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

What I Liked Tonight 42.01

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 5
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 template Next
  • #1

    What I Liked Tonight 42.01

    For those wondering, 42.01 = Season 42, Game 01.

    I've tried to start a traditional post-game thread of my own a la Peck's Odd Thoughts at least once before, so this is definitely a "wait and see" situation as to whether I can bring this together 82 times a year. Since it's a positive slant on things, I'm hoping it will prove to boost my motivation to keep going all season long.

    Anyway, on with the thread.

    Brandon Rush. I loved how he was not afraid to take it to the hoop. I thought he would just float around the perimeter, but once he got the ball, he didn't just jack up shots or pass around the perimeter, he went to the hole and that's a great sign for a rookie.

    Speaking of which, this is something I liked about the entire team tonight. We didn't just chuck up 3's. Not by a long shot. No, we made an obvious, deliberate effort to attack the basket, and it showed in our free throw attempts tonight. Very, very happy to see this. Sure, there were times where we were patient to a fault, and the turnovers were maddening, but I loved the fact that our offense looked focused on getting into the paint and not settling for 3 point shots off of a pass from another perimeter player. This will be huge if it's something we can keep up all season long.

    Back to Rush. Anyone else pleased as punch that this kid can play that good defense from game 1 of his career? I was always happy to see him on the defensive side of the floor because aside from some mistakes, he looked great out there. Good position, used his length, kept good position, and contested shots. Very happy about this. Really all around I was pretty thrilled with our rookie wingman tonight. Just wait until he starts bombing some 3's, too.

    Hibbert. Barely played, but bonus points for making a sweet, sort of quick move that a guy like him (one would think) has no business making, yet he did and he scored off of it. I saw him attempt this same move in the preseason, and I think when the D gives him an island on his man, he will surprise people with his ability to get a few buckets 1-on-1. I know it's disappointing to not see him more, but Detroit's big men are just not a good match for him; especially as a rookie.

    Danny Granger. Holy cow. I often thought to myself that Danny is a guy who shows up most often when he views the situation to be a big one. That showed tonight with an very, very good effort. Would like to see some assists, but otherwise there was not much to complain about because he was doing a terrific job at attacking the hoop. This is HUGE for Danny. I'm talking "turning yet another corner" huge.

    He's driving, he's getting fouled, and he's finishing at a respectable clip. If this becomes his game, I expect his scoring to go up by 5+ points from last year, and he'll likely see his FG% go up as well. It's also very important because it will leave him a little bit more open from 3 when his defender doesn't know what to expect (before now, Danny took way too many jumpshots).

    I liked our new PGs and starting center. While I would have liked to have seen more good things from all of them, they all showed some positives tonight that contrast with our horrible situation last year at these spots. I liked the fact that when Jack was in the game, Chauncy didn't feel like he was on the verge of erupting offensively. He was pretty quiet tonight, but I thought Jack did a good job of staying with him, being physical, and not fouling.

    I liked that Marquis' shot looks better from the outside. He didn't torch anybody, but when he shoots a 3 now, it no longer makes me want to scream.

    Finally, I liked that we looked like a team that had a legitimate shot to win tonight against a good team. We played hard, we played (kinda) smart, we showed some real positives tonight. Some of the mistakes were head-scratchers, but others looked clearly to be the result of not having team chemistry on the floor yet.

    Frankly, I feel encouraged. I think this team has a chance.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

    Rush looks miles ahead of Granger in his rookie year. But they are also in different circumstances too. Granger was playing behind Artest and the Pacers were thought to be contenders that year. Rush is getting immediate minutes and nobody really expects much out of the Pacers this year.

    I can see Rush being a really good defender in this league after a night like tonight.

    "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

      Originally posted by Hicks View Post

      Frankly, I feel encouraged. I think this team has a chance.
      I agree with everything you said. I watched on League Pass and listened to Boyle and Slick on the Internet. Slick liked the effort too.

      One thing I might mention was that some of the turnovers occurred because the Pacers were over passing. Also they clearly aren't used to each other yet. Ford made one pass to where he expected Daniels to be which resulted in a turnover. And Danny made one when he passed to the referee.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

        I also thought that the Pacers were very good tonight. Also the other nite when they were in NO, the announcers said many times that the Pacers were goin to surpriaise a lot of people.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

          I watched the game on League Pass, i live in nashville so I was watching the detroit announcers.

          They seemed surprised by the fact the Pacers were competing. Twenty games into the season I expect us to be playing very good basketball. Our lack of a superstar player will hurt us to a degree, but I think between Granger and Dunleavy we are close enough to having a go to guy.

          I liked what I saw from Brandon Rush more than anything, as has been mentioned his defense was incredible. I think he will become an established 2nd option type player in this league.

          We need to trade Rasho/Quis and some 2nd rounders to see what kind of big we may be able to get.
          *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

            When Chauncey hit that three that killed us, who was in? Ford or Jack?

            Anyway, good post.
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

              Why wouldnt this just just be in the Post Game Thread?
              "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


              Comment

              • #8
                Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                I still wish we would try to trade Rasho and Tinsley for Marion. We could start him and Murphy in the front court with Hibbert and Foster off the bench (with Maceo playing occasionally). They need a starting point and a starting center and that trade gives them both and gives us a versitile player that fits our offense perfectly.


                About the game, I was estatic to see Murphy rebounding so well. This could be the year he shows that he is a 15/10 guy in this league.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                  Originally posted by JGray View Post
                  I still wish we would try to trade Rasho and Tinsley for Marion. We could start him and Murphy in the front court with Hibbert and Foster off the bench (with Maceo playing occasionally). They need a starting point and a starting center and that trade gives them both and gives us a versitile player that fits our offense perfectly.


                  About the game, I was estatic to see Murphy rebounding so well. This could be the year he shows that he is a 15/10 guy in this league.
                  Im all for trading for Marion, but if we have Murphy and Hibert starting in our front court, where would we start Marion? at SF? Does that mean Dunleavy would come off the bench? We would most likely have to trade Daniels + Tinsley + Rasho + 2 2nd rounder (from Dallas) for Marion and Banks. Miami isnt going to let Marion go without sending Banks. If that were to happen, our lineup would look like this:

                  Ford/Jack/Banks/Diener
                  Dunleavy/Rush
                  Granger/Graham
                  Marion/Foster
                  Murphy/Hibbert

                  We're not as deep, but a better team for sure
                  "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                    Can we not talk about unrealistic trades for Shawn Marion here, please? This is a thread for positive talk about things we saw and liked during the game.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                      This team has a chance to be something special. After all those turnovers we were still in the game, down 5 with 2 min or something. If this was last seasons team, we would have been down 20. I think we showed real heart out there and we didn't give up. Who knows, maybe if we had Dun we could have won this one.

                      I'm very interested to see how we do against Boston. I think if we play like this against other teams, we're gonna win most of those games (without the turnovers of course.)
                      2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        Can we not talk about unrealistic trades for Shawn Marion here, please? This is a thread for positive talk about things we saw and liked during the game.
                        I still dont understand why this wouldnt be talked about in the post game thread?
                        "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                          Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
                          I still dont understand why this wouldnt be talked about in the post game thread?
                          It's a different slant. Typically, there's a general purpose post-game thread for any/all thoughts. Often, others have traditionally put their unique stamp on the game (see Peck's "Odd Thoughts" threads). This is me taking a crack at something like that. Beyond that, it's open for anyone to post positive things they liked/saw about the game, versus negative or more balanced views. It's about positive energy.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                            why aren't peck's in the post game thread. He's allowed to offer a specific viewpoint that people will want or not want to read. Good post hicks. I agree with pretty much everything you said.

                            Hicks got to it before me.

                            What I really liked tonight:

                            High fg percentage for the possesions that didn't end up in a turnover or a trip to the line.
                            Didn't get bogged down into a 80 to 68 game like i feared we would.
                            Good spacing most of the time, and that will only improve.
                            Ford and Jack's ability to get to the hoop, they just need to finish more consistently.
                            Granger, everything he did.
                            Rush's defense and his ability to get to the hoop. He looks miles ahead of where granger was offensively his rookie year as someone else said.
                            Rasho and Ford's chemistry.
                            Coming back at the end to make a game of it was encouraging, we could have let it slip away.

                            and what I'm most excited about is this team is going to improve with every game as
                            a.) Dunleavy comes back.
                            b.) Rush and Hibbert develop and get more playing time.
                            c.) The team learns how to play together.

                            I'm excited.
                            Last edited by Pig Nash; 10-29-2008, 11:10 PM.
                            Play Mafia!
                            Twitter

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: What I Liked Tonight 42.01

                              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                              It's a different slant. Typically, there's a general purpose post-game thread for any/all thoughts. Often, others have traditionally put their unique stamp on the game (see Peck's "Odd Thoughts" threads). This is me taking a crack at something like that. Beyond that, it's open for anyone to post positive things they liked/saw about the game, versus negative or more balanced views. It's about positive energy.
                              cool
                              "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 template Next
                              Working...
                              X