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

What would you do? (Granger Related)

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

  • #16
    Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

    Danny is a very good allround player, yes he is used to play the 3, but its wrong to say that he fits in best there.. basketball doesnt work that way. You are young, 6ยด8" and your style is allround = SG-SF-PF. He can play all 3 positions with equal success because of his allround skills, sorry to say.

    Its only up to the coach what he wants. But he MUST have Peja & Granger in there, he must find a way... If only SJAX could be a backup instead? (he is NOT better than Granger).

    Moving Danny to 4 is just impossible because of JO? But a very good idea if only Sarunas was a starter and they learned to play that way, they would be almost exactly like Phoenix (a la European basketball) offensively, 1 great leader/playmaker, everybody else can shoot & pass, much ball movement, much movement overall, pick & rolls.

    But still it WONT happen, because this is NBA, not Europe. In Europe the Coach setups his team to WIN after teamplay, no matter what, they dont care if they have players like JO / SJAX that MUST have their minutes and starting spot all the time and give them ISO plays. That is very good, but its NOT consistant and will not guarantee you a win everyday.

    Like many of my coaches said to me, Basketball is the most succesfull when you are playing the way its meant to be played! With other words = NO SUPERSTARS = NO ISOs = NO BALLHOGING.. Something like this:

    PG = A point guard that always gets the ball and runs the offense always thru his hands and thinks Pass first, who drives to the basket JUST to open up his teammates.
    (1.SARUNAS, 2.TINSLEY)

    SG = Literally a "Shooting" Guard who have a very good allround game, can pass, usually the highest scorer in the team and he is usually PGs highest priority on offense because of his high shooting accuracy.
    (1.DANNY 2. SJAX - good backup only)

    SF = A taller "SG", That can rebound and is a very good spot up shooter, if its a very good shooter / player then it will not be a Conflict between him and the SG.
    (1. PEJA 2. GRANGER - extremly good backup if the Coach chooses not to go with him at SG)

    PF = Literally a "POWER" Forward, He is big, Tall, leaves the shooting part to the rest of his teammates, a HUSTLER, a BEAST, a WARRIOR, that goes efter EVERY loose ball and sacrifices his body non-stop.
    (1. JO (if he would stop the 1on1 shake-n-bake "hey look at me! im a 7 foot tall PointGuard!" and long distance shooting). 2. JEFF FOSTER)

    C = Exactly like PF but less athleticism and more strength and Tallness, a big guy that is there just for ONE purpose. To do the things the shorter guys cant do... get up hiigh up under the basket fastest and geting exploited in different ways. (1. DAVID HARRISON)

    As you can see? We have what it takes to be a succesfull team, Larry Bird has seen it... the question is? Can RICK see it?

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

      Originally posted by JBones19
      Great- maybe the TPTB can tell Danny to gain 20lbs of muscle in the off-season so he can play the 4 and he can rely on the fade-away jumper for the rest of his career and get a buncha nagging injuries because his frame can handle the extra 20lbs run on sentence.

      Sounds great typed out, but need I remind you that gaining weight didn't really work for JO or Bender. Both became far more injury prone after gaining the weight their frames couldn't handle. Bender had more to do with is bad knees, but O'Neal has everything to do with his weight gain.

      Not a good idea IMHO.

      MarcD
      "Because clever got me this far, then tricky got me in..."

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

        I think he was being sarcastic. Look how well the extra weight has helped
        JO. It hasn't.


        owl
        {o,o}
        |)__)
        -"-"-

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

          This team is sorely lacking in speed and mobility and in the ability to shoot.
          This team is a poor shooting team. Peja is the Pacers only shooter of note.
          Granger could turn into one. But the guards are lacking in so many ways.
          I am also of the belief that having your PF as your number one option
          is a disaster. When was the last team to win a title with a dominant
          pf as your number one option? Elvin Hayes????? And was he even the
          number one option on those Bullet teams????
          Bottom line is that the makeup of this team has to change.


          owl
          {o,o}
          |)__)
          -"-"-

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

            Originally posted by owl
            This team is sorely lacking in speed and mobility and in the ability to shoot.
            This team is a poor shooting team. Peja is the Pacers only shooter of note.
            Granger could turn into one. But the guards are lacking in so many ways.
            I am also of the belief that having your PF as your number one option
            is a disaster. When was the last team to win a title with a dominant
            pf as your number one option? Elvin Hayes????? And was he even the
            number one option on those Bullet teams????
            Bottom line is that the makeup of this team has to change.


            owl

            Tim Duncan. Some will say that he is a center, well then if he is then so is J.O.

            I've been saying for about 6 years now that the Pacers need a dominant offensive player at one of the guard positions.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

              Originally posted by Unclebuck
              I've been saying for about 6 years now that the Pacers need a dominant offensive player at one of the guard positions.
              This is an absolute must. And I agree that Tinsley, Jackson AND O'Neal must go.

              I've been on the fence about Jermaine. But Kravitz article this morning reminded me of things that I've actually said. He's an imposter, he is NOT a leader. And with him still on the team and actually anointed as the leader, he will always try to be the leader, regardless of who else is acquired to fill that role.

              Jackson? You guys want a PG that can point? I want a freakin' SG that can actually shoot consistently.

              Tinsley? He's not even worth my time to give all the reasons.

              Probably reserved for a thread of my own will be an apology to Saras' fans. I'll never admit that he could be a savior if only given an opportunity to play. But, whether he is a leader or not I won't get into. What he is is passionate. And right now, this team needs every player with a beating heart that it can muster.

              PASSION. I think that one word sums up what this team is not. We have Danny, Foster, Saras and Peja. They are passionate. Freddy, AJ and Harrison are also passionate, although they can sometimes misdirect that passion, especially David.

              One player that I'd like to see the Pacers acquire would be Al Harrington. Never thought I'd say that. But after playing Atlanta, I've come to realzie something. We miss his passion and how he was capable of firing up every other player on the floor to give a better effort. Al could help bring leadership back to this team.

              Getting back to Buck's comments.

              We have to have a dominant guard. More importantly, I think we have to have a dominant POINT GUARD. I know you're never supposed to trade a dominant big for a guard. But right now, I'd trade Jermaine to get my hands on a truly dominant PG... one with handles that can defend, pass and hit an open shot.

              If we can somehow get this done, I'd then start Harrison/Foster at C, Al at PF, Danny at SF, Peja at SG and the new PG.

              That is a passionate lineup. You would have Al who could swing to SF and Danny who could swing to PF or SG. Peja could obviously play SF as well. Four good defenders in the lineup could help cover any problems that Peja (or Danny) encounters defending at SG. You would also have 4 players capable of shooting anywhere on the floor.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                I think that having Granger add a bunch of muscle would be a mistake. If muscle made the ball player then Jake Voskhul would be an all-star center. I would much rather have a player with fast-twitch reactions (young Dale Davis, Big Ben) than some beefed up (slower) muscle bound player.

                I'm no NBA caliber player, but I know from my own experience in the weight room that big muscles don't always translate well to the court.

                Danny is great the way he is; sleek, strong and smart. I look forward to him improving in the coming years. Maybe he can be our next Reggie.
                Dallas Clark>Tony Gonzalez

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                  Granger better not add a bunch of muscle, yes he needs to get stronger, but bodies are made to carry a certain amount of weight and his will always be a little slight.

                  I have no problem trading J.O. But I want quality back. Don't trade him for a package of two or three role players - that won't help the team any. if you don't believe me watch the Bulls. They play so hgard, are so well coached, they have players who play the right way, but they are talent poor. You still need talent.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                    Originally posted by beast23
                    This is an absolute must. And I agree that Tinsley, Jackson AND O'Neal must go.


                    PASSION. I think that one word sums up what this team is not. We have Danny, Foster, Saras and Peja. They are passionate. Freddy, AJ and Harrison are also passionate, although they can sometimes misdirect that passion, especially David.
                    Agree. Passion and ENERGY are what the Pacers are missing right now. I can't think of any NBA championship caliber team that did not play with energy, especially on defense.

                    For all the ugliness that the Pacers are showing on offense, it is pitiful defense that is causing them to lose games. How many times did the Suns hit WIDE OPEN shots last night? The Pacers looked like a seventh-grade team playing help defense and leaving shooters open on the perimeter. They need to start physically dominating their opponents defensively, the way they did two seasons ago.

                    IMO, Jackson and Tinsley are not playing with defensive energy. When JO is on the floor I haven't really seen it from him either. The Pacers scored enough to win the game last night. They just didn't lock Phoenix down, which is what they have to start doing if they want to be competitive.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck
                      I've been saying for about 6 years now that the Pacers need a dominant offensive player at one of the guard positions.

                      That Miller kid worked pretty well for a lot of years. Even with Reggie's
                      limitations it is amazing how he carried the franchise for 18 years.
                      Trading JO is going to be very difficult and in a trade I suppose you
                      could get a young player and a draft pick and someone for cap filler.
                      How about JO to LA? I would want a high draft pick out of any trade for JO.
                      This summer should be very interesting. I would love to get Tyrus Thomas
                      out of a trade. I am not sold on Harrison. I would prefer someone else
                      long term there also. I want mentally strong players with some talent.



                      owl
                      {o,o}
                      |)__)
                      -"-"-

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                        Owl,

                        I agree that we may not get as much for Jermaine right now as we would have 1 to 1-1/2 years ago.

                        That is really why I would suggest breaking that cardinal rule that you don't trade a dominant big for a guard.

                        I think we can get more value out of Jermaine if we are willing to trade him for a guard. But I also believe that a draft pick and a front-court backup could be gained in the trade.

                        It is definitely going to be an active summer. And if by some chance it isn't, I believe that the Pacers will seriously suffer in attendance.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck
                          Granger better not add a bunch of muscle, yes he needs to get stronger, but bodies are made to carry a certain amount of weight and his will always be a little slight.

                          I have no problem trading J.O. But I want quality back. Don't trade him for a package of two or three role players - that won't help the team any. if you don't believe me watch the Bulls. They play so hgard, are so well coached, they have players who play the right way, but they are talent poor. You still need talent.
                          Fully agree!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                            Originally posted by beast23

                            That is really why I would suggest breaking that cardinal rule that you don't trade a dominant big for a guard.
                            Not sure this cardinal rule applies here, since the Pacers don't have a dominant big. What they have is a big who thinks he's dominant, and talks like he's dominant, but doesn't play that way.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                              Originally posted by Roy Munson
                              Not sure this cardinal rule applies here, since the Pacers don't have a dominant big. What they have is a big who thinks he's dominant, and talks like he's dominant, but doesn't play that way.
                              Key being: most think he is dominant. I've read several times that the feeling around the league is that JO's trade value is fairly high...still.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                                Originally posted by owl
                                That Miller kid worked pretty well for a lot of years. Even with Reggie's
                                limitations it is amazing how he carried the franchise for 18 years.
                                Trading JO is going to be very difficult and in a trade I suppose you
                                could get a young player and a draft pick and someone for cap filler.
                                How about JO to LA? I would want a high draft pick out of any trade for JO.
                                This summer should be very interesting. I would love to get Tyrus Thomas
                                out of a trade. I am not sold on Harrison. I would prefer someone else
                                long term there also. I want mentally strong players with some talent.



                                owl
                                The Lakers do not own their draft pick, the Celtics do because of a series of trades, but I dig the idea. How about Toronto or Atlanta?
                                Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
                                http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X