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

Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

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

  • #31
    Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

    Unless Paul George improves, DJ closing games means Hill finishes at the two.

    (or Granger moves to power forward and either Hibbs or West sits.)
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

      Don't see Augustin closing games unless we are going for a last second shot. He can't play the D.


      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
        I'm not sure really, but if Augustin ends up being as good of a distributor as people are making him out to be doesn't it kind of make sense to have him play with the starters? Especially West?
        Because of age and other related issues, I think it means that Granger is moved if they can get good value out of him. I think a potent DJ, means that GH moves to the 2, and PG moves to the 3.

        If DJ can feed West and Hibbert as effectively as I can imagine he might be able to, we could be really dangerous. I think PG and GH defense could cover up DJ's weaknesses here.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

          Originally posted by billbradley View Post
          Not at all. While I'm excited to have DJ, it is not a good thing that your 8 mill a year guy can't beat him out for starting PG. I'm not saying Hill wouldn't slide back into his role as a starter, but I would be concerned spending that much on a guy who isn't better than DJ.
          As I've said in another place, Hill is a combo guard. The chances are that if he isn't better than DJ at PG, is he better than Paul at SG? If Paul improves in a way obvious to the rest of the league, being second to him at $8M - particularly a few years from now since it is a flat contract - won't seem bad at all and certainly won't make GH untradeable.

          I think you write contracts based on what you have right now, and if DJ improves by some huge amount because he's playing for a real team instead of a bottom feeder, he could be a steal as opposed to Hill being not worth his contract.
          BillS

          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

            Originally posted by BillS View Post
            As I've said in another place, Hill is a combo guard. The chances are that if he isn't better than DJ at PG, is he better than Paul at SG? If Paul improves in a way obvious to the rest of the league, being second to him at $8M - particularly a few years from now since it is a flat contract - won't seem bad at all and certainly won't make GH untradeable.

            I think you write contracts based on what you have right now, and if DJ improves by some huge amount because he's playing for a real team instead of a bottom feeder, he could be a steal as opposed to Hill being not worth his contract.
            I just don't think DJ is the all around player on both ends that Hill is. While's DJ's play making ability is greater than Hill's, if that is enough to overtake the starting spot I would be concerned with Hill's growth as a player and our investment.

            In other words, to go back to your original comment saying who starts isn't a concern as fans, I think the best thing for us fans is for the guy who is locked in for five years to prove he is a starter over the guy only here for one year.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

              As far as DJ playing with the starters goes, people are forgetting the possibility of small ball lineups. Don't be surprised to see lineups featuring Augustin at the 1 with Hill at the 2, possibly Granger at the 4.

              I expect to see DJ as our most important backup along with Green and Mahimni (sp?). I'm hoping we run primarily this 8 man rotation, with a lot of mixed/mashed lineups as opposed to anything close to the hockey line substitutions of last season.
              "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

              - ilive4sports

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

                Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                In other words, to go back to your original comment saying who starts isn't a concern as fans, I think the best thing for us fans is for the guy who is locked in for five years to prove he is a starter over the guy only here for one year.
                Not quite what I meant (I meant that if the guy penciled in as the bench turns out to be better than the current starter without the current starter getting worse that's not a concern), but I get your point.

                Bottom line for me is that ultimately I don't care what guys are paid. I want to see a fight for every position that brings the absolute best out of every player, and if the guy making less turns out to be better than the guy making more, so be it. I don't think Hill's contract is such that if we really needed to send him somewhere to make room for a better player at 1 and 2 we could not do so.
                BillS

                A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

                  Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                  As far as DJ playing with the starters goes, people are forgetting the possibility of small ball lineups. Don't be surprised to see lineups featuring Augustin at the 1 with Hill at the 2, possibly Granger at the 4.

                  I expect to see DJ as our most important backup along with Green and Mahimni (sp?). I'm hoping we run primarily this 8 man rotation, with a lot of mixed/mashed lineups as opposed to anything close to the hockey line substitutions of last season.
                  There is all kinds of flexibility throughout the game. Even who starts isn't that big a deal (see Terry, Ginobli, etc.). The possible logjam discussion is all about who finishes.
                  "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

                    Above all, I hope DJ makes Tyler a quality backup. Is that possible?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

                      Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                      Above all, I hope DJ makes Tyler a quality backup. Is that possible?
                      If he can feed him near the rim, limiting Tyler's opportunity to isolate from 15 feet away.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

                        Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                        This is the exact reason why I have been clamoring for Granger to develop a low post game FOR YEARS NOW! It drives me absolutely f-ing crazy, that DG hasn't show a willingness to play ball within the three point line. He has that little mid-range pull up jumper which is perfect playing the four. If he could post, we would have better roster options, but you absolutely cannot afford to play Danny at PF if we have four players on the perimeter offensively.

                        DRIVES ME CRAZY!!!!
                        Danny posted up a lot last year. Did you not see it?
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

                          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                          Danny posted up a lot last year. Did you not see it?
                          My thought also. Danny did post a lot. in that weird Danny way of course. Never shoved the defender under the basket to make a layup, but just shoved him back far enough to take that little mid-range jumper. Personally I think Danny is allergic to the orange paint on the rim. He never finishes at the rim, always a little way away from it. strange, but effective. Danny at 8 ft is better than most guys at the rim.

                          But yeah, Danny did a lot of posting. Looking forward to more of it this year. and from Gerald and Paul also.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

                            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                            Explain the scenario where this happens. How badly does Hill have to be playing?
                            On a newly signed 5 for $40 deal? Pretty ****ing bad. I don't think Hill as a long term starting PG is a good idea, but I also don't think he'll be so poor that he's not the starter for the whole season with that kind of contract.
                            "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                            -Lance Stephenson

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

                              Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                              My thought also. Danny did post a lot. in that weird Danny way of course. Never shoved the defender under the basket to make a layup, but just shoved him back far enough to take that little mid-range jumper. Personally I think Danny is allergic to the orange paint on the rim. He never finishes at the rim, always a little way away from it. strange, but effective. Danny at 8 ft is better than most guys at the rim.

                              But yeah, Danny did a lot of posting. Looking forward to more of it this year. and from Gerald and Paul also.
                              Which is it? Does Danny not have the dribbling skills to get to the rim, or is he allergic? I would say he does not have the skills. How many times does Danny get called for a forearm push off as he drives? How many more times does he NOT get called for it?

                              He has no in-and-out dribble move. He has no hesitation to respect because his crossover is slow. He is not a driver/slasher. He is a stop and pop and curler. He is old enough to expect nothing more. The only time he gets to the rim is when Roy and West have sealed their man on their hip, and the close out on his shot opens a dribble drive.

                              A pull up from midrange is not a bad thing. In fact you need it to get into the paint. It is why Durant is so dangerous. He can catch, triple threat, drive past closeout, get into the midrange, hesitate, either pull up, step back, or drive hard to the rim.

                              Danny is not that. And I don't think he ever will be. That is what we want Paul George to be.
                              Last edited by Major Cold; 10-03-2012, 09:55 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Hibberts respond to DJ versus DC

                                Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                                Danny posted up a lot last year. Did you not see it?
                                No I saw it. I have wanted him to do it more for a long time now. Last year was easily the most he has done it in his career IMO. I just wish he had done it sooner and that he would have a more versatile and consistent post game than he does. I think he still has a severe propensity to camp behind the three point line and that needs to stop. For me, Danny matches up well against a lot of SFs in the strength department. Some he doesn't, but even then I would contend that guys like Josh Smith and Lebron James could get into foul trouble guarding Danny in the post much more than they would otherwise. Danny is such a good shooter that he should be money on those little fadeaways. He hit a fair number of them last year for sure, but half the times he does it he is awkward as hell because he doesn't get his hips squared away on his turnaround. I think Danny could command a double team the way that Hibbert often does and that creates passing lanes for West and lobs for Hibbert. That could be a sick three man game right there if Danny was better in the post than he is. I just hate seeing an opportunity to play to our strengths not being taken advantage of. Danny IMO should have been developing this big time under the JOB era, which is probably why he isn't better at it right now than he is. Not making JOB excuses per se, but its something that has bothered me for a while and I think of where his game could be right now as opposed to where it's at. Danny absolutely has to be our most efficient player. That is what we need from him and this would go a long way to helping his efficiency with the way he shoots free throws. Plus he'd be in position to rebound more, which is something I ABSOLUTELY LOVE to see him be aggressive with.
                                Last edited by pacergod2; 10-03-2012, 10:03 AM.
                                "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X