us atleast, and used it for a short time. Then when a new girl came up to the table (Murph returning from injury) he decided it would be a good idea to scrap that winning throw, and start tossing them a new way. A new way that wasn't producing the same results.

                  EDIT: No one will ever convince me playing Troy Murphy 28mins a game is coaching the best way for this ball club. Cut that number down to 20mins or so, and I'll be in agreement. Especially when he plays him heavy mins in the 4th when his production is down.

                  All summer he complained that he needed better defensive players. And yet DJones got a DNP-CD a few games ago. "Things that make you go huh."
                  Last edited by Since86; 01-15-2010, 01:38 PM.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

                    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                    I'll stick with your dice games. Crap. (I could go in multiple directions here!)

                    No, I'm specifically talking about Craps, the dice game. There are those that are really good at coming up with winning throws. They hold the dice the same way, throw it the same way, put the same speed on the throw, etc. And they win with that combination. They might not throw 7's every time, but they throw them more often than not.

                    JOb found that throwing technique, for some of us atleast, and used it for a short time. Then when a new girl came up to the table (Murph returning from injury) he decided it would be a good idea to scrap that winning throw, and start tossing them a new way. A new way that wasn't producing the same results.
                    You have a point. But I can't blame the losses squarely on Murphy. Yes, I am defending him, but he alone isn't losing us the games.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

                      I know he's not making them lose games. They aren't that good of a team to begin with.

                      Murphy is the best example of what's wrong with JOb and his basketball philosophy. Without Murphy, he's cornered into using a lineup that suits my ideals of how the team should be coached. When Troy is available, he has the tools to revert back to the style that makes me want to pull out my hair.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        I know he's not making them lose games. They aren't that good of a team to begin with.

                        Murphy is the best example of what's wrong with JOb and his basketball philosophy. Without Murphy, he's cornered into using a lineup that suits my ideals of how the team should be coached. When Troy is available, he has the tools to revert back to the style that makes me want to pull out my hair.
                        Well, benching Murphy isn't going help this team any more than it will hurt.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

                          well....glad i did listen to this show....altough...not sure if im still sold on JOb.....i understand that he is trying differnt line up combos.....but i disagree with him in saying that playing small is our best lineup....
                          I CANT SPELL!

                          THERE ARE THOSE THAT HAVE AND THOSE THAT WILL!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

                            Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                            Well, benching Murphy isn't going help this team any more than it will hurt.
                            Like I said, I'm not calling for him to benched like TJ. I don't want him playing 28mins a game. He needs to be scaled back to the 20 range.

                            Having Murphy play the 5 for a couple of minutes isn't a BAD thing. It's when he plays there for extended minutes, or even starts there. Roy can spread the floor effectively by his ability to make good passes, and his ability to score on the block. He requires special attention down there from multiple defenders.

                            When help defenders lock on to someone other than their assignment it sets up a lot of options for the other offensive players.

                            I see benefits of establishing the game inside-out, and I see benefits of establishing it outside-in. It depends on the situation, lineup, etc. But often times there is no inside game. It just stays outside, and that is way too one dimensional.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: You should really check out the Jim O'Brien show from yesterday (01/14/10)

                              Duke, selecting the best roster shouldn't be "random". This isn't his first job as a coach either.

                              A monkey hitting a random lineup button could coach using the Yahtzee method.

                              This is exactly what Since86 is on about, JOB does talk a great game. You leave saying "yeah, that does make sense". Cult members leave meetings thinking the same thing.

                              The issue isn't whether JOB has reasons, it's whether or not he has SMART reasons. Coaches learn which things sound good on paper but don't work, and they quickly learn why they don't work.

                              I shouldn't be able to see that AJ is the PG with the best ability to pass the ball and run the offense back in July and have JOB still not using him as though that was true.


                              In fact here is the best example - Troy is getting beat badly on defense but hitting a pretty nice rate of his 3s.

                              Larry Brown - I had to take him out because he was hurting our defense too much. Reasonable

                              Jim O'Brien - I had to leave him in because we needed his outside shooting. Reasonable.

                              They can even both be right if they have different rosters or systems. Assume the same roster though, but the system falls into the same logic, they each use a system that "makes sense" when they explain it.

                              But not all systems work the same.


                              If I told you that Phil Jackson watched Pacers games and disagreed with 90% of the moves JOB made, would you say that JOB was always right simply because he has reasons for doing things?

                              I lost baseball games using what I thought were good reasons. They didn't work. I coached that game poorly and didn't give my team the best chance to win.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X