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

Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

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

  • Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

    I have not read anyone elses posts yet, but I can imagine the refs are a big topic of conversation. I refuse to talk about the refs, they did not decide the game, they did not even negatively influence the game. The Pistons played a very good game, dominated and deserved the win.

    Two worries prior to the game today: Billups posting Tinsley, and Sheed being aggressive. Well both of those two things happened.

    Let me start with Sheed. Yes he is very unselfish, yes he is a great team player, and yes he only wants to win. But if I were a Pistons fan he would frustrate me a little. He is so talented. In fact I think he is more talented than J.O. He can shoot threes, he can post up, he can shoot the midrange shot, he is a good passer, he is a decent ball handler. Defensively, he is very underrated, well I'll say it right now, he is as good a defender overall as Ben Wallace and he is a much better one-on-one low post defender. And his help defense is almost as good as Ben's.

    Sheed defended J.O extremely well and if you notice the first play Ben defended J.O he was able to back him into the lane and score rather easily. Anytime Sheed is aggressive I get very concerned as a Pacer fan.

    Billups: He was able to post up Tinsley with ease, was able to get right under the basket, and really controlled the whole game.


    What I want to get to though is this, We can talk about every aspect of a basketball game, but sometimes it does just come down to making shots.

    The Pistons made a defensive adjustment for game #4. They decided to pack it in more, cut off all pentration, trap Tinsley more often, crowd the lane and force the Pacers to shoot threes. I've never seen so many wide open three today by the Pacers. Too bad they went 1 of 17 while the game was still in doubt.

    If the Pacers had gone 6 of 17, that is 15 more points and the whole game is different. I thought the Pacers played hard, they just could not hit any outside shots. And that to me was the biggest difference in this game.

    One sure sign the Pacers are in trouble is when they have to go small and play JJ at power forward or god forbit Croshere at power forward, that is a sure sign of desperation. But you know what the Pacers had no choice, when you trail by 15 the whole game DD and Jeff really are unable to contribute, you need some offense. But of course then you see Ben start to get offensive rebounds and you start to see the Pacers interior defense break down.

    The series it still tied 2-2, Pacers can still win this series, in fact I would not be a bit surprised to see the Pacers win game #5 and lose game #6.

    Is there a worse feeling than to see the opposing team celebrating on the Pacers home court.

    I'm off to read other threads where I'm sure the refs will be crucified and J.O will be criticized.

  • #2
    Re: Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

    I disagree with you about the refs, UB. They had a very negative impact on the game. Every time we scraped back from a deficit, they squeltched it with one bad/missed call after another, benefitting the Pistons far more than not. With that said...

    We lost because we settled for jumpers, and didn't hit them. JO was passive, and Reg became passive after missing his first 4 shots. Jack and Tins played okay, but nobody else really made an impact.

    We can play MUCH better. Will we?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

      Originally posted by Unclebuck
      I have not read anyone elses posts yet, but I can imagine the refs are a big topic of conversation. I refuse to talk about the refs, they did not decide the game, they did not even negatively influence the game. The Pistons played a very good game, dominated and deserved the win.

      Two worries prior to the game today: Billups posting Tinsley, and Sheed being aggressive. Well both of those two things happened.

      Let me start with Sheed. Yes he is very unselfish, yes he is a great team player, and yes he only wants to win. But if I were a Pistons fan he would frustrate me a little. He is so talented. In fact I think he is more talented than J.O. He can shoot threes, he can post up, he can shoot the midrange shot, he is a good passer, he is a decent ball handler. Defensively, he is very underrated, well I'll say it right now, he is as good a defender overall as Ben Wallace and he is a much better one-on-one low post defender. And his help defense is almost as good as Ben's.

      Sheed defended J.O extremely well and if you notice the first play Ben defended J.O he was able to back him into the lane and score rather easily. Anytime Sheed is aggressive I get very concerned as a Pacer fan.

      Billups: He was able to post up Tinsley with ease, was able to get right under the basket, and really controlled the whole game.


      What I want to get to though is this, We can talk about every aspect of a basketball game, but sometimes it does just come down to making shots.

      The Pistons made a defensive adjustment for game #4. They decided to pack it in more, cut off all pentration, trap Tinsley more often, crowd the lane and force the Pacers to shoot threes. I've never seen so many wide open three today by the Pacers. Too bad they went 1 of 17 while the game was still in doubt.

      If the Pacers had gone 6 of 17, that is 15 more points and the whole game is different. I thought the Pacers played hard, they just could not hit any outside shots. And that to me was the biggest difference in this game.

      One sure sign the Pacers are in trouble is when they have to go small and play JJ at power forward or god forbit Croshere at power forward, that is a sure sign of desperation. But you know what the Pacers had no choice, when you trail by 15 the whole game DD and Jeff really are unable to contribute, you need some offense. But of course then you see Ben start to get offensive rebounds and you start to see the Pacers interior defense break down.

      The series it still tied 2-2, Pacers can still win this series, in fact I would not be a bit surprised to see the Pacers win game #5 and lose game #6.

      Is there a worse feeling than to see the opposing team celebrating on the Pacers home court.

      I'm off to read other threads where I'm sure the refs will be crucified and J.O will be criticized.
      After watching Sheed for awhile, I'm absolutely convinced there aren't 5 players in the league who have a greater skill-set Rasheed Wallace has. You touched on all of it. There's nothing he can't do. He can do more things than Jermaine. In fact, other than Garnett, I'm not sure what other players have a greater skill set than Sheed.

      The thing about Sheed is that he's content to just be a good player, a borderline all-star. Players like Jermaine & Garnett aren't.

      I've just learned to live with it. You know what you're getting with Sheed, and the positives far outweigh the negatives.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

        That James guy with Cleveland has some pretty good skills.
        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

          Rasheed has MVP type talent. There is no way that guy should average less than 25 points per game, it's sickening what an amazing waste of talent that guy's body is

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

            Originally posted by McKeyFan
            That James guy with Cleveland has some pretty good skills.
            And you could also say that about Kobe, T-Mac, Dwyane Wade and probably some others I'm forgetting.

            But Sheed's skills rank right up there, especially for a big man. UB's 3rd paragraph describes him perfectly. He's just not comfortable being the man. Just wants to be a complementary part on a good team.

            Him and Detroit is a perfect marriage, in I'm sure more ways than one to Pacer fans.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

              Sheed would be a great player if he could bring it more often than he does.

              And, I can't believe I'm saying this, but I liked seeing JJ at the 4.
              Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

                Not hitting shots, not getting defensive rebounds, and bad officiating definitely contributed to our loss in that order. But I think those Jamaal turnovers absolutely killed us and our momentum.

                Check the boxscore score from yahoo.

                http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/boxscore?gid=2005051511

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

                  Rasheed has the most complete game of any big man in the NBA. I wouldn't say if he used it he'd be better than TD or Garnett, but he has the offensive skills of Dirk and the defensive skills of KG.

                  Halfcourt execution. Bottom line. The execution in the halfcourt was very bad tonight. The only play that worked at all was the drive-and-pitch and then the shots didn't fall. The Pistons just clogged everything down inside. It was the bumping, holding and grabbing, etc we've seen from great defensive teams and since you weren't hitting your shots they could pack it in a little more.

                  The adjustments I'd make for Indy are:

                  1) Cut down the TO's - duh
                  2) Reverse the ball. The Pistons were very vulnerable to quick ball reversal several times but the ball didn't get reversed
                  3) Play Foster more - the O-Boards the Pistons got in the 4th killed whatever slim chance you had for a comeback
                  4) This isn't really an adjustment but you have to hit at least a few shots to soften the middle
                  5) JO needs to pass like he did in G 7 vs Boston. Detroit shaded him a lot early - then quit after a while. But they still kept the middle full and a pass-out could have helped (though with the way you were shooting, maybe not)
                  6) Billups killed you - I don't have a great solution for that - when a big man hedged out Rasheed went to the corner. He did that Friday too but tonight he hit his shots.
                  7) More discipline in the halfcourt - mostly this is on Tinsley. He tried to be spectacular too often and it usually ended up being a TO
                  8) I was disappointed in JJ's passing up open three's several times - maybe he would've bricked 'em too but brick one first before you quit
                  The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

                    The series it still tied 2-2, Pacers can still win this series, in fact I would not be a bit surprised to see the Pacers win game #5 and lose game #6.
                    I couldn't agree more.

                    Did anybody really expect the Pacers to win this game?

                    It was a game they should win.
                    It was a home game.
                    It was a game that could take pressure off of them.
                    Rasheed guaranteed a victory.
                    and...

                    IT WASN'T A PRIME NUMBER!!!!
                    “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                    motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                    Reggie Miller

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

                      Originally posted by DisplacedKnick
                      2) Reverse the ball. The Pistons were very vulnerable to quick ball reversal several times but the ball didn't get reversed
                      This is my pet peeve. Rick said days ago that we have to attack their weak side, but no, he ends up calling iso's for half the game.
                      Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

                        I wish O'neal could embrace Rasheed's role. JO isn't ready to be the dominating player he wants to be. He'd help this team out a lot more if he would accept the TEAM role, instead of the ALL-STAR role.
                        AKA Sactolover05

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

                          Another adjustment I would make is taking less three's and attacking the bucket more. There was a time during the first half where we should like 5 three's for every jumper. That's not gonna cut it!

                          That block by Ben Wallace on JO early in the 1st quarter set the tone. I think that play had a big impact on how we were going to play. You didn't see Tinsley really dominate the way he did, because Ben was focused from the start. No one really attacked the basket after that block.
                          AKA Sactolover05

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

                            UB, I agree it comes down to making shots. Especially in a game like today where we were not going to get any calls inside.

                            The only way to win these games is knock down the open jumper. Our team failed to execute and lost. The refs didn't lose it, but they certainly didn't give us any benefit of the doubt calls.

                            Our team, as per usual, CAN NOT WIN THE BIG HOME GAME!!! Only once in our history can I ever remember us getting the big home game and this was a game 5 against Milwaukee in our NBA Finals Run. We may have done it against the Knicks as well, but don't recall.

                            We ALWAYS CHOKE when we have a chance to strangle the other team. Just as Hicks pointed out on Fri/Sat thread!

                            Water

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Sometimes it does come down to just hitting shots.

                              Late last night I went back and watched the first and third quarters of the game, and my initial analyze was a little off. Turnovers killed us. Right after Pacers cut it to 6 in the 3rd, Jamaal had two straight turnovers and then J.O was clearly fouled and no call.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X