Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

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

  • Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

    Ok as is normal the first knee jerk reaction (I thought I would say that so you guys wouldn't have to) is for the majority of us to blow up and blame O'Brien for everything.

    Fair enough, cause God knows as I set there tonight watching sportsline tick off the min. that James Posey was playing while producing nothing I made my share of blame O'Brien statements.

    But I know that the entire game was not lost on Jim's coaching.

    So with that in mind please tell us what the players did wrong and why the game plan failed due to their poor execution & if it is at all possible to go a little more in-depth beyond saying "Roy or Danny couldn't hit the side of a barn" I would deeply appreciate it.

    I'm trying to be fair here. But just saying shooting is the problem is not going to cut it, because earlier this season we were having some trouble scoring but our defense picked up the slack, so why is that failing now.

    So O'Brien fanatics here is your chance, your free chance for today to dump on the players.


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

  • #2
    Re: Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

    I will make an effort - but am not a strong x and o student.

    Unforced errors / ball handling / situational awareness - when a team is shooting as well as the Griz the extra opportunities just adds to the challenge.

    Despite what Quin says - it seems like TJ brings the ball up faster than DC.

    I believe I expected more out of DG -he seemed to lack intensity - which is odd since he usually is up for games against guys from the WC team.

    Still working this out, and I suspect it will draw criticism, but I expected DG to play more like MD. For all his faults it appears the offense moves better with Mike. When his shot is falling he seems like both a facilitator and a scorer. When Danny came in for him, fouls, things slowed down. Danny does not seem to move without the ball nearly as much. May be being a good shooter makes this seem less important but we have seen instances where no one is moving. Makes it easier to play defense I'm sure.

    Also noticed we do not get a lot of rebounds with only one person near the hoop.

    At various times nearly everyone looked indecisive. Perhaps thinking too much? If you are going to have 3 wings you need at least 2 of them moving and a point directing traffic (at least makes sense to me)
    ! Free Rick Sanchez !

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

      That darn McRoberts, how come he's not getting more rebounds and assists in his 7 minutes of quality time.

      Hansbrough should be punishing people, making other teams PF's cry like little girls, he should have dominated. What he needs more than 8 minutes? what a p*ssy.

      AJ may have looked good in his suit, but he didn't cheer worth a crap, best player in preseason my butt. He just must not want to play.

      Paul George, what a wasted draft pick, he was absolutely of no use in this game. well, at least he can be a rookie next year too.
      "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

        Wells makes some decent points


        http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsi...-for-this-one/

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

          I don't want to pin this entirely on Roy but if he isn't a threat in the post (and he hasn't been for a while) then that makes everything harder for everyone else offensively. We cannot let Roy slide for his incredibly poor offensive play of late.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

            I watched last night's game and wasn't surprised or disappointed. I came away just feeling like a cheap deflated playground basketball that hasn't seen an air pump for about a year.

            There were approximately a dozen, maybe 15 possessions the entire game that the ball and player movement produced a quality look for a player in high quality scoring position, and those plays tended to have the involvement of McRoberts early, and the rest were pretty much Dunleavy in my opinion. There were a couple of unspectacular finds by our point guards on early shots as well, but I didn't really count those.

            Otherwise, the typical O'Brien "shot creation by the individual player" methodology ruled the Pacers offense, leading to low quality shots and stagnation and predictably, misses both inside the arc and beyond it. Even Austin Croshere commented on the fact that way too many threes were shot.

            The only reason that the game wasn't a worse blowout was the rebounding was OK, and the fact that Memphis just isn't a very good team at this point. Our bigs got 25 of the 54 boards that we had, meaning that our smaller perimeter guys (as opposed to our bigger perimeter guys) got 29 with Ford and Dunleavy each contributing 8 boards.

            So, O'Brien is scrambling to figure things out after all of this time, and we are starting to see the same things developing this year that we have seen for the three prior years.

            Hibbert still needs lots of help with footwork and positioning and has no one on the staff who apparently can convey the message to him (we have seen him do those things just enough for me to believe that he can actually do them but doesn't have the reinforcement from the coaching staff).

            The point guards are playing similarly, both to each other and to past years, with Ford outplaying Collison for the most part, due to the way that point guards are used in the system. I guess I am glad that Price is not on the court learning the bad habits that Ford and Collison have on both ends of th floor. He will have less to unlearn when a new coach is hired.

            And, what could be a position of relative strength, at least from a depth standpoint, the 4 / 5 rotation (Roy is being used interchangeably with the rest due to his positioning on the court) is being completely hamstrung by playing the core future players out of their positions of strength, with arguably the only players involved in them who are being used in ways that utilize most of their skillsets are Foster, Posey, and Solomon Jones.

            Live by the 3, die by the three while the offense stagnates. 28% from beyond the arc with 25 shots taken cannot be sustained.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

              Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
              There were approximately a dozen, maybe 15 possessions the entire game that the ball and player movement produced a quality look for a player in high quality scoring position, and those plays tended to have the involvement of McRoberts early, and the rest were pretty much Dunleavy in my opinion. There were a couple of unspectacular finds by our point guards on early shots as well, but I didn't really count those.

              Otherwise, the typical O'Brien "shot creation by the individual player" methodology ruled the Pacers offense, leading to low quality shots and stagnation and predictably, misses both inside the arc and beyond it. Even Austin Croshere commented on the fact that way too many threes were shot.

              And, what could be a position of relative strength, at least from a depth standpoint, the 4 / 5 rotation (Roy is being used interchangeably with the rest due to his positioning on the court) is being completely hamstrung by playing the core future players out of their positions of strength, with arguably the only players involved in them who are being used in ways that utilize most of their skillsets are Foster, Posey, and Solomon Jones.
              First two graphs - big agreement. We end up with a lot of poor shot selection either up against the shot clock or early in it after one pass and jack it up. Ball and player movement is not consistent in the offense. However, I have to wonder if other teams have just adjusted to the scheme.

              Last graph - big disagree. Well, maybe there's depth in terms of bodies, but I'd say we have one of the worst 4/5 rotations in the league. Perhaps the biggest roster spot challenge we face from a talent standpoint other than PG. In fact, with the way Roy's looked in this slump, we may have hit rock bottom.

              I'm really disappointed with the PG play. I suppose TJ's drop off was to be expected. I understand DC is still a developing player and I understand the theory of JOB's offenses are not PG friendly. Still, I look at him and see a big lack of confidence in terms of simply running a team. That's a prime intangible for your PG and I just don't see it.
              I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

              -Emiliano Zapata

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

                I really hoped to win this game, I think Memphis is maybe a match up problem, period, like Atlanta (but not as good). This game was important, if it was a win because momemtum wise you could have had a chance to go into 2011 at .500 or above. Not to be, I guess.

                I disagree that Obie's method is 'individual shot creation'. I don't think its ever been like that by design.

                What I do think is when a team plays good defense, like Memphis did.... enough, that with the 24 second shot clock it devolves into a individual shot creation theme. Pacers aren't built for that.

                I think its the main reason they struggle to close out close games, is the exact same reason.

                As for JMac, be a better rebounder. I think it's as simple for that for him. Easier said than done, of course. I am not satisfied with his ability to be a factor on the offensive boards, which I think his skillset should lend him to, nor do I like his ability to control the defensive boards. This team needs that from that position.

                JMac does other things really well, but you need him to be a glass cleaner, moreso.

                I guess, Hansbrough and Posey aren't the answer either, hence Jeff getting minutes there.

                Unless JMac can find the ability to get extra possessions or keep the other team from doing so, I can see the problem at who gets minutes there.

                I just think unless something changes, its a big thing you're missing for this team to take the next step. (so, re begins the ongoing search for the next Dale Davis)

                On a side note, Obie had DC, BRush, Danny, Hansbrough, and Roy in the game to start the 4th. I liked that even though it wasn't effective, this time. I'd like to see this more often with an eye towards the future.

                One more edit to add this. They should change coaches probably, but doing so isn't going to solve the PF problems, imho.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

                  Darren Collison looks terrible at PG. It is starting to look like he simply isn't the player that we thought he was. What was up with the one turnover that the camera didn't even catch? He is killing us with bad passes. I haven't watched every game, but can someone please point out a highlight level pass from DC. I mean a pass that turned heads. I cannot think of a single one.
                  Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

                    Originally posted by bhaas0532 View Post
                    Darren Collison looks terrible at PG. It is starting to look like he simply isn't the player that we thought he was. What was up with the one turnover that the camera didn't even catch? He is killing us with bad passes. I haven't watched every game, but can someone please point out a highlight level pass from DC. I mean a pass that turned heads. I cannot think of a single one.
                    I think he's just inconsistent, as I would expect a second year player to be. He's better when he's in attack mode, but needs to learn to be more consistent in all situations. I like his speed and leadership. I like how he projects for this team. He's not dominant, but I didn't expect him to be.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

                      Originally posted by bhaas0532 View Post
                      Darren Collison looks terrible at PG. It is starting to look like he simply isn't the player that we thought he was. What was up with the one turnover that the camera didn't even catch? He is killing us with bad passes. I haven't watched every game, but can someone please point out a highlight level pass from DC. I mean a pass that turned heads. I cannot think of a single one.
                      Not that this gets you anything of substance if you're the Pacers, but TJ misses this pass routinely.

                      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSlFQ6a8in4

                      or

                      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oFyX...eature=related

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

                        Originally posted by Speed View Post
                        I think he's just inconsistent, as I would expect a second year player to be. He's better when he's in attack mode, but needs to learn to be more consistent in all situations. I like his speed and leadership. I like how he projects for this team. He's not dominant, but I didn't expect him to be.
                        What is up with all these excuses for DC? He was brought here to be the savior at PG, and he has failed miserably. What leadership are you refering to, as I haven't seen any of it. I have yet to see DC make any of his teammates better. All I see is DC trying to be a scorer, rather than a facilitator.
                        Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

                          Originally posted by bhaas0532 View Post
                          Darren Collison looks terrible at PG. It is starting to look like he simply isn't the player that we thought he was. What was up with the one turnover that the camera didn't even catch? He is killing us with bad passes. I haven't watched every game, but can someone please point out a highlight level pass from DC. I mean a pass that turned heads. I cannot think of a single one.
                          He's a good young PG, I just wouldn't measure him against his stats from last season. Chris Paul was hurt and hobbled all year. They basically kept the same playbook and dumped Collison into the exact same role.

                          And he did an outstanding job given the circumstances, but if you saw his team's record while he piled up those stats, you'll notice it's not as good as having a healthy Chris Paul out there in the same role.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

                            As far as DC, I would just like to see better ball handling and decision making. He needs to be able to be effective when he can't go a 100 miles per hour. That seems like the only setting he has. He always seems to be in too much of a hurry.
                            I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                            -Emiliano Zapata

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Let's look at the Grizzlies game from another point of view...

                              The things I put on the players, lumped together instead of individualized:

                              - Missing open/good shots
                              - Turnovers
                              - Poor defense in the forms of ball watching, reaching in, or being out of position

                              Intensity level I don't necessarily blame on them. They clearly were fired up earlier in the year, so what changed? Their personalities? I doubt it. I have no proof, but I tend to assume it's something chemistry related, and given this roster, I doubt it's player-to-player bad chemistry. I'm not saying there are screaming matches behind the scenes, but one thing or another could be demoralizing them.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X