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

SacBee article on Peja

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

    SacBee article on Peja

    Forward thinking: Stojakovic is the Pacers' man late in games and in their big-picture plans

    By Ailene Voisin -- Bee Sports Columnist

    http://www.sacbee.com/content/sports...15053991c.html

    Published 2:15 am PST Friday, March 17, 2006

    Story appeared in Sports section, Page C1

    INDIANAPOLIS - Peja Stojakovic left Sacramento with secrets from the past two seasons stored safely inside the ancient walls of Arco Arena, exact location never to be disclosed. He always chose his words as carefully as if he were measuring the distance on a three-pointer. He never revealed the extent of his back injury, never discussed his discontent with his diminished role in the offense, never explained why he stopped sprinting between baselines. He never really explained why, after the promise of three All-Star seasons, his career stalled and sputtered on the edges of a plateau.

    Was it him? Was it the Kings?

    Sell It Yourself
    Was it simply time to say goodbye?

    "As much as I was connected to the city," Stojakovic said late Wednesday, allowing at least a peek into his thoughts, "I felt kind of this year, that my time with the team was over. You can't connect the city with the team.

    "People were incredible there. But sometimes things have to happen. Teams have their runs. We had a great opportunity and didn't accomplish our goal. Then I hurt my back, hurt my hand, and the team wasn't doing well. With my injuries ... people didn't believe I was injured."

    In other words - and for so many reasons - it was simply time to say goodbye. The fans were frustrated, the building was a morgue, the exits becoming gridlocked well before outcomes had been decided. The Kings needed a makeover of players and personalities - the Mike Bibby, Brad Miller, Peja Stojakovic nucleus a miserably failed experiment - and Peja desperately needed a career boost as well. He sensed it. Everyone sensed it.

    "The great thing about this league," said Pacers coach Rick Carlisle, "is that dynamic changes can happen quickly, and can happen in a very positive way for multiple teams involved in a trade. And this has been a good trade for both teams (though) a little harder to evaluate it from our side with Jermaine (O'Neal) not being available."

    Ron Artest, his prior bad acts a far less juicy conversation piece these days than his on-court contributions, has transformed the Kings into a steely-minded club that looms as a scary postseason opponent. The muscular small forward with the multi-layered game has fulfilled all of Larry Bird's promises; offensively and defensively, there might not be a better player in basketball.

    But Carlisle is right. Both franchises benefited from the trade. The Pacers with Artest were grinding to a halt, emotionally as well as offensively. The Artest-0'Neal pairing was just another ill-fated marriage. Thus, besides easing the locker room tension, Peja also provides the Pacers with the long-sought perimeter shooting and adequate defense, along with someone who, with the proper push from people in high places, is eager to expand his one-on-one skills.

    So no regrets. The Kings gave him his first chance, the Pacers offer him his next challenge.

    The Pacers, in fact, are offering a lot of what he wasn't getting in Sacramento, including the ball in the fourth quarter.

    "Coming down the stretch," observed Pacers point guard Anthony Johnson, "you know it's going to be Mike Bibby and Brad Miller playing off each other. Here, partly due to the fact that Jermaine is out, Peja is going to be our No. 1 option. And when you know you're going to get the ball, that's half the battle right there."

    Adapting to Stojakovic's presence and the recurring problem with injuries to key players, Carlisle, an excellent tactician who favors a methodical, isolation-type offense that has been known to provoke grumbling from some players (all those not named O'Neal), is gritting his teeth but espousing a more free-flowing, uptempo system. Backdoor cuts and crisp ball movement are becoming common sights around Conseco Fieldhouse, as is the sight of Peja taking a handoff at the high post, settling behind screens and launching with his familiar, rhythmic stroke. And the longtime Kings small forward has been doing more than shooting jumpers. At the behest of Bird and Carlisle, he is aggressively attempting a variety of low-post moves, step-throughs and spinning, reverse layups. His one-on-one game is improving.

    "We're working with him," said Carlisle, "and we feel he has the ability to develop footwork, create his shot more effectively. There's a lot of room for expansion in his game."

    Then there's Bird's long-term plans for Peja: Re-sign the eight-year pro, who can become a free agent this summer, and alter the roster to accommodate his abilities. The plan is to build around Peja, refining an offense that utilizes O'Neal at the high post, a la Vlade Divac and Miller, and improve quickness in the backcourt. "I didn't get Peja to let him get away," said Bird. "As we move forward, he's a key player for us."

    Clearly, this presents the greatest challenge since Peja's unproven rookie season, and is the first time since 2003-04 that he has been the featured performer - given the late opportunities and expected to convert. Yet during a lengthy conversation, he insists he is determined - and, yes, once again eager - to duplicate his career-best season.

    "I never ran from that responsibility," he said, with a hint of annoyance. "I am really looking forward to this. I'm learning and adjusting. This is something new and exciting for me. We do work hard on defense. It's a different mentality. We still haven't played together, still don't know our potential. But I really like the guys on the team. I am really happy."

    Seated at his dressing stall in a nearly empty locker room, Stojakovic, who typically reveals little of his inner thoughts, is as polite and personable as ever. He chats openly about everything except basketball: He and his companion, Alexandra, recently had a daughter they named Mila. He proposed marriage and hopes she accepts. Asked about a yellow rubber ducky resting on a stack of papers, Peja laughs. "My son (Andrej) left that in the car," he says, his eyes suddenly alight, "and I keep it here because it reminds me of my boy."

    If there is one thing that bothers him about his last years in Sacramento, it's a suspicion that neither his teammates nor Kings fans appreciated the effect of his lower-back problems on his productivity. (Before finalizing the trade, in fact, Bird submitted Peja's MRI's to numerous specialists and was concerned enough to consult his own long-time therapist). Stojakovic also allows, with only a hint of annoyance, that he never nominated himself for the role of fourth-quarter decoy.

    "But that's OK," he adds quickly. "We had some great times. Those times are going to stay in my head like best memories. We always had great guys, great atmosphere. I never took anything personally.

    "The Kings ... that was my first team. I was always dreaming of playing in the NBA. Then I came to the Kings. I make my name with the Kings. We just ... move on."
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: SacBee article on Peja

    piksi beat you by one minute. thats crazy that you both would post the same article that close to gether.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: SacBee article on Peja

      Great article. Type of article we rarely see in Indy

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: SacBee article on Peja

        Bird's comments are fascinating.

        What's the long-term plan for Granger?
        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: SacBee article on Peja

          It appears by Bird's comments , he wants Jermaine away from the post and compares him to centers Divac and Miller. Could be he sees Danny Granger as more of a pf or even a sg? With Peja and Danny it could be they flip flop spots on both ends of the court. With Granger taking the more active sf or sg on defense.

          Bird is not throwing Danny , to the side he is just saying what his main plans are for the offense. Granger , I believe is seen as a vital cog in the Pacer plans by Bird and Walsh.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: SacBee article on Peja

            That's really interesting. Didn't I just have a post about Jermaine playing the high post and Harrison playing the low post?

            I wish I knew what Bird was thinking.
            This space for rent.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: SacBee article on Peja

              The Pacers, in fact, are offering a lot of what he wasn't getting in Sacramento, including the ball in the fourth quarter.

              "Coming down the stretch," observed Pacers point guard Anthony Johnson, "you know it's going to be Mike Bibby and Brad Miller playing off each other. Here, partly due to the fact that Jermaine is out, Peja is going to be our No. 1 option. And when you know you're going to get the ball, that's half the battle right there."
              This is not entirely true...technically....Peja is used in the 4th QTR...but the majority ( but not all ) of the "crunch time" shots have been made by SJax or AJ. I just know that if a shot has to be made....I'm not as surprised that the ball goes to SJax or AJ....and not the best shooter on the team.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: SacBee article on Peja

                Originally posted by CableKC
                This is not entirely true...technically....Peja is used in the 4th QTR...but the majority ( but not all ) of the "crunch time" shots have been made by SJax or AJ. I just know that if a shot has to be made....I'm not as surprised that the ball goes to SJax or AJ....and not the best shooter on the team.
                "attempted" would be more acurate
                Vulpes pilum mutat, non mores!

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: SacBee article on Peja

                  i undestand why peja doesnt get the ball in the fourth quarter. he isnt clutch. i know you guys dont wanna hear that and im sorry but if i was a pacer fan i would understand why someone else was taking the shot instead of peja. hes not mentally tough and hes a first 3 quarters kind of player. i know you guys wonder why the best shooter isnt shooting the ball at the end of games but peja isnt the best shooter when its under pressure. dont get me rong peja is still one of my favorite players but i just know the guy is no good in the fourth quarter or playoffs.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: SacBee article on Peja

                    Originally posted by Artest is the best!
                    i undestand why peja doesnt get the ball in the fourth quarter. he isnt clutch. i know you guys dont wanna hear that and im sorry but if i was a pacer fan i would understand why someone else was taking the shot instead of peja. hes not mentally tough and hes a first 3 quarters kind of player. i know you guys wonder why the best shooter isnt shooting the ball at the end of games but peja isnt the best shooter when its under pressure. dont get me rong peja is still one of my favorite players but i just know the guy is no good in the fourth quarter or playoffs.


                    I know that is his reputation, but since he's been here, he has hit some big shots in the 4th quarter. This topic is very subjective, I'm just judging him as a Pacers, just like I'm sure you're judging Artest just as a King.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: SacBee article on Peja

                      David in low post, JO in the high post, Danny on one wing, Peja on the other, and insert PG here. Hmm. Not bad.

                      You know, I think the interesting thing is how truly versatile Danny is. When he was in the draft, and the same was said after we picked him, was that he was versatile enough to play the 3, 2, and even a little 1. Yet he's been a very good rookie playing predominatly at the 4. With that said, I am very curoius to see how accurate the scouting reports were about him being versatile in the OTHER direction. What if he can be as effective at the 2 as he's been at the 4 and 3? If Danny can actually be an honest to God shooting guard, I think we have a hell of a good thing going.

                      PG (Tinsley or someone else)
                      SG Granger
                      SF Stojakovic
                      PF O'Neal
                      xC Harrison

                      Again, if Danny can truly play the 2, and we don't really know yet, but the pre and post-draft reports made it sound like he could, then we are in great shape for the near future.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: SacBee article on Peja

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck
                        I know that is his reputation, but since he's been here, he has hit some big shots in the 4th quarter. This topic is very subjective, I'm just judging him as a Pacers, just like I'm sure you're judging Artest just as a King.
                        thats true he has hit some big shots late in the game for the pacers. i just saw his last couple of games where he didint score much in the fourth quarter.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: SacBee article on Peja

                          I think clutch play can be learned, but it's a bumpy road full of blown games before you get comfortable, just ask LeBron James. I have no problem giving Peja the opportunity to win or lose games for us, because even with him being (formerly) gun-shy, he's still more likely to make it than Jax

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: SacBee article on Peja

                            Originally posted by Eindar
                            I think clutch play can be learned, but it's a bumpy road full of blown games before you get comfortable, just ask LeBron James. I have no problem giving Peja the opportunity to win or lose games for us, because even with him being (formerly) gun-shy, he's still more likely to make it than Jax
                            i dont think peja can learn to be clutch! lebron isnt a good comparison because this is his third year. peja has benn in the league a long time and if he isnt clutch by now he will never be.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: SacBee article on Peja

                              Originally posted by Artest is the best!
                              thats true he has hit some big shots late in the game for the pacers. i just saw his last couple of games where he didint score much in the fourth quarter.

                              Which games were those.

                              Comment

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