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

Triple Doubles Overrated?

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

  • #16
    Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

    Triple double means you were responsible for 50 pts. Score 10 points. 10 assists means you were responsible for at least 20 points. 10 rebounds means you prevented the other team from scoring fg's. Not overrated
    Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
      Maybe a little overrated. I like the 20/20/20 club better. 20 points, 20 rebounds and 20 assists. That is what is impressive.
      http://www.basketball-reference.com/...Y&round_is_ecf

      Basketball Reference's rebound and assist numbers only go back to the 1985-1986 season, but that has happened exactly 0 times in the almost 3 decades since.

      Rajon Rondo has gotten the closest with 18-20-17 in that ridiculous Sunday afternoon game in the 2012 season against the Knicks. Only 3 other players have even had 15-15-15 games in that time frame: Jason Kidd did it twice, Magic Johnson did it twice, and Larry Bird did it once.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

        Wilt chamberlain is the only guy ever to pull it off. Once.

        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

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

          There have been 3 quadruple doubles since '85. Hakeem and David Robinson both got one with blocks, and Alvin Robertson got one with steals.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            Maybe a little overrated. I like the 20/20/20 club better. 20 points, 20 rebounds and 20 assists. That is what is impressive.
            Is this sarcasm


            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
              Is this sarcasm
              Yes, that is what it is.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                Yes, that is what it is.
                Was that sarcasm?

                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

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

                  Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                  Triple double means you were responsible for 50 pts. Score 10 points. 10 assists means you were responsible for at least 20 points. 10 rebounds means you prevented the other team from scoring fg's. Not overrated
                  Not entirely true. Rebounds rarely come from you playing great defense individually (see David Lee and Troy Murphy)

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

                    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                    Was that sarcasm?

                    Not really, but now that I think about it, maybe a little bit.

                    OK, done with all sarcasm

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

                      Wilt went for 22 points, 25 rebounds, and 21 assists in a 131-121 win on February 2nd, 1968. It was, to date, the only 20-20-20 performance in basketball history, and something no other Sixer has ever got close to accomplishing–Charles Barkley's 15-14-14 against Boston in 1986 was the only time a Liberty Baller even nearly approached a 15-15-15 game.

                      http://the700level.com/top-stories/t...020-game-1968/

                      Most 15-15-15's ever:


                      Oscar Robertson 14
                      Wilt Chamberlain 8
                      Magic Johnson 3
                      Larry Bird 2
                      Jason Kidd 2
                      Micheal Richardson 2

                      the 14 year distance between Kidd's 2 15/15/15 performances is amazing too

                      http://sturminator.blogspot.com/2010...sterpiece.html
                      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        Not really, but now that I think about it, maybe a little bit.

                        OK, done with all sarcasm
                        Man, am I confused.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

                          Let me add this.

                          I know some folks on here are irritated with Lance for trying to get a triple double. But the opportunity (or temptation) of getting one is incredible in terms of his recognition. Since he has gotten two triple doubles every single broadcast team brings it up as soon as his name is mentioned. They also add that he is the only player in the NBA with two. It is his new identity. It communicates very quickly, and very well, the added dimension he brings to the team.

                          So, my point, is to be a little merciful regarding his temptation to grab a third triple double during a blowout where it doesn't affect the win. He is a generally selfless player who is agreeable to let someone else on the team lead in scoring and play the franchise player role. This is an area where he can shine, and it is understandable he would want to do so.
                          Last edited by McKeyFan; 12-05-2013, 01:22 PM.
                          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

                            To dovetail onto what McKey Fan has said...
                            Lance has indicated he takes pride in his passing game. And I'd say he also understands the value of rebounding and what it adds to the team (considering his success and willingness to rebound from the 2 spot). So I'd think triple doubles are a confidence boost for him to show that he's making valuable contributions to the team concept. It's not like he's out there trying to be the leading scorer and dominating the ball play after play.
                            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                            ------

                            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                            -John Wooden

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

                              Originally posted by Bball View Post
                              It's not like he's out there trying to be the leading scorer and dominating the ball play after play.
                              He certainly was during his last minute or so on the court. I've never gone with the thought of letting someone put up stats just to put up stats. Do your job, take the W, let the other guys get a few minutes, smile and move on to the next game.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Triple Doubles Overrated?

                                Players are so much better all around now, I think. trip/dubs can come from almost any position. I love it for the game. Its a really good brand of basketball right now, with superstars and great team play on both ends, and players who are versitile. They have great physical abilities AND fundamentals. I think its the best basketball the league has ever played with this generation of players and I'd consider myself an old school purist. There was a dark time where it was selfish bad basketball, but that time is gone. imho. Triple Doubles are a reflection of this, I think.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X