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

2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

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

  • 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

    not sure the best way to phrase the question but basically does this current group of Pacers have the chance to become the best pacers team ever in the post ABA era?

    imo 98-00 was the best Pacers teams assembled to this point. 03-04 second but that group never had a chance.

    98-00

    Jackson, Miller, Jalen/Mullin, Dale/AD, Smits/ Smooth
    * I know AD was traded before Smooth arrived but any of those 98-00 teams are in the running. there are slight differences esp with jalen/ mullin by 00. I still think 98 was the best pacers team ever when we went 7 with the bulls and MJ in the ECF.

    I look at this years group and I think its quite possible better than those Pacers teams.

    if George and Hibbert take the next step. Granger is healthy. This may be the best Pacers team ever. Coincendentally, Bird coached those teams now he is GM.

    Good to have Legend back. Vogel, Nate McMillen, darn good coaching staff.


    This year could be special Pacer fans!

  • #2
    Re: 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

    We can argue, discuss, theorize about which team has been the best. But unless this team wins the championship then that is all it is discussion.

    The results show the '04 team was our best regular season team with 61 wins. The results show us that the 2000 team was the best playoff team because they got to game 6 of the NBA Finals.

    Beyond that a lot of people will argue that the 1998 team was really the best Pacers team ever.

    (disclaimer - of course this is NBA Pacers teams)

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

      The prior teams were very strong in the first eight players. We need to wait to see how the newly acquire guys perform. In our systems, but I'd say the present team looks like it might one day be classified as a stronger team in positions 1-10 than earlier teams.

      But I agree with Buck. Unless this team goes to the finals, its not really worth the argument regarding whether it is the best team.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

        I think it has a chance.


        Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

          If the playoff performance Roy put on is anywhere close to the new norm for him, if Paul takes the next step, if Stephenson continues to improve, if Hill gets more comfortable as a PG, and if Granger and West are their usual selves I think we are talking about a team far better than any previous teams.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

            I agree completely with the OP. I think the 98 team was the best with the 2000 team being a very close second.

            I understand where Unclebuck is coming from but the I look at is a little different. I'm comparing these Pacers squads to the other Pacers squads. So IOW, I ask myself who would win if the '98 team played a 7 game series against the 2000 team?

            Also I don't think you can just say that the 2000 team is the best because they advanced the furthest. If it was just based on how far each team advanced, how would you determine which Larry Bird Celtics team was the best considering that 3 of them won a championship? Almost everyone agrees it's the 1986 Celtics because they had 5 Hall-of-Famers on the squad and one of the best benches in NBA history. Even so, it's just an opinion. There's no real way to say one squad was really better than the other.

            With all that said, IMO, this team has the potential to be the best NBA Pacers team. This team has 4 All-Star caliber players, a top-notch defense, and a league leading rebounding team. With the bench upgrades and the addition of 3 really good shooters they should be able to contend for a championship.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

              61 wins is 61 wins, but the East was a complete joke in 2004. The Pacers won 61, the Pistons 54, and the Nets 47. The next highest was Miami with 42. Just an absolutely pathetic conference. The quality of teams that the 2014 Pacers will play night in and night out is much higher than what the 2004 team faced.

              1998 and 2000 stand above all else. 1998 was probably the best team from top to bottom, while 2000 got further than anyone else.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

                If the injury bug favors us then yes it's possible. It's really nice to be able to think that way after the way things went during the JOB era. A lot of teams put a plan together to peak like this team can but never get there and have to start over again. We're very fortunate right now.
                Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

                  Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                  61 wins is 61 wins, but the East was a complete joke in 2004. The Pacers won 61, the Pistons 54, and the Nets 47. The next highest was Miami with 42. Just an absolutely pathetic conference.
                  Whenever a thread comparing teams is started, inevitably I see this same thing mentioned. And I always respond the same way. The 2004 team had a better winning percentage against Western Conference teams than any team from the WC did. Actually, no matter how you slice it among divisions or conferences, the Pacers had a better winning percentage. That team was the team to beat in the entire league from day 1. And, as it turned out, no one could beat them... but themselves.

                  I still prefer the 1998-2000 teams myself. In the shortened season, we had the team to beat but couldn't get it done. The finals team wasn't considered the top team in the league, but was always considered a very strong contender. And, I think that most considered the 2004 team as one of the top 2-3 contenders, if not the team to beat.

                  Each of these teams shared one thing in common. Despite how good they were, they did not get the job done. So, to me, it's difficult to select one over the other, although one team did set a playoff bar by actually making it to the finals.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

                    I think it's one of the most talented rosters we've had, whether that translates or not, I'm not sure.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

                      I'ma say it, this team will be the best ever. We have had the best starting 5 in the league the past 2 seasons. Our bench looks like its finally ready to compete. We will dominate the league this year, and we will win the championship. We are just built too well for the playoffs, and we have the built in chemistry that is rare in this era of the NBA where rosters are bought.

                      They're gonna build statues of this Starting 5. Hill, George, Granger, West, Hibbert.
                      You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

                        Easily most talented ever. But injuries and other issues can always come into play. Will they win it? Who knows. I think they're the best team coming out of the gate tho for sure.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

                          This will certainly depend on next offseason of course (what's up Lance).... Barring injury of course...

                          Players on the 2013-14 Pacers roster could be the best "core" in franchise history.

                          George Hill, Roy Hibbert, Paul George, Lance Stephenson, Ian Mahinmi, and Solomon Hill are all 27 years old or younger. David West is David West. Every player mentioned (with one obvious possible exception) will be with the team in 2 years unless a trade goes down. That's 2 more years of growing together. That's 2 more years of a few young talents growing together with David West thrown in the mix and at worst two solid bench players (Ian and Solomon). That's incredibly exciting.

                          It felt like Mark, Reggie, Derrick, Dale, Rik, Antonio, and even Jalen and Mullin to a lesser extent played their entire careers together.

                          We're about to stumble into that same luxury here in a couple years.

                          In 2 years, how long will G3, Lance, PG, West, Hibbert, Ian, and Solomon have played together (or with each other behind closed doors)? Answer: a long time, especially by today's basketball's standards.

                          Sprinkle in younger players (i.e. rookies) and/or cheap veterans and this will be a tough team to beat for many years.

                          If you sit back and think about it, you could almost compare that 1998 team with the current team.... again, I said "almost" so don't rake me over the coals with some of these comparisons (although I would love to argue every current player is better than the 1998 player with one exception... for now) Mark = G3. Jalen = Lance. Reggie = PG. Derrick = Danny. The Davis Boy's and David West deserve categories of their own, we don't really have a Mullin (or do we?), and they didn't really have a Ian or Solomon (or did they?).... but you may get my point. Not to mention, Larry Joe Bird was heavily involved with both teams.

                          A previous post mentioned championships. In the NBA Pacers case, past or current championships don't matter because those championships don't exist. This makes the original post as close to perfect as you can get on the internet. Every argument gets tricky when championships are involved (Steve Kerr better than Robert Horry or Robert Horry better than Steve Kerr? Trent Dilfer better than Dan Marino? Michael Jordan better than Larry Bird?). Right now, it's the perfect discussion....

                          We know what past teams accomplished. We know what they mean to us right now. We have no clue what this year's team means to us right now. If they win a championship, the discussion is over. If they don't win a championship, the discussion lingers on until we're lucky enough to have it again. Right now, it's my favorite thread of all time.

                          Nice work.

                          Caesar Rayford.
                          Last edited by dgranger17; 08-28-2013, 11:34 PM. Reason: You Already Know

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

                            Originally posted by Peck View Post
                            I think it has a chance.
                            if this team is better than the 98 pacers, and there is every reason to believe they can be. no one will stand in the way.

                            the best pacers team was 99 with AD. buts its too painful to describe. albeit 98 hurt more.

                            all 3 years were brutal endings. 03 never materialized.

                            I have to believe the CULTURE in indy has changed. the core of our team I will argue is better than any in the East.

                            spanning a 5 year window. obviously bron bron is a gamechanger but we got a core.

                            were gonna win a championship.

                            bottom line. if Granger is healthy. give me vegas odds. and good health for this team.

                            Granger would be icing. having him hoist a trophy.. sweet.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 2013 - 14 Best Pacers Team ever?

                              When I look at it by position I have to say that I don't think this current team is as talented overall to the 98 team based mostly off last years performance. Our bench is really imprvoed but it's not even close to the 98 team. This team is younger and still improving though and expect them to do just that this season. It is very possible with growth from our young core they could become the best team yet. As of now.
                              Jackson > GH
                              Reggie > PG (yes still at this point)
                              Mullen < Granger ?
                              DD, Rick = West, Hibbert (I put it this way because I feel like I'm just comparing offense to defense otherwise but together both tandoms cover the spectrum)

                              AD, McKey, Rose, Best > seriously that's not even worth comparing to our improved bench.
                              Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X