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

***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

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

  • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
    What was the sentiment on here when they failed to pick up his option earlier this year? Can someone find the thread?
    http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...th-year-option

    Originally posted by PetPaima View Post
    edit : I doubt even 1 % of the people on the board knew about it either.
    Everybody knew. It's been discussed ad nauseum. And I wasn't even on the board for most of this season.
    This space for rent.

    Comment


    • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

      I love it when the Raps switch to a zone on us. When they zone with PG and Turner on the floor, we score. We have to make sure everytime they zone us, PG or Turner gets the ball.


      "Pacers will win 50 games this season" 07-16-2015
      "Ian will average 10-10 this season" 10-21-15

      Comment


      • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

        Originally posted by JimmyJames View Post
        His basketball IQ goes up in the playoffs. I think that is what drives me crazy. How many times has he dribbled the ball off his foot? Remember when about broke Derrick Rose's leg with the ball? I never seen a player go out of the game from the other players bad ball handling.
        He throws the ball away and into the crowd. Forces shots, takes bad shots, doesn't make the extra pass when he should. Gets stripped trying to Globe Trotter dribble.
        The the playoffs come and those things go away. Playoff PG is a smarter player. If it drives me crazy, imagine Vogel and Bird. When PG can take his Playoff IQ to the regular season, we are in for a treat.
        If he can play smart ball instead of "Paul Ball" in the regular season, will we get a even better Playoff PG? I bet Bird thinks so.


        Edit: Why do you guys think his I goes up in the playoffs? We know own he steps up his game. He is just one of those guys that goes to the next level, has a extra gear, when playoffs come.
        But his IQ improves. Why is this? Is he trying to expand his game during the season, then locks down for the playoffs? There has to be some reason his IQ goes up.
        In a vacuum, the regular season is too long at 82 games, and the games really don't matter. PG is more flexibility to do whatever he wants to. In the playoffs, things get real, and Paul understands that the showboating and hot dogging is not winning basketball
        Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

        Comment


        • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

          Originally posted by docpaul View Post
          Super happy for S. Hill, that he's peaking right as he's up for contract renewal. That said, if you look at the full resume, you'll see a mixed bag. He could continue to thrive, but I still think he has a lot to prove. Pacers have experience with this kind of scenario. Don't forget the parable of Austin Croshere.

          Not hating, just trying to balance the conversation. Not collecting the option year was a bit perplexing though given the evolving cap dynamics alone. Perhaps it was clearing the way for GRIII?

          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
          I thought that there were good stretches of games in the 2014-2015 season when he did prove himself. It's not like he all of a sudden showed that he can play in the last month or so....he has shown that he was capable of contributing in a meaningful manner prior to his demotion.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

            Originally posted by sav View Post
            I for one thought it was a bad move. I know there were some others along with me that thought, if we were going to small ball, Solo should have been our starting PF.
            In the thread asking for opinions on whether the Pacers should pick up his option, you said this:

            Originally posted by sav View Post
            They should not and will not pick up his option.

            Next season they will have CJ Miles and GRIII to man the 3 unless they can find a legitimate stretch 4. Then they will have PG-13, Miles and GRII. There is no room for Solo, he will struggle to get minutes, just like he will struggle this year. We will be able to find a guy to sit on the bench for less than $2.3 million.

            In my opinion, that would also be best for Solo. I think he is a decent backup wing and will be able to stay in the league for 10 years or so and average 15-20 mpg....just not with the Pacers.
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment


            • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
              The story was Solo said he wanted to go and then when he showed up he was a bit out of shape and looked disinterested IIRC.

              I will say this...as much as I like Solo it's not like he's irreplaceable. Pacers at least know a type of player they need to pick up. In fact a Solo type guy will probably be available where we pick in the first round. I know that's not much consolation, but it's the truth.

              Solo is still an 8th or 9th man. He's not going to make or break your team. I do like his attitude this season though.

              But it is probably worth asking, how much of that attitude may be because of his option not getting picked up?
              Overall, I agree that the type of Player that Solo can be replaced via the Draft or via Free Agency.

              The problem is that it will take time for a 1st round pick to contribute on the same level that Solo is producing ( as a solid 7th to 9th Man in the rotation on a Playoff bound Team ). Of course....you can find a replacement for Solo via Free Agency....but not at the same cost of the $2.2 mil Team Option that the Pacers declined to pick up.

              Then, there is the resulting "Path's not taken" because of not picking up the Team Option.

              - As a RFA after next season, we can match any offer that he gets going even if we are over the Salary Cap ( that's Cap Space we can't use if we go with a Non-Pacers Free Agent ). This will help in the long term beyond next season.
              - We can draft some replacement for him in 3 months.....but if we picked up Solo's Team option....we could have drafted another type of Player instead of one to replace Solo.
              - Unless GRIII or CJ or the 21st pick is the guy that will help in the bench on a regular basis as the 8th-9th Man in the rotation or the 21st pick , that means that we would have to spend Salary Cap space to upgrade our roster.

              I'm not suggesting that Solo isn't replaceable and that he was the "End all" to this conversation about who should be part of the core. I ( and many others ) are saying that we won't likely be able to find anyone to replace him and contribute on a high level for the $2.2 mil price tag that it would cost to have picked up his Team option. These are benefits and advantages to retaining him and that's the cost of not picking up the Team option for a rookie Player.

              Now, we have to find a replacement via Free Agency and spend likely more Salary Cap Space to find someone to do what he can do when it would have been nice to spend that Cap Space that went towards a bench Player ( probably $5+ mil ) towards getting a better Player in the Starting lineup.
              Last edited by CableKC; 04-30-2016, 05:39 PM.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

                And in that thread about picking up Solo's options (I'm about halfway through it), props to xIndyFan, Ace, CableKC, Dece, and Wage (so far) who called it right that we blundered by failing to pick up Solo's option ... at least it looks that way.
                Last edited by McKeyFan; 04-30-2016, 05:49 PM.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

                  Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                  And in that thread about picking up Solo's options (I'm about halfway through it), props to xIndyFan, Ace, CableKC, Dece, and Wage (so far) who called it right that we blundered by failing to pick up Solo's option ... at least it looks that way.
                  You're reading the thread differently. It feels people were wanting to keep him, because he would have been cheap due to the exploding salary cap. Also, he's a solid player that doesn't make or break your team.


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

                  Comment


                  • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

                    Originally posted by sav View Post
                    .


                    The past couple of seasons, Solo has always shot the 3 fairly well when he is the 4th or 5th option. As I (and others) have stated, after GHill returned the second time last season, Solo shot 37% from 3. This season when he started getting consistent playing time, he also shot in the mid to upper 30's from 3.

                    If he is on a decent team, he will be a good 3 & D guy that can give you 15-25 minutes per night and guard multiple positions.

                    I wouldn't be surprised to see San Antonio go after him.
                    Solo might be like GHill. He performs better when featured. The issue is, Solo is far less likely to be featured once this team gets to the point of contention.

                    Comment


                    • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

                      Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                      You're reading the thread differently. It feels people were wanting to keep him, because he would have been cheap due to the exploding salary cap. Also, he's a solid player that doesn't make or break your team.
                      Maybe for some of them. But xIndyFan was spot on:

                      Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                      This is a no-brainer. Of course you pick it up. Solo has NBA skills and is a jump shot away from being a 10 yr rotation guy. 2.3M is cheap.
                      Post #5 in a five page thread: http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...th-year-option
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

                        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                        In the thread asking for opinions on whether the Pacers should pick up his option, you said this:
                        See what happens when you get old? You forget stuff sometimes.

                        Thanks for posting and reminding me.

                        Actually, for the most part I have advocated Solo be the starting PF if we play small ball, but obviously I did not do that all the time.

                        Even in this post I said Solo can be a good bench player for 10 years, so I have clearly stood by that fact.

                        Comment


                        • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

                          I'll miss Solo too, but I'm waiting to see what Larry does with cash before I decide if this was an awful move. That 2.3 could come in handy this offseason.

                          Comment


                          • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

                            Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                            I'll miss Solo too, but I'm waiting to see what Larry does with cash before I decide if this was an awful move. That 2.3 could come in handy this offseason.
                            It'd better come in helpful.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

                              I mean, its kinda tough to blame Bird for this one. If anyone should be blamed, I feel like its Vogel.

                              We wouldn't have lost a whole lot by picking up his option, but that was still 2.2 million dollars that could have been used on someone else. From Bird's point of view, as of the time we declined it, Solomon Hill was not in the rotation. If we have a guy who isn't in the rotation, that money could be better spent elsewhere. So if ya'll want to blame anyone, it should be Vogel for playing other guys ahead of him. That said, when we did decline the option, I don't feel like many of us thought it was a big deal. Solomon Hill was AWFUL in Summer League and did not have a good start to the season. Obviously he has really turned his season around and become a fan favorite, but at the time this decision was made, he did not appear to be in the future plans.

                              I will miss Solomon Hill and I wish we would have kept him, but its not a Franchise breaking move - even if it certainly wasn't a good one.


                              EDIT: I'm not really mad at Vogel for this. I believe he had his reasons for playing the other guys over Solo at the time. Solo really did not look good to start the season.

                              Comment


                              • Re: ***TOR vs IND Game 6***Post Game

                                Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                                I mean, its kinda tough to blame Bird for this one. If anyone should be blamed, I feel like its Vogel.

                                We wouldn't have lost a whole lot by picking up his option, but that was still 2.2 million dollars that could have been used on someone else. From Bird's point of view, as of the time we declined it, Solomon Hill was not in the rotation. If we have a guy who isn't in the rotation, that money could be better spent elsewhere. So if ya'll want to blame anyone, it should be Vogel for playing other guys ahead of him. That said, when we did decline the option, I don't feel like many of us thought it was a big deal. Solomon Hill was AWFUL in Summer League and did not have a good start to the season. Obviously he has really turned his season around and become a fan favorite, but at the time this decision was made, he did not appear to be in the future plans.

                                I will miss Solomon Hill and I wish we would have kept him, but its not a Franchise breaking move - even if it certainly wasn't a good one.


                                EDIT: I'm not really mad at Vogel for this. I believe he had his reasons for playing the other guys over Solo at the time. Solo really did not look good to start the season.


                                What this team needs in the off-season is another player like Solo. Physical defender and can hit a shot once in a while. This team is going to win with toughness and defense.
                                Solo is about the only player on the team who fills this role to a "T". K Leonard was another that slipped through the Pacers hands.
                                What I love about Solomon Hill is that when he guards a taller player they generally cannot back him down under the paint. They have to take an off balance jump shot generally.
                                {o,o}
                                |)__)
                                -"-"-

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X