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

Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

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

  • Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

    What are the rotation spots that need upgrading the most. every poster seems to have a different set of priorities for the pacer FO this summer. I just want to see what rotation spots need to be improved first?

    used an 8 man rotation. if you are worrying about your teams 9th guy, your team doesn't have any problems. Starting PG, SG, SF, PF and C, backup wing, PG and big. pick the one(s) you think should be the main priority for the pacer FO to fix.
    111
    starting PG
    9.01%
    10
    backup PG
    9.01%
    10
    starting SG
    22.52%
    25
    startubg SF
    0.90%
    1
    backup wing
    3.60%
    4
    starting PF
    18.92%
    21
    starting C
    2.70%
    3
    backup big
    22.52%
    25
    It doesn't matter who, just that we raise the overall talent level of the team. (mellifluous)
    10.81%
    12

  • #2
    Re: Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

    I'd like to see a 4/5 combo guy brought in that would allow us to bring Tyler off the bench. Im fine with PG starting at the 2. I think we need to bring in a more steady hand to back up DC. AJ is a good guy but I'd look to upgrade.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

      We need another big right now that can play center. Jeff is aging so there must be an "heir to his throne" and the sooner we can add this to our lineup, the better. It can either be a backup or starting material.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

        Starting PF: Hansbrough's best-case-scenario is probably as an average starting PF, and McBob's isn't even that. That's not gonna cut it.

        Starting SG: Paul George has been a huge disappointment, and neither Dunleavy nor Rush are long-term answers (or even short-term in Rush's case).

        Backup C: Foster can't go on forever. It's Stanko Time!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

          Originally posted by Jared Sullinger View Post
          It's Stanko Time!
          I like to refer to it as:


          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

            There's no question we could use some depth at 4/5, particularly with some length, toughness, and defensive ability. Maybe some vet depth at point, even better if defense is a strong suit.

            However, over the course Vogel's run and culminating in a live look against the NYKs last night, I have made those important, but secondary priorities. If I could get one thing it would be a guy who's forte is creating offense (points or teammate opportunities) off the dribble. This could be a 1, 2, or 3.

            Collison can do this to a degree, but we need more help there on offense. I realize this is not easy to obtain, but I'd have it at the top of my list and investigate every alternative. A guy like the previously bandied about A. Iguodala might fit the bill.

            In the end, any of those three pieces I think helps the team in some way.
            I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

            -Emiliano Zapata

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

              Originally posted by Jared Sullinger View Post
              Starting PF: Hansbrough's best-case-scenario is probably as an average starting PF, and McBob's isn't even that. That's not gonna cut it.

              Starting SG: Paul George has been a huge disappointment, and neither Dunleavy nor Rush are long-term answers (or even short-term in Rush's case).

              Backup C: Foster can't go on forever. It's Stanko Time!
              In regards to Paul George: I'm with the many who are tired of hearing "they're young, they'll develop."

              You cannot say that forever. But I also think you need to depend on that talent to provide the performance you expect. With George, all we've seen is home being ignored on offense, while having his bench replacement end up taking the majority of his minutes every night.

              I don't think it is right to replace George. I think the correct way to handle him is directly involve him in the offense now. Make him the third option now. Expect and demand that performance. Give him his second season, as his one season to prove whether he'll realize his potential. If he doesn't not live up by that time, then we can assume the shooting guard position is a hole that needs to be filled. That is when the front office should try to acquire someone like OJ Mayo* that can be the starting guard for at least the following years. To be specific, we'd expect Paul to throw up 14-15 points a game next season efficiently every night. If he does that, we know he's on his way. If he cannot? We know it is a waste of time to ever assume he'll turn into that player.

              Really, this is the case with all of our talent- Set realistic expectations with the team we have, and move on when they aren't met.

              Consider the general plan that we can look forward to. We know of course the key to title run would be, in the fewest words possible, great defense, capable offense, and outstanding chemistry.

              We have team now that is already developing great chemistry. They're all young basketball heads that strictly care about winning.

              We have Roy who has the potential to turn into either all-star or near all-star status. He should be a 16-9 guy, that produces that consistently on a nightly basis. We've seen this the last 20 games without fail. It would be reasonable to expect consistency from him on a nightly basis next season. He's grown a lot. Now we need him to play as he is capable right now, every night. If he doesn't do that next season? If he has another up and down season? That is when consider him as trade bait for us go another direction if he cannot full fill that role. The nice thing about Roy, as he protects the rim well, he rebounds much better than people realize, and while he will get beat by some of the more offensively gifted centers in the league, he'd still be a championship caliber starter.

              We have Danny Granger who is a known quantity. He does all the things you'd need from a championship caliber SF, as long as we have true number one option on offense that he can play with. Now, if Paul George next season shows absolutely no signs of being that player? That's when we look to trade Granger for something in order take our team in a different direction.

              We have a core on this team that looks like they're going to be able to contend with the best. Probably the best thing for the Pacers to do is sit on that talent and let them come together as a team.

              We cannot just wait for ever with the blind belief that some day they will become what we hope them to be. But at the same time, we cannot carelessly acquire talent that does not help form a true title contending unit.

              I don't want a team that is inherently flawed that wins 50 games a season. It's a waste of time. It is truly tough to build a championship contending team. Let's hopefully stick to that concept, of building a team that can work together as a great unit.

              I don't want to become like the Hawks. I don't see them ever competing for a championship in the next 5-7 years. I just don't see it. They wasted cap space on Joe Johnson. He's not ever going to lead them to a championship. I think the Hawks are in a terrible situation. They're winning games with a lot of talent, but how could they make the necessary movies to push them over the top? They don't have cap space, but they have a bunch of good players that are essentially overrated because of the stats they produce. (excluding Al Horford) I couldn't care less about stats if they don't correspond with a true winning team.

              The Pacers essentially need to place bets. They need to place a bet on Paul George that next season he proves he'll be one of the top 2 guards with in 2-3 years. They need to place a bet that Hibbert will be a solid, dependable big man. They need to place a bet on DC that next season he proves he can be a Tony Parker level point guard, one that distributes the ball well enough, doesn't turn the ball over, and can be good enough to a solid starting point guard in the NBA.

              If none, or a combination of those bets don't pay out? Then its time to make somewhat drastic moves to take the team in a new direction.

              That is certainly a lot of ifs that all of those players become exactly what we need them to be. But if none of it happens? No harm no foul. Winning isn't easy. The Pacers just need to try again, and if they do things smart, like staying under the cap, and remaining patiently optimistic while keeping true realistic expectations as to the teams direction, things will turn around in a big way. The Pacers cannot sign people that do not represent the possibility of winning. That means you cannot sign, or trade for people like Joe Johnson, Monta Ellis, Al Jefferson, OJ Mayo, or David Lee. The kind of guys that do put up good numbers but will never result in a big time winning team. They're wastes of time that help their teams remain mediocre.

              The Pacers are in a wonderful spot. They're actually not in a spot were they are going to be average for years to come. I think we're truly in a make it or break it position.

              We have one true good player that helps us win our below 40 games. We are going to be below the cap. If the talent is realized, we stick to the formula and acquire the specific needs. IF the talent is not realized, we trade Granger for that draft pick we need, or that new young talent we need. We blow the team up. We ensure not to sign Roy for instance to a large contract that handicaps us for years to come.

              I think that is the key to the Pacers success. This is what needs to happen. As fans, it seems we can see the Pacers tend to be thinking at least somewhat in the general thought process that I've laid out in this post. We can watch and enjoy what they're doing now and hopefully this works! I know I'll be rooting for Roy, Paul and DC... Go Pacers.


              *OJ Mayo- later on in this post I make the argument you couldn't sign him as he has not shown he'd be someone who could help lead us to a championship. However-, if the Pacers were at the point were they thought they needed just one piece, such a shooting guard, then they could sign someone like OJ to a small contract to be a temporary solution to the shooting guard problem until we are able to find the right player for the job.
              Last edited by mattie; 04-11-2011, 07:22 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

                George was not even supposed to be a contributor this year, so everything he's given us so far has just been gravy. Plus, he's really more of a 3 than a 2. He'll be fine.

                We need to upgrade starting SG for sure, and probably PF unless Bro becomes more consistent there. I think we'll have a good idea of our starting PG situation after the Chicago series. And pretty much every back-up spot could use an upgrade.

                In short, there is a lot of work to be done this summer.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

                  We need an starting PG and an starting SG.
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

                    Get back with me after the playoffs

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

                      Originally posted by Shade View Post
                      George was not even supposed to be a contributor this year, so everything he's given us so far has just been gravy. Plus, he's really more of a 3 than a 2. He'll be fine.

                      We need to upgrade starting SG for sure, and probably PF unless Bro becomes more consistent there. I think we'll have a good idea of our starting PG situation after the Chicago series. And pretty much every back-up spot could use an upgrade.

                      In short, there is a lot of work to be done this summer.
                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      We need an starting PG and an starting SG.
                      If we have a rookie starting at 2 guard now, after his 2 years playing college ball, and if we all agree he has a lot of potential, why would want someone else to play in his stead?

                      How does it make any sense to sign someone to start ahead of him when it is quite clear he should (meaning, expected) mature into a solid starter in his second season? Why waste cap space acquiring someone for a position in which we already feel we have the long term solution for that position?? If he is not good enough to start in his second season, as a 21 year old with already 3 years experience combined from both college and pro, than is he not already a bust?

                      Shouldn't we be using all resources to get players at the other positions such as PG and PF? Most everyone on this board agrees they don't think DC is the long term solution and they do not think Tyler is a starting quality PF. I'd think that would be most everyones main concern right?

                      I realize I must be wrong, as I simply cannot understand the thought process behind it even with the majority of the board having similar opinions. But I'd like to understand it. I've made it quite clear why I think in this coming off season the 2 guard position is the last thing we need to look for. What am I missing?
                      Last edited by mattie; 04-11-2011, 08:17 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

                        This is stolen from Count55, but it helped me understand Paul George a bit. These are the usage rates of the 4 other starters:

                        Danny 26.7%
                        Hibbert 23.8%
                        Tyler 23.3%
                        Collison 22.0%

                        If you add that up, you see that these 4 guys are using 95.8% of the possessions when they're on the floor together. There's not much more than scraps for George to pick up. (Yes, I know that adding usage rates is simplistic and mildly inaccurate, but I do think this paints an accurate picture of what goes on when the starting unit is on the floor.)

                        2 more things:

                        UB is right, we'll know a bunch more after we watch the 4 playoff games.

                        Also, my line is the same. We need to take advantage of whatever opportunity we have to improve the overall talent. There is no player on the team who's good enough to consider their position "locked down" at the moment.
                        Last edited by OakMoses; 04-11-2011, 11:23 AM. Reason: I don't know that Count want's his pet name for Hibbert spread around too much.
                        "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                        - Salman Rushdie

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                          Get back with me after the playoffs
                          I'm not sure if playoffs is the tool use to rate the players, remember how Croshere looked in the playoffs and because of that he got a huge contract? I think that playoffs should be a tool but not the tool.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            I'm not sure if playoffs is the tool use to rate the players, remember how Croshere looked in the playoffs and because of that he got a huge contract? I think that playoffs should be a tool but not the tool.

                            if you go back and re-watch the entire 2000 playoffs, it was only in the lakers series where Cro was good in more than 1 game per series.

                            I think you learn a lot about your team in the playoffs. I whole lot more than a few meaningless games at the end of the regiular season

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Who needs to be replaced in the rotation this summer.

                              Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                              UB is right, we'll know a bunch more after we watch the 4 playoff games.
                              Come on. Be optimistic.
                              We cam make it a 5 game series.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X