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

A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

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

  • #16
    Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

    I think JO is still a great player, but after tonight. Maybe a trade would be best, b/c it sure seemed that they never wanted to feed JO the ball unless it was a last resort.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

      Legler said that.
      I'm in these bands
      The Humans
      Dr. Goldfoot
      The Bar Brawlers
      ME

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

        This I might buy into, or a combination of J.O. not being 100%, and not being happy. To say he's not the player he was just doesn't sound rational when he was just that player all of last season, and this preseason. J.O. still took more shots then any other Pacer tonight. If he is playing this way because of the offense I hope he can adjust to taking advantage of what all the outside shooting opens up for him inside. If his offense has dropped off because he's unhappy due to not being traded then he isn't helping his trade value any.


        Originally posted by Evan_The_Dude View Post
        Just 7 months ago Jermaine was having the best season of his career -- on a bad knee. Going into the pre-season, Jermaine said his knee was feeling 100% better and he was in the best condition that he's been in in several seasons. How do you go from that to what we're seeing now? Simple, he's not happy.

        He wanted to be traded. I don't care what he told the media, he wanted to be traded. In fact I bet he was certain that he would be traded and when it didn't happen, he had to force himself to like it here again. Well once you're mentally gone, you can't force yourself to want to be somewhere because in one way or another it's going to show that you don't want to be there.
        We built this team around a post presence. We brought in shooters fully expecting Jermaine to be our lead guy and our #1 offensive threat. That's not the case anymore. Our leading scorer is Danny Granger. As good as Danny has been, I don't see that he's ready to carry the load like he is and lead us to being a winning team without some real help. We at the very least need Ike right now. Losing him seems like it's hurting us more than anything else because of the way this team is built.
        If we continue to rely on this version of Jermaine to be the centerpiece of our offense, we're seriously in trouble. This team needs a low post threat or 2 [Ike] to make everything else work. If we're not going to have that, then we need to alter the makeup of this team to make the team work the way it's supposed to. This is a hard thing to do during a season, but I think it badly needs to be done.
        Larry Bird qouted March 25th. 2015:

        Bird: I wanted to keep our group together because in the summer, if David and Roy opt out, we're back to zero, really. We don't have that much, so you leave your options open. If we did make a trade, I didn't want to take on a lot of contracts -- because that's what usually happens. Plus, I liked my guys. They're playing well. If we keep the core together and Paul comes back healthy, we'll be right back to where we were.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

          As much as I've loved JO as a Pacer over the last several years, I think I am finally ready to see him go. He's still a force, takes charges alot, some assists and blocks, but his shot isn't consistant. He's a double double kinda guy, but he isn't the player to goto when you're down 10 with 2 to go and expect him to save the game. He could be a duncanesque type of player but, but Duncan is more savvy than JO is, and he has playmakers around him. JO used to be 'explosive' and I don't see that much from him these days. He didn't want to rebuild with the Pacers, and let's face it, we're kinda rebuilding, or at least retooling.

          If we trade him can we trade Tinsley too? (but then who do we get to run the point??) ugh
          :thepacers
          No Linking to your own site if it sells something.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

            Originally posted by IndyFan032589 View Post
            it sure seemed that they never wanted to feed JO the ball unless it was a last resort.
            I know the feeling.
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

              Did we have to demand both Odom and Bynum? I know in that package, they were unwilling to part ways with Bynum but were they as unwilling in a deal just centered around Bynum? If not, then damn that we didn't pull that off before the start of the season because LA probably doesn't care for JO as much, and the most they'd be willing to dish out is something centered around VladRad and Kwame...

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

                Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                If his offense has dropped off because he's unhappy due to not being traded then he isn't helping his trade value any.
                I don't think he's intentionally going out there trying to get traded. If you're not happy somewhere it's a mental block to overcome. He might want to be that 20-10 guy right now, but mentally he probably just can't bring himself to be motivated enough to get it done. It's one thing to tell yourself to get over it, it's another thing to actually get over it. I strongly believe this is what he's going through. We all thought the same thing about Jamaal under Rick Carlisle though he never said it. But guess what, as soon as Rick was gone we all heard how unhappy Jamaal was under him.

                Since J'OB isn't going anywhere anytime soon and Kobe Bryant won't be coming here, we should probably do what we can with Jermaine to land us a piece or some pieces that actually work. Also we shouldn't feel obligated to trade him to a contender. He has the option of opting out, so wherever he goes he doesn't have to stay anyway. Sure we should at least try to put him on a good team, but most of the good teams don't really need him.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

                  I'm sick of using the "injury excuse" any more for players like JONeal, Marquis and ( a little less frequently now ) with Tinsley when it comes to how this team performs. It's really bad when our whole team's success pretty much hinges on whether any of these players are injured or not.

                  I know that injuries to teams is a common thing...it's unavoidable. But when we have as many injuries as we have had in the last 3 seasons....and most notably to key players....then it just gets tiring. As many have pointed out...this team is simply built bad. I agree with this....but not as much how well they play...but more that we have assembled talented players that are simply too injury prone to be considered dependable.

                  If JONeal is healthy, then we can ....if Marquis is playing, then .....if Tinsley is playing in control and healthy, then . There are too many "ifs" for this team to properly succeed. I am frustrated and probably need to calm down a little.....but right now, I would much rather trade JONeal and Tinsley for $.75 on the dollar and get back decent players that at least fits our needs but can play 75+ games at 100% then go through another season hoping that JONeal can get healthy and can therefore contribute. I really think that if we can eliminate any worries associated with "if JONeal / Tinsley / Marquis is going to be healthy", then we can focus on fixing the other problems this team has. We simply have too many variables for this team to succeed.


                  Okay....my rant is done....I have to calm down a little.
                  Last edited by CableKC; 11-14-2007, 03:10 AM.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

                    There's another thread asking if we thought JO might be dogging it. Initially, I thought no. But I think JO views his situation much like KG's situation was in Minny. I think to see KG as happy as he is in Boston was tough for JO. He didn't look like he really cared to be out there last night IMHO. I don't think he's washed up, but I think it's hard to do something for a place when your heart isn't there.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

                      Multiple good points going on here. I can't say I've come to a definitive assessment of the situation myself. Still in the new coach, new system, recovery from injury window for maybe 5-8 more games.

                      However, I can certainly say that what I'm seeing from JO and Tins has me leaning in the direction of "is it even worth it to consider holding out/having this conversation?" as far as our franchise is concerned?

                      We've been going on with these guys for years and we haven't really seen more than one year of outstanding play from both (2004) that coincided with any success for the team. How long will Walsh/Bird can Walsh/Bird hold out?

                      Currently, they seem to be regressing as the season progresses and the team with them. Neither as of now is displaying the attitude/toughness to transition to this brand of ball and lead others in doing so. Should we be surprised? Honestly, they look like they're suffering out there when they should still be in a honeymoon period w/ JOB.

                      From my POV, they could still technically show me something in the near future, but unless that happens (and maybe even if it does), TPTB will have to admit that these guys have run their course here whatever the reasons for that may be. Did we wait too long to pull the trigger on a JO deal?
                      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                      -Emiliano Zapata

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

                        Goes back to what I thought last summer - the Pacers won't trade JO until the season has truly been lost and his trade value is as low as it's ever been.

                        Good thing Bird and Walsh aren't in the stock market. Lately they seem to have mastered the "Buy high, sell low" principle.

                        I still think you might manage a .500 record this season but you're a team that has big salary cap problems and few tradable assets while being well below league average in talent. IMO this summer was the time to blow it up and start over by trading the one guy you might get some real value for.

                        Based on what's going on, you may not even get value for him now.

                        Someone mentioned injuries - the reason JO's getting hurt is his body can't handle a lot of pounding in the post - and the last 5 years he's been pounded on in the post. Unfortunately his game and what his body can handle don't match. That's why what's happening is the wear-and-tear you get from a 34-year-old, not one major injury that kills some part of your body.

                        Best thing for JO would be if he could take some kind of one-year sabbatical from the game and let his body really heal - he might coax another couple of good years out that way. But pro sports doesn't work that way.
                        The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

                          Most on here have probably seen more of the initial games than
                          I. So, I haven't seen J.O. for extended mins at this point.
                          But if he's still hurting physically, what's he doing on the court ?
                          Sit his *** out until he's totally healthy !

                          As far as I'm concerned, THE goal for this franchise right now with
                          respect to J.O. is to maximize his ability to show enough this year
                          to allow them to maximize his eventual trade value.

                          The Pacers are not going to compete for an NBA title again w/ J.O.
                          So, despite Bird's fixation w/ making the playoffs, this year doesn't
                          really matter in the long run. What matters is transitioning optimally
                          to the next phase of franchise history and preparing/trying to assemble
                          the pieces to potentially compete for a title down the road.

                          Just my take.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

                            Is it time to bring out the tank already????? I thought maybe waiting till mid-season
                            would be a reasonable time frame.
                            {o,o}
                            |)__)
                            -"-"-

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

                              It's definitely not time to bring out the tank. Like I said before, if we can get something just something that can work for us now in exchange for Jermaine and possibly another player, we should pull that trigger now. That way we still have plenty of time to gel and work out the kinks, and possibly make a winning run after the All-Star break. If we keep losing Jermaine is going to become more and more unhappy, and by the All-Star break we'll only have a couple of weeks to find a deal for him.

                              I'd rather start the work now and try to find something and at the worst have some months to spare, instead of waiting and standing pat like we always do and deciding to rush something with 2 weeks to spare. Do it now and we can probably still make this a good season.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: A realistic discussion about Jermaine O'Neal

                                On a side note, it will be interesting to see how long the "high school to NBA" players can stretch out their careers. Does starting the 82 game grind at a younger age mean that the career nosedive hits at 30?

                                1995: Garnett

                                1996: Kobe, JO

                                1997: McGrady

                                1998: Harrington, Rashard Lewis

                                1999: Bender :P

                                2000: Darius Miles, Deshawn Stevenson

                                2001: Brown, Chandler, Curry, Diop

                                2002: Stoudamire

                                Taking a look at the list of the early college-skippers, you could argue that JO, McGrady, Bender, Miles, Brown & Stoudamire have all had injury-hit careers to date. Clearly the sample size is too small at this stage to conclude anything. A study on the impact of the NBA physicality on immature bodies & minds would be interesting reading though.

                                BTW, I am certainly not advocating that these guys should have gone to college. Just saying that maybe we can't expect the likes of JO to have much success past age 30.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X