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

I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On

    http://www.indystar.com/articles/8/150150-4338-179.html

    AUBURN HILLS, Mich. -- Jermaine O'Neal wouldn't say it. Somebody had just asked him about his lack of shots in the second half of another excruciating Pacers loss, the way Indiana's offense managed to make its best player disappear when it mattered for the second game in a row. O'Neal shrugged, and gave the proper, political answer, saying he has faith his teammates can make the big shots.

    That's when Reggie Miller, sitting to one side of O'Neal, made his biggest contribution of the night -- really, his only meaningful contribution of the night.

    He piped up and spoke the truth.

    "Jermaine needs to be shooting upwards of 25 times a game," Miller said without direct provocation. "We have to do a better job of finding ways to get the ball to him. He has to get 30, 40, 50 touches a night."

    Last anybody checked, O'Neal was not only Indiana's best player, but he finished third in the Most Valuable Player balloting. And yet, he rarely got the ball during a scoreless second half of Game 2, unless it was late in the shot clock. And by the time the Pacers rediscovered him late in the fourth quarter of Wednesday night's 85-78 Detroit victory, it was too late.

    It's not just time for Indiana's star player to play like a star. It's time for Indiana to give its star a chance to play like a star.

    Where else are the Pacers, who can't shoot 35 percent in their fondest dreams, supposed to get offense now?

    Ron Artest? For some reason, he's just lost, his shot is AWOL, his confidence is flagging. He played well defensively Wednesday night, but he is being used solely as a defensive specialist.

    Jamaal Tinsley? He was the weakest link going into this Eastern Conference finals, and now he's got a bum ankle and a barking hamstring to make matters worse.

    His replacement, Anthony Johnson, has given the Pacers some good minutes, but he's struggled terribly against Detroit's pressure, leaving the offense scant time to make plays.

    And while some of us would have liked to have seen Kenny Anderson earlier, it's fair to say that ship has sailed. "Frustrating, man," Anderson said after the game. "I know I can help. I've been through this before."

    Miller? If Indiana thinks Uncle Reggie is going to save them, they're living in yesterday. Miller still has his moments, but they are too scattered. More and more, it feels like Tayshaun Prince didn't catch up with Miller the other night as much as Father Time did.

    Please don't tell me how he stretches the defense with his mere presence. Did you see any gaping holes in Detroit's defense? If anybody else plays 15 minutes and doesn't do anything -- nothing -- he's on Rick Carlisle's bench.

    It's time to stop waiting for the Reggie of 1999 to show up, because he's not going to show up. Maybe that means more Jonathan Bender. Or Fred Jones. Or Al Harrington, who spent way too much time on the bench during the fourth quarter. Somebody. This isn't a sentimental journey. These are the playoffs. The best way to get that "Ring for Reggie" may be to turn him into a spectator.

    Let's face it: The Pacers aren't going to reinvent themselves between now and a Game 4 they absolutely, positively have to win if they want any hope of taking this series. As Miller said, at this point, there are "no gimmicks or different schemes."

    Which is why the Pacers must, more than ever, put it on O'Neal's shoulders and give him a chance to show whether he can play like a superstar.

    If he can't get it done, fine, it's part of the process for a player who is still quite young. This is a new stage for O'Neal. It's a new stage for almost all of them.

    The shame would come, though, if the Pacers drop Game 4, and ultimately the series, without giving O'Neal a chance to take ownership of this thing. That could mean taking more shots. That could mean drawing the defense and moving it to somebody else. But he has now gone nine games without a double-double, his longest stretch of the season, and not all of that is his fault.

    It's getting late now, the Pacers down two games to one, staring at the business end of a 3-1 deficit. This is when teams turn to their stars, when Minnesota looks at Kevin Garnett and San Antonio finds Tim Duncan and the Lakers rely on Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant.

    This used to be Miller Time. But Miller said it right. It's time to find out how far Jermaine O'Neal can take them.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On

    Great read.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On

      That is probably Bob Kravitz's finest effort in covering the Pacers.

      Usually, he writes well but misses the point in a lot of his articles. This one is on the money.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On

        Reggie does "stretch the defense"

        Larry Brown said so after the game, saying they do not help off Reggie, and if you watch Rip never leaves Reggie, never.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On

          Yeah, it hasn't been help defense off of Reggie, it has been (up to this game) the Pacers doing help defense off of (*name a Piston's player*)

          Did anyone else notice we stayed away from the doubleteam more this game than the first two? It's another reason I'm more optimistic.
          BillS

          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On

            This was a good read. I agree with him this time.


            2006 WORLD CHAMPION INDIANAPOLIS COLTS

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On

              Why should we double team , the Pistons are playing us Straight up 1-1 for the most part.
              Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On

                Why? Because we are getting beat one on one. We need people to step up even before they get to the lane. I thought the zone was pretty effective last night. The bench did get burned though a few times playing zone. Also putting a little ball pressure when its inbounded would help.


                2006 WORLD CHAMPION INDIANAPOLIS COLTS

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On

                  I have been Mulling over this ever since i read it at 10 am my time.

                  Mullin for several reasons but let's just write them down and see what you guys think;

                  If the offense flows, (usually with Tins on the floor) JO gets his fair share of shots. not as much as we all would like, but he passes out more and more to the open man, that's when Ron has a monster game, or Reg, or anybody on our team for that matter, IF JO gets the ball, there is at least one player free to take a moneyshot.

                  Sorry to say, no matter how hard AJ worked, and whether we can agree on him delivering a "great" game or not (we can't I'm still not impressed, he does simply not bring the ball up that much, Ron does it most of the times and when AJ does it, it takes him ages to get across the timeline) but with AJ the offense has no flow whatsoever.

                  IF the ball does not go to JO, then he is unable to find the open man in time, he hardly ever finds JO to begin with, this leads to out of position play, sets not ready, not executed, and peple forcing their own chances in order to make something happy, which does or does not work. (the latter in most cases)

                  JO IF he gets the ball gets it way out of his comfortzone, game 2 second half made that very clear. he has to do way to much and go way to far to not be seen, and easily defended if he has to come from far outside.

                  It is not a matter of JO dissapearing, it is a matter of the second string not finding him.

                  JO, unlike Ron, is not the type of player who will force his way into or out of (as is most often the case) a game, he has learned the hard way that no matter how much he start shouldering himself, the team will not get better if he stops passing, he plays within the concept, he has bought into it and sticks with it till the end, whether it falls apart or not, he does what coach wants him to do.

                  Though we would lose some on defense with AJ out, I still believe KA can get the ball where we need it to be, whether he still has any value as a frustrated player, whether he can still play in the concept with the amount of frustration he has to deal with is uncertain, the same goes for Scot Pollard, there is no way that he could not hustle with BB under the boards, he might be an offensive disaster waiting to happen, but let's be honest, he has hardly seen the minutes to get used to making some, last game he got more the 3 minutes (yes this was regular season) he made 4 of 4 from the floor, so somewhere there is something that could have value beyonf hustle and strength.

                  I for one do not buy in this outside shooting solution most of you are talking about, I agree that neither the Bucks nor the Nets had their shot "falling" except for exceptions, this is in large part due to the style of defense. We are forced (while we are not a great shooting team) to take even less time for our shots then usual and this disallows the already not so sure shooters to get their shot off. Result: poor shooting.

                  Seemingly, beside unhappy benchplayers like KA and Polly, there is more brewing under the surface it seems, JO remains political correct, but his expression says a lot, Al is unhappy, which was very clear towards the end of the game, and from his statements in the press (he's not as savvy yet), Ron is obviously not happy with the way things are going, and I ahve a feeling harsh words are spoken in closed quarters (once again).

                  I am not sure, but I have at the same time the feeling that the players are siding together in this, and that the "changes" Rick's made are not enough in their eyes, they want something else, though I can not really guess what. (OK winning, but that's to obvious).

                  NO, I am not saying we're doomed because we ahve problems, definitely not! But it is obvious that there is more going on then we had hoped for.

                  I firmly believe we will see more changes in the next game or latest (if they lose) in game 5, changes made on wishes of the players. (captains?)

                  Ron stopped shooting last night, and concentrated on defense in the second half ( he took at most half the number of shots he normally takes)
                  Reggie did not get a shot, JO got so few touches it was embaressing, Al, no matter his hustle which is admirable and defense if he decides to show, is still a weak link, JB is giving his all and creating havoc when on the floor, stop worrying about his fouls, if he fouls out you are in the same position as when he is benched, and never gets in a rythm of sorts.

                  It is very obvious that the most serious problem lies in the flow of the offense, not the shotmaking, the selecion is not even a topic, people are simply forced into bad shots or taking them out of sheer frustration, in both cases that is bad.

                  I hate to say this, Kravitz is right in a lot of places in this article.

                  As to my total assumptions; they are supported by this above article and the following from today's Star:

                  Montieth's piece; "We have to shoot better," said Reggie Miller, who also wants to shoot more.

                  Miller didn't take a shot until the third quarter, and got off just four in the game. He said afterward he'd like to be more involved in the offense, but that starts with getting O'Neal more involved so he can get open on kickout passes.

                  "We're not going to come up with gimmicks or schemes now, but I would want to get more looks now," he said. "It would be nice."

                  Coach Rick Carlisle still wants a balanced approach. The Pacers got more of it Wednesday than in the previous games, but didn't hit enough shots to make it pay off.

                  Mike Chappel:

                  Artest insisted he hasn't lost confidence in his shooting touch.

                  (Ron Artest)
                  "Not at all," he said in a congested, and subdued, Pacers locker room. "I'm just not getting the ball as much. I'm just trying to adjust to the coaching, to the game.

                  "You just play the game the way it's supposed to be played."

                  Coincidence that 2 out 3 Captains are talking the same type of talk ?
                  Consider the 3d one is "polite" and then count the beans.
                  So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                  If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                  Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On


                    Miller? If Indiana thinks Uncle Reggie is going to save them, they're living in yesterday. Miller still has his moments, but they are too scattered. More and more, it feels like Tayshaun Prince didn't catch up with Miller the other night as much as Father Time did.

                    It's time to stop waiting for the Reggie of 1999 to show up, because he's not going to show up. Maybe that means more Jonathan Bender. Or Fred Jones. Or Al Harrington, who spent way too much time on the bench during the fourth quarter. Somebody. This isn't a sentimental journey. These are the playoffs. The best way to get that "Ring for Reggie" may be to turn him into a spectator.
                    Bob Kravitz you must be in my head , I can't agree more Indiana fans need to get over the Fantasy of Miller Time and the Past ...it hasn't won us a single championship yet and nor do I believe it ever will and that's the brutal honest truth.
                    Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On


                      Miller? If Indiana thinks Uncle Reggie is going to save them, they're living in yesterday. Miller still has his moments, but they are too scattered. More and more, it feels like Tayshaun Prince didn't catch up with Miller the other night as much as Father Time did.

                      It's time to stop waiting for the Reggie of 1999 to show up, because he's not going to show up. Maybe that means more Jonathan Bender. Or Fred Jones. Or Al Harrington, who spent way too much time on the bench during the fourth quarter. Somebody. This isn't a sentimental journey. These are the playoffs. The best way to get that "Ring for Reggie" may be to turn him into a spectator.
                      Bob Kravitz you must be in my head , I can't agree more Indiana fans need to get over the Fantasy of Miller Time and the Past ...it hasn't won us a single championship yet and nor do I believe it ever will and that's the brutal honest truth.
                      AMEN!!!!

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On

                        yeah but people don't want to accept it , they would rather stick thier heads in the sand, do we really need another year of MIA reggie to convince people it's over ?
                        Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On

                          Friday, May 28th, is the day we will find out if this Pacer team is for real.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On

                            Friday, May 28th, is the day we will find out if this Pacer team is for real.
                            And I'll be there .
                            Is anyone else going?

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: I Don't Know About You Guys, But This Is Right On

                              I won't even get to see it.

                              I'll be driving to Toledo to go to a wedding. I hope that I can find the game on the radio...

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X