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

KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 4
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 template Next
  • #1

    KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

    http://www.wthr.com/article/kravitz-...hieving-pacers

    Understood, it's been just eight games, four wins at home, four losses on the road. Understood, the Pacers have six new players and have lost their three best defensive players – Ian Mahinmi, George Hill and Solomon Hill. Understood, the Pacers are attempting to re-invent themselves, morph themselves from a plodding, prehistoric half-court team to one that dreams of becoming the Golden State Warriors of the Eastern Conference.

    I understand this, too, understand it with great clarity after the Pacers avoided the ultimate hoops indignity by holding off the winless Philadelphia 76ers, 122-115, in overtime.

    The Pacers are desperately flawed and won't sniff 50 victories unless Larry Bird makes some moves – soon – to fix what's broken.

    I'll save Bird the phone call – he usually calls collect – and tell you what the Pacers need and need right now if they're going to contend for a top-four playoff spot in the Eastern Conference:

    -A bigger shooting guard who can defend and will take more shots than the mere 10 field-goal attempts Monta Ellis had in the three games leading into Wednesday's game.

    It's not that Ellis is so limited as a player, even though he's not nearly the player he was before he signed in Indiana. But when he's paired with another small guard, specifically Jeff Teague, he is a massive liability. There are a lot of reasons why the Pacers were 29th in the league defensively heading into the Philly game, but the lack of size and defensive ability in the backcourt is where it all starts. Ellis was especially spotty – being kind here – Wednesday night, finishing with nine points, six turnovers and a team-worst minus-five in plus-minus.

    -A rim defender/shot blocker coming off the bench.

    Bird knew this might be an issue, even after he signed Al Jefferson. Neither Lavoy Allen nor Jefferson is capable of guarding the rim, blocking shots or even altering shots. Right now, it's Myles Turner or…nobody.

    There's no time to waste for the Pacers' braintrust, not with Paul George looking at free agency two years from now. George needs to know the Pacers are going to be a player in the Eastern Conference, or he's going to bolt before you know it. True, this team looked interesting and fun and explosive on paper, but on the actual court, they desperately lack a defensive presence, a real dog like Ron Artest, Lance Stephenson or even Solomon Hill.

    Right now, the Pacers defense is like watching the Mannequin Challenge.

    And they knew it.

    Head coach Nate McMillan made no attempt, thankfully, to soft-pedal this victory or to suggest it was some kind of great accomplishment. The Sixers came in here without Ben Simmons, Nerlens Noel and Jerryd Bayless, and still took the underachieving Pacers to the edge of their worst loss in years. Who were those guys? Robert Covington. Hollis Thompson. T.J. McConnell. Gerald Henderson. And still, it took a Paul George jumper from the corner with 3.9 seconds left in regulation to send it into overtime.

    "(It's about) having fun out there," McMillan said. "I think we're still new to each other, and at times, I don't know if maybe we're afraid to show emotions or what, but it didn't look tonight like we were having fun."

    The one time Indiana played something resembling dogged defense in regulation, it came on the Sixers' penultimate possession. For 22, 23 seconds, the Pacers dug in, scrambled, switched everything, only to lose Henderson and watch him drain a late three that put the Sixers ahead by two points.

    "That defense was the defense we've got to play for 48 minutes," McMillan said.

    Exactly.

    If there was any good news – and it was like a Clinton supporter learning that she had won the popular vote – it's that struggling Jeff Teague finally looked like the guy we expected to be Jeff Teague. The point guard scored nine straight points down the stretch before George's game-tying shot, and generally showed why he will ultimately be viewed as an upgrade over George Hill: Teague scored 30 points on 10-of-16 shooting and had nine assists, his best offensive game of the season.

    RELATED: Read more from Bob Kravitz
    "I stopped thinking," he said, "and just played. I've been thinking a lot, trying to figure it out, and I've been hard on myself. Tonight, when Paul (George) got into foul trouble, I decided to be a little more aggressive and just play, not think."

    It's been a rough road for Teague, especially as George Hill continues to play well in Utah. But this is a new team for him. It's a new style offensively, one that's less free-flowing and more geared toward getting the ball into scorers' hands. It's a new style defensively; he noted that the Hawks tried to trap the pick and roll while the Pacers simply attempt to stay with and stay in front of the ball handler. And while Indy is his hometown, it's not always easy to come back home and deal with family and friends in your face and in your ear.

    "Definitely, especially the way it (the trade) happened and me and George being friends, but it's basketball wherever you play it," Teague said. "It's been very crazy and I'm still getting used to it, getting tickets before games, doing something here, something there, it's different. I had nobody coming to games in Atlanta, so I didn't even use my tickets…I say 'no' (to people who want tickets) and then you've got people saying `You've changed' and all that. But it takes time."

    When many of us looked at this Pacers team on paper, we liked what we saw. This would be a dramatically improved team that would win 50-plus games and earn a top-four seed in the Eastern Conference. Now, we've seen what they look like on the court, and even after just eight games, it's easy to see what needs to be fixed.

    The ball is in Bird's court.

    Time to let it fly.
    Sittin on top of the world!
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

    Hard to disagree with anything here, but we have all been saying this for a few games now. Nothing new.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

      Nothing about this team that keeping G3, trading Ellis for Teague and re-signing Ian wouldn't have fixed. This may well be the worst offseason Bird has ever had. IMO

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ahinmis-rehab/

        My concern with Ian was his back and now he has had knee surgery. A risky player to re-sign for the money he wanted
        {o,o}
        |)__)
        -"-"-

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

          Better even. Some of us over the summer allready mentioned our defence was going to take a big hit. Granted I didn't expect it to be this horrific, but I expected a pretty big gap defensively compared with last year.

          The backcourt has been widely discussed over the summer on here and it's probably not a surprise to pretty much anyone on here that Teague and Ellis are struggling massively. Teague is learning how to play with a whole new team and, offensively, he seems to become more into his own the past few games, even though his defense still leaves a lot to be desired.

          1+1=2. It's that simple and obvious that Teague and Ellis just doesn't work as a backcourt. Not now and not when the team is fully acclimated to Nate's game filosophy, etc. So, Ellis needs to go to the bench, while someone else has to take his place. C.J. seems the most logical, but I guess a case could be made for Rob-III aswell.

          As long as we get someone out there that can hit a 3 decently and can play some defense for his position. This also gives Ellis more room to operate in and be a factor with the bencsquad. That's not a bad thing IMHO. IF he throws a fit then bench him, ban him from the rest of the team or trade him. This is about what's best for all and thus the individual sometimes will have to make a sacrifice for the team to benefit. He's wealthily rewarded for his play, so he really should know what's right here.
          Last edited by Mourning; 11-10-2016, 10:49 AM.
          2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

          2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

          2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

            Originally posted by Cousy47 View Post
            Nothing about this team that keeping G3, trading Ellis for Teague and re-signing Ian wouldn't have fixed. This may well be the worst offseason Bird has ever had. IMO
            I've seen this stated a few times now, so what makes you think Utah wanted Ellis? I'm sure if Bird could have traded Ellis instead he would have.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

              Originally posted by HickeyS2000 View Post
              I've seen this stated a few times now, so what makes you think Utah wanted Ellis? I'm sure if Bird could have traded Ellis instead he would have.
              That offer was never on the table. We weren't getting Teague without trading Hill.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

                It's easy to say we need to upgrade at PF and a bigger SG, but it takes 2 to tango. I think the Pacers tried to trade Ellis over the summer for Gay but Sacramento rejected it.

                I think it is pretty clear that a Teague/Ellis; Ellis/Brooks or Teague/Brooks back court is too small to have on the court together for any significant amount of time.

                I think we have guys with decent size that can adequately handle SG. Stuckey, Miles and some GRIII. McMillan just needs to use them and limit Ellis minutes at SG. Let Ellis get the bulk of his minutes as back up PG.

                Hopefully Bird is on the phone trying to make a deal or two. With the signing of Jefferson we pretty much eliminated getting a rim protector in the second unit. We can live with that for now if we upgrade at back up PF and SG.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

                  Should have hired a better coach, imo.

                  Also need to bench Monta.

                  Sign Lance once he's healthy and drop GRIII who couldn't guard my grandma.
                  First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

                    Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                    Sign Lance once he's healthy and drop GRIII who couldn't guard my grandma.
                    And what's Lance going to do - blow in her ear ??

                    Yes - a move or 3 wouldn't hurt this team, but let's try to move forward - not backwards.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

                      I would keep tabs on Danny Green. He seemed out of sorts last season after signing the biggest contract of his career and had a poor season. Maybe a change of scenery will help him refocus. Kyle Anderson and Jonathan Simmons could cover his role this season while the Spurs could go after a major free agent like Hayward, maybe Blake, with Green and Manu off the books. I wonder if they would consider a protected pick with one of Miles, Stuckey, Joe Young or even Ellis.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

                        Have we tried calling orlando and begging for frank back? Just an idea
                        Lifelong pacers fan

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

                          Originally posted by Team Indy View Post
                          I would keep tabs on Danny Green. He seemed out of sorts last season after signing the biggest contract of his career and had a poor season. Maybe a change of scenery will help him refocus. Kyle Anderson and Jonathan Simmons could cover his role this season while the Spurs could go after a major free agent like Hayward, maybe Blake, with Green and Manu off the books. I wonder if they would consider a protected pick with one of Miles, Stuckey, Joe Young or even Ellis.
                          I think we only have about $4 million in cap space left so we couldn't trade Young or Miles. I doubt that San Antonio would want Ellis since his contract is the same length as Green...not to mention a little higher. Stuckey could be a possibility. They would save $3 million in salary this year and Stuckey is a FA in the summer.

                          The problem I have trading with San Antonio is that are very good at taking advantage of people in trades. Even when it looks like a fair trade, somehow the Spurs always seem to come out ahead. If they are trading Green, there must be more to it than meets the eye.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

                            Originally posted by sav View Post
                            I think we only have about $4 million in cap space left so we couldn't trade Young or Miles. I doubt that San Antonio would want Ellis since his contract is the same length as Green...not to mention a little higher. Stuckey could be a possibility. They would save $3 million in salary this year and Stuckey is a FA in the summer.

                            The problem I have trading with San Antonio is that are very good at taking advantage of people in trades. Even when it looks like a fair trade, somehow the Spurs always seem to come out ahead. If they are trading Green, there must be more to it than meets the eye.
                            Even if Green doesn't get back to his normal shooting percentages, his defence will be invaluable. I was thinking they might want Miles to replace his 3 pt shooting, or try to turn Young into a Patty Mills. Ellis could be a poor man's Parker, especially given the team's lack of playmaking. Lavoy Allen and others could be thrown in for salary purposes. But ya, Stuckey and pick would be ideal from a Pacer perspective.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: KRAVITZ: It’s not too early for Bird to make changes with his underachieving Pacers

                              For now move CJ Miles to the starting 2 spot.

                              Then look for trading partners for Monta, Stuckey and or Brooks. Use Seraphin as the back up Pf for more size inside with the bench...
                              I'm not perfect and neither are you.

                              Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the esteem of Elohim,
                              Ephisians 4: 32 And be kind towards one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as Elohim also forgave you in Messiah.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 template Next
                              Working...
                              X