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

2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

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

  • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

    Originally posted by Shade View Post
    So, you don't think Cleveland would be a significantly weaker team without Thompson, Smith, and Korver? And that's just to bring them back to the lux tax level, nevermind the actual cap.

    .
    No. Korver makes them about 1% better than Shumpert or James Jones or whoever else they can find for cheap to knock down wide open threes. Thompson makes them about 5% better than pretty much anyone they could find for cheap to do nothing but grab rebounds all game and set screen and rolls. Neither of those players are difference makers. Occasionally Korver will catch fire sure but he isn't an every night threat anymore. JR Smith was the knucklehead nobody else in the NBA wanted to touch with a 10-foot pole before the cavs traded for him.

    You know who makes them look as good as they are? LeBron. No one else was beating down the door to acquire Smith or Thompson 3 years ago and Korver is well past his prime.

    This Cavs team is 80% Lebron, 10% Kyrie, 4% Kevin love and 1% everyone else. It's the world's greatest playmaker surrounded by one great one-on-one player, one undersized garbage pail guy, one really good stretch four and 10 other 1-dimensional 3-point shooters that are a dime a dozen.
    Last edited by Kstat; 05-08-2017, 06:27 PM.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

    Comment


    • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
      No. Korver makes them about 1% better than Shumpert or James Jones or whoever else they can find for cheap to knock down wide open threes. Thompson makes them about 5% better than pretty much anyone they could find for cheap to do nothing but grab rebounds all game and set screen and rolls. Neither of those players are difference makers. Occasionally Korver will catch fire sure but he isn't an every night threat anymore. JR Smith was the knucklehead nobody else in the NBA wanted to touch with a 10-foot pole before the cavs traded for him.

      You know who makes them look as good as they are? LeBron. No one else was beating down the door to acquire Smith or Thompson 3 years ago and Korver is well past his prime.

      This Cavs team is 80% Lebron, 10% Kyrie, 4% Kevin love and 1% everyone else. It's the world's greatest playmaker surrounded by one great one-on-one player, one undersized garbage pail guy, one really good stretch four and 10 other 1-dimensional 3-point shooters that are a dime a dozen.
      It's not that LeBron isn't way better than everyone else on the Cavs. It's that they have good enough veteran players who don't mess things up for him. Not only does he have two all-star level players. He has a number of veterans who, at one time, were all-star level players. That includes DWill and Korver. More than anything, he has the right mix of players because he's able to recruit the right pieces. So, it's not so much about these guys adding that much individually. It's what they do for the team as a whole. LeBron needs other players on the court and he has the right pieces.

      Comment


      • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

        Originally posted by wintermute View Post
        1/4? Surely you exaggerate.

        And even if that happens, the NBA is in the content provider business, not content delivery. They'll find another way to monetize their product. Maybe their TV revenue will crater, but surely not their total revenue. Live sports is still the hottest content in the market.

        As for the parity discussions - the fundamental problem is that individual superstars impact winning a lot more than in other sports, and there aren't enough of those guys to go around. You do still want to discourage teams from being able to accumulate superstars (assuming parity is the goal) and possible ways to do that include a hard cap and increasing the individual player max. Btw I think the new designated player provision is effectively an increase of the individual player max, so the league seems to be moving in the right direction, at least as far as parity is concerned.

        It's a shame that GSW went the Durant route, because pre-Durant they were a shining example of a team built the "right" way. Most of their important players were drafted, none of whom were top 5 picks, and one guy even in the second round. You can't even say they needed Durant to push them over the top, because they won a title pre-Durant. They are proof that the system can work, but of course they then went and signed the biggest FA out there and that's all that people think about now.
        The only reason GSW was able to get Durant was because it worked out that way Curry, Green, Thompson were paid below the market value they are probably worth today they had room for Durant who lucky for them I guess wanted to be there. Its not as if they gamed the season like the Cavs/LeBron/Heat.

        Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
        Lol...I meant that Paul George seems like the only player who can go toe to toe against LeBron from a talent standpoint or seems "not afraid" of him. Think about it.
        And yet has nothing to show for it...

        Comment


        • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

          Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
          I sincerely hate saying this but do you think the success of those Miami teams during the regular season is why Lebron is so willing to step off the gas pedal during the regular season now?

          Those Miami teams played with a fierce will and effort. Especially defensively. That wears on you and wasnt sustainable in the long term. They did go 2-2 in the finals, and were one rebound away from going 1-3.

          The result of this years finals will go a long way in the grand scheme of things IMO
          Another thing people may be forgetting....is that even though Miami wasn't dominating on defense on an individual level, but they were quick. So when they trapped, and the opponent would try to pass out of it, they were fast enough to recover to not leave an open shot, most of the time.

          Comment


          • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

            If this Pacer team had taken on the Heat, it would have been a complete embarrassment. So, no, I don't think this Cavs team is as good. Maybe they take so much time off they aren't as sharp. It could also be that Kyrie Irving isn't remotely as good as DWade. It's probably related to the fact their defensive rating is 21st in the NBA. They are just not very good defensively. I think GS is going to beat them.

            Comment


            • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
              If this Pacer team had taken on the Heat, it would have been a complete embarrassment. So, no, I don't think this Cavs team is as good. Maybe they take so much time off they aren't as sharp. It could also be that Kyrie Irving isn't remotely as good as DWade. It's probably related to the fact their defensive rating is 21st in the NBA. They are just not very good defensively. I think GS is going to beat them.
              If they do, it's because they have enough horses to run the race.


              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: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                If they do, it's because they have enough horses to run the race.
                I think the Cavs will have a tough time outscoring Kevin Durant, Stephon Curry and Klay Thompson. GS didn't have Durant last year. They had Harrison Barnes who is a nice player but not a superstar. That hands them 15 more points right out of the gate. Guarding that guy will wear on the defense. A defense that isn't nearly as good as last year's defense.

                Comment


                • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                  Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                  This Cavs team is 80% Lebron,
                  I think the point is that a team where Lebron has to be more than 80% is beatable. Not that they still wouldn't be very, very good, but they would not be this level of invincible.
                  BillS

                  A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                  Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                    No. Korver makes them about 1% better than Shumpert or James Jones or whoever else they can find for cheap to knock down wide open threes. Thompson makes them about 5% better than pretty much anyone they could find for cheap to do nothing but grab rebounds all game and set screen and rolls. Neither of those players are difference makers. Occasionally Korver will catch fire sure but he isn't an every night threat anymore. JR Smith was the knucklehead nobody else in the NBA wanted to touch with a 10-foot pole before the cavs traded for him.

                    You know who makes them look as good as they are? LeBron. No one else was beating down the door to acquire Smith or Thompson 3 years ago and Korver is well past his prime.

                    This Cavs team is 80% Lebron, 10% Kyrie, 4% Kevin love and 1% everyone else. It's the world's greatest playmaker surrounded by one great one-on-one player, one undersized garbage pail guy, one really good stretch four and 10 other 1-dimensional 3-point shooters that are a dime a dozen.
                    Going to have to disagree with you on that one. You take off those three guys without replacing them and that bench becomes a lot worse. You also don't have Thompson grabbing all those offensive boards, leading to open threes.

                    Besides, even a 10% drop off at least allows some teams to compete with them. There is absolutely no competition right now.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                      Originally posted by BillS View Post
                      I think the point is that a team where Lebron has to be more than 80% is beatable. Not that they still wouldn't be very, very good, but they would not be this level of invincible.
                      Exactly.

                      Pretty much any team LeBron is on is going to be an instant contender. But when you're able to add a couple of other superstars to that mix, AND have quality players like Korver and Williams off the bench, it just becomes unfair.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                        Originally posted by Shade View Post
                        Going to have to disagree with you on that one. You take off those three guys without replacing them and that bench becomes a lot worse. You also don't have Thompson grabbing all those offensive boards, leading to open threes.

                        Besides, even a 10% drop off at least allows some teams to compete with them. There is absolutely no competition right now.
                        Guys like Frye, Williams, and Korver were thought to be old corpses on their previous teams. So I do think they're replaceable. Thompson, not so much.

                        Edit: also teams had a chance to get Frye, Williams and Korver. They all could have been had, but nobody wanted them because they wouldn't have made their teams much better.

                        But also, isn't it up to the other teams in the league to build a team good enough to be competitive with Lebron? The league shouldn't need to put in mandates and rules to try and make up for the fact that other teams are struggling in terms of roster management

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                          Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                          Guys like Frye, Williams, and Korver were thought to be old corpses on their previous teams. So I do think they're replaceable. Thompson, not so much.

                          Edit: also teams had a chance to get Frye, Williams and Korver. They all could have been had, but nobody wanted them because they wouldn't have made their teams much better.

                          But also, isn't it up to the other teams in the league to build a team good enough to be competitive with Lebron? The league shouldn't need to put in mandates and rules to try and make up for the fact that other teams are struggling in terms of roster management
                          I wish we had a corpse that could shoot 8-12 from three and score 32 efficient points in his last two games. IDK. Better than Aaron Brooks and Monta Ellis. Of course, Korver being one of the best shooters in the history of the league cannot be better than the great CJ Miles.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                            I wish we had a corpse that could shoot 8-12 from three and score 32 efficient points in his last two games. IDK. Better than Aaron Brooks and Monta Ellis. Of course, Korver being one of the best shooters in the history of the league cannot be better than the great CJ Miles.
                            CJ Miles is about to get paid this summer....


                            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: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                              Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                              CJ Miles is about to get paid this summer....
                              I hope it's NOT by us

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2017 NBA Playoffs Round 2: (2) Cleveland vs. (3) Toronto

                                Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                                CJ Miles is about to get paid this summer....
                                If Solomon Hill, a backup for life, can score a 50M contract in the NBA, CJ will do quite well himself. Doesn't make him a good player or the type a contender would ever want. But he will get paid so I agree. The NBA does need some fodder to "compete" against LeBron, Kyrie, Love, Korver and the rest of the super friends.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X