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

2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

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

  • 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

    SLOAN'S UP



    -VS-



    Game Time Start: 7:30 PM ET
    Where: The Barclays Center, Brooklyn, NY
    Officials: Rodney Mott, Mitchell Ervin, James Williams

    Media Notes: Indiana Notes, Brooklyn Notes
    Television: FOX Sports Indiana / YES Network
    Radio: WFNI 1070 AM, 107.5 FM / WFAN 660 AM, 101.9 FM
    NBA Feeds: NBA Audio & Broadband League Pass (subscription req'd)


    REMINDER: Per PD policy, please do not share a link to, describe how to search for, request a link to, or request a PM about streaming video of a NBA game that is not coming directly through the NBA. Not even in a "wink-wink, nudge-nudge, know-what-I-mean" round-about sort of way. Thank you


    25-23
    Home: 15-8
    East: 16-9
    12-37
    Away:  4-18
    East: 8-22
    Feb 05
    Feb 06
    Feb 08
    Feb 10
    7:00pm
    7:00pm
    7:00pm
    7:00pm

    HILL
    TURNER
    GEORGE
    ELLIS
    HILL
    LOPEZ
    YOUNG
    JOHNSON
    ELLINGTON
    SLOAN


    PACERS
    Ian Mahinmi - Back (questionable)
    Rodney Stuckey - Right Foot (out)


    NETS
    Jarrett Jack - torn ACL, right knee (out)
    Rondae Hollis-Jefferson - fractured right ankle (out)
    Chris McCullough - right knee rehab (out)
    Willie Reed - tight left groin (questionable)





    Brooklyn Nets Cannot Afford To Gamble On Themselves
    Jon Shames


    The Brooklyn Nets are in a precarious position as the NBA trade deadline approaches;
    should the team gamble on itself and stand pat?


    The Brooklyn Nets are hosting the Miami Heat in a matchup that would’ve been a must-see
    just two seasons ago. In 2016, this game is considered a shoe-in win for the now-LeBron-less
    Heat. It’s just your average Tuesday night trap game against a bottom-feeding Nets squad.

    With his team sitting in the cellar of the Eastern Conference, Brooklyn Nets owner Mikhail
    Prokhorov seldom attends games these days. Tonight is different, though.

    Now in the hunt for a new general manager and head coach, Prokhorov, who recently became
    the sole owner of the franchise, has promised to spend more time in New York, so as to be
    more intimately involved in the hiring process.

    While he watches the Nets notch yet another loss, Prokhorov sits in his owner’s box, donning
    his patented facial expression — one screaming of apathy — as usual.

    By the end of the game, the “Let’s go Heat!” chants have started. Two seasons ago, the
    famous “Brooklyn” rallying call was the hallmark sound of the Barclays Center. Now,
    Prokhorov listens, knowing that the pro-Miami cheers are more demonstrative of Nets fans’
    increasing lethargy than an improving sentiment among Heat fans.

    As the owner and now the face of the Nets’ front office, Prokhorov has to publicly maintain a
    positive disposition. Presumably, he understands the volatility of the fanbase right now, much
    of which can be attributed to the recent move to Brooklyn, which came less than four years
    ago.

    The Brooklyn Nets are in a dangerous position right now. Ultimately, the upcoming Feb. 18
    trade deadline is going to very much shape this team’s immediate and long-term future.

    Even in the tightly contested East, the 12-34 Nets have no shot at sniffing the playoffs this
    year. Brooklyn surrenders the ninth-most points per game, and scores the third-fewest.
    Injuries have ravaged this team, the most notable absence being that of Jarrett Jack, the Nets
    former starting point guard. Jack, who tore his ACL and meniscus in a game against Boston,
    will be out for the remainder of the season.

    Thanks to the now-infamous Paul Pierce trade, the Nets have no draft pick this year. They
    have more than $90 million in committed salary, much of that coming from the contract of Joe
    Johnson. Likely under the impression that they would’ve been a playoff team again (as they
    were last season) Brooklyn handed multi-year extensions to Thaddeus Young and Brook Lopez,
    both of whom are impact makers, but neither of whom are real stars.

    With no general manager and an unstable coaching situation, Prokhorov has to decide — and
    quickly, too –in what direction he wants to move his franchise. The ultimate question being, of
    course, whether he should level the roster before the deadline and start fresh, or stand pat and
    bank on Brooklyn’s huge market and the few pieces the Nets do have to bring in top-tier talent
    this summer.

    Lopez and Young are really the only two players on the roster with any noteworthy value. They
    have played well together this year, and could be a formidable pairing for a competitive
    Brooklyn squad down the road, should the team return to that point of course. Unlike most of
    their teammates, though, the Nets’ frontcourt pairing has considerable trade value as well.

    Lopez is having another solid season, averaging 19.6 points and 8.4 rebounds per game. He’s
    shown the ability to be a go-to scorer, and was formerly considered the best offensive center in
    the league. He’s also played the best defense of his career this year, an area that was once a
    huge red flag for prospective trade partners.

    Lopez was almost dealt to Oklahoma City at last season’s deadline for Reggie Jackson, but the
    trade fell through. If nothing else, the talks with the Thunder allowed the Nets to gauge
    Lopez’s trade value a bit, though it’s likely gone down this season, now that his contract is no
    longer expiring.

    Still, it’s safe to say that Brooklyn could bring in a first-round pick for Lopez. A skilled seven-
    footer is somewhat of a rare commodity in today’s guard-oriented league, so there’s likely a
    sizable market for a legit low-post threat and big body. Ironically, Boston comes to mind as a
    suitable trade partner.

    Young’s contract is more manageable, and health hasn’t been much of an issue for him. He
    probably wouldn’t yield a first-rounder on his own, but packaging him with Bojan Bogdanovic
    and/or Shane Larkin might do the trick. One first-rounder might seem a steep deal for two
    players, but this would be a salary-clearing move as well for the Nets, assuming they wanted
    to wipe the slate clean and start fresh.

    The more likely option, however, is that Brooklyn stays dormant at the deadline. Per
    Basketball Insiders:
    Sources close to the process say that there isn’t a lot of urgency to
    make a deal before the deadline. Instead, the priority is to get new
    leadership in place and let the future of the team take shape that way.

    That’s not to say the Nets wouldn’t do a deal, they’re just not overly active in looking for
    one.

    If this is, indeed, what the Nets elect to do, they would be taking an enormous gamble on
    themselves. The expiring contract of Johnson is an invaluable asset in this scenario. It would
    significantly contribute to a crucial $40 million in potential cap space that Brooklyn could use
    to pursue impending free agents like Kevin Durant and Mike Conley, both of whom have
    garnered significant interest from Brooklyn in recent weeks, according to ESPN and the New
    York Post, respectively.

    The free agency game is a dangerous one though. Lopez and Young have reportedly been
    recruiting for Brooklyn, but top-tier free agents seldom hop on board with a lottery team.
    The dysfunction of the front office is yet another surefire turn off.

    Then again, the importance of the market cannot be understated. While some argue that the
    Knicks are the true face of the Big Apple, Brooklyn is still New York City, deemed the “mecca
    of basketball” by none other than Durant himself.



    Still, the chances seem slim that Durant would spurn his Oklahoma City Thunder to begin
    with, never mind leaving his perennial contender to squad up with the likes of Lopez and
    Young. His hometown Washington Wizards (represented by two youthful and bonafide stars
    in John Wall and Bradley Beal) are sure to be calling as well.

    Conley is the more realistic target, but once again, it doesn’t seem very likely. The Knicks are
    going to be in the hunt for the point guard’s services as well, and the Knicks are considered
    to be far more stable than...CONTINUE READING HOOPS HABIT


    Pacers
    Candace Buckner @CandaceDBuckner
    Nate Taylor @ByNateTaylor
    Jared Wade @8pts9secs
    Tim Donahue @TimDonahue8p9s
    Tom Lewis @indycornrows
    Whitney @its_whitney

    Nets
    Mike Mazzeo @MazzESPN
    Nets Daily @NetsDaily
    Devin Kharpertian @uuords
    Tom Lorenzo @TomLorenzo
    Jeremy Gordon @jeremypgordon
    Ohm Youngmisuk @NotoriousOHM

    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

    Kudos on these game threads. I certainly appreciate the thought and effort that goes into each one.

    Thanks.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

      Well obviously George Hill wasn't to blame and in light of our newest thread...

      I BLAME PAUL GEORGE!!!

      Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

        Anyone follow Premier League soccer? Well if you do then as a Newcastle fan you will understand that I'm in foul humour for the night.
        https://twitter.com/DrogsNavan

        Change is neither good or bad, it simply is.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

          Really hope PG can bounce back defensively here. No one else to contain Donald Sloan.
          You Got The Tony!!!!!!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

            I love this Myles Turner thing they are doing on the pregame. What was he talking about when he was a kid they didn't have PlayStations? When he was their age I was putting in crazy hours into Crash Bandicoot.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

              Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
              I love this Myles Turner thing they are doing on the pregame. What was he talking about when he was a kid they didn't have PlayStations? When he was their age I was putting in crazy hours into Crash Bandicoot.
              I was in the #1 SOCOM clan haha. Best game ever.

              Actually, my name back then was PaCeR haha.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

                Originally posted by IrishPacer View Post
                Anyone follow Premier League soccer? Well if you do then as a Newcastle fan you will understand that I'm in foul humour for the night.
                I see where you are coming from :P

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

                  Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                  I was in the #1 SOCOM clan haha. Best game ever.

                  Actually, my name back then was PaCeR haha.
                  haha I didn't have Internet back then. I was just playing Crash Bandicoot, Tony Hawk, and the free demos they gave out at like Pizza Hut or something.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

                    Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
                    haha I didn't have Internet back then. I was just playing Crash Bandicoot, Tony Hawk, and the free demos they gave out at like Pizza Hut or something.
                    Crash Bandicoot was awesome. So was Tony Hawk.

                    My first gaming love was Sonic and The Lion King on the Sega Megadrive.
                    https://twitter.com/DrogsNavan

                    Change is neither good or bad, it simply is.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

                      Originally posted by IrishPacer View Post
                      Anyone follow Premier League soccer? Well if you do then as a Newcastle fan you will understand that I'm in foul humour for the night.
                      I'm a Leeds fan. You will find no sympathy here.
                      Danger Zone

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

                        Originally posted by IrishPacer View Post
                        Crash Bandicoot was awesome. So was Tony Hawk.

                        My first gaming love was Sonic and The Lion King on the Sega Megadrive.
                        They made a Sonic / Lion King mash?
                        Danger Zone

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

                          Was he lying down?
                          Danger Zone

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

                            Not even getting the game on fox here (Brazil, IN) It appears to have been preempted by Evansville vs. Wichita St. of all things? FML.....

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 2/3/16 Game Thread #49: Pacers vs. Nets

                              Monta Ellis legit just walked away from Ellington for no reason...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X