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

Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

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

  • #16
    Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

    Paul, if the measure is who improves the most. We are so impatient. He went from 7.8ppg to 12.1ppg over one season while raising his 3pt% dramatically. I fully expect his scoring average to exceed 15ppg this year and if he really blossoms he's going to be pushing 20ppg.

    Roy will remain the team's MVP and we may see him improve further from his first all-star season. Hill is rather mature already and he may improve but only marginally. Paul is more likely than either to make a noticeable jump, partially due to his age and experience. He's getting to that age where his body is starting to mature and he will convert shots he used to miss simply due to maturity level. Unlike Hill, he's never had a preseason with a good coaching staff...and he's never really had good coaching like Hibbert did at GTown.
    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


    • #17
      Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

      Originally posted by travmil View Post
      I don't know what your beef is with my post is. I was responding to a post where the original post used that phrasing. Those were the other poster's words, not mine.
      He desperately wants PG to be his mythical definition of a SF. So despite having his entire theory disputed in January of this year, he'll keep repeating it. Just ignore him. :-)
      Last edited by mattie; 07-17-2012, 08:54 PM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

        lol disputed by who? I think more people agree then disagree with me at this point.

        The idea going around here that Paul's some kinda disappoint is what bothers me. Especially, when it's partially our fault.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

          Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
          lol disputed by who? I think more people agree then disagree with me at this point.

          The idea going around here that Paul's some kinda disappoint is what bothers me. Especially, when it's partially our fault.
          Though I'd agree that PG is more of a SF as opposed to a SG, but I don't agree that it's the "teams fault" that his progression is where it is. If he had the ability to be features within the offense more, why would we stop him from doing so? NO coach would do that. The number of shots and touches a player gets is based on both their ability (which results in more plays called for them) and aggressiveness. If Paul comes into training camp with a more polished offensive game, then he'll get the opportunity to do more offensively.

          I will say this though, people are writing off the 22 yr old a lil quickly. Though he will never be T-Mac like so many wanted, he still could easily grow into a 17-19 ppg scorer simply by getting comfortable enough to be more aggressive and utilizing his size and athleticism.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

            When your wing players are a combination of Danny Granger, Paul George, and Gerald Green, you are always creating a mismatch somewhere. The team and Paul himself seem to be putting an emphasis on improving his ball-handling. If he can become an average ballhandler for SG he creates so many advantages FOR us that him playing slightly out of position shouldn't be an issue.
            Time for a new sig.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

              Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
              It better be Roy Hibbert's overpaid ***.
              We were forced to overpay for Hibbert, and it's hard to argue against our decision to match. But Hill making $8mil a year being no better than a backup combo guard? No excuses for that.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

                Originally posted by travmil View Post
                I don't know what your beef is with my post is. I was responding to a post where the original post used that phrasing. Those were the other poster's words, not mine.
                You're right... i shouldn't have quoted you.

                Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                Though I'd agree that PG is more of a SF as opposed to a SG, but I don't agree that it's the "teams fault" that his progression is where it is. If he had the ability to be features within the offense more, why would we stop him from doing so? NO coach would do that. The number of shots and touches a player gets is based on both their ability (which results in more plays called for them) and aggressiveness. If Paul comes into training camp with a more polished offensive game, then he'll get the opportunity to do more offensively.

                I will say this though, people are writing off the 22 yr old a lil quickly. Though he will never be T-Mac like so many wanted, he still could easily grow into a 17-19 ppg scorer simply by getting comfortable enough to be more aggressive and utilizing his size and athleticism.
                I think we're really holding the kid back. Playing him out of position with no play makers around him is setting him up for failure. As long as Danny feels the need to shoot 15+ shots per game, and we have West and Hibbert in the paint, I don't see Paul getting the shots he needs to develop into an all star caliber offensive player. If that's what we're banking on, we need to deal Danny and get a SG that can handle the ball and make a play asap.

                Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                When your wing players are a combination of Danny Granger, Paul George, and Gerald Green, you are always creating a mismatch somewhere. The team and Paul himself seem to be putting an emphasis on improving his ball-handling. If he can become an average ballhandler for SG he creates so many advantages FOR us that him playing slightly out of position shouldn't be an issue.
                He'll get better when he starts playing with more confidence. Occasionally he'd show some good ball handling skills, but he was thinking too much at times instead of just playing IMO.

                If we're gonna keep him at SG I'd rather him work on a post game, though.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

                  Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                  We were forced to overpay for Hibbert, and it's hard to argue against our decision to match. But Hill making $8mil a year being no better than a backup combo guard? No excuses for that.
                  i disagree. hill is probably worth 6.5 to 7M on the open market. also considering hill is locked in for five.. by then 8M will be a bargain. it would be relative to 6M or so by then easily. those who understand dollar inflation understand the point im making here.

                  so we overpaid 1M for a hometown kid who is good in the community, and has a championship pedigree. imo pacers coulda saved a million but its not as bad a signing as some fans want to make it out to be.

                  i also disagree hill has peaked, i think his shooting can and will improve. also, a year with the same players and continuity will be huge for him as well..

                  in many ways a point gaurd is a floor general and we have searched for one .. hill is not that pure pg on the floor but he is a general in some ways. hill has strong leadership abilities most likely inherited as a member of the spurs.

                  if i had to choose mayo or hill.. i go hill at 8M. for the simple fact i know what we are getting with hill. mayo is way too much of a wildcard.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

                    IMO I see PG having a break out season this year. It will be close because I see big Roy coming in with imptovement as well. I am hoping Hill will come in and focus more on running the offense and being a distributor. His stats may not show the improvement but he will have almost as much impact on the teams success. Add to the fact that I see Danny and West improved due to spacing made by the our young three. I also see that even with PG and big Roy out the 2nd unit players will be much better because of the improvement in athleticism and scoring potential.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

                      Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                      lol disputed by who? I think more people agree then disagree with me at this point.

                      The idea going around here that Paul's some kinda disappoint is what bothers me. Especially, when it's partially our fault.
                      at this time paul is fine at sg. in two seasons from now when he adds another 10+ lbs of muscle we can slide him to sf.. which is most likely about the same time grangers contract expires.

                      i see no rush in turing george into the primary offensive weapon simply because i dont believe he is ready. nothing wrong with having paul focus on defense and letting his offense come to him.

                      anyone who considers george a dissapointing right now in his career is not worthy of paying attn to imho.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

                        Whoever it is, I'm glad we can be having this conversation.
                        follow me @TruenoPanda - lets talk Pacers!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

                          Why are you so concerned which wing position he plays?
                          Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                          [/B]



                          If he doesn't get what together? As if we're putting him in a position to succeed... you guys crack me up with this non sense. You want to him to start blowing by midgets off the dribble? You want him to grab 8 boards at SG? You want him to chuck up 15 shots a game outside of the offense? There's only so much he can do playing out of position and being the last offensive option. Until we see him at SF it's impossible to know how good he could be.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

                            The 3rd year seems to be the year where young players take off, so my money is on Paul George.
                            //

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

                              How about all 3 of them have a breakout year. Now that would be a delight.
                              I'm a Beast

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Roy Hibbert vs Paul George vs George Hill

                                Originally posted by ReginaldWayne View Post
                                Why are you so concerned which wing position he plays?
                                Offensively he's limited in what he can do going against smaller quicker players every game. At SF he'd have the advantage in speed in quickness against everyone not named LeBron and Iggy.

                                Defensively we're taking him away from the rim when he's chasing perimeter players, and I believe if he was given 36 minutes at SF, doing Danny's job, he'd lead our team in rebounding. He's probably our second best shot blocker, too.

                                His chances of becoming an all star player at SF are much higher than at SG imo.

                                btw i expect D. West to breakout...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X