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

Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

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

  • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

    Originally posted by Sookie View Post
    That's why Danny is important. Good vet's are always important.
    You rarely, if ever, see young teams winning championships. They are almost always middle aged or older teams.

    Comment


    • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

      Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
      Danny can't see or make the play for his teammates, and he shoots a lot. I consider that a black hole. Apparently we define it differently. Just curious, who do you consider to be a black hole and why? Rudy, Monta, guys that get a lot of hate around here...what makes them different from Danny?
      What makes them different is that they have the ability to pass (especially Monta) but they just prefer to not do it.
      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


      • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

        Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
        So we're supposed to just dismiss assists and assist %? Two guys playing the exact same position in the exact same offense? No, I don't think so. There's nothing you've posted that's disproven my opinion.
        1) You do not get an assist for passing the ball. You get an assist for passing the ball to someone who scores. To pass the ball to someone who is in a scoring position you need to do things. 1) Willingness and 2) Ability. Paul has both the willingness and the ability to pass. Danny has the willingness but he does not have the ability to do it.

        2) Our offense this year is much different than it was two years ago. We are running a lot more Pick and Roll and Pick and Pop this year and we're posting up less. We have jumped 10 spots in most Assist categories this year compared to last year.

        Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
        I gotta feeling my opinion was part of the reason I got an infraction, and m sure you and mattie came out clean even though the lame posts you guys made were considerably worse than anything I've said in this thread.
        And there goes the victim card again. Try this. Tell the rest of the forum which posts you think deserve an infraction and compare them with your post that got one.

        I'm seriously tired of this victim card that some people constantly use.
        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


        • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
          1) You do not get an assist for passing the ball. You get an assist for passing the ball to someone who scores. To pass the ball to someone who is in a scoring position you need to do things. 1) Willingness and 2) Ability. Paul has both the willingness and the ability to pass. Danny has the willingness but he does not have the ability to do it.
          I would add that the person you pass to has to take the assisted shot and make it. Considering the offense in some of the JOB years neither of those was a given.


          Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk
          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


          • Re: Granger To Resume Practice


            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              I would add that the person you pass to has to take the assisted shot and make it. Considering the offense in some of the JOB years neither of those was a given.


              Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk
              Also, you don't get an assist if you are a person who passes the ball to the person who gets the assist. Or if you were the person who passes the ball to the person who passes the ball to the person who gets the assist.

              There are a lot of high assist players that are still ball hogs, because they happen to dribble the ball for 20 seconds before passing off to someone, instead of keeping the ball moving with a flowing offense.

              Danny isn't a playmaker. And his is more likely to shoot than pass if he's got a good shot. That doesn't mean his a ball hog or a ball stopper.

              Comment


              • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                [B]
                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                Obviously you care about shooting rates, if you say that he's a black hole because he shoots too much.
                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                And that's why I brought up PG, because of how identical their numbers are. You're willing to call one a blackhole, while punting towards the other. It shows clear biasness, not based on play, but rather who we're talking about. Inconsistent in your application of the arugment.

                I've never only focused on his shot attempts. It's his all around game I take into consideration.

                And Nuntius , whether he can help it or not doesn't really matter to me. You can be an unselfish person and still be a black hole.

                Comment


                • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                  I'm not saying there aren't 2 sides to every argument, I'm just not listening to yours! A direct quote from every angry ex-wife who ever lived.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

                    And there goes the victim card again. Try this. Tell the rest of the forum which posts you think deserve an infraction and compare them with your post that got one.

                    I'm seriously tired of this victim card that some people constantly use.
                    I thought you weren't talking about me the first time you brought that out, Nuntius, but clearly you were. My opinion on Danny and comment about Vnz, which was obviously a joke and a play on Free Lance, was given an infraction and met with disrespectful remarks. I shouldn't have to repost them for you to figure that out.
                    Last edited by CJ Jones; 11-18-2013, 06:54 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                      If JOB's offense is to blame for Danny's shoot early and often mentality, which I agree played a large part, why didn't his shots per minute take a hit in Franks first full year? And why, even though he was finally on the floor with good players, did his assist and assist % plummet to near career lows? Fact is he didn't change his game at all. If anything he became even more of a ball stopper. I want Danny to take less shots, take better shots, and pass the ball more. When he does that I'll change my opinion. Hopefully that'll happen in the next few weeks.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                        Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                        If JOB's offense is to blame for Danny's shoot early and often mentality, which I agree played a large part, why didn't his shots per minute take a hit in Franks first full year? And why, even though he was finally on the floor with good players, did his assist and assist % plummet to near career lows? Fact is he didn't change his game at all. If anything he became even more of a ball stopper. I want Danny to take less shots, take better shots, and pass the ball more. When he does that I'll change my opinion. Hopefully that'll happen in the next few weeks.
                        Um, his shots per minute did drop. He went from 18 shots per 36 minutes to 16.4 shots per 36 minutes.

                        Why did almost everyone's assist% also drop, like Darren Collison's. From 32.9% to 28.9 and then again to 24.9. Roy Hibbert's assist% also dropped once Frank took over. His second year he was averaging 2 assists in 25 minutes, now he is averaging half that in 29 minutes.

                        Also, by the way, Granger's TO% did drop to career lows under Vogel, not just near career lows. So under Vogel Danny's shots per minute decreased, his assists decreased, his turnover decreased, his Offensive Rating increased to the second best of his career, and his Offensive Win Share increased to the second best of his career. Note, ORtg and OWS take into consideration more than just how many points he scored individually. They take into consider things such as assists and turnovers. So if you are telling me that the more of a ball stopper Danny is the more efficient he becomes, then by all means I want Danny to be a ball stopper. That isn't reality though. Reality is Danny is not a ball stopper, he is not a black hole, he is not inefficient, and your opinion of what he has been over his career is just dead wrong. There is no truth to it at all. I have no idea how you came to that opinion, but it isn't by remembering things correctly. Knowing how memories work I imagine it has something to do with him not playing in a year, and it is easier for you to remember the bad plays than it is for you to remember the good plays.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post

                          So Granger is probably still going to be a while?
                          "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                            Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                            It's slowly going to become last year all over again.
                            That's what I have been thinking for a while now....
                            "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                              Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                              I thought you weren't talking about me the first time you brought that out, Nuntius, but clearly you were. My opinion on Danny and comment about Vnz, which was obviously a joke and a play on Free Lance, was given an infraction and met with disrespectful remarks. I shouldn't have to repost them for you to figure that out.
                              I'm not talking specifically about you. I'm talking about everyone who uses that victim card in this forum which in that case included you. Seriously, it's extremely annoying that some people choose to end their arguments with the "of course, I will be attacked for my opinions" part.

                              A forum is supposed to be a community, CJ. If you feel persecuted, SPEAK UP.
                              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


                              • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                                Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                                And Nuntius , whether he can help it or not doesn't really matter to me. You can be an unselfish person and still be a black hole.
                                It matters to a coach, though. A good coach should not task a player to do something out of his capabilities. We don't task Hibbert to shoot 3 pointers because that would be a bad use of his talents. Similarly, we should not task Danny with facilitating because that's not the best use of his talents. Danny is better used as a finisher. That has always been the case with him and that's why he has traditionally played his best when he is paired with players that are good at facilitating.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X