Tweet
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.
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
-
"Pacers will win 50 games this season" 07-16-2015
"Ian will average 10-10 this season" 10-21-15 -
Re: IND vs SAC *Post Game*
Best game I've seen from PG in a long time. Loved the way he played tonight. -
Re: IND vs SAC *Post Game*
PG played well. . but nothing we did could stop Boogie. the man has his career high for Points against us.PACER FAN ON STRIKE!!!-The moment the Pacers fire Larry Bird I will cheer for them again.Comment
-
Re: IND vs SAC *Post Game*
PG started off trying to show off his loose handles. He knocked off the silly dribbles and lazy passes. Then he had himself a game. Best he has looked in a while. JHill had a double double. Turner got a taste of playing against Boogie. He handled it better than I thought he would.
Monta looked good out there tonight. He was moving well and his shot looked good. Joey Buckets got a taste of playing against Rondo. I am sure he will learn something from that, lol.
"Pacers will win 50 games this season" 07-16-2015
"Ian will average 10-10 this season" 10-21-15Comment
-
Re: IND vs SAC *Post Game*
Turner got some nice experience having to guard Boogie tonight.Comment
-
Re: IND vs SAC *Post Game*
The takes from this game :
1) Our only really good defensive big was DNP. Boogie took off. (Lavoy is a reasonably good defender against traditional 4s, but can't handle monster 5s nor very good small-ball 4s)
2) PG13 should keep playing with his brains. Today he did, wasn't just enough for a win.
3) C.J.Miles is shooting .313 in January and .193 on this current Western trip. Yeah, exactly the guy I would also like to keep taking shots every 3rd possession he is in for
4) Back to the planet Tellus -day for our rookies... Myles was manhandled and Young was completely out of sorts. That's good thing though... Nothing to worry about their long-term promise, but lowers the expectations for realistic level (for time-being). "Some" grimps here were calling GH3 & Ian total waste of roster spots and unable to carry Myles'/Young's jockstraps on proof of 3!!!! games run. LOL! Many talented rookies have great games straight off before they are taken seriously and their traits are known. Do you remember the 7th game of Brandon Jennings' career?Comment
-
Re: IND vs SAC *Post Game*
Rondo is a great defender. He flustered Young and kept him from getting the 2 man game going with turner. Well the Kings as a whole played great defense.
"Pacers will win 50 games this season" 07-16-2015
"Ian will average 10-10 this season" 10-21-15Comment
-
Re: IND vs SAC *Post Game*
I wanted GR3 to get minutes initially, but after tonight I don't feel he deserves them anymore atm. Would've much preferred starting CJ instead (even though he was awful) and have Budinger or Solo off the bench backup PG.
I'd rather just throw CJ out of the rotation but that isn't realistic and he isn't as bad as he's been lately (though I don't like his shot selection).
Myles clearly was still on a high from yesterday and had his worst game with extended minutes but still made a couple nice plays, a lot of rookie mistakes, but there's no way I'd trade him for WCS...he had a sneaky 5 blocks lol.
Glad to see PG have a really good game, maybe it can kind of get him back on track."It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."
----------------- Reggie MillerComment
-
Re: IND vs SAC *Post Game*
I realize that we could not guard Boogie, which honestly who in the NBA one on one can, but overall I thought our defense was good enough on everyone else to win.
Our offense though is an absolute mess. We have no ball movement, we have very little off the ball movement and overall our shooters can't shoot.
I know people are going to blame Frank and I will freely admit that he has to accept his responsibility in this, but do you honestly thing Frank say's he go down and on one side of the court dribble till we get to about 8 seconds and then someone come set a screen and let's see if we can't get a 12' fade away with double coverage. Although to be fair since Frank has arrived that has been somewhat of an MO for our team. But I still believe it is the players breaking the plays.
We have 3 of the 5 starters who like to dribble and go one on one and thus the ball just doesn't move.
Sigh....I'm not taking this loss as well as some of you are for some reason. Honestly I knew this game was over when MaClemore hit that three to open the game. I am just so sick of getting blown out in the beginning of every game and then have to scrape and crawl to get back in the game only to never be able to get over the hump because we cannot score enough points or stop them from scoring.
Also while I'm bitter I might as well get this out there as well. I realize that Miles is struggling, that is really like saying the Titanic had some leakage issues, and I know you have to let shooters shoot their way out of their slump. But IMO you do NOT do it when it kills your team. He is so bad right now he is a net negative when he is on the floor and honestly I though there were times in the 3rd quarter we could have gotten back in the game only to have him throw up some really really crappy shot that hit nothing. He should have been pulled and Solo or hell Chase should have come in. Also not that I mind them sitting but is GR3 really doing anything to earn his playing time? I remember early in the season he was scoring and hitting athletic shots, now he just cannot score to save his life and has been made to look foolish when he has gone up for what should have been an athletic play.
Sadly this is another game that will go down as a loss that LaVoy Allen actually played very well. I still think we are going to make the playoffs but right now I think we are in a tailspin and I hope we can get out of it before we find ourselves in the 8th seed and stuck there for the rest of the season. Fortunately several other teams who were around us are having issues as well but we really are in a mess because it is over halfway through the season and we still have no idea who we are.
Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13Comment
-
Re: IND vs SAC *Post Game*
Yeah, he's got the bumps and bruises to remind him of the experience as well.Originally posted by cdash View Post
I was legitimately concerned that Cousins was going to bully ball Myles a little too much and that Myles would somehow get injured. I'd rather have Lavoy or Jordan guard him. I get that he has to learn to deal with Players like Cousins....but the guy just pushes/bumps his way to the paint just to get in position.Last edited by CableKC; 01-24-2016, 01:44 AM.Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.Comment
-
Re: IND vs SAC *Post Game*
This new starting lineup of Ellis/GR3/PG/Allen/J.Hill is a dumpster fire and needs to not be used any more. It's been destroyed just about any time it's been played.Originally posted by Peck View Post"It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."
----------------- Reggie MillerComment
-
Re: IND vs SAC *Post Game*
Myles needed a little physical play. That dude is pretty soft.Originally posted by CableKC View PostYeah, he's got the bumps and bruises to remind him of the experience as well.
I was legitimately concerned that Cousins was going to bully ball Myles a little too much and that Myles would somehow get injured. I'd rather have Lavoy or Jordan guard him. I get that he has to learn to deal with Players like Cousins....but the guy just pushes/bumps his way to the paint just to get in position.Comment
-
Re: IND vs SAC *Post Game*
CJ Miles is not a good shooter over his career. He's been borderline adequate.
It's only right tht his way over average start to the year was followed by an even worse slump making his numbers match his career numbers.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.
Comment
-
Re: IND vs SAC *Post Game*
It's not tht he is tht bad of a shooter but he's just got the worst shot selection to shooting % ratio in the NBA.
Also a smaller complaint but G Hill always pushes the ball down court just to hit the paint w/ momentum so he can then retreat back to the outside. I like Hill & want him to stay but a light went off tonight tht said he will not ever lead us to true contender status as a PG.
Everyone including Hill himself has been saying he's a 2 gaurd for years. Can we please stop making him a PG? PLEASE?!
Ellis was out assisting him much of the year. The same Ellis known only as a pure scorer, was getting more dimes as a 2 guard.
Hill or Ellis need to be a bench 2 guard & the other a starting 2.
Hill does NOT need to be a PGLast edited by larry; 01-24-2016, 01:58 AM.1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.
Comment
-
Re: IND vs SAC *Post Game*
It's amazing what seeing the game in person let's you see. I'm generally pretty positive about the Pacers. But tonight I must say they got me down. It's not cause we lost. The Kings are playing good ball, Cousins is a beast and our best big defender is out. I knew he would have a monster game.
What has me down is the body language and attitude this team has. And quite frankly, it starts with the coach. I love Frank. Hesbdone a great job coaching the Pacers. But it has become very clear he cannot design or install a decent offense. The players deserve much blame in this as well. As does Bird for all the micromanaging. We have a team of me first players. Not one guy on this team is a pass first player. We don't run plays. The Kings had to run three times the amount of plays we did. Karl and rondo constantly calling things out. Rondo literally stood at the top of the key, not even dribbling, but just waiting for the play to run its course and he delivers a dime to Cousins at the rim. Our team has no patience and each player is too selfish. We rarely make the extra pass. And every guy knows it. That's why movement is so ******. Because what's the point in running around the sloppy screen when the guy who has the ball is just gonna shoot anyways?
PG had a pretty good game, but man he didn't look happy at any point in the game. It looked like he felt he had no help out there. Like the game was just a lost cause. And this was from the start. I think Monta is probably the only guy on the team who brings a consistent effort every night. He kept us in it in the first half. PG took over in the second.
PG just looked dejected out there. Any time he walked back to the bench at a time out, it was very disappointing to see. And I don't say that because I think PG should feel differently. But because its completely valid.
Our front court contains two NBA players. One is currently hurt. The other is a rookie. Lavoy Allen was so in over his head it wasn't even funny. His first half was abysmal. Jordan hill was a blackhole early on. These two guys just aren't cut out for the roles we have them playing.
Also for the love of God can someone please box out?! I think this is where we miss Hibbert the most. I dont care what his individual rebound numbers were. Roy would box out the opponents best big man and the Pacers were a great rebounding team because of it. This frontcourt is weak as hell.
Also why is CJ Miles playing? He did not one positive thing tonight. He jacked up multiple shots with 20+ left on the shot clock. He couldn't shoot at all, couldn't catch, couldn't dribble. He had 0 business being out there.
This is the first time I've really am questioning Frank. His rotations aren't making sense. He's too strict on taking X player out at Y minute mark. Monta hits 2 threes in the first and gets the score close and is immediately taken out because its that time. In the third when PG gets cooking, he subs CJ in for him rather than riding his best player. Either whatever Frank is coaching offensively is wrong, or the players just aren't listening. Either way Frank needs to fix it.
Comment
Comment