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

Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

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

  • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
    Because there isn't always an elite wing scorer out there to guard? Why not try to create Paul an offensive mismatch in those situations?
    I bet we'll be able to count the number of times PG is guarded by the opposing 4 on one hand. Pacers play in a conference with the Bulls/Cavs. Which would we rather see, PG guarding LeBon/Jimmy Butler, or Love/Gasol? Which do we see guarding PG, LeBron/Butler or Love/Gasol?

    I think this is where paper meets reality. On paper, it's easy to say it's going to create a mismatch. But in reality, opposing coaches aren't going to be dumb enough to have let a glaring mismatch happen. They'll force CJ/Chase/Solo to kill their 4s, long before letting PG do it.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

      I think the lineup Vogel proposed is very likely the Pacers most effective lineup. I just wish they would use it as a bench lineup and as the finishing lineup rather than the starting lineup. The bench lineup doesn't have as many post scorers so it becomes more effective there, and it's more efficient in the 4th quarter when bigs are tired defensively, and teams use less post ups offensively. The Pacers probably aren't going to be able to run 30+ minutes of this lineup every night, so why not stick it where it's most likely to be efficient?

      Also while I love where the Pacers are going philosophically, Paul George doing it gives me pause. I wish they had another big 3/small 4 to share the load. A DeMarre Carroll type player would be wonderful to have on this roster. Maybe Budinger can do some of that, but we'll have to see.

      Comment


      • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
        I bet we'll be able to count the number of times PG is guarded by the opposing 4 on one hand. Pacers play in a conference with the Bulls/Cavs. Which would we rather see, PG guarding LeBon/Jimmy Butler, or Love/Gasol? Which do we see guarding PG, LeBron/Butler or Love/Gasol?

        I think this is where paper meets reality. On paper, it's easy to say it's going to create a mismatch. But in reality, opposing coaches aren't going to be dumb enough to have let a glaring mismatch happen. They'll force CJ/Chase/Solo to kill their 4s, long before letting PG do it.
        That's a completely legit point. We will just have to wait and see.


        Comment


        • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          I bet we'll be able to count the number of times PG is guarded by the opposing 4 on one hand. Pacers play in a conference with the Bulls/Cavs. Which would we rather see, PG guarding LeBon/Jimmy Butler, or Love/Gasol? Which do we see guarding PG, LeBron/Butler or Love/Gasol?

          I think this is where paper meets reality. On paper, it's easy to say it's going to create a mismatch. But in reality, opposing coaches aren't going to be dumb enough to have let a glaring mismatch happen. They'll force CJ/Chase/Solo to kill their 4s, long before letting PG do it.
          This is all true, but there are still tons of offensive advantages/options with this sort of lineup. For one, it puts one less big in easy help position to stop the penetrating guards around the basket. That has quite a bit of value on it's own. The 3's in the lineup can run through off the ball screens or be the screener in a pick and roll, which both tires the opposing big man and also causes some open 3's or some juicy switches. Finally, the rebounding advantage for the other team is never quite as big as the sizes of the players would suggest because of one of the primary rebounders on the other team now being forced to rebound in space.

          Miles or Budinger trying to beat the big off the dribble is probably the least interesting effect, although you will probably see it occasionally. But the way it opens up the other spots on the floor is really helpful. It's also helpful that the one Pacers small guy who can't shoot from outside is the one guy the big man can't realistically defend, even on a switch.

          Comment


          • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
            They'll force CJ/Chase/Solo to kill their 4s, long before letting PG do it.
            Wouldn't you think that CJ/Chase pulling their 4s out to the perimeter is an advantage in and of itself? Are those 4s going to be able to use their size to prevent a 3 from dribbling around them when they close in to prevent the shot?

            The success of this is going to depend on whether the Pacers can hit a jump shot with even league average frequency. If not, the whole scheme falls apart, but if so, it opens up a lot of options.
            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


            • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

              Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post
              Also while I love where the Pacers are going philosophically, Paul George doing it gives me pause. I wish they had another big 3/small 4 to share the load. A DeMarre Carroll type player would be wonderful to have on this roster. Maybe Budinger can do some of that, but we'll have to see.
              Same for me. Also think they can use another 3/4 combo forward. Maybe it will be Chase, or one of the youngsters (Solo, Little Dog). More likely it will be someone we draft or sign next year.

              Comment


              • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                Wouldn't you think that CJ/Chase pulling their 4s out to the perimeter is an advantage in and of itself? Are those 4s going to be able to use their size to prevent a 3 from dribbling around them when they close in to prevent the shot?

                The success of this is going to depend on whether the Pacers can hit a jump shot with even league average frequency. If not, the whole scheme falls apart, but if so, it opens up a lot of options.
                Yes. But if CJ/Chase is being guarded by the opposing 4 and guards the opposing 4, wouldn't it be reality to say that CJ/Chase is the 4 and not PG?

                That's my point here, this change isn't really anything about PG except on paper.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

                  I would be surprised if all the quotes from PG are either writer's wishes or a tongue in cheek LB/Vogel smoke screen. LB does not and has not ever believed in one position players as described by sports writers. I really see PG taking advantage of whichever position is easier for him against each team and/or player he's facing at the moment. He will still line up opposite LeBron, Melo, etc. regardless of which position we want to think they are playing. I just wish he would stop trying to please everyone who questions him by overthinking what they're trying. Just say I'm up for it, it's something a little different, and we'll see how it goes.
                  I really expect to see PG play a bit at the 4 until Frank and Larry have a chance to see if any of our 'bigs' step forward to take over the 4 spot. If not, I would look for a trade by the ASB for a more traditional PF to shoulder some of the burden. Maybe Chase has one more good year left. Maybe Lavoy will decide to get into condition so he can play serious minutes for a change. Maybe Turner will want to be a 4 more than a 5. Maybe Whit or Solo will step up their game. It's early, folks, let's play at least one preseason game before we fire everyone and start over.
                  Oh yeah, welcome back Grimp! Trade everyone on the roster!

                  Comment


                  • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    Man the star is really trying to milk this as a controversy if you look at the headlines on their web site.

                    My opinion is pretty simple, it's too early to make comment however I freely admit that I do not like the fact that we are going into training camp and it seems like there is a disconnect between the star player the President of basketball operations. I just hope it is being overplayed by the media.

                    On the other hand while at face value I hate it, I really thought we were just going to play Paul spot min. there not start him. I am open to the idea of trying something new as well. If it works then who am I to complain. I just have to understand that stretch four is not just some phrase from the necronomicon used to raise the dead or something. Troy Murphy flat out ruined me on the phrase, however I have to understand that Paul will actually try and defend his man so there will be all the difference in the world.

                    Yes and USA Today picked it up and it has turned into a national NBA story. I don't think it is significant

                    Comment


                    • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

                      What's the point of moving PG to the 4 to create more offense and have Ian in there? Ian can't hit his free throws, can barely catch passes, can't shoot. And he was a good defender against mostly backup centers, not starting centers.
                      Paul George is still going to defend perimeter players. IMO Solo or Bud make more sense than CJ to try to guard his 4s. Streaky CJ seems a better bench player to me.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

                        I read some of the thread, but not all. Ignore me, per usual, if this has been discussed.

                        If Paul starts at PF his first 10 people he will guard is

                        Patterson/Johnson
                        ZBO
                        Favors
                        Illysova
                        Lee/Amir Johnson/Sullinger
                        Bosh
                        Love
                        Aaron Gordon
                        Lee/Amir Johnson/Sullinger
                        Dieng/Garnett

                        Of those players ZBO, Favors, Love, Bosh, Amir Johnson scare me. They will physically take advantage inside. But if a team thinks they can just back him down, it will slow their offense. And the overall pace of the game. We will give up more three pointers because I think we will be doubling the post more. Watch PG playing 3/4 hedge on the baseline and essentially giving the rim to the players where Ian/Myles will wait. The rotations better be crisp. If they are we might get more fast break points. But we will give up more open shots this year than with previous seasons will Vogel.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

                          Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                          I read some of the thread, but not all. Ignore me, per usual, if this has been discussed.

                          If Paul starts at PF his first 10 people he will guard is

                          Patterson/Johnson
                          ZBO
                          Favors
                          Illysova
                          Lee/Amir Johnson/Sullinger
                          Bosh
                          Love
                          Aaron Gordon
                          Lee/Amir Johnson/Sullinger
                          Dieng/Garnett

                          Of those players ZBO, Favors, Love, Bosh, Amir Johnson scare me. They will physically take advantage inside. But if a team thinks they can just back him down, it will slow their offense. And the overall pace of the game. We will give up more three pointers because I think we will be doubling the post more. Watch PG playing 3/4 hedge on the baseline and essentially giving the rim to the players where Ian/Myles will wait. The rotations better be crisp. If they are we might get more fast break points. But we will give up more open shots this year than with previous seasons will Vogel.

                          Bosh, Love, and Favors are not "physical" players.


                          Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                          Comment


                          • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

                            Originally posted by MvPlumlee View Post
                            What's the point of moving PG to the 4 to create more offense and have Ian in there? Ian can't hit his free throws, can barely catch passes, can't shoot. And he was a good defender against mostly backup centers, not starting centers.
                            Paul George is still going to defend perimeter players. IMO Solo or Bud make more sense than CJ to try to guard his 4s. Streaky CJ seems a better bench player to me.
                            As I look at our wings, to me there seems to be only 2 that are suited to try and be a stretch 4. PG has the length and Solo seems to be strong enough to have a chance to compete with the traditional 4's.

                            Out of curiosity, I looked at some of Solo's stats. Since GHill returned last year for the second time, January 23, by my calculations Solo was 31-83 (37.3%) from 3 point range and 152-363 (41.8%) from the field. He shot 82.4% from the line all of last year so I did not check his figures since GHill returned. It seems to me like Solo should get some strong consideration as the starting 4 in a small ball lineup.

                            Just an observation on my part.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

                              Originally posted by sav View Post
                              As I look at our wings, to me there seems to be only 2 that are suited to try and be a stretch 4. PG has the length and Solo seems to be strong enough to have a chance to compete with the traditional 4's.

                              Out of curiosity, I looked at some of Solo's stats. Since GHill returned last year for the second time, January 23, by my calculations Solo was 31-83 (37.3%) from 3 point range and 152-363 (41.8%) from the field. He shot 82.4% from the line all of last year so I did not check his figures since GHill returned. It seems to me like Solo should get some strong consideration as the starting 4 in a small ball lineup.

                              Just an observation on my part.
                              What about Budinger?

                              Solo is a very good roleplayer. He will get even better looks from deep with Ellis and PG in there and defensively he can hold his own. He can be our 3 and D guy that every team needs in their starting lineup. Thank you for calculating and sharing.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Candace unveils Vogel's projected starters GHill, Ellis, Miles, PG13 and Ian

                                Originally posted by sav View Post
                                As I look at our wings, to me there seems to be only 2 that are suited to try and be a stretch 4. PG has the length and Solo seems to be strong enough to have a chance to compete with the traditional 4's.

                                Out of curiosity, I looked at some of Solo's stats. Since GHill returned last year for the second time, January 23, by my calculations Solo was 31-83 (37.3%) from 3 point range and 152-363 (41.8%) from the field. He shot 82.4% from the line all of last year so I did not check his figures since GHill returned. It seems to me like Solo should get some strong consideration as the starting 4 in a small ball lineup.

                                Just an observation on my part.
                                Solo's the new whipping boy around here, though. You get crucified for saying anything good about him.

                                But seriously, I do agree with what you said about Solo once we got a competent and fluent rotation going last season. His three poor shooting improvement post All-Star break was one of the things that really stood out for me.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X