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

Top 10 Playoffs Storylines

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

  • Top 10 Playoffs Storylines

    http://www.nba.com/playoffs2004/top10_storylines.html


    By Rob Peterson

    April 15 -- With the seeds set, the playoff decals freshly applied to hardwood floors in 16 cities and the coaches going through mountains of tape to prepare for their first-round opponents, NBA Playoffs 2004 is set to begin.

    But before we get started on Saturday with four fabulous matchups (it all starts at 2 p.m. ET when the Pacers visit the Celtics on ESPN), we have some important questions we would like to ask about some of the teams, players and coaches in the Playoffs. And while we've answered these questions to the best of our abilities, the final answers will be provided over the next eight weeks as the playoff teams have one, and only one, destination: The Finals.

    But without further ado, here are the 10 top questions for this year's playoffs:

    1. Which of the "Big Six" -- Indiana, Detroit, Minnesota, Sacramento, San Antonio and L.A. Lakers -- has the best chance of winning the 2004 NBA title?

    This is the most wide open race in years for the Larry O'Brien trophy.

    You could give the Pacers the edge because they have home-court advantage throughout the Finals, if they advance that far. (See No. 5.)

    You could tab the Pistons as the favorite b
    ecause they've had the most stifling defense in the league since adding Rasheed Wallace at the trading deadline. And defense wins championships, right?

    As the West's top seed, you could claim the Timberwolves have the inside track to the title. But then again, they must make their way through the minefield that is the Western Conference.

    Some may even be tempted to claim the tempestuous Lakers or the wildly inconsistent Kings as the teams to beat. But with injuries to Karl Malone and Shaquille O'Neal -- and then there's the whole Kobe Bryant situation -- the only member of the Fab Four that's been there the whole time is Gary Payton. Meaning they haven't had enough time to really put it together.

    As for the Kings, they've been hampered instead of helped by Chris Webber's return. (See No. 2.)

    That leaves the defending-champion Spurs. With six new players, the Spurs won three fewer games this season (57) than last season, but they have reeled off 11 consecutive wins heading into their first-round matchup with the neophyte Grizzlies (Game 1, Saturday, 7 p.m ET, ESPN). They have two-time Finals MVP Tim Duncan, who is as unflappable as they come, and as tough as the situations he faces.

    That, and since they're still the champs, the Spurs are the team to beat.

    2. Given their late-season inconsistency, could the Kings actually be better off without Chris Webber?

    The numbers give any seasoned NBA observer pause. The Kings without Chris Webber: 44-15. The Kings with Webber: 11-12.

    Without Webber, the Kings, led by Peja Stojakovic's sweet shooting, and deft passing from post players Vlade Divac and Brad Miller, were a fluid offensive machine. With Webber, who missed the first 58 games of the season because of a knee injury and an eight-game suspension, the Kings' offense has looked as stiff as Webber's surgically repaired knee.

    But better off without Webber? One Sacramento Bee reporter thinks the Kings would be better served bringing Webber off the bench. His teammates are singing a different tune.

    "(Webber) is invaluable for the different things he brings to our team," guard Doug Christie told the Sacramento Bee on March 12. "Whether his shot is going or not, we are going to stick with him through the good and the bad times."

    It looks as if Webber and his teammates are in it together, no matter how long (or short) their stay may be.

    3. Is the matchup between Shaquille O'Neal and Yao Ming the best of the first round?
    At a combined 14' 6" and 650 pounds, the Shaq-Yao first-round matchup is certainly the biggest. And it's one of the more intriguing. But the best?

    The numbers don't bode well for Yao and the seventh-seeded Rockets. True, Yao and the Rockets have a 3-3 record when they have faced Shaq and the Lakers in the last two regular seasons. But this is the postseason, and Shaq is a different, and better, man when the chips are down.

    Shaq has 136 playoff games under his belt. In those games, he's poured in 28.1 points per game and grabbed 12.9 rebounds per game. He's won three titles and three Finals MVP trophies.

    Yao has none of that, as this will be his first postseason appearance.

    In addition to experience, Shaq also has a better supporting cast than Yao. So expect Shaq and the Lakers to advance past the relatively inexperienced Rockets. But that doesn't mean that the matchup won't be fun to watch. The eventual successor to Shaq's super-sized throne starts his playoff education Saturday (April 17, 7:30 p.m. ET, ESPN).

    4. Who is the Timberwolves' go-to guy in crunch time?

    Some may think this answer is easy, considering Kevin Garnett is the odds-on favorite to be named the 2003-04 MVP. But the Wolves now have Sam Cassell, a point guard with two NBA championship rings who likes to take shots in the crunch. Some would say Cassell shoots too much, but he welcomes the playoff pressure. Considering that Cassell shot .486 from the field and .847 from the line, it may not be a bad idea to put the ball in his sure hands.

    Cassell will be important to the Wolves in the postseason, as last year's playoff stud, Troy Hudson, who averaged 23.5 points in the Wolves' seven-game loss to the Lakers, is nursing two tender ankles.

    "Right now, I don't know what it is," Hudson told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. "But I'm just not feeling the same out there. It seems like I can't do the things I need to ... Some nights it has felt OK, but recently every possession was a struggle. When it gets to that point, defensively as well as offensively, that's when you maybe have to take a step back."

    The Wolves don't want to take a step back. It's imperative that this best-team-never-to-get-past-the-first-round gets to the Western semis. And the Wolves guards need to step up.

    Still, with Garnett on the floor, he'll get most of the important touches down the stretch, with Cassell being a great complement.


    5. The Pacers are the first Eastern Conference team since the '97 Bulls to have the league's best record and get home-court advantage throughout the playoffs. Will this help them make the Finals and is this 60-win team being overlooked?

    Here's an interesting stat: Six of the last eight teams to have home-court advantage throughout the playoffs have made the Finals, and five of those have won. So, the stats bode well for the Pacers, who won a franchise-record 61 games.

    Seemingly no one (see No. 1) is giving the Pacers their props. Is it because of the perceived weakness of the Eastern Conference? Is it because the Pacers haven't made it out of the first round of the playoffs the last three years? Is it because no one expected the Pacers to be 61-wins-good this season? All of those factors may come into play when it comes to assessing Indy's chances to hold the Larry O'Brien trophy this season. Yet, one Pacer has already had a chance to hold said trophy ... during the filming of a commercial.

    "That's the first time I've ever touched it and it does feel good to hold it," Jermaine O'Neal told the Indianapolis Star as he walked back to the locker room after his commercial work was done. "It's something you've got to have. Hopefully, it's something we'll be able to bring back to the city this year."

    Because if NBA history is any indication, the Pacers have a good chance to do just that.

    6. Will the Grizzlies shorten their 10-man rotation for the playoffs?

    'Tis the (post)season most coaches count on their best seven or eight guys and ride them until they're eliminated or until they have rings.

    Grizzlies coach Hubie Brown has had a 10-man rotation most of this season. That philosophy has guided the Grizzlies to 50 wins and the first postseason in franchise history. So, why should Brown change his ways now? Brown expects all 10 of his guys to toughen up for the long haul that is the NBA Playoffs.

    "At playoff time, our guys have got to get into the paint to make things happen," Brown told the Memphis Commercial-Appeal. "And our big people have got to have game in the paint while they're being semi-mugged. That's been a part of the playoffs from Day One. These are things we'll lay out and things we've tried to do to prepare them."

    Sounds like Brown will need all the bodies he can get. Don't expect him to change his egalitarian strategy.

    7. Which of the No. 8 seeds, Denver or Boston, has a better chance of pulling a first-round upset?

    Who can forget the image of then-Nuggets center Dikembe Mutombo on the floor, joyfully clutching the basketball with a huge smile on his face after the Nuggets defeated the SuperSonics in 1994 to become the first-ever No. 8 seed ever to defeat a No. 1 seed?

    "We went into Denver thinking that it was going to be easy after winning the first two games," former Sonics coach George Karl admitted recently to the Rocky Mountain News.

    Three games later, the Sonics were toast.

    Can the Nuggets do that again, this time against the Timberwolves? Can the 36-46 Celtics defeat the Pacers, the team with a league-high 61 wins, a team Boston upset in last year's playoffs?

    When the Nuggets pulled their shocker 10 years ago, the first round was five games. With the first round now seven games, the possibility of a Nuggets or Celtics upset is slim. Conventional wisdom says the better team always wins a seven-game series.

    Since it would be wise for us not to count anyone out in the playoffs, the Nuggets, with at least two games in Denver's mile-high air and the huge monkey that Minnesota will play with on its back, have the slightly better chance of the two No. 8 seeds of pulling off a shocker.

    That being said, don't bet the farm on it.

    8. Which of the first-time playoff coaches is best prepared for the pressure of the postseason?

    Of the 16 teams in the playoffs, six teams -- Boston, Denver, Miami, Milwaukee, New Jersey and New Orleans -- will have coaches making their first-ever playoff appearances. All bring varying degrees of experience with them.

    New Orleans' head coach Tim Floyd has never been to the playoffs in the NBA as a coach. Boston's John Carroll was an assistant on two Celtics playoffs teams before being named interim head coach on Jan. 27. Milwaukee head coach Terry Porter made the playoffs 16 times as a player.

    As far as playoff coaching experience, three coaches stand out.

    Heat head coach Stan Van Gundy brings nine years of experience as Pat Riley's assistant in Miami. For the first seven seasons, the Heat made the playoffs, advancing as far as the Eastern Conference Finals in 1997. Van Gundy will have his work cut out for him with a team whose average age is 26.6.

    In six seasons as an assistant to Riley in Miami, Denver's Jeff Bzdelik went to the playoffs all six seasons. He did a masterful job of getting the Nuggets, who won 17 games last season, into the postseason. Bzdelik will also need to guide a relatively young team (average age, 26.3) against the West's top seed, Minnesota.

    But the one coach who is best prepared to handle the playoff pressure is the youngest coach of the lot. Nets coach Lawrence Frank is just 33 years old, yet as an assistant with New Jersey, he's been to two consecutive NBA Finals. In addition to the experience, he has the best team of the six first-time playoff coaches. The Nets core -- Jason Kidd, Kenyon Martin and Richard Jefferson -- have appeared in 40 playoff games in the last two seasons. That will help a lot.

    9. Does the New Jersey-New York first-round matchup hold any interest outside of the New York metropolitan area?

    We'd like to think so. You have the defending Eastern Conference champion Nets beginning their quest for a third consecutive Finals appearance. You have Madison Square Garden open for the postseason for the first time since 2001. The point guard matchup -- Jason Kidd vs. Stephon Marbury -- is one of the best matchups of the first round. New Orleans Hornets guard Baron Davis knows what he'll be doing on off days after battling the Heat.

    "There's always a comparison there because of the trade," Davis told the New York Post. "That's one of the playoff series I'm looking forward to watching. I know both players -- inside -- are looking forward to that matchup and that battle."

    So, yes, there are plenty of intriguing subplots to Nets-Knicks (Saturday, April 17, 4:30 p.m. ET, ESPN). Not to mention these teams don't particularly like each other. They've been making noise all season.

    "They have been asking for us," Kenyon Martin told the New York Daily News on April 3. "The guys proved that we are still the No. 1 team in the area."

    Now, however, the stakes are much higher than No. 1 team in the New York metropolitan area, which means the action should be even more intense than normal.

    10. Will Kobe Bryant play ball?

    After his April 11 "performance" against the Kings in Sacramento, people were asking, and some none too kindly, as to where Kobe Bryant had his head.

    "I can't tell you what he was thinking," Gary Payton told the Los Angeles Times.

    But have you seen Bryant in his last two games? On Monday, he poured in 45 against the Warriors. And in the double-OT season finale against the Blazers on Wednesday, Bryant may have had his finest moment this season, and possibly his career.

    Standing 25 feet from the hoop and with Ruben Patterson on his left hip, Bryant made an improbable three to send the game into the first overtime. Then, with one second remaining in the second OT, Bryant drained a fade-away 3-pointer over a hard-charging Theo Ratliff to give the Lakers the win.

    Will Kobe play ball? Five days ago, that was a good question. After Wednesday, that question seemingly has been answered.
    Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

Working...
X