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

Olympic Basketball Thread

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

  • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    Ah, reality is setting in.

    Quickness and athleticism combined with an actual game plan is pretty much unstoppable. While other teams are more than capable of playing smart, eurostyle, team basketball...tremendous athletes that have a relatively good game plan will ultimately be victorious.

    Similar to Sarunas, the superstar, the rest of the world will bow to the quickness and athleticism of the NBA...because that's the difference. The rest of the world can learn ALL they want about the game, but they cannot learn how to be quicker and more athletic. It is an advantage the Americans alone have from top to bottom.
    No doubt athleticism is an advantage and no doubt the American team has it in spades in this tournament, but will it "ultimately be victorious"? Not necessarily, otherwise the Atlanta Hawks would have been NBA champions last year and Stromile Swift and Tyrus Thomas would have been co-MVPs.

    There still is a place for disciplined team play and skill, not just an impressive 40 time and a vertical leap. As others pointed out, that has been proven in the past internationally and even to an extent this year, as far less athletic teams aren't exactly looking like they don't even belong on the floor next to the US side (despite the fact that none of the games have been especially close, they aren't out-and-out domination like the FIBA Americas tournament last year).

    As far as the 92 Dream Team, it's just speculation, but I'm fairly confident they'd handle this US team fairly easily and be fairly dominant against the international competition. They had a far better inside presence, far more success in the NBA playoffs (Mullin and Laettner excepted, although Laettner did win back-to-back NCAA titles), far more accomplished team players and arguably far better defensively. I just think that the fact that the Dream Team was mostly comprised of proven winners and champions gives them a huge edge over guys who have experienced less success as a part of a team.

    Comment


    • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
      The Dream team wasn't as good offensively as this one, but they were infinitely better offensively.

      It remains the greatest team ever assembled. They'd shred the modern day zones of the current teams.
      I think you mean they weren't as good "defensively" at this one, right? Because I think that the 1992 Dream Team was far better defensively. They boasted a far better interior core than this team defensively, I don't think any wing defender on this current team is fit to carry Jordan, Pippen or Stockton's underwear or even arguably Drexler's.

      Perhaps the presence of Mullin, Bird, Magic and Laettner make that team look a tad worse than it was. Barkley, I'm sure, also makes that team defensively look bad, except he was motivated and helpful in 1992 (and, at least by his own standards, he was "in shape" then). But I think the whole team defense on the 1992 squad is considerably better than this squad.

      I'm fairly biased on this account, because I think people are in the habit of greatly understating how great those players on that team were, and overstating how good players on this one are (and I have Kobe Bryant, Dwight Howard and Carmelo Anthony firmly in mind as I say that).

      Comment


      • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

        Originally posted by Kstat View Post
        The Dream team wasn't as good offensively as this one, but they were infinitely better offensively.

        It remains the greatest team ever assembled. They'd shred the modern day zones of the current teams.

        I do not know if that is the greatest team ever assembled. It had great players but I would be interested to see this team play that team. The 1992 team played in an era where basketball did dot develop as much as it has internationally. Teams were in awe of them and did not even think about trying let alone winning.
        ANDY: I guess it comes down to a simple choice, really. Get busy winning or get busy losing.

        Comment


        • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

          Good to see Rubio not playing scared.

          Comment


          • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

            USA up 61-45. Lebron's been an absolute beast so far.
            Last edited by Trader Joe; 08-16-2008, 11:19 AM.


            Comment


            • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

              Boris do you understand why Carmelo is on the team now?


              Comment


              • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                USA wins 119-82.

                Um yeah, I think the score pretty much speaks for itself, but it was Dream Team-esque.


                Comment


                • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                  Originally posted by Indy View Post
                  Boris do you understand why Carmelo is on the team now?
                  Don't forget to give credit to his chauffer/designated driver.

                  And no, I still don't think he's the best choice for that team - notwithstanding his performance at the FIBA Americas tournament (which was admittedly fantastic) or his one good game so far. And realistically, one game isn't going to change my mind (nor that of many people here who are probably as bewildered by his addition as I am).

                  Does the USA have such a dearth of wing scoring that they need Carmelo Anthony? Or maybe he'd just look better if they left Kobe at home? I don't know the answer to that, frankly. But one of the two could have been left at home without being missed.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                    http://www.20minutos.es/noticia/4060...spana/cronica/

                    In case anyone (Boris) has any doubts anymore, the Spanish media has a message for you:

                    Por si alguien tenía alguna duda, Estados Unidos demostró que es la gran favorita al oro olímpico en baloncesto tras pasar por encima de la que se presenta como la gran alternativa, la selección española.

                    In case anyone has doubts, the United States demonstrated that it is the great favorite to win basketball Olympic gold basketball against perhaps its greatest foe, the Spanish team.

                    At this point, the collapse of the stadium and cancellation of the event or the US team somehow ending up in a Chinese prison might be the most likely ways they don't get the gold.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                      Originally posted by ChicagoPacer View Post
                      http://www.20minutos.es/noticia/4060...spana/cronica/

                      In case anyone (Boris) has any doubts anymore, the Spanish media has a message for you:

                      Por si alguien tenía alguna duda, Estados Unidos demostró que es la gran favorita al oro olímpico en baloncesto tras pasar por encima de la que se presenta como la gran alternativa, la selección española.

                      In case anyone has doubts, the United States demonstrated that it is the great favorite to win basketball Olympic gold basketball against perhaps its greatest foe, the Spanish team.

                      At this point, the collapse of the stadium and cancellation of the event or the US team somehow ending up in a Chinese prison might be the most likely ways they don't get the gold.
                      Hey, I'll give the US team credit: they beat a good Spanish team and a good Greek team. At this point, yes, I'd agree with that newspaper, the USA has proven it can rescue their team from Kobe Bryant's ghastly play even without a great frontcourt which makes them heavy favourites to win this. (And I'm mostly a Kobe fan, I'm not just hating because it's fashionable or "easy" for me.)

                      I still think it's far from inconceivable that Greece or Spain steal a game from the USA, even Lithuania could beat them, but the odds seem more long than from when the tournament began. Spain's just a mess, I don't know what's going on there but they are not unified at all, and Greece just doesn't seem to have it. I was expecting big things from Russia, but I don't know what's happening there either. IMO, David Blatt is the best coach in this tournament by a fairly healthy margin but I can't explain Russia's collapse.

                      What can I say? They've proven me wrong so far, and fairly convincingly.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                        I don't get the Kobe hate (strong word, I know). Offensively he has been miserable, but his presence defensively has absolutely caused everyone else to raise their games on that end, IMO. Another thing Kobe gives us is the ability to bring Wade off the bench and this allows Wade to come in with all kinds of energy.

                        I think the issue with Carmelo is you are looking at him like a wing player when IMO, that simply is not how he is being used by this team. Carmelo is a great player for us to put at the four next to Howard. He is able to spread the floor, but he is also strong and athletic enough to go inside and guard most other team's power forwards.

                        I can't really say I'd swap anyone off the team at this point. At the start of the Olympics, I might have swapped Prince out, but he has played extremely well so far.


                        Comment


                        • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                          Spain just doesn't match up well with the US at all. Their style of play is exactly what American players are used to countering.

                          Even when USA sent team disharmony to the 2004 olympics that lost 3 times, they still managed to knock Spain out.

                          Spain loves to fire away and outscore people. You can't beat the US doing that, especially not this team.
                          Last edited by Kstat; 08-16-2008, 02:09 PM.

                          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                          Comment


                          • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                            Originally posted by BorisD View Post
                            I think you mean they weren't as good "defensively" at this one, right? Because I think that the 1992 Dream Team was far better defensively. They boasted a far better interior core than this team defensively, I don't think any wing defender on this current team is fit to carry Jordan, Pippen or Stockton's underwear or even arguably Drexler's.

                            Perhaps the presence of Mullin, Bird, Magic and Laettner make that team look a tad worse than it was. Barkley, I'm sure, also makes that team defensively look bad, except he was motivated and helpful in 1992 (and, at least by his own standards, he was "in shape" then). But I think the whole team defense on the 1992 squad is considerably better than this squad.

                            I'm fairly biased on this account, because I think people are in the habit of greatly understating how great those players on that team were, and overstating how good players on this one are (and I have Kobe Bryant, Dwight Howard and Carmelo Anthony firmly in mind as I say that).
                            My take is that the 1992 team would in fact beat this team because it was simply assembled with winners. Magic, Larry, Stockton, and Jordan had a passing game and such versatile moves that they would find a way to outscore you. Larry was way past his prime, but as he said many times "I've got making up for a lack of speed down to a science" and so many of those guys had fast hands and great anticipation.

                            Offensively the 1992 team was much, much better. I think it could be arguend that the 2008 team is better defensively. The real standout guys from the team were Pippen and Jordan... the original Dobermans. Some of the better defenders in the NBA at that time simply weren't on the squad.

                            Any team can be beat in basketball on a given day, not to think so is naive. However, it would take the US playing it's worst and another team playing the game of their life to beat this team. We have been beaten in International Play enough to realize our vulnerability, particularly if we can't hit some outside shots.

                            I agree that 1992 had that presence that froze people out, but it was still simply the greatest talent I have ever seen assembled. My only regret is that is wasn't assembled about 4 years earlier... now that would have been something to witness indeed. Bird, Magic, and Jordan in their prime... whew!
                            “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                            motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                            Reggie Miller

                            Comment


                            • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                              It was the best passing team ever. It really isn't even close. They were so much better at moving the ball than every other team I've ever seen.

                              Not to mention it was the 2nd best shooting team ever assembled, after the 1994 team.

                              With that caliber of passing and shooting on the same team, they would have destroyed anybody.

                              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                              Comment


                              • Re: Olympic Basketball Thread

                                Originally posted by Indy View Post
                                I don't get the Kobe hate (strong word, I know). Offensively he has been miserable, but his presence defensively has absolutely caused everyone else to raise their games on that end, IMO. Another thing Kobe gives us is the ability to bring Wade off the bench and this allows Wade to come in with all kinds of energy.

                                I think the issue with Carmelo is you are looking at him like a wing player when IMO, that simply is not how he is being used by this team. Carmelo is a great player for us to put at the four next to Howard. He is able to spread the floor, but he is also strong and athletic enough to go inside and guard most other team's power forwards.

                                I can't really say I'd swap anyone off the team at this point. At the start of the Olympics, I might have swapped Prince out, but he has played extremely well so far.
                                I don't think Kobe's defense has been that great, given that he plays with his head on a swivel, wanders around without regard to what the team needs, and is probably the worst off-ball defender on that team. His seeming effort has been top-notch, I'll admit that that has probably been inspirational, though; his actual quality defensively has been weak at best.

                                I don't buy that coming off the bench gives Wade energy; I think being healthy at last and playing with great teammates is probably giving him that boost, but this is just the D-Wade of 2006 come back to life. I wouldn't give Kobe any more credit for that than I would giving him credit for the sun coming up in the east in the morning.

                                There aren't really a lot of individual performances to date - Kobe's excepted, and Carmelo's up until the last game - that are really worthy of scorn; it's the issue of how well this team plays together. So far, they've managed to get it done but I think their lack of outside shooting coupled with mediocre post play could very well be their undoing.

                                Realistically, a team that uses substitutions well to stop transition and gambles a little bit by jamming outlet passes instead of letting them go uncontested has a puncher's chance of beating this team. It would require some quick wing players and good post play and it would take a very good team to get that done. The USA obviously has some counters to that, like wing players who rebound and can handle the ball well, but basically a team that can disrupt the USA's transition attack can beat them. I still give Spain the best chance of doing that, but it'll be tough if they're too busy making slant-eyed faces and just shrugging off the criticism of it. But they're basically where the USA is at, just expecting teams to roll over for them - and that's just not going to happen, and at least the USA has the talent to maybe get away with that.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X