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

Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

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

  • Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

    I had to give away my tickets to the game because of a conflict so once again I did not get to see this one live. However I did Tivo this & I did see the house feed.

    First & formost I will point this out now, it's pre-season so we can't take way to much away from this. However, like any game, there are trends we can begin to see.

    1. Danny Granger must & I mean MUST be more aggressive on the offensive end. He is already to good to defer this much to J.O. & we have yet to see him Al & J.O. on the floor together. He also needs to work on his ball handling ability because as far as I can tell the only real weakness he has is that he lacks the ability to break his man down off of the dribble as well as other players who become stars do.

    2. We are in trouble with our back court. No need to beat a dead horse here but both the p.g. & the S.G. spot is in need of some very serious upgrading. Marshal had some nice drives but better defensive teams will just shut down the lane on him & then what will he do? He looks to be very limited in his ability to hit from the outside. Again, Armstrong was the best p.g. on our team. That should tell you how bad things were right there.

    3. Shawne Williams needs some work but I honestly think by the end of the year he will be a solid rotation player. I don't know why but when I see him play I sometimes get the feeling he is a more talented Stromile Swift in the making. I know it will never happen but I would not be opposed to some D-League time for Shawne if we won't give him regular rotational min.

    4. Jermaine O'Neal looked average. That's not an insult or a compliment it's just what I saw. Also whenever he was in we once again went back to the low post offense we all know oh so well.

    5. Jackson made poor decisions & seemed to play more one on one than I am used to from him. I'm used to a lot btw, but this seemed even more to me. As to the fans booing, again I wasn't there but on tv it sounded like a wall of boo's, I could be wrong though. I know that for the teams benefit they probably need to stop sooner rather than later but IMO it's ok for the fans to let TPTB know how they feel.

    6. I'm about done with David Harrison. I know that sounds harsh & it is but I'm sorry I just don't see the growth there as a player that we should see after three seasons. For God's sake he couldn't even accidently grab a rebound? He also has become the black hole on offense, once the ball goes in it does not come back out. Look I gripe all the time at Foster for not expanding his game at all, well David is on the same path. What does he do better now than he did as a rookie? Look this is coming from a guy who was a huge David fan, but if I don't see some real honest growth over the next couple of months I would not be opposed to packaging up David with whomever & get something good out of him if we can. He still was the last pick in the first round so I guess nothing lost there but he has got to start improving & fast.

    7. I'm not sure what to think about Saras. Not good from the field, leaving his man open for jumper after jumper & trouble bringing the ball up the floor. I just don't understand what is going on with him. Has the NBA figured him out? Is he fatigued? Was he never that good to begin with? I don't know the answer but something is wrong.

    8. Snap Hunter had a horrid game.

    9. I still can not stand Jeff Foster & Jermaine O'Neal on the floor at the same time.

    10. James White has so far shown why he is a second round pick.

    Like I said at the start, it's pre-season. I'll be interested to see what Danny Al-Jermaine does together. But no matter what I worry about our back court.


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

  • #2
    Re: Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

    Maybe we should start Greene and Quisey in the backcourt...

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

      I was just getting ready to go to bed when I saw this so I will only talk to one point....The question of Sarunas.

      Since I didn't see the him versus the US in international competition I have to ask why was he effective then playing against NBA players? What's changed?

      Also, one thing that has always worried me a little about Sarunas is that we might've gotten him a couple of years too late. He's not an athletic freak to begin with and his age keeps moving on. Is that part of the problem?

      -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, thatís teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

        Sarunas had an out-of-body shooting performance. He spent 4 years waiting to get the US back for 2000 and he pretty much played it like it was his last game. He hit something like seven threes, with Iverson draped over him.

        I think a lot of people saw that and thought he could duplicate that performance, instead of looking at his overall euroleague career, where he was a fine distributor but a streaky shooter at best.

        Just my opnion, anyway. I think Sarunas has trouble keeping up with the faster pace of the NBA, wheras international ball is much slower and controlled.

        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

          Where was there TV coverage? I looked and didn't see them listed as playing on TV.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

            Originally posted by jjbjjbjjb View Post
            Maybe we should start Greene and Quisey in the backcourt...
            We wouldn't be significantly worse off than with Tins or Saras running with Jack. Defensively we'd be way better. But what's up with Greene's injury? Broken pinky on the left hand I think I heard? Sounds like he could be out a while perhaps? Anybody got info on that situation?

            As far as dissatisfaction with Harrison, anybody near the point of using him for trade bait? I know the arguments about being young and big and so forth. But could he net us an upgrade at one of the backcourt spots and/or help us help us unload Tins or Jack? Just crossed my mind reading Peck's post game.
            I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

            -Emiliano Zapata

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
              Sarunas had an out-of-body shooting performance. He spent 4 years waiting to get the US back for 2000 and he pretty much played it like it was his last game. He hit something like seven threes, with Iverson draped over him.

              I think a lot of people saw that and thought he could duplicate that performance, instead of looking at his overall euroleague career, where he was a fine distributor but a streaky shooter at best.

              Just my opnion, anyway. I think Sarunas has trouble keeping up with the faster pace of the NBA, wheras international ball is much slower and controlled.
              Maybe Iverson guarded him too, but I specifically recall Marbury guarding (LMAO) Sarunas when Lithuania beat the US. Sarunas looked nothing short of incredible during that game. Marbury played off him early on and Sarunas got hot....and was visibly having a great time draining three's. Marbury was trying to return the favor, but was not nearly as successful shooting. I was convinced at the time that Sarunas was a combination of Jason Kidd and Steve Nash. I now truly think that game was an aberration.
              Lance is finally home. Whether he becomes our starting PG or he's 6th man, he's getting big minutes and he's here to stay. #llortontnia

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

                I believe Greene will be the starter at some point during the year and not relinquish the spot, maybe ever. He consistently give you a prescence that physical and defensive oriented. Makes guys around him better just by playing a role. I know I'm taking great leaps here, but I think it's just what they need. He is also a natural floor leader. His only downfall is that guys will start to play off him, but a shot can be learned. Jason Kidd couldn't throw it in the ocean, at first. Not comparing the two, just saying it can be learned.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

                  The closest Team USA had to a decent perimeter defender in that Lithuania game was Lamar Odom, and Saras hit that huge 4pt play against him.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

                    I also don't like Foster and JO on the floor, but I love Powell and JO there.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

                      Originally posted by Peck View Post

                      6. I'm about done with David Harrison. I know that sounds harsh & it is but I'm sorry I just don't see the growth there as a player that we should see after three seasons. For God's sake he couldn't even accidently grab a rebound? He also has become the black hole on offense, once the ball goes in it does not come back out. Look I gripe all the time at Foster for not expanding his game at all, well David is on the same path. What does he do better now than he did as a rookie? Look this is coming from a guy who was a huge David fan, but if I don't see some real honest growth over the next couple of months I would not be opposed to packaging up David with whomever & get something good out of him if we can. He still was the last pick in the first round so I guess nothing lost there but he has got to start improving & fast.
                      I would like to officially welcome you aboard, you are about a year late, but you are here now and it is nice to have some company aboard what was a lonely train. Right now the only thing I see him good for is shotblocking, but he is rarely in the correct position so even that is few and far between. One thing he simply isn't good at is being a primary post-up guy, I can't figure out why, but when we throw the ball to him directly in a post-up he rarely scores, he gets into a wierd crouching position and tries to over power his guy and then throws up a weak shot that is almost always short.


                      Originally posted by Peck View Post
                      7. I'm not sure what to think about Saras. Not good from the field, leaving his man open for jumper after jumper & trouble bringing the ball up the floor. I just don't understand what is going on with him. Has the NBA figured him out? Is he fatigued? Was he never that good to begin with? I don't know the answer but something is wrong.
                      The thing I've noticed that is different this season is his fire is gone. At least last year he had enthusiasm, he has a certain spirit about him, this preseason he has none of that. For whatever reason his shot has left him, and now we are left with a guy who is a good passer, but cannot do anything else even fairly well.

                      Just for sake of comparision, I went back and looked at the box scores of the preseason games last season.

                      And not that scoring is the best way to judge any player, but this is at least interesting. he played in all 8 preseason games and here are his minutes played and points scored.

                      23 - 8
                      25 - 18
                      24 - 9
                      24 - 0
                      21 - 10
                      16 - 14
                      20 - 2
                      20 - 7

                      here is the link, did anyone remember Bender having 17 points in a game last preseason.
                      http://www.nba.com/pacers/schedule/results_2005.html


                      I just want to say one thing, and it pains me to say this, I haven't been this unexcited (is that a word) about a Pacers season in about 17 or 18 years. There is this sense of dread, sense of doom that I don't think I've felt before - and I can't figure out why that is. I don't read much into preseason games (certainly not the results of the games) so I don't know why I feel this way.

                      There almost seems like there are three current Pacers teams. One I'm sick of, One I'm excited about, and one that is third string so I just don't think they'll play much - so I really don't care about them.

                      1) the team I'm sick of is Tinsley, Jackson, Saras, Harrison - JO, Granger, and Al. I just don't think the starters are going to work., Granger hasn't found his place yet - but he'll be fine, although it might be better if he came off the bench. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with JO and Al, but it just seems like when they are on the floor with Jax and Tins it seems to be same old same old .

                      2) team I'm excited about - Marquis, Armstrong, Greene, White, Granger,

                      3) team that I really don't care about right now - Hunter, Powell, White, Marshal. I care for the future but right now they aren't going to play much, except maybe White.

                      But more than anything the starters seem like a stale re-hash of last years team (although if the pacers went with a new backcourt it would seem like a totally different team).

                      Do you know what would get me excited - if we replaced Jax, JT, and Saras with DA, Marquis, and Greene - and by that I mean replace them in the starting lineup and as the primary backcourt players.

                      If someone told me right now the primary backcourt rotation would include Danials, Armstrong, Greene and White (meaning Jax, JT and Saras would not play at all)- that would make me very happy. And if that means the Pacers lose a few games they otherwise wouldn't, I could live with that. Because I believe that is the direction we need to go.

                      If the opening night starters were Greene and Marquis - I would stand and cheer We need to go in a new direction, a radically new direction. Does Carlisle have the guts to do that. (the problem is they are both injured right now, so it won't happen, but I think that would send a good message)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        here is the link, did anyone remember Bender having 17 points in a game last preseason.


                        (I had forgotten about the game where he hit 11-14 FTs, though)
                        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

                          I think we will do a preseason trade. Why? Because Walsh has already told Greene they had seen enough and we know Powell has made the team.

                          However, they keep starting Marshall so it's obvious they are looking hard at him.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

                            I agree with you Peck about Harrison, I have see nothing from him since his rookie year that shows me he is going to grow into a solid center. He lost a bunch of weight this summer but thats it, he didnt improve his post game at all. The game against Nets he was playing against their scrubs in the last few minutes of that game and he couldnt do nothing.

                            And he still hasnt learned how to stop fouling players. I doubt he will be in the rotation once the season starts.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Some quick random thoughts about the loss to the wolves....

                              Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                              I think we will do a preseason trade. Why? Because Walsh has already told Greene they had seen enough and we know Powell has made the team.

                              However, they keep starting Marshall so it's obvious they are looking hard at him.
                              In the back of my mind, that's what I have been thinking as well. Given all the circumstances, and the number crunch, it just seems logical that some move will go down soon.

                              Why Not Us ?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X