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

The Former Player Thread

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

  • #76
    Re: The Former Player Thread

    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
    The Pacers developed Miles. All you've got to do is watch him try Roy's hook and the way he defends the rim to realize that.


    Which might be another thread topic, about how great the Pacers are about developing talent. Roy/PG/Lance/Miles/OJ. The list just keeps getting longer and longer.
    I think this proves that our FO, especially Bird, have been doing a really nice job for several years in a row on those low picks to get solid rotational talent to all-star level talent players. Even the players who were previous bird picks from recent memory have been solid from other teams. Miles, Tyler, Rush pre-injury, AJ before John Wall's return. And of course our own players.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: The Former Player Thread

      Originally posted by 15th parallel View Post
      Haven't watched the whole game though, but the last Phoenix game I saw most of his made shots are closer to the basket, and had more highlight plays at this time of the year than last year. So I'm guessing that on most games he's pretty much less of a jump shooter and more of an inside player slashing and cutting and just getting those points closer to the basket.

      As for Miles, I'm pretty impressed. Just going from a player who can't even get consistent garbage time to a really solid starting center is really impressive. Just a win-win trade for us and the Suns, following up from a win-win trade with the Spurs from several years back.
      I know exactly which game you're talking about, and yeah, he did a nice job of finding his points inside, but that game was more of an exception than the norm. According to Synergy:

      He's had 89 plays this year
      -21 on spot up (keep in mind this can include a pump fake+drive)
      -28 in transition
      -1 cut

      He's been great in transition, solid spotting up, and then small sample size in pretty much every other category. They aren't designing inside stuff for him, most of it is coming off simple drives after a guy closes out too hard on a spot up shot, or in transition. NBA.com stats have him taking 53 jumpers to 17 shots inside the paint, so he's still doing far more jump shooting than anything else.

      A Gerald Green fan who now finds himself rooting for the Suns.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: The Former Player Thread

        Originally posted by repole View Post
        I know exactly which game you're talking about, and yeah, he did a nice job of finding his points inside, but that game was more of an exception than the norm. According to Synergy:

        He's had 89 plays this year
        -21 on spot up (keep in mind this can include a pump fake+drive)
        -28 in transition
        -1 cut

        He's been great in transition, solid spotting up, and then small sample size in pretty much every other category. They aren't designing inside stuff for him, most of it is coming off simple drives after a guy closes out too hard on a spot up shot, or in transition. NBA.com stats have him taking 53 jumpers to 17 shots inside the paint, so he's still doing far more jump shooting than anything else.
        Last night's 3 after faking out Anthony Davis was great.
        Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
        Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

        Panopticon

        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: The Former Player Thread

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          The Pacers developed Miles. All you've got to do is watch him try Roy's hook and the way he defends the rim to realize that.


          Which might be another thread topic, about how great the Pacers are about developing talent. Roy/PG/Lance/Miles/OJ. The list just keeps getting longer and longer.

          EDIT: PHX was even surprised about how well Miles looked when he came to their camp.

          http://arizonasports.com/41/1672038/...sing-preseason

          Summer league with the Pacers.

          Good point. There's no doubt that practicing here for a year improved his skills. So he has sort of had the best scenario. He practiced with an elite team for a year, then took his improved skills to a place where he could actually use them. I wasn't high on drafting him and never dreamed that he could play like this. I admit that I was wrong and am glad for him.

          The development of all of these young players is just the symptom of franchise whose culture is shaped by a guy like Larry Bird. It doesn't surprise me that someone who has succeeded in every level of basketball knows exactly how to pick the right guys out.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: The Former Player Thread

            To bad we couldn't have replaced Ian for Plumlee in that trade.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: The Former Player Thread

              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
              The development of all of these young players is just the symptom of franchise whose culture is shaped by a guy like Larry Bird. It doesn't surprise me that someone who has succeeded in every level of basketball knows exactly how to pick the right guys out.
              I think the focus on character really helps this point. Teams fall in love with talent, but talent doesn't mean much if you have an immature dumbass.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: The Former Player Thread

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                I think the focus on character really helps this point. Teams fall in love with talent, but talent doesn't mean much if you have an immature dumbass.
                True. Where Bird has succeeded is that he has found the perfect talent/character balance.

                O'Neal/Artest/Jackson/Tinsley were obviously a talented bunch, but they had character flaws on a catastrophic level.

                Murphy/Dunleavy/Ford all seemed like decent enough guys, but they didn't make us a very talented basketball team.

                Bird has succeeded with this team because he managed to build a roster that has both talent and high character. He drafted talented high character guys like Danny, Roy, and Paul. He added strong proven high character vets in David West and Hill. All of this meant that he was able to take a chance on Lance because he was a low cost second rounder who we were putting on a team with very high character guys. That's way different than building a roster of O'Neal/Artest/Jackson/Tinsley, which was destined to blowup at a catastrophic price to the franchise. Bird knew that Lance would have a great chance of succeeding if surrounded by mature high player guys, and if he didn't then we could have just dumped him at virtually no cost.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: The Former Player Thread

                  Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                  To bad we couldn't have replaced Ian for Plumlee in that trade.
                  It would be better for our financial future but the Suns wanted Miles.
                  Tonight, all flags must burn, in place of steeples.
                  Autonomy must return into the hands of the people.

                  Panopticon

                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: The Former Player Thread

                    McBob with a nice game tonight. 19pts, 5/8 3pt FG (!), 6rebs, 7asts...too bad they lost to the Hawks.

                    Jarrett Jack has been wildly inconsistent so far in Cavs uniform. Just 2pts on 0/6 shooting.

                    Tyler only had 9 mins with 2pts on 1/3 shooting, so it's a down for him after the previous big game.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: The Former Player Thread

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      I think the focus on character really helps this point. Teams fall in love with talent, but talent doesn't mean much if you have an immature dumbass.
                      Over the summer, around draft time, Pritchard did a radio interview with someone, JMV I think, and he got asked a generic "so what do you look for in a prospect?" type question. He immediately said cultural fit and went on to say it a handful of more times in his 30 second or so answer. "Cultural fit" can mean a lot of things to a lot of different people, Bird's the guy that drafted both Lance and Plumlee, you'd probably be more hard pressed to find two more different personalities. But they've both clearly got a dedication to the craft and, after a little nurturing maybe, have their priorities in order.

                      That's the kind of stuff that makes what we've done hard to replicate, the personality assessment and chemistry fit stuff. I've never been a big fan of former players getting jobs just because "he played, he knows better," there're plenty of examples where that's just wrong. But Bird's just different I guess. Not that Bird's a clairvoyant or anything, there's always a good deal of luck involved, but I think it's pretty undeniable that he's got a sixth sense when it comes to seeking out guys that can mesh. That's one of the art forms that differentiates a successful NBA executive from Joe Schmoe on a message board that thinks all it takes to run a team is getting good players.

                      edit: also, there's not a lot of franchises that would let Bird finish out his building plan, or hell, probably even start it. and if it's Random Executive X he'd get even less time. I bet a lot of current execs could build a strong team given as much time as it takes, well, maybe, but they don't have the luxury of job security.
                      Last edited by Heisenberg; 11-12-2013, 02:14 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: The Former Player Thread

                        In the highlight packages of his games so far, Plumlee looks far better than Roy did in all aspects of the game. What a difference being with the Pacers during the Vogel era and going against Roy in practices has made for Plumlee compared to what Roy had to go through. Plumlee looks like a young Tim Duncan. I wouldn't be surprised if the Spurs are willing to part with a fairly significant veteran player to nab Plumlee so that Duncan can help polish him into their center / pf of the future.

                        Happy we have Scola, but VERY sad we don't have Plumlee.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: The Former Player Thread

                          Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                          In the highlight packages of his games so far, Plumlee looks far better than Roy did in all aspects of the game. What a difference being with the Pacers during the Vogel era and going against Roy in practices has made for Plumlee compared to what Roy had to go through. Plumlee looks like a young Tim Duncan. I wouldn't be surprised if the Spurs are willing to part with a fairly significant veteran player to nab Plumlee so that Duncan can help polish him into their center / pf of the future.

                          Happy we have Scola, but VERY sad we don't have Plumlee.
                          Thats an extreme exaggeration in my opinion.
                          https://www.twitch.tv/xxSnEaKyPxx
                          https://www.youtube.com/xxSnEaKyPxx

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: The Former Player Thread

                            Bit of an over statement, he's gone from garbage to the next Tim Duncan in just over a year.

                            This was a championship move, Luis has helped the Pacers win at least a couple of the 8 games so far.

                            Plumlee looks decent, but lets wait until either reality hits or people take the Suns seriously. Them and the 76ers are the fun, hot teams that maybe could continue and sneak in the playoffs, or flame out really fast (no pun intended there) and win 20 games. You have to part w/ young talent that you'd ideally want to keep in order to win the big prize, especially a team like Indiana where most free-agents don't swarm to.

                            A 30th pick, or late 20s pick by the end of the season probably, was just mainly going to be more money towards the luxury tax, and a mediocre player at best. Gerald Green was a dent in the cap space for 2 more years, and didn't fit the Pacers system at all. Ideally, this trade would've been done before Copeland signed, but Phoenix must've had higher demands for a while.
                            "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                            ----------------- Reggie Miller

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: The Former Player Thread

                              Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                              In the highlight packages of his games so far, Plumlee looks far better than Roy did in all aspects of the game. What a difference being with the Pacers during the Vogel era and going against Roy in practices has made for Plumlee compared to what Roy had to go through. Plumlee looks like a young Tim Duncan. I wouldn't be surprised if the Spurs are willing to part with a fairly significant veteran player to nab Plumlee so that Duncan can help polish him into their center / pf of the future.

                              Happy we have Scola, but VERY sad we don't have Plumlee.
                              Crazy talk.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: The Former Player Thread

                                Originally posted by Cactus Jax View Post
                                Plumlee looks decent
                                I think he looks great... for a second-year player picked at the end of the first round. I have no doubt Plum will be a great rotational player and a potentially solid starter for years to come. He's in a great situation down there: that team has nothing to lose and they can play spoiler all season long. It's not a big deal to make mistakes; they're all learning together.

                                But our window is now, and Scola's veteran poise and experience is much more valuable for a team trying to win a championship. Scola's decision-making has been nearly flawless on the floor, which I wouldn't expect from Miles for the next few years.

                                Everybody won in that trade.
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X