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

Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

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

  • Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

    Let's just have a thread about the basic question because it seems to be the theme or undercurrent of a large number of the threads on posts this season.

    I haven't posted much so far this year but I've been lurking here and watching as many games as I can on League Pass and I've had some time to chew on our current situation.

    Just to get the point: this is one of those years where a championship run is out of the question for any reasonable objective observer. Even making the playoffs will be a real challenge. Having said that, I (as a fan) really would prefer to see this organization fight and compete and let the chips fall where they may, rather than tank and pretty much intentionally lose games in order to try and secure a better draft pick.

    I will admit there is a gray area here. I'm not suggesting you bench the young guys and forego the future of the team just to wring a few more quality minutes out of vets etc. like Carlisle and JOB were accused of doing in the tough years. I'm not saying you treat your trade and free agent situations the same as you would if you were in "win now" mode. But I just don't think this organization or this market is wired to endure years of intentional bad basketball so we can accelerate a rebuilding project. In fact I think one of the things I think Donnie Walsh did right in his tenure was to re-tool on the fly as much as possible instead of going into full tank mode and risk a slippery slope of losing seasons that can easily result in s chronic losing culture.

    I get that the fact that PG is coming back next year makes it very tempting to compare this to the late 90s Spurs when Robinson went down and they got Duncan. But even in that situation the Spurs got very lucky. And I also think it's really early in the season this year for so many of the forum folks to be automatically assuming we should throw in the towel this early.

    Personally I would love for us to get the eighth seed, fight hard, do something very clever with next year's pick (draft or trade) and proceed from there with PG back. I don't get why that would be so terrible. Some of you will probably think that is insane but I think in the long term it really is better for the franchise to always try to win and to generally have a winning culture.
    Last edited by rabid; 11-18-2014, 02:28 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

    Also watching a team that isn't really trying to win is just a drag. It gets old fast. Very hard to maintain an emotional investment. JMHO. So far this team has been the opposite of that this year and it's been great, even in most of the losses.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

      I will always be a Pacers fan. But I really, REALLY want for my team to be one that has (or is genuinely trying to instill) a winning culture.

      There are very few circumstances in which I would want the Pacers to lose a single game, never mind many of them. For me it's a matter of pride and principle. If it were the last game of the season, and a loss would give us the worst record in the league, I would desperately hope for a win to avoid that distinction. Even though it would mean fewer ping pong balls. I just can't bring myself to feel any differently. It's just not in my fan DNA.

      I don't begrudge folks who feel the opposite though. I understand my views may be perceived as a bit radical I suppose. As long as others respect my desire to see the team win every chance they get, I will respect their desire to see them lose. Lol.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

        I think it's because it's easy to see the benefit of tanking (having the #9 pick is clearly better than #10), but it's not so easy to see the benefit of making the playoffs (growth in players and coaches, but there's no easily visible number for that).

        What people don't realize is that lottery positioning just isn't that valuable. The Cavs for instance had 3 #1 overall picks in the last 4 years, but it took LeBron's decision to vault them into contender status. On the flip side, teams like the Spurs and Griz built their teams mostly without the benefit of high lotto picks. Scouting matters more than draft positioning. Everybody likes to point to OKC with their high picks, but the truth is other than Durant they absolutely nailed those other guys (Westbrook and Harden) when other teams were drafting busts at the same draft positions. And of course OKC drafts well outside of the top picks too (Ibaka, Jackson, Adams), so they would have been fine without top picks anyway.

        Here's a fun exercise. List all 30 teams in the league, and choose the top 3 players for each team. You'd be surprised by how many of those guys were drafted outside of the top 10.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

          Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?
          The way our guys have been scrapping and playing hard, I wouldn't be at all
          surprised if Vogel has them believing that they can compete for a championship.

          These players are a good group of thoughtful professionals who are coming
          out and trying to play the best basketball they can, and continue getting
          better at it; exactly as they should be doing. Any nonsense about being
          pointless to try, or tanking is an insult to their desire to win, their intelligence,
          their professionalism, and their desire to be the best that they can.

          What I've been seeing so far has been quite inspiring, and is a far far cry
          from being pointless. Now if there were a bunch of knuckleheads on the
          team that didn't care, then it would be a different story, and yes would
          be pointless.
          Last edited by RamBo_Lamar; 11-18-2014, 06:37 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

            Originally posted by RamBo_Lamar View Post
            The way our guys have been scrapping and playing hard, I wouldn't be at all
            surprised if Vogel has them believing that they can compete for a championship.

            These players are a good group of thoughtful professionals who are coming
            out and trying to play the best basketball they can, and continue getting
            better at it; exactly as they should be doing. Any nonsense about being
            pointless to try, or tanking is an insult to their desire to win, their intelligence,
            their professionalism, and their desire to be the best that they can.

            What I've been seeing so far has been quite inspiring, and is a far far cry
            from being pointless. Now if there were a bunch of knuckleheads on the
            team that didn't care, then it would be a different story, and yes would
            be pointless.
            This is what I was going to say but you did it so well.

            I will add both Miami and San Antonio won championships and neither of them had Paul George on their team. I think it can be done without him. That's why they play the games.

            Go Pacers
            Last edited by hoopsforlife; 11-18-2014, 06:52 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

              Originally posted by hoopsforlife View Post
              I will add both Miami and San Antonio won championships and neither of them had Paul George on their team. I think it can be done without him. That's why they play the games.
              Um, both Miami and SA had players who are better than Paul George. Might have something to do with that.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

                It's not pointless. Championship or bust would be an incredibly fun-sucking way to be a fan to me.
                Time for a new sig.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

                  Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                  Um, both Miami and SA had players who are better than Paul George. Might have something to do with that.
                  True but I am saying it doesn't have to be Paul for us. It may be someone already on the team or a player we trade for, or a draftee, who steps up and give us that edge needed to win it all.

                  We won't know who until it happens.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

                    Yes there is a point to try to win. Winning a title doesn't happen overnight. You need to build and develop a culture, and that is tough to do when you lose 55 games a year for draft picks.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

                      In all fairness this is absolutely the wrong forum to ask this question. By far and away our membership hates the idea of tanking and therefor you are not going to get an accurate representation of whether or not it is beneficial.

                      Tanking is a very common and widely respected way of advancing a team outside of the confines of the Pacers Digest. I listen to NBA radio all of the time and I can tell you without fail the majority of the paid columnist working for major publications either endorse it or at the very least acknowledge it as a legitimate way of improving your club. To a man every one of the NBA on TNT guys have endorsed the idea of not being mediocre and either going for it all or dropping back.

                      BTW, I'm as guilty as the rest of you are. I don't believe in the idea of tanking as a guaranteed way of improving the club, however I freely admit that around the NBA it is an accepted and even respected policy.

                      But to play devils advocate everybody wants to point out all of the teams who have failed with the tanking but none of us want to point out the teams who have refused to do it and have toiled away in mid level hell for years. The Knicks are the most prominent of these teams and even did it again this year by bringing back Melo at a max deal when many people argued they should have cut ties, cut contracts and attempted to rebuild through the draft and future free agents.

                      To me there is no one way to build a title contender, if there was everybody would do it.


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

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

                        Originally posted by Peck View Post
                        however I freely admit that around the NBA it is an accepted and even respected policy.
                        Accepted, yes. Respected, no. The absolute derision the Sixers get from the media should be proof enough. The "6-76"ers, they're being called now, etc. It's not a respected strategy by the actual NBA either - remember that the league tried to pass lottery changes that penalize tanking? It didn't pass, but the vote was 17-13 in favor, and a lot of the no voters voted that way because they were afraid of unintended consequences, not because they supported tanking.

                        The Knicks are absolutely a bad example for a so-called treadmill team. They re-signed Melo not so as to tread water, but in order to sign another big name FA next year when Amar'e's $23m and Bargs' $12m come off the books. That's pretty much the polar opposite of a treadmill strategy.

                        Let's consider some other teams that were more appropriately considered "treadmill". How about those Raptors? Lost in the first round last year. Their big offseason move was re-signing Kyle Lowry. It's early yet, but they're playing very well and leading the East, and it's coming entirely from internal development.

                        Or how about the Bucks, the poster child for treadmill teams. So ok, they drafted Jabari Parker, but he's been pretty crappy to be honest. He's not even their best young player! That would be one G. Antetokounmpo, drafted 15th (classic treadmill draft position). No, the Bucks are doing it with defense, which is strangely reminiscent of another Central Division team. The future is looking brighter for these Bucks, and it's not because of the losing they did last year (and apparently it wasn't deliberate - by all reports the Bucks were trying to make the playoffs last year).

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

                          Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                          I think it's because it's easy to see the benefit of tanking (having the #9 pick is clearly better than #10), but it's not so easy to see the benefit of making the playoffs (growth in players and coaches, but there's no easily visible number for that).

                          What people don't realize is that lottery positioning just isn't that valuable. The Cavs for instance had 3 #1 overall picks in the last 4 years, but it took LeBron's decision to vault them into contender status. On the flip side, teams like the Spurs and Griz built their teams mostly without the benefit of high lotto picks. Scouting matters more than draft positioning. Everybody likes to point to OKC with their high picks, but the truth is other than Durant they absolutely nailed those other guys (Westbrook and Harden) when other teams were drafting busts at the same draft positions. And of course OKC drafts well outside of the top picks too (Ibaka, Jackson, Adams), so they would have been fine without top picks anyway.

                          Here's a fun exercise. List all 30 teams in the league, and choose the top 3 players for each team. You'd be surprised by how many of those guys were drafted outside of the top 10.
                          But you are including all the teams that will never win a title, a better and more relevant game would be look at the teams that have won titles over the last 20 years and see how many of them did not have a top draft pick. You mention the Spurs but the anchor of that team was a high pick that happened because they had a terrible injury filled year a ton of luck and the basketball gods apparently deciding that Rick Pitino belongs in the college ranks and they needed to send him a sign.

                          Clearly LeBron was a high pick, Wade was a lottery pick as well. Tim Duncan has how many titles now? How many teams have a title without Jordan Shaq Kobe Dream Magic Bird Isiah all high picks. Do you know how many top 10 picks were on the Mavs.
                          Last edited by Ragnar; 11-18-2014, 08:47 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

                            Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                            and it's not because of the losing they did last year (and apparently it wasn't deliberate - by all reports the Bucks were trying to make the playoffs last year).
                            Yeah, their horrible record had a lot more to do with injuries than with a desire to tank.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Is it pointless to try and win in a season where you can't win a championship?

                              I will not watch a team that refuses to give any effort. That is the sole reason last year was so painful. You knew the capability and talent were there, it was the desire to win that wasn't down the stretch.

                              If the team didn't attempt to win any games, I would simply stop watching. No reason to pay for FSI at that point. So there would go one customer.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X