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

3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

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

  • #76
    Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

    Originally posted by beast23 View Post
    Big deal. I would trade them both, together, plus a second round draft choice, for Jarrett Jack.

    He11 YES!
    10 Pts... 47% FG... 32% 3PT... 87% FT... 3 Reb... 4.5 Ast as a b/u PG for 5 mil.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

      George Hill isn't a pure point guard (who is), but its nice to have a legit starting defensive Point Guard who clutch, than the parade of 'could be one of the best back ups' Point Guards who have been on this team over recent years. Looking at you Jarret Jack, DC, and Earl Watson. Not a diss on those guys, but honestly, if you have aspirations to contend and don't have a top 5 player, great back up types who are starting for you, aren't going to get it done. So ya, DJ hasn't been what I'd hoped for yet, but I'm still pretty happy with George Hill even though he not my preferred offensive type starting Point Guard. He is exactly what I want on defense, leadership, toughness, and he's fearless. Glass half full, for me, for now.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

        Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
        What's he had 2 good games, 2 decent games and 14 bad games? I'll admit that he's played better lately but let's not forget his complete work to date as a Pacer.
        He's been consistently good defensively and sucked it up for the most part offensively, but who hasn't? He's shown me enough talent that I believe he's very capable of becoming a damn good player. Better than nearly every player mentioned in his price range in this thread. Did you see him finish that pass from Paul in traffic with his off hand last night? Or the fake pass then a crab dribble to free up space for the mid range jumper 2 games ago? Yeah he's got butterfingers, but I've noticed gradual improvements there also. He's a developing young player who's already fairly skilled. Once he fine tunes everything I think we're gonna have a gem on our hands. Go ahead and quote me on that.

        Also, loving the West/Ian combo. They compliment each other very well on the court together. I'd like to see lots more of it.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

          Originally posted by Major Cold View Post

          GSWs are not trading their insurance on Curry's gank ankle.

          BUT, he's a UFA this off season.

          Jarrett will command more than what he's presently making at 5.5 mil. I figure he'll get paid 6-7 mil by a team needing a starting PG.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
            BUT, he's a UFA this off season.

            Jarrett will command more than what he's presently making at 5.5 mil. I figure he'll get paid 6-7 mil by a team needing a starting PG.
            ...who will then realize he's one of the best back up Point Guards in the league.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

              Originally posted by purdue101 View Post

              Mozgov

              I watched Mosgov play in the Denver game the other night. He hasn't been playing much this season with Koufos starting and McGee playing off the bench. I didn't think he was that bad for a reserve bench player. He's a Walsh player from the Knicks that came to Denver in the Melo trade.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post

                For a guy like Ian not much, he should get the same type of contract the Pacers gave Solo, they are pretty similar.
                Solo's name shouldn't be used in the same sentence with Ian as it's an insult to Ian. Ian has more talent than Solo ever had. Terrible comparison!

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

                  Originally posted by purdue101 View Post

                  I got JO - that's about it.

                  Rasheed Wallace

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

                    [QUOTE=aamcguy;1541429]

                    And let's not pretend that Indiana is a hot ticket for veteran guys that are on their last legs. They want to be on teams where they can use their veteran awareness to make up for their lack of mobility utiltizing space that only superstars can create. /QUOTE]


                    Let us not pretend JO wouldn't love to come back to play for the Pacers. He's a steal at $854,300!

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

                      Originally posted by aamcguy View Post

                      And let's not pretend that Indiana is a hot ticket for veteran guys that are on their last legs. They want to be on teams where they can use their veteran awareness to make up for their lack of mobility utiltizing space that only superstars can create.
                      Chris Mullens and Sam Perkins say hello. When it comes to a team being a hotbed for veterans on their last leg, what vets prefer is all relative. They tend to pick championship caliber teams no matter where it is located. We haven't been championship caliber team lone enough to get those kind of vets..

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

                        Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post

                        Let us not pretend JO wouldn't love to come back to play for the Pacers. He's a steal at $854,300!
                        If someone asks hey would you rather have a physical and athletic 26 yr old 7-footer as your B/U C for 4 mil a yr, or an old broken down 35 yr old 7 footer for under a million--most teams would choose the former.

                        JO looked DONE in Bos last yr, another yr taken away following injuries. Yes he would have loved to come back here, but nobody could have known that he'd be relatively healthy for the first time since...well forever really.

                        Also, he's playing in PHO where their training staff is known to work wonders (see Grant Hill) so it's not a surprise he goes there and is relatively healthy when compared to the past 5-6 yrs.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          No way they are eating that salary. Even Vnzla would dump him to sign someone like KMart for the same amount.

                          Hustling undersized bigs that shoot 40% are available for that price. They won't draw fouls like Tyler, but they'll get the same RebP48, better FG%, better defense, no blocked shots at the rim, etc.
                          Yes I would dump him even though I really like the guy, as you can see I don't let my love for a guy to blind my look for what is better for the team, I wish some people could do the same thing, hell I wish the team could do the same, there is a reason why I admire Bill Polian the guy has the cojones many team owners don't have.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

                            Originally posted by Speed View Post

                            ...who will then realize he's one of the best back up Point Guards in the league.

                            That could be said about Hill too. Neither are true PG's, but combo guards. Some on this board want to bring the 8 MILLION MAN off the bench. That's 8 mil for 40% FG% for the year. Last 2 games of 18% in the Chicago game and 37% in the Portland game. Yeah, but he's clutch, right?

                            Jack 47% FG... 32% 3PT... 87% FT... 3 Reb... 4.5 Ast... 10 PPG as a BACKUP PG!

                            The things you mention about Hill such as defense, leadership, toughness, and fearlessness is the samething Jack has and had as a Pacer. Bird could have re-signed Jack at less than 20 mil for 4 years. HALF the money Walsh re-signed Hill for. No doubt to me which player is the better bargain, and his name isn't George Hill.

                            Lets hope Lawson can be contained tonight by the 8 MIL MAN. If not, it's going to be a long night in BLF.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

                              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                              Yes, he's actually a very good spark off the bench. He showed that against Miami and became a good weapon. But that's really all he is. He's like Vinnie Johnson back in the day in Detroit. He can heat up. He's not much different than having a Nate Robinson coming off the bench. But neither is a good starting PG. They are explosive scorers, short in stature. Neither make their team mates better and neither have that great court awareness you want in a PG.
                              Nate Robinson is the exact same comparison I was going to make. I think both players are above average bench players that can give you a good 20 - 24 minutes a game and keep things going offensively scoring-wise. They're great at pushing the tempo and getting shots early in the offense. I'd take either of them over DJ and give them the primary scoring role off the bench. I'm also missing Jarret Jack, TJ Ford, and even Travis Best right now.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: 3-pointer: Darren Collison disappoints again. ESPN Dallas

                                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                                Solo's name shouldn't be used in the same sentence with Ian as it's an insult to Ian. Ian has more talent than Solo ever had. Terrible comparison!
                                Similar players, Solo was brought here because of his ability to defend, block shots and score the jumper, sounds familiar? Ian to me looks better because of the system but at the end they are pretty close to be the same players.

                                Here are Bird comments after signing him, this sounds familiar:
                                “He’s a young, athletic player who has improved each year he has been in the league,” said Pacers President of Basketball Larry Bird. “He definitely can help hold down our interior defense and we believe he can be part of what we’re trying to do here.”

                                Read more: http://www.insidehoops.com/blog/?p=4649#ixzz2ENtdtvkR
                                I also came across this tweet from Wells from few months ago, I didn't know they were looking at him again(before the off season so we are clear)
                                Keep an eye on Solomon Jones, who New Orleans didn't sign 4 rest of season, as a possible big man Pacers may look at to help at center
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X