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

Too much depth can hinder growth...

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

  • Too much depth can hinder growth...

    In the NBA, there is a contractual element that can affect the value of any player. It's not an issue of whether or not a player is good, it's is he good relative to his salary. Austin Croshere, Al Harrington, and Jonathon Bender all went through that process with the Pacers, and with all of them on the same roster behind Jalen Rose then Ron Artest it took too long to determine their value.

    No team wants to give up on a player too early, i.e. Jermaine O'Neal and Portland, and worse, they don't want to be the 'next team' to give up on a kid. The fear of losing a player is far worse than sticking with one who doesn't quite live up.

    Three 'tweeners coming off the bench was one too many. Good subs in the NBA often get 25-30 minutes on average. It seemed clear to me Croshere was definitely a second team defender and a special situations player. Rotate him early vs. the other team's 2nd PF, create matchup problems on the other end, and use him in situations where his shooting can create space.

    Bender had the most potential but was frail. Still, he had a year or two early where he was able get minutes. Harrington always wanted to start, and he was the one who was able to step up.

    The log jam three years ago killed any shot at Indiana getting much for Bender or Croshere (minus the Antoine Walker flirtation). The backcourt depth suffered, and while I like Jax, I'm not sure he is ultimately the best fit with this lineup. Harrington is dealt, for Jax, but last year's turn of events just killed any shot any sense of normalcy.

    Enter Granger. Granger is an absolute steal at this point, but with Croshere and Bender on the roster with inflated contracts, how are they going to develop any sort of value? They have two years left on their contracts. That can be valuable to a team looking to clear some cap space in the future. Not that the Pacers want to be burdened with salary, but it's a nice chip to have to get additional help.

    Granger, Bender, and Croshere all need minutes. It would be nice if Bender could stay healthy to the point of showing he has a future here, or showing he can be used to fetch help at another position. Croshere has probably shot his wad in terms of value, but he has provided some pretty important play for the Pacers over the years, especially when Isaiah Thomas isn't coaching him. Granger may indeed be the future for this franchise at the forward spot. I don't get the impression he's going to be "injured" as has been the past for others.

    I'd like to see the Pacers get a real shooter who can start. It would put the roster where it should have been last year, balancing out the positions. It won't please Jackson, but he would be PERFECT off the bench. He can play both wing positions. He's just as much of a 'tweener as the forwards above. Coming off the bench, he could still 30+ minutes.

    With the depth the Pacers have, the best thing for them to do is balance their roster out and add a shooter behind or in front of Jackson. The prototype would be Ray Allen, and behind him would be Michael Redd, Richard Hamilton, or a Joe Johnson. I'm not suggesting any of these players are available. Behind Jackson could be Mike Miller or Cuttino Mobley.

    It would have been nice to parlay of this depth toward a Martell Webster or Francisco Garcia in the draft as an additional pick.
    Courtside: Featuring Indiana boys' high school basketball

  • #2
    Re: Too much depth can hinder growth...

    All we really need is a healthy team. Getting one seems to be the problem.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Too much depth can hinder growth...

      I agree with a lot of what you said. It's very true, a lot of players on this team could be much more productive somewhere else (statistically.)

      But, we need to get rid of some PG"s and get a Center, not another shooter.

      Sjack/Sarunas/Artest/Jermaine are all great shooters from different spots on the floor. And Sjack/Artest/Jermaine are all among the best defenders in the league at their position, none of them are have a compromised offensive game either.

      Sjack/Artest/Jermaine all compliment each other well with what they bring, mainly they are all excellent defenders as I stated.

      Defense wins championships, not ray allen. If we get a defensive minded Center, game over for anyone we play. Simple as that.

      All we have to do is beat people with our depth. Guys like Ronnie/jermaine could be expected to play 40 minutes a night, but here they don't have to do that.

      This not only increases their longevity as players, but should make them a lot better off come playoff time.

      If i were carlisle, i would play the bench a lot during the regular season. Just wear teams out by constantly throwing fresh legs at them. Everyone on our team can put the ball in the basket, we build a lead and put in our starters to hold it down defensively.

      All I know is this season can't start soon enough and I just drank three cups of coffee and typed this.

      GO PACERS!!!! God I love this team.
      *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Too much depth can hinder growth...

        I'm really hopeful that Bender can stay healthy for long enough to raise his trade value.

        Granger looks like a perfect backup to both forward spots, which means no minutes for Bender.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Too much depth can hinder growth...

          Originally posted by Jon Theodore

          Sjack/Sarunas/Artest/Jermaine are all great shooters from different spots on the floor.
          I have yet to locate a spot on the floor from which Sjax is a great shooter. He is NOT a great shooter.

          I don't think the Pacers have a great shooter on their team. I haven't seen enough of Sarunas to know for sure. Other three guys mentioned hardly qualify as great shooters. They are great at other things, just not shooting.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Too much depth can hinder growth...

            Agreed that this team has no great shooter. But then, last year's spurs didn't either. And don't say Horry.
            This space for rent.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Too much depth can hinder growth...

              Maybe not great shooters like Allan Houston or Reggie Miller. But they all can knock down enough shots.
              *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Too much depth can hinder growth...

                How do you think we would get Ray Allen or Michael Redd?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Too much depth can hinder growth...

                  Depth is one of the most overrated terms in the NBA.

                  Depth only helps a team survive the regular season. It is not important during the playoffs.

                  If one of your three best players go down in the spring, you probably aren't going to win, period.

                  If your three best players aren't good enough, it doesn't matter how good guys #4-8 or 9 in the rotation are. And guys #10, #11 & #12 are not relevant.
                  Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                  Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                  Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                  Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                  And life itself, rushing over me
                  Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                  Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Too much depth can hinder growth...

                    I feel like I'm reading a thread from a couple months ago, before Saras signed on. He is a great shooter, he is that shooter you want behind Jax.
                    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Too much depth can hinder growth...

                      Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                      Depth is one of the most overrated terms in the NBA.

                      Depth only helps a team survive the regular season. It is not important during the playoffs.

                      If one of your three best players go down in the spring, you probably aren't going to win, period.

                      If your three best players aren't good enough, it doesn't matter how good guys #4-8 or 9 in the rotation are. And guys #10, #11 & #12 are not relevant.

                      Jay I know this has always been your stance....and i agree to a point. But a few guys off the bench can help situationally in the playoffs ....

                      Robert Horry has been key off the bench for both LA and SA. Steve Kerr hit big shots off the bench for Chicago....Sam Cassell was a monster for Houston in the Mid 90's playoff runs.

                      If we have a key starter (JO, Tins, Jack,Feisty,Ron) limping into the playoffs Harrison, Granger, Saras, FJ, JB, AJ could be key to holding the fort until that starter got back for a later round.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Too much depth can hinder growth...

                        Originally posted by waxman
                        Robert Horry has been key off the bench for both LA and SA. Steve Kerr hit big shots off the bench for Chicago....Sam Cassell was a monster for Houston in the Mid 90's playoff runs.
                        But those guys don't even get that chance without the contributions of the main cogs.

                        I agree with Jay.

                        -Bball
                        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


                        • #13
                          Re: Too much depth can hinder growth...

                          Wow, just wow. I mean Wow, Some of the recent stupidity when it comes to trades has just been WOW.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Too much depth can hinder growth...

                            It is a good point that we have SCORERS, but really do not have a single SHOOTER. At least not yet. I think many of us hope that Saras proves himself to be the shooter we need.

                            And Jay, I agree with Waxman about subs being situationally vital. Not just important, but vital.

                            Most would probably agree that a deep team uses 10 players, give or take, during the regular season. And, I know that it is your stance during playoffs that teams only need to primarily use their starting 5s, with maybe contributions from 6-8 where needed.

                            But I think subs 9-12 play a much more important role than that. For a good case in point, just look at our series against the Pistons this past season. We were giving the Pistons all they could handle, even with an injured and short lineup, until Brown suddenly discovered that he had Arroyo on his bench.

                            Arroyo for god's sake. What was he? Maybe #10 in Brown's rotation. But voila... Brown inserted the bugger and he was more than we could handle. We couldn't stop his passing, his penetration and the few mid-range shots that he took. So, I think that Detroit's #10 player was the difference-maker. He may not have decided the playoffs, but he was the player who seemed to swing things to their favor.

                            But basically, I believe that your #9-#12 are the players that provide a different twist to your lineup. You put them in, and every now and then, you get lucky. And all they have to do is collectively have one of them contribute just enough to swing one game. One game. That's oftentimes enough to get you to the next round.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Too much depth can hinder growth...

                              Originally posted by Bball
                              But those guys don't even get that chance without the contributions of the main cogs.



                              -Bball
                              Of course they don't. My point is there are valuable contributions to be made off the bench during the playoffs....in key situations and gave noted examples... yeah , none of these guys would've had the opportunity without the Superstars....but neither would the roll playing starters.

                              The reverse is true as well.

                              Jordan & Pippen didn't win 6 titles by themselves, the Bulls did.....Shaq & Kobe didn't win 3 titles, the Lakers did.....Tim Duncan & whoever....you get it right?

                              I didn't say I completely disagree.... a 10 man rotation ain't gonna help you much in the finals.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X