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

3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

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

  • 3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

    BEAT THE BARNEYS


    -VS-



    Game Time Start: 7:00 PM EST
    Where: Air Canada Center, Toronto, ON
    Officials: B. Adams, E. Dalen, C. Kirkland

    Media Notes: Indiana Notes, Toronto Notes
    Television: FOX Sports Indiana / TSN
    Radio: WFNI 1070 AM / Sportsnet 590 The FAN
    NBA Feeds:

    REMINDER: Per PD policy, please do not share a link to, describe how to search for, request a link to, or request a PM about streaming video of a NBA game that is not coming directly through the NBA. Not even in a "wink-wink, nudge-nudge, know-what-I-mean" round-about sort of way. Thank you


    36-22
    Away: 12-16
    East: 22-12
    23-35
    Home: 15-15
    East: 13-19
    Mar 03
    Mar 06
    Mar 08
    Mar 10
    8:00pm
    7:00pm
    7:00pm
    6:00pm
    HIBBERT
    WEST
    GEORGE
    STEPHENSON
    HILL
    VALANCIUNAS
    JOHNSON
    GAY
    DEROZAN
    LOWRY


    PACERS
    None



    RAPTORS
    Linas Kleiza - sore left knee (day-to-day)




    Jacob Frankel: How Has Indiana Crafted The Best Defense In The League?

    The Indiana Pacers are viewed by many as the only team that has a something close to a
    chance against Miami in the Eastern Conference Playoffs, and it all starts with their rock
    solid defense. Indiana’s is the number one unit in the NBA on a point per possession basis,
    per NBA.com, ranking significantly better (2.1 points per 100 possessions) than Memphis,
    the second best team. The Pacers allow the lowest at the rim shooting percentage in the
    league and the second fewest corner three attempts. Their style and defensive swagger
    is a throwback to teams of the late-90s, while the schemes are cutting edge.

    It all starts with personnel. Indiana’s starting lineup has played the most minutes of any
    five-man unit in the league and posted an incredible defensive efficiency of 94.4. As a
    reference point, the best team defensive rating posted in a season since the dawn of the
    three point era is 94.1 by the 2003-04 Spurs. Outside of Lance Stephenson, every player
    in the starting lineup is a plus player, and even Stephenson–prone to savvy off ball cuts
    –can recover with his athleticism. While the bench doesn’t feature as adept defenders on
    the perimeter, backup center Ian Mahinmi has been a mistake-nullifying rock along the
    back line.

    Some of the time, Indiana can get stops with their personnel alone. Here’s an example
    of stelar individual defense from Paul George.



    What’s the one sure fire way to stop a player from scoring on you? Well, don’t let them
    get the ball. That’s the most basic form of defense–ball denial.

    In one of its most important forms, teams deny the ball from getting to the pick and roll
    roll man. Called stunting, a defender on the wing or in the corner crashes down onto the
    dive man while this man’s defender is denying penetration from the ball handler. This is
    often poorly executed–if done too late, the roller gets the ball and finishes or passes to
    the open perimeter man. If done too early, the wing/corner man gets the ball straight
    from the pick and roll ball handler and has an open three. While the corner man gets the
    ball in the situation in the above video, Gerald Green times it perfectly so that he can
    both deny the entry pass to the roller and recover quickly to contest the perimeter shot
    by the outlet man.



    Another form of ball denial is fronting the post. The defender positions himself in front of
    the player he’s guarding rather than behind, in an effort to stop an entry pass from
    happening at all. If the man entering the ball to the post tries to lob it over the fronting
    defender, he has to deal with the seven-plus foot Roy Hibbert hanging around the basket.
    (Side note: the Pacers’ offense struggles with fronting defenses. Miami essentially
    nullified...CONTINUE READING AT HOOP CHALK

    Gameday: Pacers @ Raptors, March 1

    After losing two games with the mercurial Raptors clinging onto their faint playoff
    hopes, this game is as big as any this year.

    Indiana comes into town on the second half of a back-to-back after a tough loss to the
    Clippers. Apart from that loss, they have been playing quite well, with their only recent
    blemish being a loss to our very own squad at the ACC earlier in February, where Rudy
    Gay hit the game winner as the newly anointed Saviour. Remember those days?

    Roy Hibbert will be back, chomping at the bit after serving a suspension. Danny
    Granger is also back after a long layoff from a knee injury and is rounding back into
    form, albeit off the bench. He played about 19 minutes last night, and he may not play
    much more tonight if the Pacers are trying to be careful with him.

    Tale of the Tape

    Offensive Rating: Toronto 106.1 (12th), Pacers 103.4 (21st)
    Defensive Rating: Toronto 107.7 (24th), Pacers 98.9 (1st)
    Pace: Toronto 89.9 (25th), Cavaliers 89.9 (26th)
    Strength: Toronto ball control (3rd), Pacers (5th in Offensive rebounding)
    Weakness: Toronto Freebies (30th in Opp FTA/FGA), Pacers ball control (26th)

    Positional Breakdown

    Point Guard - Advantage: Raptors
    Again, Lowry is the better PG as he is on many nights, but will he take advantage of it?
    Hill is good defensively, but if Lowry can play the way he can it will change the entire
    complexion of this game. Hill can struggle with good defensive pressure, Chris Paul
    locked him up last night and Kyle held him to a 9 pt/5 ast performance in their last
    meeting.

    Shooting Guard - Advantage: Raptors
    Stephenson is one tough, mean player. The kind of guy the Raptors need, but at this
    point in his career he’s still not accomplished offensively. If DeMar can take away his
    shot, his FT totals suggest that he can’t finish at the rim, although he does have enough
    court vision to make the right pass. He will give DeMar a hard time on the defensive
    side of the ball, so it remains to be seen if DD can build on his very efficient
    performance last game (34 points off 19 shots)

    Small forward - Advantage: Pacers
    Paul George, so hot right now. It’s been a breakout season for the former 10th overall
    pick, but if there is a guy out there who has the ability to contain him, Gay would be it.
    George isn’t much of a slasher, he prefers to use his length to shoot, or drive and pull
    up, to shoot. If Gay isn’t required to help too much, he should be able to contest these
    attempts. Offensively for Gay, there were nice flashes of court awareness last game.
    Even if it didn’t translate...CONTINUE READING AT RAPTORS REPUBLIC




    Pacers
    Mike Wells @MikeWellsNBA
    Jared Wade @8pts9secs
    Tim Donahue @TimDonahue8p9s
    Tom Lewis @indycornrows


    Raptors
    Doug Smith @SmithRaps
    Holly MacKenzie @stackmack
    J.E. Skeets @jeskeets
    Adam Francis @raptorshq
    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

    Raptors republic guy "Pacers take this one on the strength of their bench..."

    Uhhhhhhh


    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
      Raptors republic guy "Pacers take this one on the strength of their bench..."

      Uhhhhhhh
      Wayy to do your homework dude...

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

        Knicks are going to probably beat the Wizards tonight. Need to win this game.
        "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

          Originally posted by rock747 View Post
          Knicks are going to probably beat the Wizards tonight. Need to win this game.
          need to win this game regardless of what knicks do.

          go pacers.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

            The Raptors offensive is heavily reliant on Lowry, DeRozan and Gay. I think that 3/4 of their Offensive Attempts come from those 3.

            GH, PG, Lance, Granger and DJ will have their hands full this game. I hope that Young gets some burn tonight as well.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

              Fitting the Pacers start with a turnover.
              "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                PG24 should take that to the rim every time on fast breaks...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                  GAWGE


                  @Coupe460

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                    Christ, George Hill, any time you wanna show up tonight...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                      Atta boy, Roy! God, Pacers missed that last night!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                        Wtf George.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                          I feel like now we are passing too much. West and Paul passed up like 3 good looks.


                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                            Pukeworthy offense tonight.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 3/1/2013 Game Thread #59: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                              Jump shots for everyone!


                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X