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

Our Second Unit

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

  • #16
    Re: Our Second Unit

    Originally posted by Steagles View Post
    When we had a good bench last year, our bench was awful. This year, we might have the best bench in the league that doesn't involve a true starter who is played as a sixth man instead, like Ginobili in San Antonio or Harden in Oklahoma.
    I'd like to see George Hill used as a sixth man at both guard positions. He could still get more "starter's minutes" playing both PG and SG than Augustin would actually starting. Augustin's passing, which is the best on the team, would be most useful alongside the starters. The Pacers were 29th in the league in assists per game last year; that's just awful. We can do better with Augustin in the starting lineup. Hill would be a terrific leader for the backup squad in both guard spots and would still be on the floor most of the game.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Our Second Unit

      I suspect that we will run a 9 man rotation instead of a 10 man rotation.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Our Second Unit

        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
        I suspect that we will run a 9 man rotation instead of a 10 man rotation.
        Who's your 9th guy?

        I think we have a clear top 8 - the starters, plus DJ (first pg), Green (first wing), and Mahinmi (first big). After that, I guess its Lance and Hans. 10 man rotation seems ok for the regular season, but I think we cut down to 8 for the playoffs.

        I also think Augustin will be playing starter's minutes (~30 mpg), with Hill shifting over to SG. I don't expect Augustin to outright start, but he'll get his playing time.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Our Second Unit

          Originally posted by wintermute View Post
          Who's your 9th guy?

          I think we have a clear top 8 - the starters, plus DJ (first pg), Green (first wing), and Mahinmi (first big). After that, I guess its Lance and Hans. 10 man rotation seems ok for the regular season, but I think we cut down to 8 for the playoffs.

          I also think Augustin will be playing starter's minutes (~30 mpg), with Hill shifting over to SG. I don't expect Augustin to outright start, but he'll get his playing time.
          Starting PG - GH
          Starting SG - PG
          Starting SF - Granger
          Starting PF - West
          Starting C - Hibbert

          1st Guard off the bench - DJ
          Backup SG/SF - Green
          1st Big Man off the bench - Mahinmi
          Backup PF - Hansbrough

          Although I expect that Mahinmi to get about 24 mpg....I fully expect Hansbrough to get between 10-15 mpg as he's a better scoring Big Man than Mahinmi, Miles or Pendagraph.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Our Second Unit

            Originally posted by wintermute View Post
            Who's your 9th guy?

            I think we have a clear top 8 - the starters, plus DJ (first pg), Green (first wing), and Mahinmi (first big). After that, I guess its Lance and Hans. 10 man rotation seems ok for the regular season, but I think we cut down to 8 for the playoffs.

            I also think Augustin will be playing starter's minutes (~30 mpg), with Hill shifting over to SG. I don't expect Augustin to outright start, but he'll get his playing time.
            I'm with you about the top 8. But not as sanguine about augustin being a guy that plays 30 mpg. jmo, but he'll get his 15-20 mpg as a backup PG, but that's it. It seems TPTB like George Hill as a PG. Lance and Orlando and Green will get shots at the backup 2. Whoever plays best plays most. But come playoff time it will be Hill and DJ, Paul, Danny and Green, Roy, David and Ian. That give the Pacers size everywhere but at the backup PG.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Our Second Unit

              I hope by the beginning of the season Augustine works his way into the starters, and Plumlee works his way in front of Hasnbrough. In neither case though do I want it to be because Hill or Hasnbrough isn't playing well, only that Augustine and Plumlee are playing better.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Our Second Unit

                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                Starting PG - GH
                Starting SG - PG
                Starting SF - Granger
                Starting PF - West
                Starting C - Hibbert

                1st Guard off the bench - DJ
                Backup SG/SF - Green
                1st Big Man off the bench - Mahinmi
                Backup PF - Hansbrough

                Although I expect that Mahinmi to get about 24 mpg....I fully expect Hansbrough to get between 10-15 mpg as he's a better scoring Big Man than Mahinmi, Miles or Pendagraph.
                That's almost exactly where I am right now. I think there will be several minutes in each half where Augustin and Hill are on the court together in the backcourt.

                I think there may be time when the point and two wings are Augustin - Hill - George perhaps with subs in the two post positions as well.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Our Second Unit

                  Defensively I don't think they are worse than last year. I mean if Foster had played last season then OK. But DJ is better defensively than DC. Isn't he, couldn't he have to be.

                  Overall I like our bench better than last season, and I expect Hansbrough to be better this upcoming season.

                  OK, I'm officially rambling.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Our Second Unit

                    Listening to Frank, they'll have some sets with Stephenson with the ball in his hands with Green and DJ at the 3 point area. I'm really interested to see how Mahinmi can do as the pick part of a P-N-R with Lance. And yes, I'd agree Tyler has to get better.

                    I like the 3 new bench guys alot, its the existing guys in Lance and Tyler that have to improve. If Tyler hasn't added to his game and the league still has the book on him, he becomes/is still ineffective to the point i'd not want to play at all. If Lance is inconsistent and irradict (sp?), then that hurts as well.

                    If neither guy is viable, then I could see Mahinmi moving over to PF with Plumlee giving minutes as a legit sized center, who hopefully doesn't hurt you. The two guard spot can be absorbed with a 3 man roation of PG, Danny, and Green, but not over a whole season. It really would have been nice to keep DJones as a back up plan, but wasn't to be.

                    I'd guess if Tyler or Lance isn't getting it done (or Mahinmi for that matter), you'll see some moves at the trade deadline to shore up those spots.

                    Its funny, I'm way more sure about the new guys they've added than the players we've all watched for a few years now.

                    Best case: Lance is a creator and gets his and gets everyone involved and its one of the better second units in the league, with Lance just killing other teams second units.

                    Worst case: Lance is a turnover machine, they have no chemistry, DJ takes bad shots with the shot clock running down and no one is there for the offensive rebounds.

                    I really don't know, its why I was surprised by how much the two extremes talked about how bad or good the bench will be, I think its completely up in the air. It would really be nice to see these 5 guys get some pre pre preseason run together, because its really going to be a challenge to gel, imo.

                    I worry about the defense being tied together, but honestly, I really don't know if any of the 5 on the second unit can be a leader and mistake eraser. The overall defensive IQ doesn't seem great to me, the ability is there, I just worry about having a Battier, Derrick McKey guy who can make it all work on D. I'd really like to get a vet who is a great team defender to run with this group.

                    Tony Allen, is really the only guy I can think of that I'd love to have with that group.

                    Now, THATS A 7/17/12 STYLE RAMBLING!!
                    Last edited by Speed; 07-17-2012, 02:29 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Our Second Unit

                      Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                      That's almost exactly where I am right now. I think there will be several minutes in each half where Augustin and Hill are on the court together in the backcourt.

                      I think there may be time when the point and two wings are Augustin - Hill - George perhaps with subs in the two post positions as well.
                      There's no way around them sharing the floor unless Augustin plays less than 24 mpg.

                      Unless matchups dictate it....I'd hope that we would try to minimize "going small" with Augustin and GH on the floor at the same time.

                      However, I'd expect that Augustin and Hill share ( at most ) about 4 to 6 mpg on the floor together on a regular basis.

                      As for Lance....I'd expect that he'd get some run on the floor...but only as the game dictates. My preference is that after GH/PG/Granger/DJ that Green would be the bulk ( but not all ) of the remaining WingMan minutes...but that Lance would get some consistent but minimal minutes ( maybe 6 to 10 mpg ).
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Our Second Unit

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        Overall I like our bench better than last season, and I expect Hansbrough to be better this upcoming season.
                        I really didn't like Hansbrough paired up with West and Hibbert on the floor....my hope is that Hansbrough is only paired up with Mahinmi. Hopefully it will make a difference of some sort on both the offensive and defensive end....also paired up with better passing Guards like DJ and Lance/GH.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Our Second Unit

                          Two separate thoughts that I think dictates our bench this year:

                          I think the real x-factor here is Ian Mahinmi. Will he be a Solomon Jones or will he be an Emeka Okafor? If he's more of the latter, then we are in good hands. And I think it could go either way.

                          If he can be a post defender, shot blocker, and athletic player and use that for him then we will be well off. I just wish we could have netted us a backup power forward to complement Mahinmi. I believe that the FO sees something in Ian that the average spectator doesn't... Maybe enough to slide him into the starting 4 spot when West hangs it up. Who knows.

                          As far as Green goes, I figure he's more of a guy who can come in and really give us an advantage in transition, along with hopefully Ian and Miles. I think that he would be best off with a wing who could create shots for him, and DJ would be best off being the second creator and pure shooter.

                          And that is what makes Lance so important to us this year. Sink or swim time for Lance. Either have a re-do of last year where he really struggles, or having new shooters playing with him along with athletic big men elevates his game, and he's more consistently the player he was against Chicago.
                          Last edited by BringJackBack; 07-17-2012, 02:41 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Our Second Unit

                            I'd rather have Hill come off the bench since we'd benefit from a distributing point guard in the starting unit. The second unit would benefit from Hill's ability to score.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X