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

So... can we talk about TJ?

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

  • So... can we talk about TJ?

    I wasn't thrilled when we got TJ, and I thought the folks saying "top 5 PG" were nuts. But I expected him to be better than he's been, even without the injury issues. I thought ChicagoJ (who doesn't look at all like his avatar, by the way) was far too harsh in his early criticism of Ford, but so far his analysis has been right on the money.

    So what's up with TJ? I'm not sure we're much better with him on the court than with Jack, who I consider the ideal backup PG. I certainly don't like the two-PG backcourt that we keep running. Will he get better? Is this just a slump? Injury? Does it relate to who he's on the court with? He seemed to be playing far better next to Quis than Jack... coincidence?

    It would suck for him to lose a third starting job on 3 teams, but right now it's not out of the realm of possibility (and here I'm assuming that Jack's been getting the nod purely for health reasons).

    Thoughts on our "starting" PG?
    This space for rent.

  • #2
    Re: So... can we talk about TJ?

    He looked pretty good to start the season.

    "go go go" may be the problem.
    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


    • #3
      Re: So... can we talk about TJ?

      Originally posted by Bball View Post
      He looked pretty good to start the season.

      "go go go" may be the problem.
      Lots of players look good to start the season and then crater. It's usually an indication that they're not as good as their earlier performance indicated.

      Regardless, plenty of his difficulties are hard to pin on the system.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: So... can we talk about TJ?

        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
        ChicagoJ (who doesn't look at all like his avatar, by the way)
        Isn't my avatar Dick LeBeau? I'm waiting a couple more weeks to change it.



        EDIT:

        PS, I'll stay out of this discussion. You all know my opinion already.
        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


        • #5
          Re: So... can we talk about TJ?

          I think our offense is not well suited for TJ. He's not good without the ball and our offense is focused on him not overdribbling. He comes down and passes to a big in the high post and then he's pretty much useless because he doesn't cut well or have an excellent outside shot. When he's effective is when he breaks the offense and takes his man off the dribble, but this is exactly what O'Brien doesn't want him to do.

          I always assumed that TJ's play would improve when Dunleavy came back because our offense would spread the floor better. Since he's still battling injuries, we haven't seen if this is true or not.

          Another factor is that he seems to be better at passing to interior players after beating his man than at kicking out to open shooters. Since we have bigs who are not good at finishing around the rim, this is probably hurting his play a bit as well.
          "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

          - Salman Rushdie

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: So... can we talk about TJ?

            Please find me anyone who ever said that TJ is or ever was a top 5 point guard.


            TJ has been exactly what I thought he was when he is healthy - an above average starting NBA point guard. But he hasn't been healthy in a couple of months.

            I don't think O'Brien likes Ford's style of play though. Ford tends to want to dominate the ball and always make the scoring /assisting pass where as OB likes a point guard to move the ball and pass instead of trying to do everything off the dribble.

            I'm going to go searching for some early threads on TJ, because I don't think anypone ever suggeted he was a top 5.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: So... can we talk about TJ?

              Honestly, I'd rather not ..... I'm starting to agree with ChicagoJ, and that hurts my soul because I really don't want to on this. Yet every time he goes to the rim lately, I vomit a little bit in my mouth.

              Yes, it's that bad.

              -- Steve --

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: So... can we talk about TJ?

                i've been wondering about TJ - He plays as many minutes as Jack on most occasions, so I'm wondering if O'Brien's decision to bring him off the bench was due to his play, and not his back problems.

                Either way, color me disappointed thus far. If he ever makes it to the starting lineup alongside Dun, maybe we'll learn more.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: So... can we talk about TJ?

                  Originally posted by Pacersfan46 View Post
                  Honestly, I'd rather not ..... I'm starting to agree with ChicagoJ, and that hurts my soul because I really don't want to on this. Yet every time he goes to the rim lately, I vomit a little bit in my mouth.

                  Yes, it's that bad.

                  -- Steve --
                  I'm pretty much there with you.

                  TJ has been massively dissapointing to me, even before the injury. The only time he ever makes a differance IMO is when he is scoring the ball and frankly I just have never loved point guards who are scorers first.

                  As to losing his starting job, I think that has already occured. Yes, he still has some injury issues but I think it's pretty clear that O'Brien is going to start Jack. In fact I wonder if Jack will have a 48 min. game this year?


                  Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: So... can we talk about TJ?

                    Most of you are way, way underestimating his injuries - the man can barely walk and you are saying he has "some injury issues".

                    I couldn't find a thread devoted to him from eariler in the season - probably buried in the postgame threads.

                    Peck, TJ has always been a scoring point guard - that is what he does - that is his game.
                    Last edited by Unclebuck; 01-22-2009, 03:27 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: So... can we talk about TJ?

                      Originally posted by Peck View Post
                      In fact I wonder if Jack will have a 48 min. game this year?

                      If he does I guarantee it won't be in a winning effort.
                      "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                      -Lance Stephenson

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: So... can we talk about TJ?

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        Most of you are way, way underestimating his injuries - the man can barely walk and you are saying he has "some injury issues".

                        I couldn't find a thread devoted to him from eariler in the season - probably buried in the postgame threads
                        If he can 'barely walk' he certainly wouldn't be capable of running. Let alone blowing by defenders. I will never buy injuries as an excuse. Even with myself.

                        After I got shot, I have/had a 10 inch scar down my stomach. My friends knew this and we were playing a game, and as someone drove to the rim he pushed off on my stomach with his forearm. It hurt, and I winced in pain. He apologized, but what was my reaction?

                        I told him "if I can't go all out, or am too injured to play all out ... my *** shouldn't be out here, so don't apologize and play like you always would"

                        Same for TJ

                        -- Steve --

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: So... can we talk about TJ?

                          He can barely walk yet he's in for most of the 4th quarter during a blowout loss? I don't buy it. I think Jack is the starter and TJ was playing with the backups because that is what he is.

                          His quickness is useless when he can't finish around the rim. Either he misses a layup, or he throws a wild pass out from under the rim and it goes straight to the other team for a fast break the other way. This is all we see from TJ. This and his little pull-up mid range jumper which hasn't been going in that often lately.
                          2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: So... can we talk about TJ?

                            From what I can tell whenever Ford is on the court...I agree that he has the tendency to over-dribble the ball. IMHO, he has Flip Murray syndrome....where he tends to tries to do fancy cross-overs and show off some dazzling dribbling skills, but this tendency often leads to him losing the ball....dribbling it off his foot or dribbling into some dark corner of the paint where he's surrounded by the opposing Frontcourt.

                            He's the type of player that is an on-and-off type player. Depending on the team we play, he could dominate the other team simply cuz they have no answer for a super quick but small scoring PG.....but more often then not....I see that super quick but Small scoring PG has poor shot selection and often puts himself in a position where he will somehow turn the ball over.

                            But to be fair.....he isn't playing at 100%....which I think is still affecting his game.....so I will hold complete judgement on him until he's healthy ( if that ever happens ).

                            As to whether I think that he will be a long-term solution at the PG spot, I don't think that we have any choice.....it's going to be hard to move his contract.
                            Last edited by CableKC; 01-22-2009, 03:33 PM.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: So... can we talk about TJ?

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              Please find me anyone who ever said that TJ is or ever was a top 5 point guard.

                              I'm going to go searching for some early threads on TJ, because I don't think anyone ever suggested he was a top 5.


                              http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-...ad.php?t=40494

                              Originally posted by Merz View Post
                              Those [i.e., "Jay's" -ed] statements just reek of ignorance. Ford can run a team. He is arguably one the top five pgs in the league when it comes to being a pure point guard. Besides his size he is nothing like Travis Best. Ford will push it and try to make something happen not just pound the ball for 15-20 seconds. If you're going to make comments about a guy atleast know a little something about him.
                              Originally posted by Landry View Post
                              If Ford stays healthy, he's a top 10 point guard. Merz is right, he's a top 5 pure point guard and he can also give you 14-18 points a night, depending on minutes played.
                              Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
                              Good post I totally agree
                              Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                              This is the most excited I've been about a PG since Jax. He's potentially a top 5 PG, and if healthy, I expect nothing less. And I expect him to improve his shooting under JOB.
                              Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
                              I really wonder if any of these guys have seen TJ play before. His main weakness is his health. Nobody around the leaque denies he has the ability to be a top 10 or top 5 PG.
                              Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                              yep, pretty close.

                              Hollinger Stats: Player Efficiency Rating - Point Guard

                              1 Chris Paul, NOR
                              2 Chauncey Billups, DET
                              3 Steve Nash, PHO
                              4 Deron Williams, UTH
                              5 Jose Calderon, TOR
                              6 T.J. Ford, IND
                              7 Tony Parker, SAS
                              8 Baron Davis, LAC
                              9 Andre Miller, PHI
                              10 Jason Terry, DAL

                              ...oh snap.
                              Oh snap is right. My bball knowledge is second to lots of people, but I know what I read.
                              Last edited by Anthem; 01-22-2009, 03:46 PM.
                              This space for rent.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X