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

Who is better Jax2 or Quis ??

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

  • #31
    Re: Who is better Jax2 or Quis ??

    Originally posted by ajbry View Post
    He's averaged 16+ PPG the last 3 seasons and when JO was hurt during the 04-05 season, he put up 22 PPG to keep this team afloat. If you legitimately feel Stephen Jackson is not a good basketball player, I simply do not wish to pursue any of your baiting further. Have a nice life.
    He shot a lot. You shoot a lot, and even if you do hit only 40% of your shots, you're bound to put up a nice average.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Who is better Jax2 or Quis ??

      I started of liking this thread thinking it was a good idea and had scope for being an interesting debate .... but i dont see the point in reading post which simply state flat often biased statements with seemingly no thought or result coming from them. i no im not a PD veteren but i liked this board because of intelegent well thought out sensible posts, not random drivel

      Sorry about the rant.

      As for Jax Vs Quis ... currently i think Jax is a better player. I think his all round game provides a lot more flexability and is better polished. However my major concerns with Jax are both his attitude and his court IQ. I think if he can learn his place and control his shot (in many ways like he did as a 6th man in SAS,) he can be a very effective and strong player. This said i still love Quis as an addition he has an interesting and effective set of skills that can contribute to a team successfully but i feel his game has holes in it, including shooting i think in the future Quis could become a very valuable player but i think Jax is closer to the complete product and therefor gets my Vote.
      'All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.'
      Animal Farm, by George Orwell

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Who is better Jax2 or Quis ??

        I like Quis's intangables over S-Jax. Jax takes to many forced shots. I think the team as a hole takes to many threes. I don't like the make up of the team I believe it is flawed. We have a group of guy's that play the same way. I think we need a pure shooter very badly. You have to have a guy to kick the ball out to that can hit a open jumper. But back to the Quis Vs. Jack debate. I think Jack likes to be the go to guy and he can do that with the second string guys. But what sways me most is simple. When Jack gets the ball I say OH No he is going to force something when Quis gets it I have hope.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Who is better Jax2 or Quis ??

          Tonight Jax was better, but Marquis made a couple of key plays, helping out on Redd with about 35 seconds left, and a hard cut to the basket to bail Jamaal out

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Who is better Jax2 or Quis ??

            There is alot of animosity on this subject.

            Quis is a distributor/scorer
            Jax is a shooter/scorer

            They are both above average defenders, with Quis being quicker and Jax being longer.

            Both of them have consistency issues but also have the ability to be productive players on good teams.

            I think Jax is more suited to being a primary option with the second unit, similar to Stackhouse in Dallas. But Quis and Tins as a starting backcourt is desperately short on perimeter shooting, so I dont see those two as a permanent fixture.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Who is better Jax2 or Quis ??

              I agree with what UB said earlier. Having a back court of Daniels and Tinsley is not a very good idea because Tinsley is a poor shooter. We could pair him with Saras but he is just a terrible defender and his shot isn't really automatic.

              Having Daniels at PG isn't something you should look forward too sometimes because he will have problems against quick point guards. Plus, his decision making at times will make destroy your television set with a baseball bat. I believe he will get better as he matures but when he was playing for Dallas, he would just make the some of the most stupidest mistakes at the most critical situations.

              As for who is the better player? Well I think its Marquis. I just don't think he'll fit well with Tinsley.
              "Remember the pain of my fist. That is my power!"

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Who is better Jax2 or Quis ??

                I'm really big on Daniels at this point and have been saying so quite a bit. However, other than Jack's 3pt shot I consider him one of the better players on the court for the Pacers.

                I call it a dead heat between the two. I think the defense really goes up when they are both on the court together, just like we saw to end the MIL game tonight. Jack forced Redd to take possession out at the HC logo with outstanding defense, and then kept him from coming to the lane as Redd drove which ran him right into a smart Daniels who moved into position to take anything else away from him.

                The thing is the two of them had a very similar defensive combo play in the last game vs MIL. They work well together.

                Take away the 4 3pt misses tonight (and you can't overlook those, the dude is struggling badly and needs to find it in practice before he takes 4 during a game) and Jack's line is very all-around solid for the night. Much like Daniels he is doing just a little of everything.


                I'm very pleased with the games they both bring...I just wish Jack could find his 3pt shot because I'd take 1-3 and 2-5 every other night from him (which would be in his normal PCT range).


                The only place Quis may have the edge is in breaking down a defender to penetrate off the perimeter, but even given that, I'd still say Jack is better at finishing his penetration than Marquis.
                Yeah. Here is what Jack does VERY well - he feeds JO (or other) from the wing, runs the Give and Go usually baseline and that's money I'd guess 80% of the time or more.

                He also gets the ball out on the wing for clear outs, sometimes the 3pt corner too, and can go baseline or over top if the guy cheats baseline and that's money as well. In the @MIL game they ran this back to back to start the 2nd and he went right in for easy layups both times.

                Finally he is a good SG post-up player. He's a little bigger and stronger than a lot of SGs and can work this for scores in the paint pretty well. One problem is that more than other spots he is TO prone here, but only on the double-down help defense.

                His 3pt shot is bland normally, certainly below average for more shooting guards, but serviceable. This year it stinks beyond belief. Guys normally do not lose their shots this badly unless they are injured. Dude looks like Steve Sax out there suddenly. Can't figure that.

                Otherwise driving the ball I give it to Daniels totally. He's not a "slasher", he doesn't go first step to the rim like Jack does. He's like Barry Sanders, he steps back and forth, lots of horizontal moves, and picks his way into the lane. He can do this AT WILL.

                The issue with him had been finishing, though the other night he was much stronger with it. Normally Jack is a better finisher than Daniels, but MD is very good about making something happen off the penetration, usually a pass instead.

                He rarely wastes his penetration with a kickout - something only a casual fan could love because it generally means you just wasted all the mismatches you got on the drive. You don't need drives to get open 3pt looks which is why kickouts are terribly overrated.

                MD will dump to a big or someone coming to the rim instead which means a nice high % shot and maybe the foul too, plus you then have offensive board action.

                MD has no 3pt shot and previously he knew this. His attempts jumped 2-3 times when he got to Indy. Hopefully that will go away when they get the offensive system settled.


                MD is a little more instinctive as a help defender. Jack is more physical. Jack is a master of the from-behind blocks and tap away's (something Reggie was great at too) and he often baits players into putting up shots they think they are clear on and then swipes it when they get it over their head. He gets these nearly every game for a TO.

                Jack muscles guys better and while MD is more OG due to the ball handling, Jack fares better vs SGs because he uses his size more. MD uses speed and smarts which IMO has given him more success on SFs on either end. Yes he can be posted, and if they try that I'd like to see Jack switch with him, but otherwise Jack is better vs Wade and Redd than bigger guys like Pierce (who shoot over him with ease).

                MD hurts a guy like PP more because his defense is about denial and speed rather than size.


                At least this is how I've read both their games. Obviously I've watched Jack play a lot more.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Who is better Jax2 or Quis ??

                  my major concerns with Jax are both his attitude and his court IQ
                  This has been his biggest flaw since day 1. The main reason I'm so happy with his game right now despite the 3pt shooting (which is awful even for him) is that his attitude is 100% better (smiles, claps, discusses with refs rather than throwing fits, calms OTHER players down, etc) and his game looks A LOT smarter overall that last year.

                  The "aww Jack come on" plays are way down this year. They needed to be, and even more so considering his outside shot is gone. I'd estimate he used to be about 35-40% plays where you were frustrated with him, and now it's down to maybe 10% or less.

                  When I say "you" I mean fans like me who don't carry a huge grudge against him for being alive.

                  Jack is getting older and where I think he differs from Artest is that each time he goes through some crap he does seem to improve it a little. His arguing actually dropped way off last year after the first two months, which were a disaster. He had a tech in the @LA game (JAN or early FEB) and then went about a month before getting a tech for catching the ball on his own made shot (delay of game tech, total BS IMO).

                  I've posted photos before of him actually calming down AJ as he lost it on a ref toward the end of the season last year (I think the PORT game), he listened to AJ rather than just pulling him away, listened to the ref, let them air some of the stuff out and then politely started pulling AJ away. It was a very mature moment for a guy who just a few months before was the one that always had to be calmed down.

                  That's what I mean about learning. He stunk at dealing with those issues, especially the refs. But he's gotten better. That suggests a guy that listens and learns. Sure a fan would rather he didn't learn on the job with the Pacers, but it's better than never getting it at least.

                  I think Jack is trying to not make the same mistakes and does regret a lot of his actions. He's just not been emotionally smart and apparently has only begun to learn how to be in the last 2 years. To me it suggests that this could be a guy that as an elder player he'll be a leader type where fans look back and say "THAT guy became THIS guy?"

                  A little like you've seen with Barkley for example, or better yet Jim Brown who was far from the stand-up leader type he is now. Contrast that with Ron who actually seems to be more good natured instinctively yet also maybe a little crazy in the literal sense. For him I don't think it's control problems but just that he sees the world in an unusual way all the time.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Who is better Jax2 or Quis ??

                    Originally posted by Quis View Post
                    There's nothing biased about my opinion.
                    Originally posted by Quis
                    Jackson is a superior passer to Quis?
                    Not counting tonight's game...
                    Assists
                    Jack 3.8
                    MD 1.8

                    Assists per 48
                    Jack 5.9
                    MD 3.8

                    Assist to TO
                    Jack 2.00
                    MD 1.13

                    In tonight's game MD had 4 assists to 2 for Jack, played less than Jack so his per 48 is even better, each had 2.00 A/TO on the night. So tonight MD was better. Not enough to overturn those numbers of course.

                    That's just full disclosure on my part anyway. You made your posts BEFORE tonights game. So in fact there is something EXTREMELY biased about your opinion, as in the FACTS clearly contradicted it.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Who is better Jax2 or Quis ??

                      Jack is my 3rd favorite Pacer behind JO and Al, that being said, I'm going to keep this simple.

                      We're 2-0 with Quis starting, so let's ride it while we can.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Who is better Jax2 or Quis ??

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        Not counting tonight's game...
                        Assists
                        Jack 3.8
                        MD 1.8

                        Assists per 48
                        Jack 5.9
                        MD 3.8

                        Assist to TO
                        Jack 2.00
                        MD 1.13

                        In tonight's game MD had 4 assists to 2 for Jack, played less than Jack so his per 48 is even better, each had 2.00 A/TO on the night. So tonight MD was better. Not enough to overturn those numbers of course.

                        That's just full disclosure on my part anyway. You made your posts BEFORE tonights game. So in fact there is something EXTREMELY biased about your opinion, as in the FACTS clearly contradicted it.
                        Career Minutes Per Game
                        Quis: 23.6
                        Jack: 30.1

                        Career Assists Per Game
                        Quis: 2.3
                        Jack: 2.4

                        Career Assists Per-48 Minutes.
                        Quis: 4.7
                        Jack: 3.8

                        You stand corrected.

                        But hey, why bother with over 3 years worth of data when you can just use 11 games?

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Who is better Jax2 or Quis ??

                          It doesn't matter who would win if they were playing 1 on 1.
                          I like Jack coming off of the bench. It lightens his burden & gives us a bit more of an offensive punch with the subs.
                          It also gives us better defense w/ our starters imo.
                          We have enough scoring w/ J.O., Al, & Danny in the starting string.
                          There are several reasons to keep this current lineup in operation.
                          If they did play 1 on 1... I would probably take Jack in 6, hahaha.
                          1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
                          3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
                          5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
                          7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.



                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X