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

4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

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

  • 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

    WRAPPING UP A
    SLOW, STEADY MARCH
    TOWARD ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


    -VS-



    Game Time Start: 7:30 PM ET
    Where: Air Canada Centre, Toronto, CA
    Officials: Scott Foster, Sean Corbin, Justin Van Duyne

    Media Notes: Indiana Notes, Toronto Notes
    Television: FOX Sports Indiana / TSN
    Radio: WFNI 1070 AM, 107.5 FM / CJCL 590, 1050 AM
    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


    42-36
    Away: 18-21
    East: 27-20
    52-26
    Home: 30-9
    East: 35-15
    Apr 10
    Apr 12
    Apr 13
    Apr 16
    7:00pm
    7:00pm
    8:00pm
    T B D

    MAHINMI
    ALLEN
    GEORGE
    ELLIS
    HILL
    VALANCIUNAS
    SCOLA
    POWELL
    DEROZAN
    LOWRY


    PACERS
    Ty Lawson - Upper roommate infection (probable)


    RAPTORS
    None Reported






    Why the Playoffs Should Scare You: DeMarre Carroll's uncertain status
    Sean Woodley


    The Raptors are playoff bound. But as we've come to learn, the playoffs can be a scary place.

    After weeks of grasping at straws, trying to find minor areas of weakness that could give Toronto
    trouble in the playoffs, we've finally gotten to the serious stuff: factors that could legitimately
    derail the Raptors' hopes of making an extended run this spring.

    Individual opposing players, fixable defensive warts and a reliance on getting to the line might
    be small stumbling blocks once the playoffs get going in under three weeks, but the Raptors
    have too much talent to allow any one of those concerns to stifle them completely.

    There are however, legitimate reasons to fret about the Raptors' playoff prospects, if you're in
    to that sort of thing. Not only are there some teams that could cause the Raptors fits in a
    seven-game series, but there is the whole internal question of whether or not the team will
    even be at full strength by April 16th.

    Reason number four to be wary of the playoffs if you're a Raptors fan: the uncertainty
    surrounding DeMarre Carroll.

    Why DeMarre Carroll's uncertain status should scare you

    Accurate three-point shooting, an understanding of the value of ball movement and lock down
    perimeter defense were all elements missing from the 2014-15 Raptors squad that was
    unceremoniously swept in the playoffs by the Wizards. In response, Masai Ujiri went out and
    signed Carroll to a handsome four year contract. He was supposed to be the remedy for all
    those flaws.

    It hasn't quite come together as planned for the former Hawk. He's played in just 23 games
    this year, and was truly healthy for only a fraction of those games as he's battled a combination
    of plantar fasciitis and a knee issue which required a surgical scope for almost all of his first
    season in Toronto.

    Sans Carroll, Toronto has cruised throughout the regular season, but that doesn't mean the
    Raptors couldn't use all of the different elements he brings to the table. Though the things he
    does best haven't exactly been necessary cogs in the machine, Carroll's presence offers plenty
    of luxuries that could serve as keys to victory in the playoffs.

    Without Carroll's willingness to pass and impeccably timed off-ball cuts, the Raptors offense can
    become more prone to stagnation. Additionally, not having his near-40 percent three-point
    shooting manning the perimeter leaves the oh so important safety valve in the Raptors' offense
    slightly clogged. Norman Powell's scorching three-point shooting of late has been wonderful, but
    it's also completely out of line with how the rookie shot the long ball in college and the D-League.
    If and when the regression bug strikes Powell, Carroll's dependable accuracy will be a necessity;
    we saw just how crumpled the Raptors starting five can look when James Johnson started in
    place of Carroll for 30 games before Powell usurped him.

    When Carroll's defense is out of the lineup, you see flashes of the porous play on the perimeter
    that eventually contributed to the Raptors demise last season. Cory Joseph is a defensive
    maestro who has really helped to compensate for the loss of Carroll; Powell is good on the ball,
    as is Johnson -- off-ball, both guys are iffy; Terrence Ross is improved in terms of his focus and
    intensity, but is still inconsistent; and DeMar DeRozan has taken a noticeable step back on that
    end this year. It's probably not the fatal flaw it was when Greivis Vasquez and Lou Williams
    were the go-to guys off the bench, but Carroll is such a stabilizer. He relieves the defensive
    burden of everyone he plays with, when healthy.

    Lastly, without Carroll's positional versatility, the number of effective of lineups Dwane Casey
    can rely upon is diminished. The starting five has suffered all year, not just because of Carroll
    being out, but his presence would surely help boost it's poor defensive numbers. Casey's
    original crunch time lineup, the small look featuring Kyle Lowry, Joseph, DeRozan, Carroll and
    Jonas Valanciunas, was electric to start the year, but had it's momentum slowed when Carroll
    went down. Switchable defensive looks featuring Carroll, Patrick Patterson and Bismack
    Biyombo have been out of the question, as have shooting-heavy units that include both
    Carroll and Ross.

    Casey still has solid lineup combos at his disposal, but the selection becomes tantalizingly
    diverse when Carroll is available. As of right now of course, he is not. And that leads us to...

    How scared should you be?

    Fear Level: 3 red tracksuits out of 5

    In reality, Carroll's return probably doesn't alter the Raptors playoff floor all that much. With
    or without him, Toronto has a talent advantage against either of its most likely first-round
    opponents in Detroit or Indiana. Having Carroll around for a Pacers series to guard Paul
    George with the same tenacity he showed on the first night of the season would be a bonus,
    but the Raptors can probably eke out a series win against Indiana regardless of Carroll's
    status based on the pure talent present on both teams.

    The heights the Raptors...CONTINUE READING RAPTORS HQ


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

    Raptors
    Doug Smith @SmithRaps
    Holly MacKenzie @stackmack
    Sam Holako @RapsFan
    Adam Francis @raptorshq
    Joseph Casciaro @JosephCasciaro
    Blake Murphy @BlakeMurphyODC

    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

    @RaptorsMR
    DeRozan, Lowry, Scola resting tonight vs. Indiana. Carroll inactive on a back-to-back. Joseph, Powell, JJ, Thompson and JV start.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

      Alright, they are resting a bunch of players. Let's smack the living crap out of them and give them something to think about. Win by 23!

      Danger Zone

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

        Secure that playoff spot tonight!

        Valanciunas is in my top ten least favorite opponents.
        Last edited by LG33; 04-08-2016, 07:41 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

          Nice to see PG come off the screen ready to shoot.
          Danger Zone

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

            Nice acting by Vali
            Danger Zone

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

              Nice to see Myles getting some court vision!
              Danger Zone

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

                I'm not sure we can expect even officiating during playoff games in Toronto.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

                  Monta Ellis jumpshots. I hate them so much.


                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

                    Such a boring game so far.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

                      Sometimes this team is too unselfish.


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

                        Paul is the only guy trying to get Myles involved.


                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

                          Not terribly encouraging thus far...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

                            Great offense fellas

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 4/8/2016 Game Thread #79: Pacers vs. Raptors

                              I'll tell you what, the dynamic ball handling duo of GH and Monta just tears through opponents defense.

                              :shakehead:shakehead:shakehead:shakehead:shakehead :shakehead:shakehead:shakehead:shakehead:shakehead :shakehead
                              Danger Zone

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X