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

THE PROBLEM

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

  • THE PROBLEM

    Another loss last night, another team scoring over 100 points, and another team shooting 50% or more against the Pacers. There are 3 areas where this problem can lie... players, coach, or Bird.

    Since this forum has discussed the players and coach as possible problems, what about Bird? Who went out and brought in almost half a new roster of players, who selected and hired the coach over the phone, and who got those "NBA ready players" from the draft, and who has constructed this team?

    With the way Bird has constructed the team, is it that the players don't match the coach, the coach doesn't match the players, or Bird just doesn't know players and how to judge their talent? Has he put together a group of mismatched role players that can't understand or execute his phone hired coaches system?

    Any opinions as to whether the problem is or isn't Bird and how he has put this team together?

  • #2
    Re: THE PROBLEM

    The team isn't "put together." It's a rebuilding year. It's always been a rebuilding year. It was always going to be a rebuilding year.

    People are upset because a couple of early wins convinced them that this was a deep playoff team. But it wasn't.

    If we make the playoffs and let Rush/Roy/Jack/McBob/Danny develop some, then this makes for a very good year.
    This space for rent.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: THE PROBLEM

      The fact other teams are scoring at will is a good sign the players on the court are not good defensive players...particularly as individual as opposed to team defenders.

      Now as for whether Bird is the cause for the poor defense, you have to look at the trades and draft picks.

      To summarize, I think Bird has helped and hurt the defense, but overall he has made good personnel moves. He traded away JO, probably our best defensive player for Rasho, TJ and Roy....but without going OT, that was a good move for the franchise in the long term and from a financial perspective.

      Another move was picking up Brandon Rush. Extremely good defender, so Bird helped the D right there. Another point is, we need to stretch the floor as much as possible to open up lanes. This is why Brandon Rush is a lot better for this team than Quis. He forces the other team to spend energy guarding him on the perimeter...opening up the floor and the passing lanes for ball movement and drives to the bucket.

      Another move was picking up Jarrett Jack and McRoberts....both decent defensive players. Yes, I think McRoberts can be a pretty good defensive player if ever given a chance...(btw, we have won every single game he has played more than 10 minutes...and he was key to slowing down OK City's frontline).

      Our best bet to win games is for JOb to play the best defensive players he can without sacrificing too much on the offensive end. As good as they are offensively, we must not play Murphy, Rasho, Ford and Dunleavy at the same time...or y'all better get used to sub .500 teams scoring 120 points on us.

      Why defense is not the top priority on every team in the the NBA remains a mystery to me. I figured after watching San Antonio and Detroit contend for the last decade, that lesson would have been learned by now.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: THE PROBLEM

        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
        The team isn't "put together." It's a rebuilding year. It's always been a rebuilding year. It was always going to be a rebuilding year.

        People are upset because a couple of early wins convinced them that this was a deep playoff team. But it wasn't.

        If we make the playoffs and let Rush/Roy/Jack/McBob/Danny develop some, then this makes for a very good year.


        I'm not disagreeing this is a rebuilding year, BUT this team has a major problem situation by losing to teams it shouldn't, giving up way too many points to it's opposition, and allowing them to shoot 50% or better. There has to be reasons, and can it be Bird with how he's gone about the rebuilding?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: THE PROBLEM

          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
          The team isn't "put together." It's a rebuilding year. It's always been a rebuilding year. It was always going to be a rebuilding year.

          People are upset because a couple of early wins convinced them that this was a deep playoff team. But it wasn't.

          If we make the playoffs and let Rush/Roy/Jack/McBob/Danny develop some, then this makes for a very good year.
          Wow, that is the exact point I made at the forum party last weekend. Did you have a hidden microphone there, or something?
          ...Still "flying casual"
          @roaminggnome74

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: THE PROBLEM

            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
            I'm not disagreeing this is a rebuilding year, BUT this team has a major problem situation by losing to teams it shouldn't, giving up way too many points to it's opposition, and allowing them to shoot 50% or better. There has to be reasons, and can it be Bird with how he's gone about the rebuilding?
            I really don't think so because before this stretch, these exact same players were playing good defense. The change happened during the season. Bird has not done anything to the team during the season.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: THE PROBLEM

              Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
              Wow, that is the exact point I made at the forum party last weekend. Did you have a hidden microphone there, or something?
              Great minds think alike.







              And ours too.
              This space for rent.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: THE PROBLEM

                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                I'm not disagreeing this is a rebuilding year, BUT this team has a major problem situation by losing to teams it shouldn't, giving up way too many points to it's opposition, and allowing them to shoot 50% or better. There has to be reasons, and can it be Bird with how he's gone about the rebuilding?
                Wait, if this team could beat "the teams they are supposed to" if they could play defense well enough not to give up too many points - then it wouldn't be a rebulding year.

                And the fact of the matter is, the Bucks have more talent than the Pacers and considering it was at Milwaukee - yes they should beat the Pacers THERE.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: THE PROBLEM

                  Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                  I'm not disagreeing this is a rebuilding year, BUT this team has a major problem situation by losing to teams it shouldn't,
                  Like who?

                  Yeah, the Bucks loss hurt, but it's not like the team has less talent than us. We're really not that good. We have the potential to be better, but right now the players we need simply aren't here or aren't ready.

                  Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                  There has to be reasons, and can it be Bird with how he's gone about the rebuilding?
                  There IS a reason. You just don't like it. The reason is that we're currently not a very good team, and even with Dun back we weren't going to be a very good team this year. Dun being out just means Rush gets some burn, which I'm fine with.
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: THE PROBLEM

                    Based on talent level there are only 3-4 teams the Pacers SHOULD beat - OK City, Minn, Sacto and maybe Washington. You don't have a franchise player and just one guy who even deserves consideration for the AS Game. You have a little more experience and better coaching than some other teams which can get you a few more wins but the team just isn't that good.
                    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: THE PROBLEM

                      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                      Like who?

                      Yeah, the Bucks loss hurt, but it's not like the team has less talent than us. We're really not that good. We have the potential to be better, but right now the players we need simply aren't here or aren't ready.


                      There IS a reason. You just don't like it. The reason is that we're currently not a very good team, and even with Dun back we weren't going to be a very good team this year. Dun being out just means Rush gets some burn, which I'm fine with.
                      I have nothing more to say on this topic. Thank you.

                      That should get serious consideration for "Post of the Month."
                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: THE PROBLEM

                        Heres an article posted by HoopsWorld about the Pacers problems:

                        When the Indiana Pacers traded for T.J. Ford this offseason, plenty of experts praised the move, saying that Ford was exactly the player the Pacers needed - a proven point guard that could run the team. Undoubtedly, a squad with Ford, Danny Granger, and Mike Dunleavy, Jr. would bring the Pacers at least back into the playoffs. That has not happened.

                        Head Coach Jim O'Brien was quite aware of his team's need to quickly improve before the Pacers match on Saturday against the Bucks, especially with the alarming rate at which NBA coaches have been fired this year. "We're still growing as a basketball team, and every game is a chance to learn."

                        So what do the Pacers need to learn? What are the areas in which they must improve?

                        When asked what he has been told to work on in order to earn more minutes, Brandon Rush said "I need to work on my defense." When asked on Saturday what the Pacers did differently to make their run in the third quarter, T.J. Ford also pointed to the team's defensive effort. "We were more aggressive defensively, we picked up the intensity."

                        Indiana also has to get better play from their bench. O'Brien clearly aired his frustration about his limited options. "I'm not crazy about playing a seven-man rotation, but I'm going to do what I can to win the game at hand... depth is the name of the game in the NBA, but depth has to be productive. When it is - and that's what we're working towards - then we'll be a better basketball team."

                        Ford claims one problem the Pacers don't have is team chemistry. "Most of the time when you start losing is when teams get divided....As far as this team, I think we've been doing a good job of staying together, staying positive, just undersanding what our task is.... we've just got to stick together - that's the only way were gonna make it through this and get on the right rack."

                        But signs of the frustration of losing a sixth-straight game may have started against the Bucks on Saturday. In addition to a technical called on O'Brien, the Pacers also gave up points for two flagrant foul calls. As the pressure mounts, and as more head coaches get fired, the Pacers know winning is the only relief they will find. They have only won once this month - strangely, against the Lakers - but will get another chance on Monday.
                        http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=10938
                        "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: THE PROBLEM

                          Yes, I agree with the posts this isn't a very good team, but WHY! Oh yeah, lack of "D", poor shooting, Dun injured, etc. Granted Bird has no control over players' injuries, BUT he does have control of poor "D", poor shooting, weak bench, no inside presence to name a few, b/c he put this team together by getting the players that aren't getting the job done. Who's fault is it this team isn't a talented team if it's not Bird's fault? Who's fault is it if this team can't win games from lack of talent? Who is in control of putting players in the Pacers' uniform? How does Bird not have fault with this team being 7-16, since he was the one who put it together? Bird is the CEO/president/leader of a 340 mil corporation that isn't producing, so why are the leaders of industry liable for the responsibility of their companies failure yet Bird isn't?

                          Can it be that Bird doesn't have the knowledge/expertise to recognize talent nor put a good team together? Being a GREAT player doesn't relate to being good at being a GM running a NBA franchise. I only need to point out Zeke, MJ, and McHale as examples of failure to be able to be successful in running a NBA franchise. Why is Bird any different? B/c he's from Indiana, and he's Larry Legend?

                          I've put forth a lot of questions, and I feel these are legit questions about Bird. I'm sure there will be those that will disagree, so have at it.
                          Last edited by Justin Tyme; 12-15-2008, 08:05 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: THE PROBLEM

                            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                            Yes, I agree with the posts this isn't a very good team, but WHY! Oh yeah, lack of "D", poor shooting, Dun injured, etc. Granted Bird has no control over players' injuries, BUT he does have control of poor "D", poor shooting, weak bench, no inside presence to name a few, b/c he put this team together by getting the players that aren't getting the job done. Who's fault is it this team isn't a talented team if it's not Bird's fault? Who's fault is it if this team can't win games from lack of talent? Who is in control of putting players in the Pacers' uniform? How does Bird not have fault with this team being 7-16, since he was the one who put it together? Bird is the CEO/president/leader of a 340 mil corporation that isn't producing, so why are the leaders of industry liable for the responsibility of their companies failure yet Bird isn't?

                            Can it be that Bird doesn't have knowledge/expertise to recognize talent nor put a good team together? Being a GREAT player doesn't relate to being good at being a GM running a NBA franchise. I only need to point out Zeke, MJ, and McHale as examples of failure to be able to be successful in running a NBA franchise. Why is Bird any different? B/c he's from Indiana, and he's Larry Legend?

                            I've put forth a lot of questions, and I feel these are legit questions about Bird. I'm sure there will be those that will disagree, so have at it.
                            Well in Bird defense, hes only been in power for one year. I think for the one offseason he has had, hes done a good job getting some new talent and a new attitude here. He has also put Indy in a position to have more cap flexibility for the future. I didnt expect Bird to change the franchise around in just one season.

                            Give him another year atleast to see what he is capable of doing
                            "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: THE PROBLEM

                              Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post

                              but the team just isn't that good.
                              Exactly! And why is that? Whose fault is it?


                              Who put the Knicks team together the previous 3 years? Whose fault was it for those teams failure?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X