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

Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

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

  • Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

    In today's star, Wells gives the following two comments regarding our need for inside offense:

    The Pacers will be without O'Neal for at least the next three games as his shoulder heals. His absence leaves Scot Pollard, Dale Davis and Jeff Foster as the primary frontcourt players.
    There's a catch, though: None is considered an offensive force near the basket, which explains why coach Rick Carlisle is relying heavily on perimeter players to carry the offense.


    And one more:

    Carlisle said they need some type of inside presence to be effective.
    "We're going to have to be more selective and we're going to have to find some way to get the ball inside," he said.



    My question: where is Harrison in this discussion? He's not even mentioned! Why? This is becoming a bit of a concern for me. Maybe there's more to it than what we know. Any ideas? I'll list a few options below that come to my mind:

    1. He's not in good enough condition
    2. He's a rookie. Too many mistakes.
    3. His lack of conditioning is only symptomatic of a bigger problem of lack of work ethic in learning the system, studying opponents, not being serious enough, etc.
    4. His decent offense is overshadowed by poor rebounding and defense.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference


  • #2
    Re: Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

    Originally posted by McKeyFan
    In today's star, Wells gives the following two comments regarding our need for inside offense:

    The Pacers will be without O'Neal for at least the next three games as his shoulder heals. His absence leaves Scot Pollard, Dale Davis and Jeff Foster as the primary frontcourt players.
    There's a catch, though: None is considered an offensive force near the basket, which explains why coach Rick Carlisle is relying heavily on perimeter players to carry the offense.


    And one more:

    Carlisle said they need some type of inside presence to be effective.
    "We're going to have to be more selective and we're going to have to find some way to get the ball inside," he said.



    My question: where is Harrison in this discussion? He's not even mentioned! Why? This is becoming a bit of a concern for me. Maybe there's more to it than what we know. Any ideas? I'll list a few options below that come to my mind:

    1. He's not in good enough condition
    2. He's a rookie. Too many mistakes.
    3. His lack of conditioning is only symptomatic of a bigger problem of lack of work ethic in learning the system, studying opponents, not being serious enough, etc.
    4. His decent offense is overshadowed by poor rebounding and defense.

    how about
    5. DD is now on the scene and rather than play a rook, RC will go with the vet everytime. Especially a vet that plays defense and rebounds. THerefore David becomes the oddman out.
    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

      RC has never been a rook man, he will never be, never become.

      The "Curry" episode has shown that more then prolific.

      Hulk however will make his mark all by himself.
      So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

      If you've done 6 impossible things today?
      Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

        I like DH, he's going tio be a very good player. But he seems to have gained a little weight since his concussion, and he really does not deserve to play over even Scot Pollard.

        He has learned quite a bit this season, he needs to have a great summer of work, get into etter condition and then be ready for next year

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

          An article either this morning or yesterday morning pointed to the fact that we are actually scoring nearly two ponts per game more than last season, but that we are giving up nearly eight points more than last season.

          Yet, all you hear anyone say is that we are not winning as much because we can't score the ball.

          IMO, that's a bunch of crap. Our offense isn't pretty by any means, but the end result is still more points per game. We are getting beat because we have not been able to maintain anywhere near the margin that we achieved last season.

          And I think that's where Davis comes in. We need to stiffen up our defense, and not allow as many second chance opportunities and as many points in the paint as we have been allowing. Davis will get the nod over Harrison, and probably Foster, Pollard and Croshere as well. Even after JO is playing again.

          It is not a question of not playing a rookie, or Harrison's conditioning, attitude or anything else regarding him as a player. It's a matter of playing the best defender/rebounder available.

          The most positive thing I see about it is that Harrison, and even Jermaine, will hopefully pick up some of Dale's good habits. Because Davis is just as fundamentally sound in his rebounding as Foster is. If Harrison is smart enough to realize why Dale has been able to immediately start upon joining the team, then I think that's a good thing for both Harrison and the Pacers.

          As far as offense around the basket, I think that will improve with better chemistry between Davis and his new teammates.

          If we do happen to get Artest back this season, because of Dale's presence with Artest and Jermaine, I think we'll also a marked increase in the number of perimeter jump shots being taken by our opponents.

          You put SJax at SG and Freddie at the point (depending on Tinsley's availability), along with Artest, Dale and Jermaine, and that is one hellacious lineup, especially at the defensive end. And if Artest does come back, as long as the Pacers can achieve anything resembling chemistry, I believe we would be extremely competitive with any other lineup in the league.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

            Originally posted by McKeyFan
            In today's star, Wells gives the following two comments regarding our need for inside offense:

            The Pacers will be without O'Neal for at least the next three games as his shoulder heals. His absence leaves Scot Pollard, Dale Davis and Jeff Foster as the primary frontcourt players.
            There's a catch, though: None is considered an offensive force near the basket, which explains why coach Rick Carlisle is relying heavily on perimeter players to carry the offense.


            And one more:

            Carlisle said they need some type of inside presence to be effective.
            "We're going to have to be more selective and we're going to have to find some way to get the ball inside," he said.



            My question: where is Harrison in this discussion? He's not even mentioned! Why? This is becoming a bit of a concern for me. Maybe there's more to it than what we know. Any ideas? I'll list a few options below that come to my mind:

            1. He's not in good enough condition
            2. He's a rookie. Too many mistakes.
            3. His lack of conditioning is only symptomatic of a bigger problem of lack of work ethic in learning the system, studying opponents, not being serious enough, etc.
            4. His decent offense is overshadowed by poor rebounding and defense.
            Hmmmm..hadn't read that article. McKeyfan, It makes me wonder, too. Of course, number 3 comes to mind immediately. You would THINK Harrison would consider this a chance to showcase himself. The whole first impressions thing. If he establishes himself as a worker, hitting the gym hard and making himself into a specimen, that rep would go a long way towards giving him PT, for this year and the next. Not saying it's true, but that's a good theory.

            A deadset rotation of DD, Scot and Jeff gives us a whole lot of the same thing: offensively challenged guys whose only strength is rebounding and putbacks. That can work if they can dominate. Unfortunately we are dead last in the NBa is team rebounding. Dead. Last. We'e also ranked third to last in scoring. Something''s got to give.

            Do you go for relative steadiness with those guys, or do you throw in the wild card with room for growth in both categories with Harrison?

            You would think that he'd want to give Harrison a better foundation for the future by playing him.

            So then, it comes back to number 3. That seems a viable, and possibly disappointing reason. Could it be THE reason?


            It seems Carlisle is using the model in seattle for how to run this team. I don't think we have the inside strength to do it.
            Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

              I keep wondering about this...

              I mean, we all heard the rumors when the Pacers drafted him.

              He seemed to be intent on proving them wrong early in the season.

              He hasn't been the same since the concussion. But his minutes have been so limited that I can't pinpoint it; and maybe that's the point. Maybe Rick knows he's not in NBA-shape. But I still believe the best way to show him what "NBA-shape" means is to put him out there for a couple weeks at 20+ mpg so he gets the feel of just how much he needs to improve.

              We're already dead last in rebounding with those so-called rebounding specialists. I don't see how playing Harrison is going to hurt.
              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


              • #8
                Re: Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

                I think the problem lies in the fact that he makes too many fouls or, depending on your interpretation, gets whistled for too many fouls. Either way, that is certainly limiting his time on the court.

                I would say your option 2 fits the bill here and he will be much better next year IF he does the same this summer as he did the previous one, which is work hard and disciplined and learn. The only thing then is that its out of his hands to determine if he will play or not, that's Carlisle's job. And that is also about the only problem I have with Rick, let's hope he proves me wrong here, like he did with Curry.

                Almost every team has scored more this season. I think it has to do with the stricter calling of fouls at the perimeter by the referees (which I think is good).

                Regards,

                Mourning
                2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

                  Originally posted by btownpacer
                  Here's the reason why:

                  He's not an inside option. Even on a team that has only a marginal chance of just making the playoffs. Could he be someday? Sure. But he's not close yet.
                  Well, that's a good theory that would explain everything.

                  However, just personally, I'd like to see him be given a game or two to try. I've seen him make some nice offensive moves. I've seen him make some nice passes in the post. I've also seen him screw up a lot.

                  But the point of this thread is that JO is out, and we probably have no offensive chance to win (or barely) without somebody somewhere to throw it to inside who JUST MIGHT make some shots and who just might be able to throw it back out to the perimeter for some uncontested shots.

                  I agree...it's a long shot. But it may be the only shot we have the next few games. I'd like to see Rick take a chance and give Hulk the opportunity.
                  "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

                    When he came into the LA game, Mark and Slick commented how he didn't make a good showing in the previous game, including almost losing his shorts. Apparently somebody on the team had to talk to him about tying his pants.

                    "Can you imagine having to tell someone to tie their shorts?" - Boyle

                    Maybe now that he doesn't have to worry about his pants falling down he'll be able to contribute on a more consistent basis........
                    PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

                      True. The longer we hang around the eighth spot, the worse the situation gets for Harrison (at least in terms of getting meaningful minutes this season).
                      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


                      • #12
                        Re: Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

                        Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                        I keep wondering about this...

                        I mean, we all heard the rumors when the Pacers drafted him.

                        He seemed to be intent on proving them wrong early in the season.

                        He hasn't been the same since the concussion. But his minutes have been so limited that I can't pinpoint it; and maybe that's the point. Maybe Rick knows he's not in NBA-shape. But I still believe the best way to show him what "NBA-shape" means is to put him out there for a couple weeks at 20+ mpg so he gets the feel of just how much he needs to improve.

                        We're already dead last in rebounding with those so-called rebounding specialists. I don't see how playing Harrison is going to hurt.
                        I wouldn't read that much into it. We all knew he was gonna hit the rookie wall, sooner or later. Little did we know the wall would be Dantay Jones' elbow.
                        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

                          I agree with most of what has been said. I'd like to see Harrison play more, particularly in the absence of JO, just so we have somebody with touch under the basket on "O." But, Rick is a veteran guy. He has had better luck with veterans, and since we are late in the season I don't see things changing.
                          “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                          motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                          Reggie Miller

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

                            2 fouls in 24 seconds last night. Kinda answers some of the question, huh?
                            Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Why is Harrison not even mentioned as an inside option?

                              I keep reading everyones post on how we are dead last in the league in rebounding. Is that a recent trend? I could care less how we have been over the season. You have to remember that we went a good stretch of games without JO, Jax, Foster...
                              We will always be near the bottom because of the hole that was dug in the rebounding department during that time. I would like to know how we compare with the rest of the league over only the last X number of games that we have had most of our team. If someone gets that info and we are still near the bottom of the league when we have had JO, Scott, Foster, Jax...and even Dale. How do we compare in the games that we have had some semblence(sp?) of a team?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X