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

Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

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

  • Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

    http://www.indystar.com/article/2009.../1088/SPORTS04

    I try not to read many Krazitz articles, but I found this one interesting because of doubts I have had in the past about O'Neal. I would hope that I am wrong on this, but wanted to see what other fans thought.

    I don't recall Jermaine having serious knee problems early in his career when he playing at a weight of 226lbs. Then I remember him bulking up to 260lbs the season after Brad Miller was traded. I searched but could not find him ever listed at a weight between either of these two, which means that he gained 34lbs in one off-season. This was followed by his several injuries to his knee and sholder, as well as a decline in overall production.

    A-Rod said he felt a lot of pressure to prove he deserved his new enormous contract, so he turned to roids as an aid. Young Jermaine may have also felt a great deal of pressure after signing a max deal and being dubbed heir to Reggies leadership role with the Pacers. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to think that O'Neal may have also turned to steroids in order to boost his performance so he could prove that he deserved the money and being considered a franchise player. (I am not accusing, just saying it wouldn't surprise me)

    Performance enhancing drugs in the NBA is something that I have wondered about for while because every other major sport has had problems with steroids, HGH, and/or EPO for several years now. What are your thought?

  • #2
    Re: Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

    I wouldnt be surprised if theres some scandal soon regarding NBA players. Gaining 34 lbs in the offseason is a lot.

    But keep in mind, Tinsley managed to gain 40 lbs in the offseason a few offseasons ago (but im sure that wasnt muscle)
    "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

      Jermaine is still listed as 226 on BBR.com, but he was heavier than that when he got here. It seems to me that he played between 240 & 250 in those first few years.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

        I was having this discussion with a friend the other day, and it's something that has always been in the back of my head. As Kravitz points out, it would be naive for us to think that nobody in the NBA uses PED's. Furthermore, it's not uncommon to hear someone say "Well, basketball is a sport that wouldn't benefit steroid-users". But how can becoming bigger, stronger, and faster not end up helping in some shape or form?

        I was watching Lebron a couple nights ago alongside the great Newman8r, and commented on how fast he is for someone of his size. What Kravitz points out is something that has been on my mind since Lebron has entered the league. I don't mean to single him out by any means, but he is a physical specimen. One that has consistently got bigger and stronger each year in the league. Sure, it could be 100% natural (after all, the kid was young and still physically developing when he entered the league). I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. But when you watch him, particularly in today's steroid-age, it's hard to silence that voice in the back of your head saying "hmmmmm..."

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

          Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
          But keep in mind, Tinsley managed to gain 40 lbs in the offseason a few offseasons ago (but im sure that wasnt muscle)
          Havin the munchies will do that to ya...

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

            There has never been any allegations about steriod use by NBA players - past present or future. I just don't think steriods are part of the basketball culture in HS, college or the NBA.

            Does that mean that no one has ever used them - no of course not - but I don't think it is used to any large extent by basketball players, mainly because the prevailing thought is it won't help
            Last edited by Unclebuck; 02-11-2009, 10:00 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

              Originally posted by Evan_The_Dude View Post
              Havin the munchies will do that to ya...
              <-- that was Tinsley coming into training camp
              "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

                you have Lebron,Howard and Greg Oden, they all look like they are 40 years old, I never seen guys this young with such a big body.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  you have Lebron,Howard and Greg Oden, they all look like they are 40 years old, I never seen guys this young with such a big body.
                  They are freaks of nature. They only occur every so often.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

                    What about Shaq? How about Wade's recovery? I hope this doesn't start a witch hunt.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

                      I've read that LeBron didn't start really lifting weights until this year. Do steroids help that much if you don't lift?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

                        Here is a really good article on this. Bob needs to read this- but then obviously he isn't around the NBA much at all. Reporters know what goes on in the locker room

                        http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/column...arc&id=2035336

                        Marc Stein
                        ESPN.com


                        Stern on steroids: 'It's not a problem we think we have'

                        --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        By Marc Stein
                        ESPN.com

                        Tony Massenburg has played with countless teammates in four countries on a professional basketball odyssey that has taken him to 15 different teams, 12 in the NBA.

                        Yet he doesn't need much of a pause when you ask him to rewind through his mental travel journal and estimate how many times he has heard a fellow member of the Spurs, Hornets, Celtics, Warriors, Clippers, Raptors, 76ers, Nets, Grizzlies, Rockets, Jazz or Kings say he wanted to give steroids a try.

                        Never is the estimate.

                        "It's hard enough to get guys in this league to lift weights," said Massenburg, who is back in San Antonio with the team that drafted him out of Maryland in 1990.


                        Grant Hill and Tracy McGrady are prototypical basketball players -- long and lean.

                        The NBA, like any other professional sports league, has faced substance-abuse scandals before, be it a growing cocaine habit that nearly ruined the league's reputation in the 1970s or a famed New York Times story in 1997 that alleged rampant marijuana and alcohol use among NBA players.

                        But steroids?

                        You really don't hear the word in NBA locker rooms unless reporters start asking questions about it, or until a congressional hearing on steroid use in baseball flickers onto a locker-room TV. Tuesday will mark another new and rare exception when detailed information about the NBA's steroid policy is formally presented to Congress, as requested by the same congressional committee that conducted baseball's steroid hearings.

                        The overwhelming belief among those interviewed on the topic in recent days and months is that NBA players do not see steroids as desirable or performance-enhancing for basketball.

                        "I can't remember even hearing anybody talk about it," said Orlando's Grant Hill. "You don't want to be naive, but we have our own issues, and steroids is not one of them."

                        Said one veteran NBA athletic trainer who wished not to be identified: "In the basketball culture, players want to be long and athletic. They want to be lean, and they would be fearful that added bulk would affect their lateral quickness. The baseball player, the power lifter, the sprinter – they're looking for power in short bursts. Those sports are built around short bursts of activity with long periods of rest and recovery. Basketball is continuous activity with short periods of rest and recovery."

                        Adds Dallas Mavericks team physician Dr. Tarek Souryal: "Steroids is really a factor in power sports. Football. Baseball if you're a power hitter. You're not going to see it in hockey, in soccer, in basketball. When you're playing every other night for 82 games, endurance is really what you're after, and steroids actually hurt that."


                        Commissioner David Stern agreed with all of those sentiments during his semiannual state-of-the-league address at All-Star Weekend in February. Yet Stern has to know attitudes could always change, and also that the odds say that there has undoubtedly been some level of experimentation in a league with more than 400 players. So he's determined to toughen the NBA's current anti-steroid policy – by mandating more frequent testing – just to "eliminate that even as a question," hoping to shield the NBA from even a tiny fraction of the increasing fan skepticism toward baseball's record-breaking feats of strength in recent seasons.

                        It's telling to note that the NBA Players Association has offered no known resistance to Stern's intentions in ongoing labor negotiations with the owners. The policy in place since 1998 calls for a five-game suspension for the first positive steroid finding, a 10-game suspension for the second offense and 25 games for subsequent positive tests.

                        "Watching what's swirling around [in other sports], it just seems to be prudent to say, 'Let's just get that issue out of any possibility,'" Stern said. "It's not a problem at the present time that we think we have. But it's a potent issue as it relates to baseball and the media around it, and we think it would be smart of us to deal with it."

                        There actually have been three steroid-related suspensions meted out by Stern's office since 1998, when the NBA introduced steroid testing. Yet all three of the suspended players – Don MacLean, Matt Geiger and Soumaila Samake – insisted at the time that they had merely taken supplements that included banned substances while recovering from injuries.

                        “ Most guys' bodies are so lean that I think people underestimate how strong NBA guys really are. Because of the nature of our sport and the total body movement and the 82-game schedule, it's hard for most guys to carry a lot of muscle mass. ”
                        — Spurs F Tony Massenburg

                        The fact that the NBA makes its steroid suspensions public – a policy baseball has only just adopted – is a strong deterrent for any NBA player thinking about sampling steroids. There is also serious debate among experts in the field whether steroids really serve as a recovery boost during injury rehabilitation.

                        "I think it's the other way around," Souryal said.

                        The aforementioned athletic trainer adds: "Our guys are much more interested in learning about the negative effects of anti-inflammatories as opposed to asking about steroids."

                        Memphis' Shane Battier echoed Massenburg's assertion that steroids are unlikely to appeal to NBA players, now or in the future, when weight training appeals to so few.

                        "Something you've got to understand is that basketball players just don't like to lift weights," Battier said. "Most of us would rather be out playing ball. We all grew up either on the playground or in the gym. If we're going to spend time working on our game, we're going to be on the court."

                        Hill remembers hearing similar views from a certain Michael Jordan when MJ returned from his dalliance with baseball in the spring of 1995.

                        "During that offseason, we did the 'Space Jam' movie and I played with him a couple days on the Warner Brothers lot," Hill said. "I remember one of the things he said was that he got too big from weight training in baseball. He needed to lift to get stronger to hit and trained his muscles differently for baseball.

                        "He got stronger, maybe a little heavier, and that may have helped him with his hitting. But I think it hurt him on the basketball court when he first came back. After 'Space Jam' he came back [the following season] not quite as big, not quite as heavy, and he was great again. Muscles and extra weight and extra size are not conducive to what basketball is all about."

                        So if there's resistance to visiting the weight room, a serious anti-steroids sentiment among NBA players shouldn't be too surprising.

                        "Steroids are not going to make you put the ball in the basket," Massenburg said. "And if you get real big and pumped up, you're not going to be able to move very well. And if you can't move, no matter how big and strong you are, in this league people are just going to be able to go right around you.

                        "Guys in the league are strong without being really, really big. Most guys' bodies are so lean that I think people underestimate how strong NBA guys really are. Because of the nature of our sport and the total body movement and the 82-game schedule, it's hard for most guys to carry a lot of muscle mass."

                        With a nickname like T-Mass, and all the different people and environments he has encountered in his basketball life, Massenburg should know.

                        Marc Stein is the senior NBA writer for ESPN.com. To e-mail him, click here. Also, click here to send a question for possible use on ESPNEWS.
                        Last edited by Unclebuck; 02-11-2009, 10:08 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

                          If I was looking for a roid suspect I'd consider Artest as a possibility. He had the body for it and maybe the roids could be looked at as a reason for his ummmmm temper?

                          -Bball
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

                            I think Jermaine might be on HGH, due to how the size of his head has increased since he got here. Also, some steroid use is used to help in recovery, not necessarily to add bulk or power. In that case, I could certainly see an NBA player use it to come back from injury faster or heal up a nagging injury while playing through it. Dunleavy is a good example of a guy in a situation where it might be tempting to use something to help that knee heal faster.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Kravitz: Steroids and the NBa

                              Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                              I've read that LeBron didn't start really lifting weights until this year. Do steroids help that much if you don't lift?
                              No.

                              They only one that I would think an NBA player would be tempted to take would be HGH. Studies are out showing that it helps injury recovery, but other than that there really wouldn't be a really good reason for it.

                              The way basketball players are geneticly built, doesn't really make muscle mass a big priority. (In HS basketball, maybe, but how many kids have the cash flow for it?) Football and baseball players aren't "tall" A receiver is considered big when they're 6'4"-6'5". In the NBA, that maybe a taller PG but either average or short for any other position.

                              There are some exceptions where increased strength, like a small post player ala Boozer/Brand, it would help. But, then again added mass has the potential to weigh them down on their moves. They don't out power anyone to begin with, and they shouldn't.

                              Basketball just isn't a power sport, and you can tell because the players of old like DD and Anthony Mason are dying off. It's completely morphed for a battle down low, to who can beat who off the dribble or from the perimeter.

                              Players shape their game around the type of body they have growing up. Players are going to be hesitant to change their body out of the fear it will change their game.

                              Maybe with injury recovery, but other than that nope.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X