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 bench still isn't good enough

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

  • Re: The bench still isn't good enough

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    Copeland is not the worse contract DG is, add the 14mil plus the 3mil of Copeland and you have about 17mil not used for anything if we want to win a championship a big part of that money has to be used.

    And expecting 80% DG at this point is really expecting a miracle I mean not even Kobe is 80% right now and I doubt he ever gets there.
    Kobe's quite a bit older and had a more significant injury IMO. 80% DG is best-case but it is a realistic outcome this year. The real problem is if you get much less than 80% out of DG, you might as well play OJ or Solo.

    My expectation is that it will go one of two ways. He will come back and make it to 80% OR he will come back and have more problems with his knee. I expect him to come back and have problems but I'm hoping for the former. I'd give him maybe a 30% chance of coming back and being a factor in the playoffs. JMHO.
    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

    Comment


    • Re: The bench still isn't good enough

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      Our bench is good enough to get it done (i.e. help rather than hinder the starters to win a championship).
      At the end of the day, this is where I'm at as well.

      If we'd had Scola and CJ instead of Tyler and DJ, I firmly believe we'd have beaten Miami last year. Add in Granger (I remain hopeful) to take the minutes that Sam Young and Gerald Green got, and I think it's a no-brainer.

      We can all imagine ways the bench could be better, but that's not the question. The bench is good enough.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • Re: The bench still isn't good enough

        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
        Copeland is not the worse contract DG is, add the 14mil plus the 3mil of Copeland and you have about 17mil not used for anything if we want to win a championship a big part of that money has to be used.

        And expecting 80% DG at this point is really expecting a miracle I mean not even Kobe is 80% right now and I doubt he ever gets there.
        The Granger and Kobe injuries are completely different. Of course Kobe isn't 80% right now, he's played like 3 games.

        I don't think it's really expecting a miracle to see a 75-80% Granger off the bench at best.

        He's only going to be adding to the team, we don't need 2009 Danny to win games. We just need a guy who can come off the bench and hit shots and help maintain our leads or help us get back in games. To think about it, we don't even need that. Anything he gives us is just icing on the cake and makes us even better/deeper.
        Super Bowl XLI Champions
        2000 Eastern Conference Champions




        Comment


        • Re: The bench still isn't good enough

          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
          Kobe's quite a bit older and had a more significant injury IMO. 80% DG is best-case but it is a realistic outcome this year. The real problem is if you get much less than 80% out of DG, you might as well play OJ or Solo.

          My expectation is that it will go one of two ways. He will come back and make it to 80% OR he will come back and have more problems with his knee. I expect him to come back and have problems but I'm hoping for the former. I'd give him maybe a 30% chance of coming back and being a factor in the playoffs. JMHO.
          A 65-70% Granger is probably better than Solo right now. Maybe not defensively but probably offensively. Which isn't a bash on Solo, guy is a rook

          But yeah, hopefully Danny doesn't have any setbacks once he starts playing
          Super Bowl XLI Champions
          2000 Eastern Conference Champions




          Comment


          • Re: The bench still isn't good enough

            Originally posted by Shade View Post
            Obviously, Scola and Watson are significant upgrades over their predecessors, but those two can't do it alone. Ian can't stay on the floor for more than 3 minutes, OJ and Cope have forgotten how to shoot, and Solo is generally just invisible.

            We really need a healthy Danny and possibly another bench upgrade if we want to go all the way.

            stumbled upon this on a heat message board. prob has no merit but interesting nonetheless.

            http://www.rantsports.com/nba/2013/1...nt-miami-heat/

            say goodbye to lance if the Pacers make this move. Do not see Rondo and Lance being able to play together at all.

            Comment


            • Re: The bench still isn't good enough

              Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
              stumbled upon this on a heat message board. prob has no merit but interesting nonetheless.

              http://www.rantsports.com/nba/2013/1...nt-miami-heat/

              say goodbye to lance if the Pacers make this move. Do not see Rondo and Lance being able to play together at all.
              make what move? it's not even a rumor, it's some random person talking on the internet.

              Comment


              • Re: The bench still isn't good enough

                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                stumbled upon this on a heat message board. prob has no merit but interesting nonetheless.

                http://www.rantsports.com/nba/2013/1...nt-miami-heat/

                say goodbye to lance if the Pacers make this move. Do not see Rondo and Lance being able to play together at all.
                If the Pacers are in win now mode and are willing to delay worrying about next years payroll until this summer comes, it makes some sense.

                But it would seem that the fact that Rondo does not have an expiring contract would make this a near impossibility of happening. Heck, he makes $13M next season. That puts us well into tax territory next season considering Paul George's new contract amount.

                Comment


                • Re: The bench still isn't good enough

                  Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                  Because Danny can hardly guard SF, let alone SG which is normally a smaller and quicker guy. Danny's better at guarding bigger wings that normally play SF.

                  As for Copeland guarding the wing, I think that's a mistake too. He's simply not quick enough on defense to guard a wing. That's why he isn't playing and Solomon Hill is playing.
                  Copeland is a Granger clone in many ways. Better defending wings in the post, 3pt threat. Danny drives much better than Cope and overall plays better defense, or in simpler terms he is just a better player. But there is a bit of Granger is to Cope as Roy is to Ian.

                  If Cope could attack with his dribble or defend out on the perimeter he'd be able to steal those "Granger replacement" minutes from OJ/Solo/Butler, but that's just not his game.


                  Still I'd like Frank to find him a role that's more clear. Surely there are some nights and matchups when he could crush people, and it's not like Scola never has problems on PF defense. Even on offense we've seen a lot of PnPop from deep lately, it's not like the team has been able to work through Scola in the low block a ton.



                  If anything I think some of the current bench issues (which are drastically lower than last year) have more to do with learning to play together than not being good enough.




                  And of course Granger could be the team's Sheed. A mid-season return (which seems very reasonable) at solid levels would really make bench concerns seem silly.

                  Comment


                  • Re: The bench still isn't good enough

                    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                    Copeland was indeed supposed to be a good shooter. But he has a 36% FG% in garbage time. The biggest issue is that he's a tweener who cannot guard anyone. I think we paid too much.
                    He is not supposed to be a good shooter. He is a good shooter. He is shooting 37.5% from 3 and not all his minutes were garbage time (second game against Chicago, New York, Boston and Philadelphia).

                    I agree that he has not learned our defensive scheme yet and thus struggles defensively but offensively he has proven to be far better than the garbage that some guys thought he was.
                    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: The bench still isn't good enough

                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      The guy can't even get playing time over a rookie a second year player and an old guy I'm sorry but Cope sucks.
                      A pretty big part of that is that he simply does not play the same position as those guys! Copeland is a PF and he isn't going to see a lot of time over Scola since Scola is awesome. He isn't a SF and thus he isn't going to see compete with OJ, Solo and Rasual for minutes.
                      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: The bench still isn't good enough

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        Yes, he's only played garbage minutes but garbage minutes are not why he was acquired.
                        He was acquired to be the back-up PF but then the opportunity to get Scola appeared. That meant that he was demoted to 3rd string PF who normally only gets garbage minutes. Vogel even tried to get him minutes by playing him out of position at SF but that wasn't good defensively.

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        Also, Copeland is relevant because his contract impacts us re-signing key players and if he indeed begins shooting the 3 with some accuracy he will be a weapon...as well as a tradeable asset.
                        If his contract plays any role in our ability to sign Lance then he will be traded. It's as simple as that. His contract is easily tradeable and Bird will re-sign Lance.

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        Also, as long as we are getting spanked by the likes of Portland and OKC, I think all the players are important and ripe for discussion.
                        It was Hill and Lance that failed us in those two games, though. It wasn't the bench.
                        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: The bench still isn't good enough

                          By the way, I find it extremely funny that some of the people who are complaining about Copeland this season are the same ones that complained about Miles last year. Remind me, how is Miles doing this season? Exactly..
                          Last edited by Nuntius; 12-16-2013, 05:16 AM. Reason: I wanted to write "Copeland" but I wrote "Scola". Sorry for the mix-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: The bench still isn't good enough

                            Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                            By the way, I find it extremely funny that some of the people who are complaining about Scola this season are the same ones that complained about Miles last year. Remind me, how is Miles doing this season? Exactly..
                            Wait....whose complaining about Scola?
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • Re: The bench still isn't good enough

                              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                              Wait....whose complaining about Scola?
                              Damn, sometimes I'm stupid. I wanted to write Copeland but I wrote Scola instead. Sorry for the mix-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: The bench still isn't good enough

                                So "Copeland is a Granger clone"? damn that has to be the worse DG insult ever, it's just a bad as "Gerald Green can replace DG just fine".

                                As a "hater" I should agree but I don't think that low of him.
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X