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

Rosen: Pacers shut up Celtics

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

  • Rosen: Pacers shut up Celtics

    http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/3570804

    Pacers set tone as they even up series

    Charley Rosen / Special to FOXSports.com
    Opening any playoff series on the exhaling end of a blowout can be dangerous.

    Imagine how easy it would be for the Celtics to think that the Pacers were already done. In fact, during the unfolding of Game 1, Ricky Davis was telling teammates to get out the broom. Who could blame him?

    Even though Boston's final margin was 20 points (102-82), the action was much more one-sided — the Celitcs' biggest lead was 36! Moreover, the Celts totally dominated every aspect of the game even though their main man, Paul Pierce, was a no-show. (He shot 2-9 and only managed nine points.)

    For sure, the Beantowners would be ready to come out of the gate at full-speed, hoping (and thinking?) that after a few minutes the Pacers would be derailed. But how would the Celtics respond if Indiana absorbed their opening salvo and refused to surrender? After all, resilience has been the Pacers' by-word ever since the Assault in Auburn Hills. Would the Celtics have the gumption and the endurance to engage in an all-out 48-minute battle?

    Rosen: Pacers shut up Celtics
    Analysis...

    Let's break the game down into small and sequential skirmishes to see how the Pacers finally won the war.


    FIRST QUARTER — minutes 1-4:
    Here's where the Pacers tried (and succeeded) to establish a grind-it-out pace.

    Both teams executed their half-court offenses, but a pair of early Celtic turnovers gave Indiana extra possessions.

    For the Pacers, Reggie Miller was moving well and his shots were finding the hole in the bottom of the net. Stephen Jackson was also bombing away. The only dependable offense for the home team was provided by Antoine Walker in the low post.

    The Pacers played sturdy if unspectacular defense-while the Celtics lacked any sense of immediacy and their defense was late and lazy.

    After four minutes, the Pacers set the pace and led 15-6.


    Minutes 4-8:
    The Pacers double-teamed Walker and nullified his offense. Dale Davis had a bad spell-losing a gamble on defense that allowed Walker to score, missing a layup, and then fumbling a pass away.

    The pace was slightly quicker-the Celtics finally ran themselves into a break situation, but Raef LaFrentz missed an open jumper. Austin Croshere had a terrible time on defense and spent the rest of the game on the bench. Miller and Jackson were the Pacers' only offensive forces.

    Neither team distinguished itself on defense.

    The Pacers mostly controlled the pace, and for this section the score was tied 9-9. The Pacers led the game 24-15.


    Minutes 8-12:
    Jackson got impatient — in an iso situation he forced (and missed) an off-balance jumper. Jermaine O'Neal made his first strong post-move, and missed a jump-hook.

    The Celtics celebrated Second Wave (who had overwhelmed the Pacers in Game 1) took the floor — Ricky Davis, Marcus Banks, Al Jefferson, Corey Blount, and Delonte West. Davis' one-on-one forays juiced the Celtics' stagnant offense, but Jefferson was clumsy and ineffective.

    With Miller taking a blow, Indiana couldn't find anybody to put the ball through the hoop. Anthony Johnson missed two long jumpers, and Jackson was invisible. Indeed, the Pacers failed to tally a field goal during this stretch.

    The Celtics' subs weren't exactly lighting up the scoreboard either-but their persistent offensive rebounding kept them in the game.

    Still the Pacers' pace, but Boston barely won the battle by 7-6. (Indiana led overall, 30-22).


    SECOND QUARTER — minutes 12-18:
    The Celtics continued to clean the offensive glass. Jefferson was more lead-footed than ever.

    The slow-down pattern resumed, but the Pacers still couldn't find the range. O'Neal got fouled on a jumper (but the refs silently sucked on their whistles), and the contact with his extended right arm made him wince.

    Here was the home team's chance to open up the game-but Boston's subs were strictly a non-factor. The chance was wasted when Dale Davis tipped in a miss and then Johnson bagged a 3-ball.

    Boston gained ground, 8-5, but Indiana still set the pace (35-30).

    Minutes 18-24:
    Nifty interior passing by Boston netted baskets by Walker and Payton.

    The Pacers ran an old-time flex offense, but their picks were sloppy and no scores resulted. A bad pass by Ricky Davis led to a fast-break opportunity for Indiana-and Miller dropped a long 3-ball.

    Boston retaliated with treys by Paul Pierce and Walker.

    Miller went off on a spurt-driving to the basket and snaking home a layup, then posting Ricky Davis (and drawing a foul). But Jackson's offense was nowhere to be found. The Pacers' chops were boosted when Johnson hit a long 3-pointer at the buzzer.

    The tempo favored Boston, but they made no headway (12-12), and at the half, Indiana's margin was 47-42.


    THIRD QUARTER — minutes 24-28:
    This is a critical time in any game because the coaches have had a chance to make on-the-spot adjustments during the intermission. That's why the opening minutes of the third quarter basically match coach against coach.

    Doc Rivers adjustment was to unleash Pierce. Driving, shooting, popping, and even passing, PP dominated the putative defense of Stephen Jackson.

    For the Pacers, Rick Carlisle decided to emphasize Miller. That meant lots of motion, screens, fakes and flops.

    The game remained a station-to-station affair, and the Miller-Pierce mini-duel led to a slight advantage for Boston (9-7), yet Indiana maintained its lead (54-51).


    Minutes 28-32:
    When O'Neal mishandled the ball, the Celtics rushed up-court and tried too hard to make something happen in a hurry-all they accomplished was a silly charging foul on Walker. On another run-out, Walker hustled and tipped in a Ricky Davis miss. In their half-court sets, Boston continued to emphasize Pierce, who now abused James Jones.


    For the Pacers, the best news was O'Neal powering into the lane and hitting a pair of jump hooks.


    The game quickened and Boston surged (9-7), thereby reducing Indiana's margin to 61-60.


    Minutes 32-36:
    The Pacers were tiring. Their only points came on a pass by Miller to a cutting Jeff Foster, who hit a reverse layup and the subsequent free throw. Otherwise, Indiana was futilely launching long-range shots.


    Meanwhile, Pierce continued his assault with a big three and a pair of deuces.

    The pace increased by another step and Boston (9-3) looked ready to take control of the game (69-64).


    FOURTH QUARTER — minutes 36-42:
    The Celtics seemed to squander their opportunity by taking quick shots (Banks and Blount). Nevertheless, PP bailed them out with another barrage of iso-generated buckets.

    On one memorable sequence, Ricky Davis blocked a jumper by Jackson — and when the Pacers' swingman recovered the ball and attempted another jumper, RD smacked it again!

    The Pacers fell behind by seven big points and, needing a miracle, had their hearts broken when Miller missed a wide open 3-ball. PP was just too much to handle, and with O'Neal playing one-armed, the Pacers were doomed.

    Their hopes were lifted slightly when Jackson suddenly came to life with a rousing baseline dunker.

    The game slowed to a crawl (6-6), and Boston looked to have the game in hand (75-70).

    Minutes 42-46:
    The Celtics offense suddenly collapsed-Pierce never smelled a shot, and their only score was a trey by Walker. For Indiana, James Jones and Fred Jones were afraid to shoot and turned down wide-open looks. But O'Neal dug deep enough to hit another jump hook, and, later, to convert a pair of free throws. Johnson chipped in with a mid-range jumper, and the Pacers were back in business.

    This was the first fire-fight captured by the Pacers (6-3) since the opening minutes. Boston clung to a narrow lead (78-76).


    Minutes 46-48 — money-time:
    This was exactly where Indiana wanted to be-within reach to sneak out of Boston with a split.

    Jackson scored on a give-and-go to-and-from O'Neal.

    Then the most crucial sequence of all-Walker missed an easy layup, snatched his own miss ... and missed another layup!

    Johnson then drove through the entire Celtics' defense and put the Pacers ahead by 80-78.

    Another spotlight play-PP was fouled, but made only 1-of-2.

    Then guess who faked, dribbled, and hit a clutch shot? You got it! Money Time is Miller Time!

    And that was that. Misses by Ricky Davis (an easy pull-up from 15 feet), Johnson, and an errant 3-ball by PP just under the buzzer.

    The Pacers won the final assault (6-1) and the game was theirs (82-79).


    Indiana opened up and finished strong. In between, they were patient, courageous, and resourceful.

    After all, sometimes the tortoise does win.


    Charley Rosen, former CBA coach, author of 12 books about hoops, the current one being A pivotal season — How the 1971-72 L.A. Lakers changed the NBA, is a frequent contributor to FOXSports.com.

  • #2
    Re: Rosen: Pacers shut up Celtics

    Wow, that's a pretty good breakdown of the game. But he missed that awesome block by JJ on Ricky Davis!
    :thepacers
    No Linking to your own site if it sells something.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Rosen: Pacers shut up Celtics

      And he did say Johnson made the 3 at the end of the half when it was JJ who made it.
      "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 Miller

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Rosen: Pacers shut up Celtics

        I agree with him about the Jone's being afraid to shoot. There ws a play in the 4th quarter where they both passed up open shots, and the Pacers had to rush a shot up against the shot ****

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Rosen: Pacers shut up Celtics

          Originally posted by Unclebuck
          shot ****

          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Rosen: Pacers shut up Celtics

            That was a fun read.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Rosen: Pacers shut up Celtics

              Originally posted by btowncolt
              We battled the shot **** all night.
              Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Rosen: Pacers shut up Celtics

                Wow, that's a funny typo.

                Shot ****, huh? Sounds painful to me.
                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                And life itself, rushing over me
                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Rosen: Pacers shut up Celtics

                  Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                  Wow, that's a funny typo.

                  Shot ****, huh? Sounds painful to me.
                  Hilarious.

                  How about Ricky Davis retracting his comments about the sweep? What an idiot.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X