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

Artest's year in review, amazing stat

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

  • Artest's year in review, amazing stat

    Pacers were 32-7 when Artest scored more than 20 points




    http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/artest_page_0304.html



    2003-04 in Review:
    Ron Artest
    Height: 6-7 Weight: 246 Age: 24 (11/13/79)

    Regular Season: Voted the NBA's Defensive Player of the Year by the media ... He was the leading vote-getter for the NBA All-Defensive team, as voted on by NBA head coaches. ... Also named to the All-NBA Third Team, his first selection to an All-NBA squad ... Named to the Eastern Conference All-Star team for the first time in 2004, he averaged career-highs of 18.3 ppg and 5.3 rpg…he was second on the team in scoring and fourth in rebounding. ...

    In his first All-Star experience, he had seven points, three rebounds, three assists and a steal in 17 minutes at L.A., 2/15. ...

    Named the Eastern Conference Player of the Week for the Week ending Nov. 9 ... He also won the same award for the week ending Mar. 28. ...

    He scored 20+ points 37 times this season and the Pacers were 32-5 in those games (.865)…that is the highest winning percentage for any team when one of its players scores 20+ points. ...

    He had three games with 30+ points, including a career-high 35 points at Orlando, 3/26…his 35 points against the Magic was the most by any Pacers' player this season. ... He connected on a career-high 75 3-pt FGS this season, third most on the team. ...

    His 272 assists ranked second best on the team. ... He had surgery to repair a torn ligament in his left thumb, 2/20, but was back in the lineup less than two weeks later. ... He had four double-doubles. ... He had a season-best and career-high tying 12 boards twice: at Atlanta, 11/1, and vs. Miami, 3/28. ...

    He topped Indiana in assists 22 times, including 11 of the first 30 games…he had a season-high nine assists vs. Washington, 12/9, tying his most ever in the NBA. ...

    He was one of just three players in the NBA with over 150 steals and he averaged 2.08 spg. ... Second on the team with 50 blocked shots this season, he rejected a career-high tying four vs. Philadelphia, 11/28. ...

    In the 55 victories that Artest has played, his defense has been a large part of the team’s success and has helped lead the Pacers to a franchise record in victories…in those 55 games, the players that Artest has guarded averaged only 8.6 points per game and shot 35.0 percent from the floor while Artest was on the floor for an average of 36.9 minutes per game (77 percent of the game)…the opposing starters only averaged 11.5 FGA per game.

    Playoffs: Struggled in the Eastern Conference Finals against Detroit, shooting just .298 from the field and .194 from the 3-point line ... Averaged 14.5 points and 8.3 rebounds against the Pistons ... In the second round against Miami, he led the Pacers with an average of 21.3 ppg in the six-game series, leading the team in scoring three times ...

    That included playoff career highs of 28 points and eight rebounds in Game 4. ... Was also the leading scorer in the first-round sweep of Boston, averaging 20.3 points ... He did not see action in Game 2 vs. Boston, 4/20, due to a league-imposed suspension for leaving the area of the bench during an altercation in Game 1, 4/17.

    Plus-Minus: Third on the team during the regular season at +6.3 per game, he was second in the playoffs at +4.1 per game but dropped to ninth during the conference finals at -2.2 per game.

    Contract Status: Signed through 2007-08, when he has the option to become a free agent

    Analysis: Showed what he can do when he keeps his emotions in check, achieving new levels of stardom and respect. He remains a very intense player who can occasionally try to do too much by himself, particularly when the team is struggling. An absolute beast as a one-on-one lock-down defender, he uses quick hands and feet, combined with uncanny anticipation, to frustrate opponents.

    Is still learning the limits of his offensive game, he either needs to become a far more accurate 3-point shooter or limit his attempts. When he posts up or attacks the basket, uses combination of strength and quickness to full advantage.



    [edit=24=1088529290][/edit]

  • #2
    Re: Artest's year in review, amazing stat

    UB...what did Ron's assist per game stat look like for the PO's? Did it go up or down? Did it remain the same? Not trying to flame Ron but thegreats find other ways to contribute when their scoring is missing and I'm curious to see if that was the case with RA.


    Very intersting read BTW.
    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Artest's year in review, amazing stat

      Thats why we keep Ron.
      Super Bowl XLI Champions
      2000 Eastern Conference Champions




      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Artest's year in review, amazing stat

        The Pacers go as Ron goes. For whatever reason he is the barometer on this team. If he starts throwing up wild shots, the team follows. If he is aggressive to the bucket, the team follows. If he passes the ball inside to JO, the team follows. Like him or hate him he is the leader of this team on the floor. I think JO is becoming the leader off of the floor but Artest is the leader on it.

        And as pacer2425 said 'that's why we keep Ron.' Those stats at his relatively cheap salary and he being locked up for 4 years, the Pacers would be nuts to trade him. If they do then there is A LOT of things going on behind the scenes.
        "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
        - Benjamin Franklin

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Artest's year in review, amazing stat

          His 272 assists ranked second best on the team



          And that is why we keep Ron. For those who think Artest can't pass.

          And he's only going to get better with his shot selection.
          Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Artest's year in review, amazing stat

            Ron's APG went down in the playoffs, but everyone's did. This was due an awful lot to the horrible shooting percentage and low scoring.
            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


            • #7
              Re: Artest's year in review, amazing stat

              Originally posted by Suaveness
              His 272 assists ranked second best on the team



              And that is why we keep Ron. For those who think Artest can't pass.

              And he's only going to get better with his shot selection.
              The reason that he had 272 assists is because he has the ball more than any other player. I don't think he CAN'T pass, but too many times he WON'T pass when he should.

              I hope he gets traded for a player of equal value because his trade value is very high. I think it would probably be beneficial to team chemistry, depending on who they got in return.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Artest's year in review, amazing stat

                I think frustration was also a factor in the Detroit series... if you can't really get into a groove you just start throwing up shots to try and get atleast something going.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Artest's year in review, amazing stat

                  Originally posted by Roy
                  Originally posted by Suaveness
                  His 272 assists ranked second best on the team



                  And that is why we keep Ron. For those who think Artest can't pass.

                  And he's only going to get better with his shot selection.
                  The reason that he had 272 assists is because he has the ball more than any other player. I don't think he CAN'T pass, but too many times he WON'T pass when he should.

                  I hope he gets traded for a player of equal value because his trade value is very high. I think it would probably be beneficial to team chemistry, depending on who they got in return.

                  The ball was in Artest's hands because the offense ran better through him most of the time. One huge problem I have in trading him is that you aren't likely to get equal value in return because of his relatively low salary. To get a player of equal value the other team would have to take one of our bad contracts and that might prove difficult.
                  "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
                  - Benjamin Franklin

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Artest's year in review, amazing stat

                    No one else on the team will step up and shoot, thats why he needs the ball. Someone has to make somthing happen.


                    2006 WORLD CHAMPION INDIANAPOLIS COLTS

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Artest's year in review, amazing stat

                      I keep going back to the fact that Artest is too good, too valuable to trade away. I know all the arguments against Ron, but I also know that when Ron plays badly the pacers struggle, and when Ron does not play at all, the pacers look like a different team.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Artest's year in review, amazing stat

                        [quote user=Unclebuck]I know all the arguments against Ron, but I also know that when Ron plays badly the pacers struggle, and when Ron does not play at all, the pacers look like a different team.
                        [/quote]

                        So, when he struggles he sinks the whole squad and the "different team" was 7-2.....hmmmmm.....


                        PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Artest's year in review, amazing stat

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck
                          I keep going back to the fact that Artest is too good, too valuable to trade away. I know all the arguments against Ron, but I also know that when Ron plays badly the pacers struggle, and when Ron does not play at all, the pacers look like a different team.
                          I feel the same UB , But I been avoiding all the Ron threads possiable , I got worn out trying to defend Ron. Sometimes I wonder if Ron wouldn not have came back so quick from his surgery would we still have won 61 games , assuming he was out til atleast the playoffs like alot of people were thinking.

                          It probably is just spinning off another question in a thread , but I think it's a legit question. My answer is no we dont win 61 games and more like 45 -50 games is what we would have finshed at which would have put us at a much lower seed in the playoffs.

                          I am sure some may strongly disagree with me , some may agree with me ...no matter which way it's just a observation and if you can honestly say we would have won 61 games without Ron , well I won't say it
                          Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Artest's year in review, amazing stat

                            Originally posted by TheSauceMaster
                            Originally posted by Unclebuck
                            I keep going back to the fact that Artest is too good, too valuable to trade away. I know all the arguments against Ron, but I also know that when Ron plays badly the pacers struggle, and when Ron does not play at all, the pacers look like a different team.
                            I feel the same UB , But I been avoiding all the Ron threads possiable , I got worn out trying to defend Ron. Sometimes I wonder if Ron wouldn not have came back so quick from his surgery would we still have won 61 games , assuming he was out til atleast the playoffs like alot of people were thinking.

                            It probably is just spinning off another question in a thread , but I think it's a legit question. My answer is no we dont win 61 games and more like 45 -50 games is what we would have finshed at which would have put us at a much lower seed in the playoffs.

                            I am sure some may strongly disagree with me , some may agree with me ...no matter which way it's just a observation and if you can honestly say we would have won 61 games without Ron , well I won't say it


                            Or what would've happened had Ron not had the surgery at all until after the season?

                            -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


                            • #15
                              Re: Artest's year in review, amazing stat

                              Originally posted by Bball
                              Originally posted by TheSauceMaster
                              Originally posted by Unclebuck
                              I keep going back to the fact that Artest is too good, too valuable to trade away. I know all the arguments against Ron, but I also know that when Ron plays badly the pacers struggle, and when Ron does not play at all, the pacers look like a different team.
                              I feel the same UB , But I been avoiding all the Ron threads possiable , I got worn out trying to defend Ron. Sometimes I wonder if Ron wouldn not have came back so quick from his surgery would we still have won 61 games , assuming he was out til atleast the playoffs like alot of people were thinking.

                              It probably is just spinning off another question in a thread , but I think it's a legit question. My answer is no we dont win 61 games and more like 45 -50 games is what we would have finshed at which would have put us at a much lower seed in the playoffs.

                              I am sure some may strongly disagree with me , some may agree with me ...no matter which way it's just a observation and if you can honestly say we would have won 61 games without Ron , well I won't say it


                              Or what would've happened had Ron not had the surgery at all until after the season?

                              -Bball

                              Bball, I don't see how that would have effected the team one way or the other.

                              I always said that Ron Artest alone is worth 15 wins. Meaning if he were not able to play for a whole season the Pacers would have won 15 fewer games. Of course if they trade him for someone who can help the Pacers some of those 15 losses would be offset.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X