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:
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

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

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

    i swear theres an echo in here


    • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

      You guys have to calm down. It doesn't matter what was said over the last 1.5 years....or even today before the game.....start off fresh and start discussing about what Granger can or cannot do now that he is able to play...not argue about the past.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.


      • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

        Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
        Well the season in question he averaged 31.4 ppg, 7 rebounds, 6.6 assists and 48% shooting in 42.5 minutes...still regarded as one of the better statistical and all around years in the modern era...he was a monster, very he smarter now? yea....hes matured...but to say he wasnt in his prime? he was in his prime his senior year of high school....

        but to answer the question would an in his prime ron artest handle an in his prime lebron the way he did back then? yes...they were both that good at what they did...thats what it made it so fun...ron was the perfect specimen to guard lebron...he was close to a physical equal-something lebron never sees...and he was crazy...which made him incredibly dangerous and incredibly good...there were nights lebron got his....but thats why i was crying so much when ron got traded instead of jermaine...because my thought was simple...ron was just never gonna lose the battle to his man on just about any night...even with lebron...hes the only guy that has ever been really able to handle lebron one on one with any degree of success...
        I think LeBron is much better than when he entered the league. You should take a moment and look at his FG% and 3% over the years. They have risen dramatically. Also, his 30ppg is a mirage compared to what he's producing now on a much, much better team. It's a lot easier to defend LeBron James as a Cav. You could gang up on him and teams did all the time. Not just a younger LeBron. But one without that team around him. That's precisely why he used to average in the 40's from the floor and the last two years he's knocking on the door to 60% from the floor. He is FAR more difficult to defend IMO than those days when Ron, SJax and Danny took turns.

        ...and his minutes are way down from the CAV days when he racked up numbers. From above 40 all the way down to 35 this year.

        Edit: I will just respond to your post below and say we will just have to agree to disagree. You responded to my post to Eleazer and misunderstood it from the beginning. You marvel at how he guarded LeBron as a Cav...early 20's. But that's not what I posted sir. But that happens when you get a bit older...
        Last edited by BlueNGold; 12-21-2013, 02:05 AM.
        Lance is finally home. Whether he becomes our starting PG or he's 6th man, he's getting big minutes and he's here to stay. #llortontnia


        • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
          I think LeBron is much better than when he entered the league. You should take a moment and look at his FG% and 3% over the years. They have risen dramatically. Also, his 30ppg is a mirage compared to what he's producing now on a much, much better team. It's a lot easier to defend LeBron James as a Cav. You could gang up on him and teams did all the time. Not just a younger LeBron. But one without that team around him. That's precisely why he used to average in the 40's from the floor and the last two years he's knocking on the door to 60% from the floor. He is FAR more difficult to defend IMO than those days when Ron, SJax and Danny took turns.

          ...and his minutes are way down from the CAV days when he racked up numbers. From above 40 all the way down to 35 this year.
          I actually watch the dont need to peruse the numbers...never said he hadnt improved...his game has i said..hes gotten smarter...lebron has always been a physical specimen as well as incredibly high basketball his early days he relied more on his physical aspects...these days he uses those less and less...he has refined his shooting...he drives less...shoots more jump shots and is better at it...he goes to the line less because hes driving less....

          but all that has nothing to do with Danny Granger not being in New Mexico and instead guarding Lebron...and doing a pretty damn good job of it to boot...something u indicated wouldnt happen even if we tried to imagine...well we didnt have to imagine it and it did happen that way...

          anyhow...ur giving 48 years olds a bad name with such lets move along...

          If Danny is able to stay relatively healthy and rounds in to form after a month or two...and Hibbert, West, George, Hill, Stephenson, Scola, Watson and Ian also remain relatively healthy Miami cant beat us...without DAnny or any of the others for that matter, its a toss up...But if Danny is back and we are whole...Miami cant touch us....only OKC would stand between us and a title...its really that simple..

          EDIT: and btw...the days of ron, jackson and danny taking turns never really happened...that first cleveland game of 2005 was the only game they were on the roster one day at best...and very early in the season...dannys rookie season.


          • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

            Last edited by Kstat; 12-21-2013, 07:06 AM.

            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004


            • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

              One thing I forgot about Danny was just how big he is. He has legitimate NBA size and that's gonna allow Vogel to put out some really interesting line ups this year.

              I also thought Danny was reading the floor extremely well. He's a real NBA player, no knock against OJ or Solo but they aren't near that level. The turnovers and rust are part of the process of coming back. Just from what I saw against the Rockets, I'm really excited.


              • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                Lol are we still arguing about DG?!


                • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion


                  i am actually encouraged by his play last night. The Rockets had to guard him. And he moved well off screens causing the defense to adjust. If he stays healthy he will give so much more than I expected. I just thought he was going to sit in the corner.

                  He is moving. He is causing movement. Something that our staters were struggling to do for a week.
                  Our bench can be the 7 seed in the east.


                  • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                    Danny is a veteran and his mind is up to speed but his body will not do what he wants it to do at this point.
                    He knows how to assist and he knows how to defend better than any of the Pacers young players. The offense will improve.


                    • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                      Originally posted by owl View Post
                      Danny is a veteran and his mind is up to speed but his body will not do what he wants it to do at this point.
                      He knows how to assist and he knows how to defend better than any of the Pacers young players. The offense will improve.
             guessing it takes at least a month maybe two of playing games before he is totally comfortable and regains his confidence...during that time Im sure there will be lots of ups and downs...high turnover games...very poor shooting games...but in the end, if hes able to stay healthy it will be so worth it come playoff time...


                      • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                        Having him come off the bench is going to be huge for us. Last night during the game I was imagining a Lance, PG, DG, DW & Hibbert lineup and what it could do to other teams.


                        • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                          Things I got to see from Danny's first game yesterday:

                          - He is moving a bit better than what he was moving in pre-season, still slow, can't lift, his recovery on D is pretty slow(all this was expected).

                          - He has no lift on his jump shot and is afraid of dribbling the ball(for obvious reasons 5 TO's)

                          - His passing was good, not as great as some are making out to be but it was good for a guy that is limited on that front.

                          - I noticed that he was icing his left knee the whole time he was on the bench Isola was right.

                          - Yes we look better with him than with OJ, Cope or Hill, it's nice to have a veteran that knows wtf he is doing

                          Note that this are my takes on the first game so a lot of things can change.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!


                          • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            - I noticed that he was icing his left knee the whole time he was on the bench Isola was right.
                            Thanks for most of those, but I have a little quibble here. Icing knees in today's NBA does not mean they are sore or even bad. It seems to be fairly standard after games (PG has ice on his knees pretty consistently after games) as a preventative measure. I suspect that's the same situation with Danny since this is his first heavy action - a preventative measure, not an admission that there are problems with the knee.

                            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...


                            • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              I don't know who are this posters you are talking about because I have said a lot of positives things about DG for years, even called him a superstar at some point lol

                              edit: Oh yeah I also said at the time that I would not have traded him for Melo, that is more than positive.
                              I mean right now/lately, and I didn't just mean Danny, but the whole team. I feel like some are just going on about what's wrong, but I don't see much of any / any cheer for how great things have been or what others are doing well, it's just going on about something they feel is wrong, and I don't notice anything else. Maybe I'm missing it? I mean a casual mention, maybe, but actual celebration or happiness besides that? No.


                              • Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion

                                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                                I'm actually a Granger fan, yet I'm labeled a hater around these parts. I love his shooting ability and his toughness. But I am not blind to the rest of his game. Yet I'm supposedly a hater because of the criticism.

                                Perhaps it's because I am pessimistic about his return. But why shouldn't I be pessimistic after watching a decade of knee issues with JO and JBender? Tell me how much money was wasted on those guys.

                                Just because I think his ability to pass, dribble and defend are at best average in the NBA I am labeled a Granger hater. But I hardly ever get an argument back on the points.
                                Frequency / repetition is a lot of it to me. It's one thing to say those things a few times, but it's gone on, and on, and on for months.

                                You aren't someone I think of with my complaint, by the way, because you also spend a lot of time enjoying the good stuff with the team.