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 #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

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

  • #46
    Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

    Our only hopes for Bynum would have been a poor start by the Lakers and Kobe *****ing like crazy. Now? Not so much.

    Btw, it takes a real man to reference an X-Men cartoon while having a Weyoun avatar. Beyond impressive, Peck.

    Oh and as far as this game goes, I'm not so sure that David didn't have a better game than JO. He certainly did better work in the post.

    Edit: Addendum, I still think a JO for Bynum and filler trade would be great for both sides. I think JO would be rejuvenated playing Robin to Kobe's Batman. If LA unloaded some bad salaries in the process, I think they should seriously consider it. That team still seems a little too weak inside.
    Last edited by rexnom; 11-21-2007, 02:03 AM.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

      If we play a team that shooting well from the outside, we'll get beat. If the team is shooting badly from the outside, we'll keep it close or win.

      This seems to be what I'm taking from most of the games so far this season.

      Rather it's our defense being that bad or what, but if the opposing team is constantly hitting from 15ft or out... we're in trouble.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

        Originally posted by rexnom View Post
        Our only hopes for Bynum would have been a poor start by the Lakers and Kobe *****ing like crazy. Now? Not so much.
        I really hope that Bird wasn't hoping that the Lakers would tank and Kobe would go ape**** and therefore force the Lakers FO to cave to Odom+Bynum. I have always thought that Bird is not a great gambler when it comes to taking risks. He may roll the dice and come up with a 7 or 11 ( like drafting Shawne ) from time to time....but most of the time...he just rolls snake eyes.

        Originally posted by rexnom View Post
        Edit: Addendum, I still think a JO for Bynum and filler trade would be great for both sides. I think JO would be rejuvenated playing Robin to Kobe's Batman. If LA unloaded some bad salaries in the process, I think they should seriously consider it. That team still seems a little too weak inside.
        Dream on......there is nothing that we can offer the Lakers that would entice them to give up Bynum for JONeal.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

          Maybe you Pacer fans can elaborate more on this but Jermaine looked like he flat out didn't want to be there. No emotions at all from him. He was playing like he didn't even care. He just looks so dejected......

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

            Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
            If we play a team that shooting well from the outside, we'll get beat. If the team is shooting badly from the outside, we'll keep it close or win.
            That's exactly my thoughts on the matter and kind of what I was getting it at with my post earlier talking about how we played our game where we protected the paint but they were hitting their threes. I really think these losses are a product of the system and ability of the other team to actually hit from 3 point land.

            In the pacers wins here's how the teams did from 3 point land
            washington (.300)
            miami (.563)
            memphis (.222)
            utah (.222)

            The miami game can be counted as somewhat of a fluke cause for once this season we actually got to the line more times than our opposition. Now as far as our losses.

            LA Clippers (.533)
            Bobcats (.357)
            Nuggets (.387)
            Celtics (.286) but they had twice as many FTA
            Wizards (.364)
            Raptors (.522)
            Lakers (.520)

            Someone made the comparisona few games ago and I forget who but they said that this reminds them of what Mike Davis did at IU where he tried to turn a bunch of people who were consistently bad shooters magically into shooters and it didn't work. I think that that's a pretty good comparison. Pacers have shot over 35% from outside 4 times...wonder if you can guess which games those were. When you come up against a situation where we can't hit a three and the other team does, worst case scenario you see games like what happened tonight.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

              Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
              If we play a team that shooting well from the outside, we'll get beat. If the team is shooting badly from the outside, we'll keep it close or win.

              This seems to be what I'm taking from most of the games so far this season.

              Rather it's our defense being that bad or what, but if the opposing team is constantly hitting from 15ft or out... we're in trouble.
              That's the $64,057,500 question ....how do we improve our defense when we have Tinsley, Dunleavy and an oft-injured Marquis guarding the perimeter?

              The short answer is we can't. We live with this until something major ( or drastic ) changes and pray that the other team doesn't shoot the ball well.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

                Originally posted by LAPacer View Post
                LA is playing really well. I don't think there was anything our personnel could have done differently. They were on their game and have alot more talent. Hard to stop that. I wish they would have traded Kobe to Detroit.
                What so we could get reamed 4 times a year by Kobe instead of 2? Count me in as one person who is very glad the Lakers are playing well and will hopefully keep him out west.

                We're a fast break, run and gun, shooting team thats gonna give up points. At least they did one of those parts well tonight.
                "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                ----------------- Reggie Miller

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

                  All I want for Christmas is some perimeter defenders

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I have a real serious question. I considered staring a new thread for this.

                    I have heard from many of you over the past couple of seasons that you can take losing if the team plays a wide open free wheeling offense. How many times have I had the Denver game from 4 seasons ago thrown in my face - the one where the Pacers won 72-72 and I made a big deal about how much I loved it.

                    Well is this better? Giving up 130 points. But the offense sure looked good

                    Unclebuck, no this isn't better. I'm one who has yanked your chain a few times, but I hope I've never said I'd accept "losing if the team plays a wide open" game. I want the Pacers to win.

                    I want the Pacers to be able to get stops when they need to. I want them to be able to protect a lead. I want them to be able to contest shots effectively and make the other team earn every point. But I'd rather see them win and score 100+ as opposed to see them win and score less than 80. I'd love the Pacers to consistently exceed the other team in rebounds, blocks and steals. I disagree with you about the other aspects of "good" defense. I suppose you'd like to see the other team blocked out and waste the 24 seconds without a shot, while I'd prefer them to take their shots and make a slightly lower percentage of them than the Pacers do.

                    And I hate the Pat Riley/Bruce Bowen aspects of defense. I hate the shoving and holding and elbowing.

                    I'm happier about this team than last years' team. It is good that they can score at a high clip. That alone is not enough, and the Pacers aren't going to be a very good team on just that. But explosive offensive potential is one good thing. Only one: there's still a lot wrong with the offense. But I'm happy knowing the Pacers can score.
                    And I won't be here to see the day
                    It all dries up and blows away
                    I'd hang around just to see
                    But they never had much use for me
                    In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      All I want for Christmas is some perimeter defenders

                      I am with you. It is sick. I wish we traded for Marice Evans.

                      Daniels and Granger are the only consistent defenders. Shawne will be better once he gets more PT and understands each player he is defending. He simply has not played players like Pierce and Kobe to be considered a reliable defender against them.

                      JO has slighty better trade value than Chris Webber did with the Sixers. There is no team with the right pieces out there to trade and get what we need. It would be better if he opts out by taking a buyout. Bynum tore him apart on both ends. But to JO's credit if Farmar, Kobe, and Fisher did not blow past their so called defenders he would have been in better position to at least have a chance.

                      With Bynum the way he is now I still think that the Lakers are stupid for not using him in a trade for Jason Kidd. Kidd can rebound better than anyone on that team.

                      David Harrison needs to put two games back to back. If he is solid again then we may be able to use him in a trade with JO.

                      So far the Rush and Diener project is failing. It is just November and I can't see any reason why Diener got that long contract. I know he is injured, but it is ridicoulous how much he looked like Saras tonight.

                      I would like to see better defense coming off a long layoff. Tommorrow should be interesting since Tyson Chandler won't be playing. He tore us apart last year.

                      And interesting stat though.

                      We give up more points than any team not in Memphis or Oakland. We give up more points than any team in the East. What is even more sad is that when your take the average Points scored of all of our opponents it is lower than the points that we give up. By 6 points.

                      Our defense is the main reason why we are failing. It may come around but we do not have the players that can assure that. A backcourt shake up is needed if we want to make the playoffs. Which means we may have to give up Shawne or Danny to get that.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        All I want for Christmas is some perimeter defenders
                        Amen Brother!
                        Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

                          How does JO manage to snag 3 measley boards? Hell the ball boy could do that for a hell of a lot less cash.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

                            With regards to JO, I think it's clear right now that you have to stick with him, hope he gets/stays healthy, and then reassess his trade value at that point. It would be a huge mistake to trade him now.

                            After watching the game last night, if Bynum was truly on the table, and Indy was holding out for Odom AND Bynum, I have to say that that was a bigtime mistake. Again, IF he was on the table, Pacers bras should have pulled the trigger.


                            As for the Bynum for Kidd trade, I think some don't realize that it was more than just Bynum. Kwame Brown and another player or two would have had to be included to make that deal work. So, having Kobe and Kidd would be nice, but do you really think that that team makes any serious noise at all in the western Conference with Brain Cook or Ronny Turiaf starting at center? I think not. To trade for Kidd, LA wouldn't have had any big men left.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

                              Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
                              Our defense all around was HORRIBLE, especially on the perimeter. The Lakers looked like they were conducting some type of orchestra with their ball movement out there. And what they were doing wasn't especially revolutionary or anything, it's just that we couldn't keep up to where the ball was at for some reason, giving them plenty of open looks from beyond the arc. We kind of looked like a tormented cat chasing one of those laser light things, always a couple of steps behind

                              I agreed with everything you said but what I quoted above was the reason they lost they game.

                              It was the same thing against the Lakers that we saw against the Clippers, Nuggets, Wizards, and Raptors - slow rotations to the open man. The goal is to trap the pick and roll and shut down the middle but neither has been to effective in those 5 losses in particular. They were running around like chickens with their heads cut off and the Lakers kept drilling wide open "practice" jumpers.

                              I'm starting to think that they should stop trapping the pick and roll and stick to man to man defense unless they can do a better job of rotating.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Post Game Thread #11 Blown Out by the Lakers

                                Originally posted by Elgin56 View Post
                                How does JO manage to snag 3 measley boards? Hell the ball boy could do that for a hell of a lot less cash.
                                How does he manage to snag 3????
                                they fell into his hands by mistake!!!!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X