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

Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

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

  • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

    Originally posted by BillS View Post
    I think if he was fully capable of doing so he wouldn't need a team that uses him a specific way to be successful.
    He didn't need a team that uses him a specific way.

    1) He played very well first time around for the Pacers, a key part of a contender.

    2) So he didn't play well in Charlotte with the Kemba Walker / Al Jeff show where all they did was PnR. With Al Jeff there certainly wasn't much room in the paint and guys were not running the break. Of course it was going to fail.

    3) In LAC, he was cheated by Doc Rivers. Statistically, Lance blew away Austin Rivers but Austin was fed minutes. Played more than Lance although Lance was clearly better. Even Chris Paul says he favored Austin Rivers which is why Chris left the team:

    Nepotism for Austin Rivers led Chris Paul to despise Doc Rivers, report says
    http://www.sportingnews.com/nba/news...716awriy1v9v0l
    Source: Sporting News

    4) He played great in Memphis. Better than his first time around in Indiana.

    5) He played very well in Indiana this spring, breathing life into the Pacers and lifting them into the playoffs on an entirely different team. ENTIRELY DIFFERENT. Yet he performed well.

    Let's try to all get behind him. Stop doubting. The proof is already there.

    Comment


    • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

      Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post
      Looking at Lance's 2013-2014 season, 2013-2014 playoffs, and 2016-2017 playoffs with Indiana, this simply isn't true. Lance averaged more shots in each one of those than all but 1 year of Collison's career, and Lance had less assists on average than Collison has had.

      This was especially true in this year's playoffs where Lance called his own number over and over again, shooting 13.3 times to only 2.8 assists. That doesn't mean he wasn't good in that playoff series, he was. But Lance has always been a shoot first kind of player, even more than Collison has been in his career.
      Cubby - Of course. Lance has played a lot at SF and SG. Of course he will be shooting. I guess I don't get your point.

      Comment


      • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
        There isn't any aspect of basketball that he doesn't do well.
        How about thinking ??

        He's talented - yes. But his own mind tells his body to do things that it can't. And then he gets pissy with himself because of a failed pass/shot/steal attempt/whatever. Then - he's mentally gone and becomes a burden.

        Repeat.

        Comment


        • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
          You are wrong. He averaged 4.2 assists. But more important, that was more assists in the playoffs than any Pacer while also having to guard LeBron. Also, Lance's PER was better than George Hill's and I would consider that a better measure of what a player is bringing to the floor.

          Anyway, you can slice your facts as you wish, but the reality is that Lance was one of the top 3 players on that team and his PER backs that up...and yes we were contending....and most important Vogel handed the rock to Lance because the Heat would take it away from any other Pacer because they either didn't have a good enough handle or they couldn't deal with the Heat's swarming defense.

          Edit: BTW, this last part about Lance playing PG. There is ABSOLUTELY NO REASON for Lance Stephenson to be asked to run the point in the playoffs unless it was the best way to compete. Come on. Stop the hate.
          Lol, you know you're full of **** when you say I'm wrong to say he averaged 4 assists a game because it was 4.2!

          Btw, I'm a Lance fan. I'm very happy he is on the team and am onboard with him starting.

          I'm just stating facts. You said we were fine when Lance quarterbacked the offense and the fact is we had one of the worst offenses in the playoffs and Lance had the worst offensive rating of the starters.

          Lance averaged 4.2 assists. DWest averaged 3.9!

          The offense was stagnant and bad. Sometimes I wonder if you even watch basketball or just troll on here.

          But when you makeup BS arguing another Lance fan you can't moronically just say "Hater!" because you have no idea what you're talking about.

          Comment


          • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

            Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
            How about thinking ??
            Not a thinking problem. Lance is savvy and smart. I think a better word here would be self-control or temperment. Definitely needs work there. But those ARE things that can be improved—a lot easier than size, athleticism, or court vision.
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment


            • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

              Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
              But those ARE things that can be improved—a lot easier than size, athleticism, or court vision.
              Not arguing your overall point, but why hasn't Lance improved on that stuff since he got to the league? Or at the very least, since his first stint with the Pacers? What I saw in 10 games this year was the exact same guy I saw when he was last here, and the same guy I saw the last three years in various places.

              Comment


              • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                Lance is savvy and smart.
                I highly doubt that. But - at least we agree that the end result is the same. He takes himself out of games.

                Comment


                • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

                  Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                  Lol, you know you're full of **** when you say I'm wrong to say he averaged 4 assists a game because it was 4.2!

                  Btw, I'm a Lance fan. I'm very happy he is on the team and am onboard with him starting.

                  I'm just stating facts. You said we were fine when Lance quarterbacked the offense and the fact is we had one of the worst offenses in the playoffs and Lance had the worst offensive rating of the starters.

                  Lance averaged 4.2 assists. DWest averaged 3.9!

                  The offense was stagnant and bad. Sometimes I wonder if you even watch basketball or just troll on here.

                  But when you makeup BS arguing another Lance fan you can't moronically just say "Hater!" because you have no idea what you're talking about.
                  The offense was bad for many reasons, but one is because Lance only led the offense part of the time, normally when an important possession came up because the Heat were starting to pull away. Now you know I saw that stuff happen.

                  That team was weak on offense also because Roy Hibbert never showed up. Pero Antic had him bent over his knee and the Pacers were struggling against Atlanta because of it. Fortunately, Paul, Lance and DWest pulled us through that series.

                  But I do agree that the offense was stagnant and bad. That happens when your starting PG is not aggressive and hesitant when he's faced with that pressure defense from the Heat. George Hill had fear his eyes when they came at him. Lance was the aggressor and made them pay. You cannot back off of that pressure like Hill did which is a large part of the reason we never could beat the Heat.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

                    Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                    How about thinking ??

                    He's talented - yes. But his own mind tells his body to do things that it can't. And then he gets pissy with himself because of a failed pass/shot/steal attempt/whatever. Then - he's mentally gone and becomes a burden.

                    Repeat.
                    You take the good with the bad and there's a lot more good.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      The offense was bad for many reasons, but one is because Lance only led the offense part of the time, normally when an important possession came up because the Heat were starting to pull away. Now you know I saw that stuff happen.

                      That team was weak on offense also because Roy Hibbert never showed up. Pero Antic had him bent over his knee and the Pacers were struggling against Atlanta because of it. Fortunately, Paul, Lance and DWest pulled us through that series.

                      But I do agree that the offense was stagnant and bad. That happens when your starting PG is not aggressive and hesitant when he's faced with that pressure defense from the Heat. George Hill had fear his eyes when they came at him. Lance was the aggressor and made them pay. You cannot back off of that pressure like Hill did which is a large part of the reason we never could beat the Heat.
                      You went from saying he ran the point for the playoffs to now saying it was a part time gig.

                      Either way, when he was on the court he didn't help the offense as much as any of the other starters.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

                        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                        Not a thinking problem. Lance is savvy and smart. I think a better word here would be self-control or temperment. Definitely needs work there. But those ARE things that can be improved—a lot easier than size, athleticism, or court vision.
                        Lance is a more mature and humble person now. He does have better control. He is not perfect, but he has learned a lot and deserves some credit for it.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

                          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                          You take the good with the bad and there's a lot more good.
                          No - you don't take it if he's the starter. A bench guy that you can put back on the bench for the nite - sure. But not a starter that you need 30+ minutes from. Because you got 29 minutes of Crap-Lance if he checks himself out in the first minute or so.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

                            Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                            You went from saying he ran the point for the playoffs to now saying it was a part time gig.

                            Either way, when he was on the court he didn't help the offense as much as any of the other starters.
                            I never said he started and ran the point full time. Find that post and I will retract.

                            He played a lot of point with the backups. That will tend to lower his ORtg. In any event, his PER which is a more comprehensive measure of what he brings to the floor was better than George Hill.

                            Beyond that, it is a fact that when the Heat was about to step on the Pacer's throat, Vogel handed Lance the ball and Lance delivered much of the time, and showed he could handle the pressure better.

                            ...and tell me. Why would Vogel hand the ball to a guy in the playoffs against the defending champs, who is supposed to be the SG...or in some people's minds the 6th man? Riddle me that.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

                              Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                              No - you don't take it if he's the starter. A bench guy that you can put back on the bench for the nite - sure. But not a starter that you need 30+ minutes from. Because you got 29 minutes of Crap-Lance if he checks himself out in the first minute or so.
                              Lance was the second best player on the Pacers in the playoffs. Just because bad Lance poked his head out some, that doesn't change that fact.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Lance the Pacers starting point guard next year?

                                And that doesn't change the fact that you don't let a psycho-wacko run the team.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X