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

Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

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

  • Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

    As I said in the game thread, to bad for the loss, refs were from the first whistle ready to kill this game and mainly the P's, but that's how it seems to go at times.
    JO had a monster, Jax was (outside of 3-4 boneheaded actions like fouling in the final 2 while Tins is (finally) making a layup on a breakaway, I mean why he needed to bodycheck the guy is beyond me.
    Al was invisible, as in as he even in the building ?
    Sara had some good and some horrendous moments, and should stop trying to be fancy with every pass, most of them are only passes because receiving players go out of their way to catch it, but it is not the road to success.

    Jeff, well if I was his coach I would even forbid him to attempt a lay-up and only allow him to dunk when he is all alone!

    Rick's "rotation" oh well there's already a thread on, so maybe someone will figure it out and I will learn, not now.

    MD was in in the first half, and it was a "forgetable" experience.

    JT certainly did not get 1 whistle in his favour while he drove, but in general did not have a great night, except for 6 on Williams.

    Boozer v JO, well the numbers speak for themselves, so that was no competition.

    In all it was a strange game, with highlights but few. Coaching was main reason of this loss imo, but I am sure better thinking heads will correct me there
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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


  • #2
    Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

    If your name isn't JO and Jack you should be disgusted. AL and Jeff may as well have not even been on the court. Worst game of the season for both of them. What really disgusts me is we could have won. Oh and at Illinois fans. Do they really cling to that Deron Williams and Dee Brown backcourt that much? They didn't even win a championship. I got a really big kick out of this.


    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

      Just got back from the game. I assume very few of you saw the - only those in person and those with League pass.

      This is going to be very random -

      Let me first repeat what I posted in another thread. Baston was not dressed for todays game, he was in a suit behind the bench sitting with Harrison.

      I think I went to my last Pacers game ever - yes that's right. Midway through the 4th quarter I notice the lower bowl trying to start the wave. OK that is bad enough, but I couldn't figure out how or why - I mean they've never tried that before. Then I see Boomer standing in section 6 imploring the fans to start the wave - I about lost it. Please Boomer - just entertain the kids and no wave.

      I don't have a real problem with the effort today. The execution wasn't good and a few key players didn't play well for the Pacers - but I can't fault the effort. The Jazz just are a much better team than the Pacers - in every area - in every way. I doubt I'll see a better coached team all season.

      Many will complain about the officiating today and rightfully so. But the Jazz for as long as Sloan has been the coach has always been very tough to referee - they set so many picks, they run through so many picks, they execute so well and are so physical that it is tough to know what to call when.

      It didn't take long for me to jump right back off the Tinsley bandwagon about 2 minutes into the game today when he was getting burned by Williams and then trying to score on the rock solid Jazz - the Jazz aren't the NY Knicks you can't just stroll down the lane and expect to get a layup.

      able - Carlisle did not lose this game for us - that just isn't correct.


      Seth, last night at the party you were critical of Granger's defense and I didn't really speak up because I figured - let me see for myself. I thought maybe I was blinded by the excellent job Granger did on Lebron and a few of the other great small forwards. And I now understand exactly what you mean. Granger get lost on defense - he gets backdoored a lot, several times today, he is often out of position. His problem is not defensive talent because he can play one-on-one defense very well - but in the team concept he is either thinking too much and therefore is always a step late or he isn't thinking at all.

      JO was really all we had today besides DA and Saras - so that is simply not going to beat a team as good as the Jazz.


      Oh, and the part about not going to another Pacers game ever was of course a joke.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

        I will be the first one in line to say that Jack blew this game. His stretch vs Fisher in the 3rd hurt a ton, and then his stupid foul on the break away from the ball and then some poor shooting on shots that had to be taken AND MADE (a layup, yes I want him to shoot that and expect any player to make it).

        He had a meltdown of both smart play and execution.

        Too bad, he shot well in the first half I thought.

        Um, did anyone see Harrington today? I think he had his invisibility cloak working or something. Non-factor except for the fouls.

        JO was a monster and came up with the play of the game when he blocked AK at the rim late to get that 24 second violation. Too bad the team choked away the chances.


        Armstrong hit a 3 after shooting a couple others that almost missed the floor they were so bad. He was good but also frustrating.


        PS - Jazz are really, really good. Great fundamentals. Not really that bad a game for Indy considering how smart Utah played.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

          I will echo that the Jazz are very, very good, but I think this was a winnable game. Quite simply 3 of our 5 starters didn't have a single good stretch (Tins, Foster, and Al.) If one of those guys puts together a half way decent strecth we win IMO. Oh and for all of you who wouldn't trade for AI to pair with him JO this game proves to me why we should do so if we have the chance.


          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

            Agree Buck, Tinsley had an overall poor game too. Roughly on par with Armstrong IMO - some good moments, but more bad ones.

            I doubt I'll see a better coached team all season.
            Agree. Very impressive.


            Fouls - when their star PG fouls out and their stud frontline all ended with 5 and were cautious on Pacers drives to keep in the game. That's why Jack was able to go right at AK for that late layup...and then just blew it.


            One other thing, they did post JO and go at them for the foul and AK came over for a monster block at one point late in the 4th. Again, Jazz are pretty talented.

            Oh and for all of you who wouldn't trade for AI to pair with him JO this game proves to me why we should do so if we have the chance
            Well obviously for today's game I would agree. AI would have been productive whereas Tins and Jack and Daniels and Al weren't.

            But in recent games they all have been (not MD) and the team won. Plus as you say THIS GAME WAS WINNABLE. Gotta execute on plays that you normally get done.


            I forgot the most important part - Thanks Gnome!!
            RG got me into my first game of the year and was great company. I like going to games with other fans that really do follow the team and understand the game.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

              i didn't watch this game but i will continue to stress that if the pacers do not make some drastic changes as far as personel is concerned, this team will NEVER be more than a .500 ballclub for the next decade. it's so hard to make any sort of negative comments about granger on this board without being hammered by the seemingly infinite blinded granger lovers. but outside of being a spot up shooter, he provides nothing to the offense. i blame carlisle for that as imo granger is still much more suited as a low post player in terms of creating for himself. and i can see how he gets lost but my biggest concern is that he'll stick with his man for the most part, but he fails to get his hand in the defenders face when they release the shot.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                I will be the first one in line to say that Jack blew this game. His stretch vs Fisher in the 3rd hurt a ton, and then his stupid foul on the break away from the ball and then some poor shooting on shots that had to be taken AND MADE (a layup, yes I want him to shoot that and expect any player to make it).

                He had a meltdown of both smart play and execution.

                .
                I think it's difficult to pin a loss on any one player. However, if we are proposing candidates, I don't see how you can put Jack over JT.

                True Jack had some poor stretches and a couple bonehead plays that hurt, but Tins's every minute on the floor was practically poor and consisted of bonehead plays-most notably consistently overpenetrating when it wasn't there and forcing numerous shots that he had not business taking. Then add in the defensive torching, which we already anticipated given the matchup.

                At any rate, it's not fair to blame just one guy. We did not play well yet we gave effort to stay in and we had several chances to get back in. Other comments:

                -DA was absolutely awesome. The only guy that gave consistent defensive effort while on the floor I thought.

                -Had we made some FTs and/or gotten a few more defensive boards following and initial stop, we probably win.

                -I actually thought Marquis was effective from an energy and defensive standpoint with the lineup that got us back in it in the first half (2nd quarter).

                -I thought there was a bit of regression by several players on the stability/maturity front. Tins and Jack were on the refs a lot. I realize that was partly due to the officiating, which I thought was awful both ways.

                I perceived both JT and Al as getting taken out of the game mentally and emotionally due to the fact things weren't really coming to them. Al's response was to be absolutely passive. He just never looked like he was in the game.

                JT's was to redirect his negative energy into forcing shots and generally making lots of poor decisions. Reminiscent of his poor habits when he feels one-upped a little. I can understand a bad game as far as being off shooting, which he was. But this went beyond that. He let his frustration with Williams and the scoreboard affect his ability to run the team. The PG has got to be a leader and a stabilizing force, not leading the charge into losing composure.

                Let's see what happens in the next few games that we should win with solid play. The way we recover from a tough and disappointing performance today could indicate a lot about the direction of this team. Are we on the cusp of coming together or were the previous two wins just fool's gold.
                I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                -Emiliano Zapata

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

                  I thought that Jax had a few good moments but for most of the game was not in the flow of the offense or defense. There were times he picked up his man on defense and other times he didn't. IMO only DA and JO had decent games. I really like the way DA schmoozes the refs. After several times that he has his little talks the refs gave the Pacers favorable calls. I didn't catch which ref it was but he was a momentum stopper for the pacers. We thought that the refs called the game ultra tight because of what happened with the knicks/nuggets last night.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

                    Can we lay off the scapegoats for now please. I swear here are people here that would bash our players even if we one the title, then there are people who think choosing the popular scapegoat makes them look smart. I didn't even see this game but sounds like the team had a chance to beat statisticly the best team in the league. How can someone blame Jack when Tinsley shot 3 for 18. I won't blame anyone for there perfomance in a game I didn't see but you people **** me off.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

                      I'm not surprised by the loss, though I was a little surprised with how we got there. Guys will have a off night now and again, and this looks like we had a conjunction of off nights. At this point, I'm hoping for a strong bounce-back these next two games. I consider the ability to leave a bad game behind and move on to be a strong part of team character.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

                        Originally posted by maragin View Post
                        I'm not surprised by the loss, though I was a little surprised with how we got there. Guys will have a off night now and again, and this looks like we had a conjunction of off nights. At this point, I'm hoping for a strong bounce-back these next two games. I consider the ability to leave a bad game behind and move on to be a strong part of team character.
                        Even when they were down by 20 I thought that they were still fighting and showing some pride. I wouldn't call this a blowout but just a bad game against a very good team.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

                          Watching the Jazz in person is fun. Some of you may want to know what I mean when I say the Jazz are probably the best coached team in the NBA (Jazz and Spurs) what are the earmarks of a well coached team. The Jazz players know exactly what they are supposed to do - there is hardly any indecision - there aren't any questions about "what are we supposed to do now"

                          Certainly the coach is vital in having a well coached team - but you need the right players also. The Jazz have smart veteran players who know but also accept their roles. Spurs have the same thing. During Rick's first season as the Pistons head coach I often described that team as the best coached team in the NBA. Also don't think if Sloan or Popovich were the pacers coach that they would then be the best coached team in the NBA

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

                            This is probably the best team we've played all year," said Jermaine O'Neal, who led Indiana with 31 points. "And they really showed why they're the best team in the NBA, because no matter what happens, they don't show very many emotions. They just come out with their hard hat and just play basketball, no matter what."

                            Nice words by O'Neal. I do not think the Jazz are the best team, they are good but still to young and inexperienced to be considered as a contenders. Spurs and Dallas are still the best teams in the West, if Jazz somehow will make it to the second round of playoffs I will be more than happy.
                            Next year on the other hand baring any major changes they should compete for Western conference title.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Post game thread (Jazz 12/17)

                              UB i was not saying that Rick lost us the game, (well that is if Baston was sitting out due to injury, but if so then the guys on NBA tv; the gawdawful Jazz crew, didn't know either) but his choice of MD was "unlucky" to say the least.

                              It is funny how everybody that hasn't seen the game harps on JT's 3-18 but as you said Seth ,some good and some bad moments, though losing a score in there because of a Jax foul is sad and not to mention the number of drives he was simply fouled on and I know this is not the Knicks, but if one guy goes up between 3, chances are about 100-1 that he gets fouled if he misses the layup.

                              Yes the Jazz are very well coached, noticable.

                              and Yes in all the game was still a pleasure to watch.

                              And indeed, why JO hardly touched the ball in the 4th was beyond me.
                              So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

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

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X