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

Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

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

  • #31
    Re: Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

    Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
    The problem is the term "ceiling" implies best case scenario, thus your "ceiling" Roy, whose production is basically current Roy playing four more minutes a game, seems unreasonably low. Best case scenario is that Roy both improves his production and plays more minutes per game, which would put him at least in the high teens in scoring and low double-figures rebounding.
    All I can say is I really hope you are right and I am wrong. 18/10 from the center position would be outstanding.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

      Originally posted by Young View Post
      Outside of Dwight Howard, who? I bet it is not nearly as many as some think. Just go through the centers on hoopshype. http://hoopshype.com/depth_charts.htm. Of course some are missing from the depth charts due to free agency but you get the point.

      I didn't think Roy would be a starter in the league due to his lack of great athleticism. I was dead wrong. I think that there is more athleticism in the big men of today but there are not as many centers Roy will go up against that he can't handle due to their athleticism.
      I agree with this post. Infact I'll go so far to say that if Roy puts on some muscle mass to his frame this offseason he will be the one pushing Bogut around. Height is the ultimate equalizer in basketball.
      You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

      Comment


      • #33
        The ways Roy needs to improve his game have little to do with his point and rebounding numbers. He could be a 13/8 guy for the rest of his career and become an integral part of a contending team if he makes the right improvements.

        First, he needs to become more efficient. Centers are supposed to shoot over 50%. Good centers should shoot 55+%. Roy's 45% from last season is never going to be acceptable, especially since he's not an Ilgauskas style jump shooter. To provide some contrast, Nene shot above 60% last season and averaged more points on fewer shots than Roy. We are never going to have an efficient offense if our only true low post scorer can't post a better FG%. Cutting down on the turnovers would help also.

        The second thing Roy needs to do is to not let his shooting affect the other aspects of his game. Last year when Roy was playing well offensively, he played high energy defense. He was a shot-blocking presence and effectively deterred other teams from attacking the basket at will. However, when he wasn't scoring, he played with far less energy and confidence defensively. In short, he was hurting the team when he was on the floor. This was never more apparent than during the Bulls series, but it happened regularly during the regular season as well.


        Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk
        "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

        - Salman Rushdie

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

          Originally posted by Smits Happens View Post
          JOB will still get the blame for as long as most of the players on the team once played for him.
          the first thing vogel should do, once this lockout is over, is take all the players to a psychiatrist. that will get rid of that little voice that says 'lob the three......' once the players step over half court.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

            Originally posted by adamscb View Post
            i think big roy should grow an afro, like what he had at georgetown except bigger. the days of the fro are all but gone...

            The last conversation I had about Roy and a Fro turned into my avatar. For at least a day you inspired me to bring it back.

            I was just curious what he would look like, he should do whatever will help him be a force every night. Whatever makes him feel like a beast.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

              Who the hell is Jonas Jerebko ?

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

                I don't think Hibbert is done improving yet. I think if he puts the work in and gets some good coaching from Vogel and Boylen, his ceiling is around 20/10 for a few years. It won't be his career average, but I think he's just approaching his prime, and in the next few years he will improve beyond the big leap he made this last year.

                The taste of the playoffs that these guys got has only made them want to push harder, and Roy already was a hard worker. Same goes for Hansbrough. Maybe not a 20/10 guy at any point, but I do think he still has room to improve and be a solid starter on a good team.
                It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

                  Originally posted by The Jackson shimmy View Post
                  Who the hell is Jonas Jerebko ?
                  he was a beast as a rookie really kind of like the Landry Fields of his draft than tore his Achilles' tendon and miss all last season. He will be back next year and should be back to being a good player

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

                    Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
                    In all seriousness, what are some of you expecting from Roy? He was a 13/7.5 guy this past year. I think that is going to be about par for the course. Could those numbers be 15/8.5? I suppose, but I think that is about his ceiling.

                    So what do you O'Brien haters/Hibbert apologists think now that Frank is the coach and the "evil" JOB is gone? Is he suddenly going to become a 20/10 guy? Is he going to be a top 5 center magically? I really would love some concrete predictions about Roy's future numbers and production and why it will dramatically improve now that O'Brien is gone.
                    And 15/8 is "bad" production from a non-allstar center, and on a team that have players that can score at all positions?


                    Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

                      Team is about having the right combination of pieces, whether it is on a basketball court or in a classroom or in an office building or on a building site.

                      The great Pacers teams were a great example of how great teams have synergistic skills across its rotations.

                      I think Hibbert can be a huge force for us long-term. Will he be an All-Star? Maybe once or twice at his peak. He needs to be something different than what ESPN has force fed us with this "he must be a superstar" mentality. Hibbert needs to get his little hook shot to go down more often. There were so many shots that Hibbert missed where the ball had the touch, but rolled off the rim. That comes with experience and confidence. He is developing both and I think Hibbert will end up averaging about 17 ppg for us. I would like to see his effectiveness more along the lines of being a defensive force that players have to consider anytime they go into the lane for a shot. We need Hibbert to contend shots most importantly. That is why it is so important for us to put players around him that will allow him to leave his man at times without giving up an easy bucket. Right now our guards are doing a better job of denying easy penetration, which is a huge help to Hibbert. Having a good weakside defnder in the front court who is capable of reading and reacting to switch situations will be really important for Hibbert as well. That, too, comes with experience. We are getting closer, but remember, we don't need Hibbert to be a Hall of Famer (or a 20/10 guy even) to have a chance to be good. We need Hibbert and the players around him to collectively gel, while fully understanding and applying our defensive and offensive schemes.
                      "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

                        Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                        And 15/8 is "bad" production from a non-allstar center, and on a team that have players that can score at all positions?
                        Only if you say so I suppose? If you are inferring I meant that I am not sure where in the heck you are getting that.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

                          Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
                          Ahhh man, this board is going to go crazy the next time the Pacers have a bad streak. Who on earth are you guys all going to blame?
                          I mentioned several points why Roy has not reached his ceiling. I would need to go backand read ur quote again but i believe u stated "we need to accept Roy for what he is" or something too that affect which basically implies he is not going too improve any.

                          and ur darn right im going too state JoB systems was not conducive too roys skills. O'briens system sukks. i guess maybe u are one of the very few who musta wanted him too stick around?

                          bottom line, i mentioned several reasons why Roy still has room too improve, guess the only disagreement u had with my post was JOB's system not sukking ba**s.

                          its not all about the numbers as u refer too in ur other posts. he can certainly become a much better player on the defensive end.. and as i illustrated previously, Roys work ethic and dedication too improving seems too me one of his most positive attribute.

                          i guess too answer ur question in all sincerity... if Roy fails, he is the only one too truly blame.

                          the only player JOB ever ruinned was Granger, yet thankfully Granger still has time too get back too the player we all thought he could be become on both ends of the court. instead of jakking up 3's time and time again, Granger made strides on taking the ball too the rim last year, which was great too see. he even started playing defense again in the playoffs.

                          it wasnt till Legend became coach that Smits actually started producing in a much more efficient manner, granted maybe injuries had something too do with it, but he seemed too become a much more seasoned veteran under Legend and knew his niche with the team.

                          Roy still has plenty he can improve on, and with more experience and dedication to his craft, i believe its a bogus statement too say we should accept him for what he is at this point in his career.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

                            I waffle on Roy, maybe more than any Pacer player ever, on what I think.

                            The part of the OP about his very unique abilities compared to the league is really something to think about. 7'2" guys who can score like Roy does are rare. Opposing teams have to really game plan for him when he's clicking.

                            I also, often, think about how we (PD) mostly feel like you need a defensive, physical, rebounding PF next to him. This really restricts how you can build going forward, which waffles me back the other way, realizing his limitations.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

                              More on the Waffling.

                              At times, I think if Roy does exactly what he did now, but more consistently on offense and especially defense then he's a top center in the league.

                              At times, I think when Roy doesn't rotate on defense, gets pushed around, gets down on himself that he can't be a starting center on a upper playoff team, ever.

                              Same for Tyler, I waffle just not as much.

                              If Tyler got 4 more rebounds a game, which is alot I realize, I think the perception of him would drastically be altered that almost everyone would think he's the starting answer at PF for the next 7 years.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Top 5 Most Promising Frontcourts (Yep , our Boys are mentioned)

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                I mentioned several points why Roy has not reached his ceiling. I would need to go backand read ur quote again but i believe u stated "we need to accept Roy for what he is" or something too that affect which basically implies he is not going too improve any.

                                and ur darn right im going too state JoB systems was not conducive too roys skills. O'briens system sukks. i guess maybe u are one of the very few who musta wanted him too stick around?

                                bottom line, i mentioned several reasons why Roy still has room too improve, guess the only disagreement u had with my post was JOB's system not sukking ba**s.

                                its not all about the numbers as u refer too in ur other posts. he can certainly become a much better player on the defensive end.. and as i illustrated previously, Roys work ethic and dedication too improving seems too me one of his most positive attribute.

                                i guess too answer ur question in all sincerity... if Roy fails, he is the only one too truly blame.

                                the only player JOB ever ruinned was Granger, yet thankfully Granger still has time too get back too the player we all thought he could be become on both ends of the court. instead of jakking up 3's time and time again, Granger made strides on taking the ball too the rim last year, which was great too see. he even started playing defense again in the playoffs.

                                it wasnt till Legend became coach that Smits actually started producing in a much more efficient manner, granted maybe injuries had something too do with it, but he seemed too become a much more seasoned veteran under Legend and knew his niche with the team.

                                Roy still has plenty he can improve on, and with more experience and dedication to his craft, i believe its a bogus statement too say we should accept him for what he is at this point in his career.
                                So just because I don't blame JOB for the heat wave means I wanted him to stay? Solid logic.

                                I am also not following your logic on how O'Brien ruined Granger? Wasn't Granger an all star under O'Brien?

                                I would love to know what areas, specifically, Roy will show dramatic improvement in now that Frank is the coach? Will he average 10 rebounds a game, 20 points, shoot 55% from the field? Since the evil JOB isn't the coach tell me how Roy's game will improve.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X