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

Pacers/Suns Postgame Thread

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

  • #91
    Re: Pacers/Suns Postgame Thread

    Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
    PG's last 3 games: FG 15-56 27%... 3PFG 1-16 6%... FT 13-23 57%

    Maybe someone should spend a little less time visiting with Jimmy Kimmel and a little more time putting up shots in the gym...its a wonder we won one of the 3
    I've been told that it's part of his job.

    I don't agree, but it seems to have been accepted.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Pacers/Suns Postgame Thread

      Paul and David just killed us late last night. They missed probably 8 shots between them that they should have made 5 or 6 at least. I don't know what's going on with this team, but they are havign issues on both sides of the ball. We need to someone to light a fire. I thoguht PJ Tucker pissing off Roy last night was going to do it, but it just didn't happen and we relaly, really, really need Scola and Watson to stop sucking.


      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Pacers/Suns Postgame Thread

        Also, for everyone who hates the three point shot, this is what happens in today's NBA when you can't at least come up with 4 or 5 made 3s a game.


        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Pacers/Suns Postgame Thread

          Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
          Also, for everyone who hates the three point shot, this is what happens in today's NBA when you can't at least come up with 4 or 5 made 3s a game.
          In our two match-ups against the Suns:

          Phoenix shot 19-33 from three.

          Pacers shot 6-30 from three.

          Ballgame(s).

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Pacers/Suns Postgame Thread

            Paul needs to just sit down and watch tape of how devastating he is when he gets even an ounce of space int he middle of the court. He is so long and athletic that he gets to the rim fromt hat point with ease. No need for him to settle for jumpers when they are not falling. He got a couple good looks, but his first half was very disengaged because phoenix was not letting him have jumpers.


            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Pacers/Suns Postgame Thread

              My take on this:

              1) Dragic was 'dialed-in' that first half. Honestly, even if Paul was guarding him the first half, I have a feeling he was getting his. I contribute his decline in the second half more on fatigue than Paul's defense. And I'm not saying that Paul wouldn't of defended him good, but I feel that Dragic was very, very confident he could break us down, and had the quickness to do it. He was going right into the paint and daring Hibbert or whomever was there to stop him.

              2) I'm usually never the one to put blame on the refs. And I'm not saying it is the refs that caused us to lose last night's game...but it was very uneven, on both sides. One minute someone is getting mangled going to the rim, a few plays later they're calling foul on a hip check. There were even questionable calls going the Pacers way. But one thing that got me going "WTF refs!!"...and if no one believes me, if you happen to dvr last nights game, watch it again, but there were numerous times that a Pacer would get past a defender, and the defender would pull on their jersey. Dragic did it to George Hill, at least, 3 times. Matter-of-fact, before one commercial break, when they show it in slow-mo, you could see Dragic pull the back of Hill's jersey as soon as he got swung around him and went to the rim.

              3) We may need to put a new wrinkle in our play-calling. I think we're getting too predictable. I noticed the last few games, especially last night's game, that our opponents knew who was getting the ball, and how-and-when they would be getting it. There were several times last night that a defender was right where our player should be. Maybe I'm not explaining it right, but, for example, Hill would be crossing half-court, and on certain plays, West would meet him at the top of the 3-point line and initialize a somewhat motion offense where Paul would curl on the left, and sometimes Lance would curl on the right. But, before David made a move, his defender steps right where West is supposed to be positioned, which, in turn, causes Hill to hesitate. And the other guys would be covered so it completely throws the timing off. Then it becomes chaos, which will end up as a last-second contested shot, a turnover, or an offensive foul. Maybe I'm talking out of my @ss, but it seems we are not crisp with our execution, or some of these coaches have figured us out. Or we just plain and simply have gotten slower for some reason.

              4) Back to the play-calling....WHAT THE HELL WAS THAT PLAY TO PAUL, WHO'S MISSED EVERY 3-POINTER HE SHOT LAST NIGHT AND WAS HEAVILY GUARDED, IN THE LAST MINUTE OR SO!!! That was a boo-boo on Vogel for even drawing that up. That play was the endgame for us.

              5) I'm not too worried about other teams thinking this is the game-plan to beat us, because in the playoffs that run-and-gun ***** doesn't work. The West is known for being geared more to this type of offense, yet, the last 3 Western teams that's won a championship (Spurs, Dallas, and L.A.) figured out that playoffs slow down, and you need the half-court set to win it all. It may hurt us during the season, but, until a team just fast-breaks us to death in series, I'm not too worried.

              Sorry for my rant.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Pacers/Suns Postgame Thread

                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                In our two match-ups against the Suns:

                Phoenix shot 19-33 from three.

                Pacers shot 6-30 from three.

                Ballgame(s).
                Further analysis of these stats:

                Suns 3pt average for the Season - 9.4 3ptM / 25.3 3ptA = 37.1 %
                Suns 3pt average for January ( 16 games ) - 8.9 3ptm / 24.3 3ptA = 36.8 %

                Against the Pacers:

                8 of 17 shooting at 47% ( in yesterday's game )
                11 of 16 shooting at 68.8% ( in Phoenix )
                19 of 33 shooting at 57% ( overall )

                They are not only scoring well above their average....they are making it seem like they are in practice hoisting up uncontested 3pt shots.
                Last edited by CableKC; 01-31-2014, 08:05 PM.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Pacers/Suns Postgame Thread

                  Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                  Further analysis of these stats:

                  Suns 3pt average for the Season - 9.4 3ptM / 25.3 3ptA = 37.1 %
                  Suns 3pt average for January ( 16 games ) - 8.9 3ptm / 24.3 3ptA = 36.8 %

                  Against the Pacers:

                  8 of 17 shooting at 47% ( in yesterday's game )
                  11 of 16 shooting at 68.8% ( in Phoenix )
                  19 of 33 shooting at 57% ( overall )

                  They are not only scoring well above their average....they are making it seem like they are in practice hoisting up uncontested 3pt shots.
                  Those shots for the most part were WIDE OPEN though. I can't count how many times Dragic easily got past George Hill, everyone collapsed in the paint, and it left a wide open 3 point shooter.
                  There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Pacers/Suns Postgame Thread

                    Originally posted by repole View Post
                    I recalled their offensive efficiency being higher, but apparently I'm wrong (19th this year, 20th last year). You could argue that their offensive style limits fast break opportunities and gives their defense a better chance to set up. That may or may not be true, I really don't know, but it was what Celtics fans claimed for a while with their elite defense and struggling offense.

                    With the personnel here it might be hard to change things much, guys like West and Hibbert really need to be operating from the post to be successful. It seems like Lance is in a pretty ideal role for his style of play, and George isn't left having to create all of the time which is nice. Ideally you'd have another shot creator involved rather than Hill, but he's also the most efficient guy on the team so it's hard to complain about him. Mahinmi seems like a terrible fit, Scola hasn't been much better, and Granger has really struggled. If you replaced those horribly unproductive minutes with anything approaching league average, this would be a decently above average offensive team.
                    Our starting lineup is actually 107 points per 100 this year compared to 108.6 last year. I'm too terrible at the NBA.com stats (at least at work, why Internet Explorer, why?) but if we are 102.6 for pp100 this year and last year we were at 101.6, it seems like the team is slightly more efficient overall (I think this is the case league-wide.), but the starters less so. They did go on a bit of a run to end last season and that could still happen. But at this point, it seems like our starting five has gotten worse on offense; it seems like they should be better with more experience, part of the reason for the confusion.

                    Meaning that the bench is possible actually improved over last year, with obviously a variety of factors possibly contributing. So I guess I'm disagreeing with you on the bench (as a noted Ian supporter notwithstanding). (I'm not 100 on these numbers since my entire PC freezes when I shuffle the columns around.)
                    You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Suns Postgame Thread

                      Schuhmann gets into it a little bit, though this is mostly in regards to our insanely consistent inconsistency with which most of us are familiar. Via. He doesn't mention much about last year other than saying we were fairly stable on the 'O' end.

                      The List

                      Highest standard deviation, quarter-to-quarter NetRtg
                      Team VOff Rank VDef Rank VNet
                      Indiana 7.2 1 3.7 14 10.4
                      Toronto 4.2 9 4.8 9 8.3
                      Minnesota 5.3 5 3.1 19 8.3
                      Milwaukee 3.5 13 4.9 8 8.0
                      New Orleans 5.8 3 6.5 1 7.9
                      Portland 2.2 26 5.5 5 7.4
                      Detroit 5.1 7 2.2 25 7.2
                      New York 2.6 20 5.5 6 6.5
                      Philadelphia 2.5 21 5.7 4 6.2
                      Boston 2.8 19 4.0 12 6.1
                      Standard deviation measures variance or, for our purposes, inconsistency.
                      VOff = Offensive variance (OffRtg = Points scored per 100 possessions)
                      VDef = Defensive variance (DefRtg = Points allowed per 100 possessions)
                      VNet = Net variance (NetRtg = Point differential per 100 possessions)

                      The Context

                      So essentially, the Pacers are the most inconsistent team in the league from quarter to quarter, which is weird, because they’re, by far, the best defensive team in the league. As we pointed out last week, they’re the best defensive team of the last 37 years (though that differential is down to 9.2), and strong defense is supposed to be the backbone of consistent success.

                      The Pacers have the No. 1 defense in the first, third and fourth quarters, and the No. 4 defense in thesecond, though there’s a pretty big difference between the (ridiculously good) 88.8 points per 100 possessions they allow in the third quarter and the (still pretty good) 97.7 they allow in the second. Still, it’s on offense where there’s a lot more fluctuation.


                      Pacers efficiency, by period
                      Quarter OffRtg Rank DefRtg Rank NetRtg Rank
                      1st quarter 96.1 27 94.7 1 +1.4 15
                      2nd quarter 96.4 27 97.7 4 -1.3 16
                      3rd quarter 110.1 3 88.8 1 +21.2 1
                      4th quarter 107.3 12 94.8 1 +12.5 2
                      Half OffRtg Rank DefRtg Rank NetRtg Rank
                      1st half 96.3 28 96.2 2 +0.0 15
                      2nd half 108.7 4 91.8 1 +16.9 1
                      There have been two different Pacers teams this season. The First Half Pacers have scored about as efficiently as the Bucks. The Second Half Pacers have an offense more closely resembling the Heat.

                      Indiana has had the lead at halftime in 24 of their 45 games. They’ve outscored their opponent in the second half of 35 of the 45.
                      In general, there’s a big offensive drop-off when the Pacers go to their bench. (Thursday’s loss to the Sunswas the definition of a bench loss, as well as an example of how they’ve played better after halftime.) But the half-to-half offensive drop-off has been spread rather evenly among their starters and bench units.

                      Efficiency of Pacers’ starting lineup, by half
                      Half MIN OffRtg DefRtg NetRtg +/-
                      1st half 403 101.5 96.5 +4.9 +35
                      2nd half 395 112.0 89.6 +22.4 +172
                      Difference 10.5 -6.9 17.4
                      Efficiency of other Pacers’ lineups, by half
                      Half MIN OffRtg DefRtg NetRtg +/-
                      1st half 676 93.2 96.1 -2.8 -32
                      2nd half 684 106.9 93.0 +13.9 +180
                      Difference 13.6 -3.1 16.7

                      The Pacers have turned the ball over at the same rate in both halves and are only a slightly better offensive rebounding team in the second half. But they’ve shot much better and gotten to the free-throw line a lot more often in the second half. They’ve also assisted on a greater percentage of their buckets.

                      Paul George and Lance Stephenson have been much better shooters in the second half of games. George and George Hill have much higher free throw rates. And both Stephenson and Hill have had higher assist rates. Off the bench, C.J. Watson has shot a lot better and also dished out more assists after halftime.

                      The Pacers’ half-to-half discrepancy has lessened some over the last seven weeks. Through their first 22 games, they were scoring 20.4 more points per 100 possessions in the second half. Over their last 23, the difference is only 4.8.

                      Amazingly, the Pacers had the second most consistent offense from quarter to quarter last season, behind only the Suns, who were just consistently awful on that end.

                      This season, Indiana has found a new gear on both ends of the floor in that third quarter. Their plus-21.2 NetRtg in those 12 minutes is, by far, the best of any team in any quarter. Next best are San Antonio’s plus-13.3 in the second quarter and Toronto’s plus-13.3 in the fourth.

                      Whether they’re consistent or inconsistent from quarter to quarter, the Pacers are a much better team than they were last season. But it will be interesting to see if their third-quarter dominance is a big factor in their quest for a championship.
                      You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X