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

Lower Seed = Better Chances? (opinion piece/article)

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

  • Lower Seed = Better Chances? (opinion piece/article)

    link

    Originally posted by imbtyler of Postgame Online
    The Indiana Pacers are currently struggling through a four-game losing streak, recently losing to the Miami Heat by 15 points, and beginning the second game of a back-to-back-to-back. Tonight, they face the Cleveland Cavaliers without Danny Granger and George Hill, which means Paul George will be starting at the small forward spot, and Lance Stephenson will be getting more burn as he (and the rest of the team) tries to find offensive and defensive consistency.

    At this point in the season, prior to the Cavaliers game, the Pacers sit at the sixth seed (at 17-11) in the Eastern Conference, a half game below both the Atlanta Hawks and Orlando Magic (18-11). Tonight, the Hawks play the Phoenix Suns, which will likely result in a win for Atlanta, despite their 90-99 loss on February 6; and the Magic face off against the Philadelphia 76ers in Orlando, which is really a toss-up. With Philly holding the third seed in the East (at 20-9), and having beaten the Magic once already this season, they are the favorites to win the game, which could potentially put the Pacers at the four or fifth seed by the next couple nights (performance pending).

    If you look at this from a “journey to the playoffs” perspective, the “schedule losses” that seem to negatively affect our record might not be as harsh and depressing as they seem. If the playoffs were to start tomorrow, and the Eastern Conference seeds were as I project them below, then the Pacers might have a better battle set for them than it looks. Though it would be nicer to have to hold the second or third seed, and be able to play the Celtics or Knicks in the first round, as opposed to the Heat or Bulls, I don’t know if there’s a safe spot for the Pacers to be in the Eastern Eight.

    Eastern Conference (projected/adjusted for games up to, but not including, 2/16/12):

    Chicago Bulls — 24-7 (no change)
    Miami Heat — 23-7 (no change)
    Philadelphia 76ers — 21-9 (projecting win over ORL)
    Atlanta Hawks — 19-11 (proj. win over PHX)
    Indiana Pacers — 18-11 (proj. win over CLE)
    Orlando Magic — 18-12 (proj. loss to PHI)
    Boston Celtics — 15-13 (proj. loss to DET)
    New York Knicks — 15-15 (proj. win over SAC)

    With help from ESPN.go.com’s (seemingly-outdated) NBA Playoff Predictor, I came up with these ‘projections’ for the first round of the Eastern Conference playoffs:



    For the Pacers, they are supposedly “evenly split” with the Atlanta Hawks as far as chances of surviving the first round. However, with the way we’re playing, that could end up being a heavily-played seven-game struggle that ends in victory, or a five-game “gentleman’s sweep” as the Hawks advance. Again, these results hinge heavily on the potential return of Al Horford, and the performances of key Hawks players such as Josh Smith, Joe Johnson, and even Jeff Teague.

    Besides the Pacers and Hawks, I can actually see the Knicks squeaking their way out of the eighth seed at some point this season, but if it came down to the Knicks vs. the Chicago Bulls in the first round, I don’t know if I can agree with the Playoff Predictor that the Knicks would manage to upset the Bulls. At least, not with the roster they currently have. If the Knicks actually signed JR Smith, or picked up someone who can perform at the SG position, the potential roster match-ups are kind of stunning:

    New York Knicks vs. Chicago Bulls

    Jeremy Lin vs. Derrick Rose
    Landry Fields/JR Smith vs. Ronnie Brewer/Rip Hamilton
    Carmelo Anthony vs. Luol Deng
    Amar’e Stoudemire vs. Carlos Boozer
    Tyson Chandler vs. Joakim Noah

    Based off these potential rosters alone, I would say that the New York Knicks actually have an advantage over the Bulls. It would be hard not to with Melo, Amar’e and Chandler alone, but if the Linsanity continues, and/or JR Smith signs in New York, they could easily give the Bulls a run for their money. In fact, adding JR Smith would be the one factor that might put them as the Miami Heat’s biggest contenders. With the same rosters:

    New York Knicks vs. Miami Heat

    Jeremy Lin vs. Mario Chalmers/Norris Cole?
    JR Smith vs. Dwyane Wade
    Carmelo Anthony vs. LeBron James
    Amar’e Stoudemire vs. Chris Bosh
    Tyson Chandler vs. Joel Anthony/Dexter Pittman?

    Though LeBron has the ability to make up for what they lack at the center and power forward positions (even with Bosh), I think that the Knicks line-up above, given time to mesh, could even take the Heat down in six games (a stretch, I know).

    Here’s the point to all of this nonsense: wouldn’t you, as a Pacers fan, rather the Pacers fall into a spot on the rankings (though preferably not this early in the season) that would allow for them to play against a team they KNOW they can beat? If, by some wild chance, Milwaukee or Cleveland step up into the sixth or seventh seeds (potentially impossible), then we would have a reason to keep rooting for the Pacers to win *every single game*. However, since any of the top eight teams in the East have the talent and ability to beat any of those other teams, and since it’s still the first half of the season, I don’t know what seed the Pacers would be reaching to stay at.

    Fighting the Bulls in the playoffs is kind of the dream that every Pacers player, fan, and staff member is hoping for this year. However, it would be much better to face them in the Eastern Conference Finals than early in the playoffs. There are many factors that can (and probably will) change by the time we actually get started with the playoffs. However, the Pacers would be better off playing against the potentially-Howard-less Orlando Magic, the aging Boston Celtics or even the Philadelphia 76ers, than getting dominated by the Heat and/or Bulls.

    So, winning and losing can fluctuate importance throughout the rest of the season. If the Pacers can stay about even (.607 currently), they could end up somewhere between the Magic, the Hawks, and the Sixers, by the end of the season. Taking into account that we will most likely be adding pieces to make us true contenders, we should be able to match up even better against these teams by the time the playoffs roll around in a few months.

    Currently, the mid-level, fourth-through-sixth seed is what we can bank on. The easier our battle in the first couple rounds, the better our chances are for having to face lesser teams deeper in the playoffs. The New York Knicks and Boston Celtics have potential to beat teams like the Bulls, Heat, and Sixers. And we have the ability to beat those teams ourselves. We just have to buckle down and get ready.

    I’ll post something new about trades and next year’s draft soon, based on who we need to bring in to make our team true contenders, or who we can realistically imagine doing so.

    Thanks for reading, enjoy your time.
    What do you think? I find this more as a way to cope with our current 17-11 record and 4-game losing streak, and what it could turn into by the end of the season. We're 6 games over .500 (.607 to be exact), and we can gain six wins over this next streak before the All-Star break. So basically, who of the other Top 7 in the East would you rather play in the first round?
    Last edited by imbtyler; 02-15-2012, 03:50 PM.
    witters: @imbtyler, @postgameonline

    Originally posted by Day-V
    In conclusion, Paul George is awesome.
    Originally posted by Slick Pinkham
    Our arena, their arena, Rucker park, it just doesn't matter. We're bigger, longer, younger, faster, and hungrier.



  • #2
    Re: Lower Seed = Better Chances? (opinion piece/article)

    Miami's the only team I don't think we could beat. They're just too talented.

    Chicago's very good, obviously, but I don't see them as being anywhere near "unbeatable." We hung with them last postseason, and we've hung with them this year. It would be tough, but we'd have a shot.

    Orlando's had our number of late, but we can beat them, especially with home court advantage, not to mention that Dwight may not even be there a month from now.

    Boston? Atlanta? New York? Philadelphia? Bring 'em on.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Lower Seed = Better Chances? (opinion piece/article)

      I really don't like the way we match up with Atlanta or Philadelphia.

      Those are two teams that for whatever reason just seem to have our number (more so Atlanta).

      With that being said, if we are going into the playoffs with some momentum and not playing like we are currently during this losing streak, I like our chances against anyone. If Vogel gets us back to playing smashmouth defense, which I believe he will, I see us being a team no one wants to face in the first round.

      We have to get back to the mentality of not being an underdog, but a team that EXPECTS to win every night. We've lost sight of that in the last week and a half. Once we get that back, I think we go places.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Lower Seed = Better Chances? (opinion piece/article)

        I think it's tough to predict how well we're going to match up against other teams because in my opinion we've been lacking consistency.
        When Granger hits his shots and plays defense and Hibbert plays like a tough center with serious post presence, we're a very hard team to stop.
        However, Granger tends to not really play lockdown D, care about rebounds, etc
        and Hibbert, well... tends to disappear, and sometimes gets bullied by other centers (who aren't always better than him)

        No matter how well our bench is going to play, we're going to have tough luck against any of the playoffs teams if Hibbert and Granger don't step their game up.
        I'm less worried about Granger because last year he had a really great playoffs series. Hibbert seems like too much of a wildcard though.
        Originally posted by Piston Prince
        Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
        "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

        Comment

        Working...
        X