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

Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

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

  • Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

    http://blogs.1070thefan.com/2013/03/...-with-granger/

    With all due respect to Frank Vogelís relentless optimism, the latest news on Danny Granger cannot be viewed as anything other than a major setback for both the individual and the team.

    This is happening at the worst possible time for a Pacers team that desperately needs to be fine-tuning for the playoffs, not putting the rotation up on the rack waiting for a part to arrive.

    After playing regular minutes in three games, and then only in the first half of two, Grangerís left knee did not respond well. He reported what Vogel referred to as ďabove-averageĒ soreness, underwent an MRI on Monday and missed practice Tuesday.

    Wednesday, the Pacers sent out an advisory that said in part ďno new damageĒ was found but that Granger would go back on the shelf and be re-evaluated in a week.

    The two operative phrases there were ďnew damage,Ē which suggests the old damage is causing this issue, and ďre-evaluated,Ē which doesnít mean heíll be playing again next week. It means theyíll see if he can play in a week. Given he was down more than four months before coming back, you have to wonder how much improvement can be expected in a week.

    ďWeíre not looking at it like (it is a setback),Ē Vogel said. ďWeíre looking at it as being precautionary, understanding itís still a long season, thereís still a lot of time left. We want him to get back to 100 percent and this is the best way to do it. Weíre looking at it like itís hopefully going to be a short-term thing.Ē

    It is a long season, but there isnít that much time left. The Pacers have 21 games remaining. By the time Granger is re-evaluated, the number will be down to 18. At that point, there will be just one month left in the regular season Ė a critical month for a team in a tightly packed Eastern Conference playoff race.

    A couple of bad weeks could cost them the Central Division, homecourt advantage and any real chance of a deep playoff run. Nine of the next 14 are on the road, so the potential for a couple of bad weeks is real.

    The thing is, what options do the Pacers have?

    They could shut down The Granger Experiment, and that may be a stronger possibility in a week if he is unable to play. For now, however, the potential of what he could mean to the team in the postseason is too great to abandon before it is absolutely, positively necessary.

    No, for the time being they must make the best of it, see if Sam Young, Orlando Johnson or even Gerald Green can bring something, anything off the bench. Even without Granger, the starting lineup is just fine. Itís the second unit that would benefit most from his return.

    In the last six games, the bench has been outscored by 84 points, an average of 14 per game. The reserves combined to shoot 34.2 percent overall, 20 percent from the 3-point line. And Granger played in five of those games. The deficit in the 83-81 loss to Boston Wednesday was 29-16, keeping in mind the Celtics have been so decimated by injuries they signed three guys out of the Chinese league just to fill out their roster.

    ďObviously, we all wanted him to come back and within a week be playing 38 minutes and being pain-free,Ē Vogel said. ďThat was the best-case scenario. This isnít anywhere near the worst-case scenario. Itís just part of the process, not as smoothly as we would have hoped but we still feel very confident heís going to give us a big lift down the stretch.Ē

    Because that is still a possibility, it is not yet time to pull the plug on Granger. But the Pacers can ill afford to let uncertainty linger much longer.
    95
    Yes
    33.68%
    32
    No
    66.32%
    63
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

  • #2
    Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

    If he isn't ready to go in the week timeline in which they said they would reevaluate, I think the answer would be Yes for me. However, not yet.
    There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

      Can we get a "not yet" option, which essentilly is what Bruno is saying?
      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


      • #4
        Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

        Not yet. I posted yesterday that there is no harm what-so-ever in waiting 3 weeks or so. So my position is if we are at the same place as we are now on April 1st, then yes pull the plug and direct his re-hab to next season.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

          It can still work if the plan is for Granger to be part of the reserves. If they still hope to make him a starter we are about out of time.
          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." óKevin Pritchard press conference

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

            The only thing it's time to pull the plug on is the idea of Danny being a starter. If he has a chance of being ready in April, hell yes see if he still can play off the bench. Nothing to lose there.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

              Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
              The only thing it's time to pull the plug on is the idea of Danny being a starter. If he has a chance of being ready in April, hell yes see if he still can play off the bench. Nothing to lose there.
              Exactly. If we can get Danny off the bench for 10 minutes a game in the ECF and that's it, I still want that.

              Who's roster spot would he be taking? Gerald Green? Come on.


              This "all or nothing" approach has been tiring. It seems as though many feel that you either get Danny back as a starter at full strength RIGHT NOW, or you give up on him contributing this season at all.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

                well apparently granger doesnt seem to get any healthier this year even in the limited minutes that he has played so far, so yeah, i say shelf him for the rest of the season, maybe until the last week of the season and see if he can give it a go for 10 min or so, if not, theres always next year, if his knees can hold up then

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

                  Our bench offense is such a concern. So like a couple others have said, a Danny Granger off the bench will be welcomed.

                  I disagree with UncleBuck, though, in saying that there's no urgency in getting him back. He looks slow and out of shape to me. Maybe a bit heavier too. I think he needs more than just 10 or so games of 15-20 minutes if we want him to be sharper come playoff time.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

                    I have no idea when Frank should pull the plug on the Granger come back. However, it is way past time for a play maker to run the offense on the second unit. DJ is about as poor a point guard as I can remember watching. Won't pass the ball, dribbles around in circles, comes off screens to drive into the paint and lose the ball and can defend NO ONE! IMO, it's time for Lance to take the backup PG minutes. Or give them to Ben and have some one bring the ball up court for him. We should either run the same plays for both units or devise some for the 2nd unit. They seem to just run around and hope for a miracle. Maybe Hill can just play 48 mpg?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

                      not gonna lie, Conrads article seems like a complete overreaction to Danny missing a week

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

                        Originally posted by Randolph_HorseLips View Post
                        Our bench offense is such a concern. So like a couple others have said, a Danny Granger off the bench will be welcomed.

                        I disagree with UncleBuck, though, in saying that there's no urgency in getting him back. He looks slow and out of shape to me. Maybe a bit heavier too. I think he needs more than just 10 or so games of 15-20 minutes if we want him to be sharper come playoff time.
                        I'm with Unclebuck on this one.

                        There's 8 games in April, that should be plenty of time for him to get into game shape considering he was already starting to look good before sitting out. If he's not ready to play by April, sit him out and focus on getting him ready for next season.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

                          Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                          not gonna lie, Conrads article seems like a complete overreaction to Danny missing a week
                          I'll venture to guess that the 55 missed games prior to this week are also factoring into Conrad's article.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

                            Originally posted by Cousy47 View Post
                            DJ is about as poor a point guard as I can remember watching. Won't pass the ball, dribbles around in circles,
                            I actually feel bad for DJ because I think he's got the toughest job on the team... to run an offense that has awful offensive ability. I actually somewhat miss a guy like Dahntay Jones.

                            You say he won't pass the ball, but he actually leads the team in assists per 48 minutes.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Is it time to pull the plug on Grangerís comeback? Conrad Brunner

                              Originally posted by Goyle View Post
                              considering he was already starting to look good
                              If by looking good you mean his shot was looking better, I'm with you.

                              But he wasn't looking good in terms of being in shape. In that last game he still looked winded and slow.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X