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

Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

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

  • #76
    Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

    Stuckey isn't a PG, that is for damn sure. He can get you through a pinch, but watching 20+ mins of it is u-g-l-y.

    I really don't care about Sloan's overall FG%, the Pacers need a PG with the ability to attack the lane and then find open guys. Stuckey drives looking for his own shot. Which is fine, if your role is a scorer, not so good if your role is a facilitator. He looks to get into the open space, to shoot the shot, instead of looking to occupy a help defender forcing defensive rotations.

    The staters offense looked much better with Sloan out there than Stuckey IMHO. The ball just moved better.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

      Sadly I have only been able to watch 2 games so far this year cause I moved out of the area. I have been listening to all the games so far. But too me, it sounds like Vogel is doing the samething he did a few years ago with the big guys. Let me explain, a few years ago he would have Lou and Tyler on the court at the same time which was a disaster. But just watching, you could see that Tyler played better with Roy and Lou better with David. Each one complimented each other.
      I see the samething now, Roy plays better with Scola and David with Lavoy.

      Solo has fell off since being moved to SG. Remember Paul a few years back, struggled at SG but thrived at SF. I keep hearing, Watson won't start cause Vogel likes him running the second unit and wants him to get comfortable there. Vogel needs to start Watson and leave him there when Hill returns. I think Hill will thrive at SG vs PG. Change the line-up for chemistry and what works. Forget starting "best talent". I don't see anyone on this team complaining about starting or off bench if the team wins.

      Start Roy, Scola, S.Hill, Stucky/Miles, Watson
      2nd Allen, West, Rudez/Cope, Stucky/Miles, Sloan

      Play players together that make the most sense, not what on paper looks best

      My 2 cents, agree or disagree

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

        Given the concerns about Stuckey running the point......should Vogel consider returning Sloan to the lineup to run the point?

        or

        Is Sloan more of a slightly better 3 pt shooting version of Stuckey?
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

          Originally posted by Peck View Post
          I stated this the other night to Trader Joe on twitter when he was saying how much we were going to miss Ian's rim protection, I'll take Lavoy's rebounding, scoring and overall bball IQ to Ian's rim protection. Bird will be failing at his job in a major way if he is not every single day trying to figure out some way to move someone so that Allen can get consistent legitimate playing time. All Allen ever does with consistent time is produce and generally at a high level.

          I'm not going to make a big deal of it but those of us that were there and were able to watch the bench can tell you we saw some of the same traits from Roy on the bench at times that we have seen in the past when he goes into a funk. I'm just going to write it off as a bad night and that he is still probably injured but if he goes into any type of long term funk I will look back on tonight and think it started here.

          But overall I'll say it was an entertaining game, far more so than the Atlanta game and once again I am not looking at wins and losses but I am looking at development. Hill had a rough night, Reddick started the game off on fire and it seemed to throw Solomon off of his pace so he didn't get the time he normally does but it's hard to blame Frank tonight because Solomon just wasn't on.

          Levoy Allen had massive development. He rotated guarding Jordan & Griffen and was nothing short of brilliant on both. His offensive rebounding in the second half led the rampage of our comeback and he showed once again how smart of a player he is with his interior passing and his solid pick setting. So we really got development from Levoy tonight.
          Am I the only one that prefers to be our future backup PF as opposed to the Backup Center to replace Mahinmi?

          If ( and when ) Scola is traded....I'd have no problem with seeing a Lavoy/Mahinmi Backup Frontcourt rotation for the next 2 seasons.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
            Given the concerns about Stuckey running the point......should Vogel consider returning Sloan to the lineup to run the point?

            or

            Is Sloan more of a slightly better 3 pt shooting version of Stuckey?
            JMO, but if Sloan was the answer, Stuckey would not be playing the point.

            I don't want to sound like I am trashing Donald Sloan, so don't read it that way. He is a good guy, high effort player that has made himself into a marginal NBA player. The truth is that is all he is. When he is shooting well, when he is hot, he is an acceptable choice. He has never been a good defender, certainly not against above average NBA talent. AJ Price was the same way. Shoot well, you can hold the fort until the guys that can play get back. Start playing day in and day out, your lack of talent starts to show up.

            Stuckey is not a PG. Kstat told us that at during the summer. His court vision is just not that good. But he is the best choice the B&G have right now. His deficiencies are aggravated by David's and Roy's injuries and poor play. Let's give the guy props for his willingness to do a job he is not really good at because the team needs him.

            The PG issue will be fixed when GHill gets back. Until then, the choices will only be poor ones. Frank is playing Stuckey instead of Sloan because that is the least bad choice.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
              Is Sloan more of a slightly better 3 pt shooting version of Stuckey?
              Even if he isn’t, I believe he’s a better distributor than Stuckey. That alone should make a noticeable difference.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                Given the concerns about Stuckey running the point......should Vogel consider returning Sloan to the lineup to run the point?

                or

                Is Sloan more of a slightly better 3 pt shooting version of Stuckey?
                I think we should allow CJ to start, slide Stuckey to the 2, and bring Sloan off the bench.

                It adds 3pt shooting, as well as some familiarity/cohesion with Hibbert and West.

                Edit: If you want to keep CJ as the PG off the bench for consistency reasons, then you have to start CJ Miles with Sloan. Either way, Cope needs out of the starting 5, and a shooter that isn't a defensive liability needs to be inserted.
                Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 12-11-2014, 12:56 PM.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

                  Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                  Edit: If you want to keep CJ as the PG off the bench for consistency reasons, then you have to start CJ Miles with Sloan. Either way, Cope needs out of the starting 5, and a shooter that isn't a defensive liability needs to be inserted.
                  Something to mention, for those who may get nervous about Sloan starting is that just because he starts it doesn't mean he should play 30 mpg. A few years ago Denver started Dahntay Jones at SG but he only played about 18 mpg. They also made the playoffs that year, as I recall.

                  We could start Sloan, play him about 18 mpg and have Watson come off the bench for the other 30 mpg.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

                    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                    I think we should allow CJ to start, slide Stuckey to the 2, and bring Sloan off the bench.

                    It adds 3pt shooting, as well as some familiarity/cohesion with Hibbert and West.

                    Edit: If you want to keep CJ as the PG off the bench for consistency reasons, then you have to start CJ Miles with Sloan. Either way, Cope needs out of the starting 5, and a shooter that isn't a defensive liability needs to be inserted.
                    I agree.

                    I would prefer to go with the below lineup:

                    Starting Lineup : Watson/Miles/Solo/West/Hibbert
                    2nd Unit : Sloan/Stuckey/Rudez/Scola/Lavoy
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

                      Originally posted by sav View Post
                      Something to mention, for those who may get nervous about Sloan starting is that just because he starts it doesn't mean he should play 30 mpg. A few years ago Denver started Dahntay Jones at SG but he only played about 18 mpg. They also made the playoffs that year, as I recall.

                      We could start Sloan, play him about 18 mpg and have Watson come off the bench for the other 30 mpg.
                      I just want to get away from the painfully slow starts. We seem so, out of sync at the start of the game. It's like we have no resemblance of a gameplan. I think Watson could help aid this, more than Sloan. No matter who starts, we need to get off to better starts if we want to have a chance to win games.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

                        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                        Stuckey was playing much better when he was playing at the 2. He's not a George Hill type of combo guard, he's a shooting guard. Both offensively and defensively. I hope Vogel sees this sooner than later
                        This. It seems some of these guys are not being played in a position that gives them the best opportunity to succeed. That's on Frank.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

                          Originally posted by sav View Post
                          We only have 2 healthy point guards on the team right now. It seems obvious to me that Watson should be starting with Sloan backing him up. That leaves Stuckey and Miles to man the SG, which is what they were originally signed to do. Solo/Copeland and Rudez would have to handle the SF spot.

                          I am ready to trade West and/or Hibbert. Not just for the sake of trading though. I still think we can get something of value. I still think West has 2-3 good years left playing 30 mpg or less. This year, I think I can live with Scola and Allen at PF. Then in the summer pick up a starting PF and resign Allen.
                          I think it'll still be hard to trade Hibbert. We couldn't get anything reasonable in the summer, and I doubt it will have changed that much. I'd be shocked if anyone would trade for West. 12 mil a year with a player option next year is a bad contract, and his effort kills his trade value.
                          Danger Zone

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

                            Originally posted by Rogco View Post
                            I think it'll still be hard to trade Hibbert. We couldn't get anything reasonable in the summer, and I doubt it will have changed that much. I'd be shocked if anyone would trade for West. 12 mil a year with a player option next year is a bad contract, and his effort kills his trade value.
                            A contender would probably love to have him. Problem is that there are no contenders in need for a veteran PF. Golden State has Lee, Green, Barnes, and Speights. Memphis has Randolph. The Hawks have Millsap. The Cavs have West. Portland has Aldridge. Clippers have Blake. Dallas has Dirk. Washington has Nene. OKC has Ibaka. I'm 100% pro-trade for West since he's not part of the future, but there's no logical trade partner.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

                              Toronto is a serious contender to win the East. They have Amir Johnson's chronically bad ankles + useful Patrick Patterson. West would give them another option and little bit different skill set...

                              Sacramento might want West to "upgrade" starting PF position - it's their Achilles heel. Of course, they will be out of playoff hunt if boogie doesn't recover soon...

                              Golden State may have a problem in their hands with Lee. Possibly better off by trying to trade him and keep current rotation running... However, not too many people here seemed to want Lee as a Pacer in exchange to West I'm lukewarm towards both..

                              Houston would be "maybe", but they don't really have pieces for trade.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Post Game Thread 12/10/2014 - Pacers Vs. Clippers

                                Originally posted by PetPaima View Post
                                Toronto is a serious contender to win the East. They have Amir Johnson's chronically bad ankles + useful Patrick Patterson. West would give them another option and little bit different skill set...
                                There it is! West to Toronto for Tyler!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X