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 for 3/21/15 vs Nets

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

  • #46
    Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

    Originally posted by Peck View Post
    I certainly understand your point of view and well honestly share a lot of it. However it's just a little inflammatory to be honest with you. There are players on here if they were on, let's just say the Warriors for example, would be just fine and would find a role on their team.

    I just think it's safe to say that the mixture we have is no longer championship caliber and you have to wonder how close we ever really were.

    At the end of the day we were put together to beat a team that no longer exists (Heat) so now we get to see if Bird can change it on the fly again or if we are going to have to do a rebuild that will take a few years.
    The Pacers put a pretty good run together. They went to the E/C finals two times, and I really thought this was going to be there year but then PG broke his leg. But even as all of us look at next years season, which does honestly look a little rough- It seems David West just can't perform at a high level anymore which of course lowers the pacers ceiling, and as you said earlier we never were able to get a legit starting 2 guard. But even then- Worst case scenario consider this. If the Pacers come back next season and try with this current core, they're going to win a lot of games. Maybe not be true competitors, but I don't see how they win less than 50 with PG and Hill on the court. And so if that run ends with say a sub par season, say 52 wins and a second round loss, or maybe a third round loss? The Pacers will look at the 16-17 season with only G-Hill, PG and CJ Miles on the books. That's it.

    You're looking at the only 2 players you truly want on the roster to build a team a round, 2 guys that are really good, and nothing else. The Pacers could have a damn near instant rebuild in 2016.

    They are not sitting bad at all. If I was Larry, I'd let Cope and Scola go, try to fill in the frontcourt backup spots with Whittington and Lavoy and if it doesn't work? Good. Let's hit the free agent market hard in 2016 with one of the best players in the NBA, PG, as the guy to help attract FA's here.

    Not saying the Pacers are in the perfect situation, but considering they had a nice little run, and the fact that they are setup to do an almost instant rebuild is a nice position to be in.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

      Originally posted by mattie View Post
      You're looking at the only 2 players you truly want on the roster to build a team a round, 2 guys that are really good, and nothing else. The Pacers could have a damn near instant rebuild in 2016.
      Yup. In the big picture, I agree with mattie. Of course, future flexibility by itself does not guarantee anything, but we will have the tools (cap space and all our future picks) to execute a rebuild. This isn't a Mike Dunleavy-Troy Murphy situation we're trying to climb out of.

      I also disagree that a worst case scenario just played out this season. The difference at most is that we'll be drafting 11th instead of 6th, and I just can't get myself worked up about that. You know what the actual worst case scenario would have look like? Us trading Solo + next year's pick for a win now vet. Don't laugh - we did that just one year ago in the Scola trade. The point is that we let this season play out mostly without endangering any future assets (don't mention CJ Miles' too long contract to me LOL), which seems like a baseline scenario rather than a worst case one to me.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

        Originally posted by mattie View Post
        The Pacers put a pretty good run together. They went to the E/C finals two times, and I really thought this was going to be there year but then PG broke his leg. But even as all of us look at next years season, which does honestly look a little rough- It seems David West just can't perform at a high level anymore which of course lowers the pacers ceiling, and as you said earlier we never were able to get a legit starting 2 guard. But even then- Worst case scenario consider this. If the Pacers come back next season and try with this current core, they're going to win a lot of games. Maybe not be true competitors, but I don't see how they win less than 50 with PG and Hill on the court. And so if that run ends with say a sub par season, say 52 wins and a second round loss, or maybe a third round loss? The Pacers will look at the 16-17 season with only G-Hill, PG and CJ Miles on the books. That's it.

        You're looking at the only 2 players you truly want on the roster to build a team a round, 2 guys that are really good, and nothing else. The Pacers could have a damn near instant rebuild in 2016.

        They are not sitting bad at all. If I was Larry, I'd let Cope and Scola go, try to fill in the frontcourt backup spots with Whittington and Lavoy and if it doesn't work? Good. Let's hit the free agent market hard in 2016 with one of the best players in the NBA, PG, as the guy to help attract FA's here.

        Not saying the Pacers are in the perfect situation, but considering they had a nice little run, and the fact that they are setup to do an almost instant rebuild is a nice position to be in.
        I can and do aggree with a lot what you say, especially about the future not beying as bleak as it may seem now.

        I seriously disaggree with the assessment of how this team would do before the season even started. Last summer IMHO was pretty disastrous on multiple levels and dimensions and I never saw us reaching the Conference finals, yes, not even with a healthy Paul George. But, when he went down I went to us being lucky to make the playoffs.

        I btw don't think that one bad season will disrupt our winning culture as much as some, amongst us hardcore fans, seem to think. I don't think we would have instantly created and instituted a culture of losing if we would have failed hard this season by losing a lot more games (and gaining a much more enticing draftpick). There's just too much going for us for me to even come close to admitting to that.
        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


        • #49
          Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

          Roy Hibbert is a more than adequate starter. And since when is the most important barometer head to head with the other starting center. How about our opponents shooting % inside the paint? Does that not count? How about just having a big body in the lane to keep oppoents from getting in there.

          Look I am not a fan of big immobile centers, but I think to suggest that Roy is not an NBA starting caliber center is just wrong

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

            David West just needs Paul George.
            Time for a new sig.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

              Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
              David West just needs Paul George.
              The Pacers need Paul George, but it's unlikely that he's "Paul George" til next year.


              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                The Pacers need Paul George, but it's unlikely that he's "Paul George" til next year.
                I don't disagree; I still think my statement will be true next season.
                Time for a new sig.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

                  Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                  David West just needs Paul George.
                  I didn't realize that Paul George was a cure for age.


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

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    I didn't realize that Paul George was a cure for age.
                    He's a floor wax AND a dessert topping!
                    BillS

                    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

                      Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                      David West just needs Paul George.
                      Or to retire.

                      At the very least, he should be coming off the bench at this point for any team that hopes to win it's fair share of games. He's had his moments earlier in the season but has really worn down as the season has progressed. Understandable given his age

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

                        When do we properly absorb how sad West's fall off the cliff has been this year. Would he have been OK if he didn't hurt his ankle and miss most of the preseason?

                        Father time is still undefeated.


                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

                          Has West fallen off this year or did he fall off last year and playing with Paul George hid his deficiencies?

                          The combination of Paul George and Roy Hibbert covers up a lot of defensive lapses(mental or physical) and the presence of Paul George means West has 1 less guy to beat when he gets by his man. West is still nailing that jumper, but he can't finish in traffic the way he used to.

                          I'm not saying I think he's still a spring chicken, but Paul George helps a ton on both sides of the ball.
                          Time for a new sig.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

                            Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                            Has West fallen off this year or did he fall off last year and playing with Paul George hid his deficiencies?

                            The combination of Paul George and Roy Hibbert covers up a lot of defensive lapses(mental or physical) and the presence of Paul George means West has 1 less guy to beat when he gets by his man. West is still nailing that jumper, but he can't finish in traffic the way he used to.

                            I'm not saying I think he's still a spring chicken, but Paul George helps a ton on both sides of the ball.
                            To win a title, which is where we need to be thinking here, we need players who do not have to have deficiencies hid.


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

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

                              Even with PG im not sold this team is back in the ECF. Lance was addition by subtraction imo. Yes it could have worked out differently than it did for him in Charlotte but one will never know. What I do know is teams at times lose an All star/ USA type of player and still can make the playoffs.

                              OKC has lost KD for most of the season and still in the hunt out West, Bulls have been dealing with a myriad of injuries the past several seasons and still find a way to be competitive. My thoughts are this roster is flawed. Primarily due to the fact we have nearly half of our cap space (27 out of 63 million - team salary cap not lg salary cap of 76) wrapped up in two players that are no longer dominant at the position.

                              Obviously, West has regressed and Roy has plateaued. I have no idea what the resolution is, because even when the Pacers do acquire additional cap savings summer of 2016, there is not alot of potential free agents to pursue. Unless your under the delusion the Pacers are going to acquire a KD or Horford - I dont see where the talent upgrade is going to come from via free agency.

                              http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11...ents-2015-2016


                              Which leaves us with the draft, in which were not selecting high enough to draft a surefire difference maker.

                              My question then is, when West does retire, this season or after next, even with the cap room what player can we reasonably expect to be able to sign and truly make a difference.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Post game for 3/21/15 vs Nets

                                David doesn't seem to be able to get shots that he wants, like we've grown accustomed to him doing. If he's not getting set up out of the PnP, he's just about worthless. His shot% by location shows that he's getting almost 50% (46%) of his shots from 16ft out to the 3pt line. His career average getting shots from that location is 28%. So there's a pretty large difference in shot location.

                                His % of shots from 0-10ft are also well under career averages. And his career averages are lower than what we've seen over the first three years.

                                He's no longer BAMF. He's pretty much just a straight mid-range jump shooter right now, and even though his fg% from those locations are still strong, he's wildly inconsistent.

                                Really sucks though, considering how well he played in Feb. 12pts/8reb/4assists on 50.5% shooting
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X