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

Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

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

  • #16
    Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

    Originally posted by Bball View Post
    Am I dreaming when I remember this:
    I thought offensive freedom had to be earned through a dedication to defense (wasn't that the JOB MO?)

    Did someone say that about JOB and he not say it himself?
    Well, if anyone can find a quote...I'm not sure if this is not a contradiction. He was giddy about that game...giving up 120pts to a dog team. Seriously, I am thankful we don't have more talent because it would be wasted.

    Edit: Take the Purdue-Davidson game. Purdue shuts down Stephen Curry with solid defense...and wins the game. I wonder how it would have turned out if Painter told Moore and Hummel he wasn't worried about slowing down the high-scoring Curry...
    Last edited by BlueNGold; 12-26-2008, 11:41 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

      D-Bone and BlueNGold,

      My fear is that our early season defensive intensity disappeared for precisely the reason that all the emphasis has been on the offense. There may be some marks you're supposed to hit on defense to keep OBrien happy, but I worry what has permeated the team is that O Brien really cares about the pedal to the metal offense. Just hit your marks on defense but make sure you keep it balls to the wall on offense. So as players settle into their roles they find it easier (and more accepted) if they take a little away from their defensive play to keep something in the tank for their offense.

      And I could easily see that taking a toll on the defense we saw earlier in the year... both with the team wearing down and with the true emphasis being on the offense.

      Defense is a constant... offense comes and goes. Value offensive possessions. That's my belief.
      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

      ------

      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

        lottery.........baby
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

          To this point this thread has been completely laughable. Grizzlies are as good as the Pacers so they should win at home and when you consider Granger went out with a concussion and our point guard missed the whole game - yeah Griz should win at home.

          A few of you act like you thought the team was going to win 48 games this season.


          Obviously, I didn't see tonight game, did listen to the fourth quarter - seemd as though he defense was the problem - but without seeing the game for myself, I really have no idea.


          I do want to address your point bball that all the emphasize (by the coaching staff) has been placed on offense. I don't believe that for a second, but if that is the case (depending to what degree) then the coach should be fired whoever it is. No I don't believe defense has been ignored, in fact I'm sure it is emphasized as much if not more than ever
          Last edited by Unclebuck; 12-27-2008, 12:00 AM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            To this point this thread has been completely laughable. Grizzlies are as good as the Pacers so they should win at home and when you consider Granger went out with a concussion and our point guard missed the whole game - yeah Griz should win at home.

            A few of you act like you thought the team was going to win 48 games this season.


            Obviously, I didn't see tonight game, did listen to the fourth quarter - seemd as though he defense was the problem - but without seeing the game for myself, I really have no idea
            i agreed this tem is lucky if they win more than 25games
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post

              I do want to address your point bball that all the emphasize (by the coaching staff) has been placed on offense. I don't believe that for a second, but if that is the case (depending to what degree) then the coach should be fired whoever it is. No I don't believe defense has been ignored, in fact I'm sure it is emphasized as much if not more than ever

              I said my fear was the offense has been over-emphasized at the expense of the defense, not that it's been ignored. ...To the point that when players look to pace themselves they do it at the expense of the defense because the over-emphasis on offense has allowed that message to permeate the team. ...And that OBrien's real focus is the offense (regardless of the lip service he might be giving the defense) and playing a high octane game and that has sunk in and become a part of the team's mentality.

              I'm waiting to see that proven wrong. The evidence seems to be stacking up in other direction.

              -Bball
              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

              ------

              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

              -John Wooden

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

                Originally posted by Bball View Post
                Defense is a constant... offense comes and goes. Value offensive possessions. That's my belief.
                That's my belief as well. This is not about tearing down JOb. It's not about saying this team should win 48 games. It's not even about this season. It's about a difference in philosophy with the coach.

                Anyway, I "absolutely love" the half court game, ball movement and defense. I do not believe JOb has that view. Beyond that, I'm fine with him sticking around for awhile. We could have done worse and probably not much better based on what the team had to offer. Hopefully we make some more good trades, improve the talent level and get back to the playoffs.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

                  Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                  . We played a controlled, chaotic style."
                  Pacers coach Jim O'Brien wasn't worried about trying to slow down the Warriors, the second highest scoring team in the league. His goal was just to make sure his team ended up on the "positive side of the ledger at the end of the game."
                  To do that, the Pacers needed a season high in points, attempted a season-high 106 shots and got by without starters T.J. Ford (groin) and Troy Murphy (stomach virus).
                  Five Pacers players attempted at least 10 shots and six players scored in double figures, led by Danny Granger's 41.
                  "I absolutely love it," O'Brien said when asked if he liked playing at such a high pace. "I think that's the way the game of basketball is meant to be played, with fast breaks."

                  Source: http://www.indystar.com/article/2008.../1088/SPORTS04



                  If you read O'Brien's quotes, he says he wasn't worried about "slowing down" the Warriors. I interpret that to mean that the Pacers will continue to run - I do not interpret that to mean we are just going to let the Warriors score at will, or that defense isn't the highest priority.


                  Just on a really general point - I love defense and a controlled style more than anyone - but it seemed like most other fans were sick and tired of Carlsle's approach (where did all those people go) I mean I can dig out thread after thread from two years ago where fans were sick of Rick calling all the plays, sick of his refusal to allow the team to run.
                  Last edited by Unclebuck; 12-27-2008, 12:20 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    If you read O'Brien's quotes, he says he wasn't worried about "slowing down" the Warriors. I interpret that to mean that the Pacers will continue to run - I do not interpret that to mean we are just going to let the Warriors score at will, or that defense isn't the highest priority
                    Well, I agree that it did not mean he wanted to let the Warriors score at will...but I cannot agree that the statement is consistent with the view that "defense is the highest priority".

                    Certainly if defense were the highest priority, he would be concerned about "slowing down" the other team's offense. Isn't that just about the definition of defense?

                    Edit: Disclosure: I loved Rick's style, but we needed a PF who could hit better than 45% from the floor. Elton Brand would have been nice.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      Certainly if defense were the highest priority, he would be concerned about "slowing down" the other team's offense. Isn't that just about the definition of defense?
                      No, the best way to slow down a fast break team is with a very controlled offense and when a coach talks about slowing down a pure run and gun team the coach is talking about doing so with a controlled offense - because that is the only way to do it. A coach cannot control how quickly the other team is going to shoot, but he can control how quickly his team is going to shoot


                      I think that O'Brien quote is being taken out of context - no actually it is simply being misinterpreted - Peck did it after the game last week and made a big deal about it, I just let is slide then.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        No, the best way to slow down a fast break team is with a very controlled offense and when a coach talks about slowing down a pure run and gun team the coach is talking about doing so with a controlled offense - because that is the only way to do it. A coach cannot control how quickly the other team is going to shoot, but he can control how quickly his team is going to shoot


                        I think that O'Brien quote is being taken out of context - no actually it is simply being misinterpreted - Peck did it after the game last week and made a big deal about it, I just let is slide then.
                        I agree that's probably the best way to slow the other team down, but that's the root of the problem with his philosophy. How do you reconcile this with his quote about "absolutely loving" the "fast break" style of play? He even went so far as saying that he believed that was the way basketball was meant to be played.

                        Certainly that's not consistent with the goal of using a controlled offense to "slow down" the other team's offense is it?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

                          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                          I agree that's probably the best way to slow the other team down, but that's the root of the problem with his philosophy. How do you reconcile this with his quote about "absolutely loving" the "fast break" style of play? He even went so far as saying that he believed that was the way basketball was meant to be played.

                          Certainly that's not consistent with the goal of using a controlled offense to "slow down" the other team's offense is it?
                          No I agree. And O'Brien never tried to slow the warriors down, I was just saying if he wanted to, he would have to do so with his offense, not with defense (I am talking about tempo, not points scored FG% and such). JOB is trying to play offense like the Suns of the past and the defense like the current Celtics. That is tough to do. I am getting really tired, so not sure I'm still making sense. But the Nets of '02 and '03 comes to mind as a team that was able to do both, run and still play good defense. Rick Carlisle has discussed this topic several times - about how difficult it is to achieve

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

                            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                            No I agree. And O'Brien never tried to slow the warriors down, I was just saying if he wanted to, he would have to do so with his offense, not with defense (I am talking about tempo, not points scored FG% and such). JOB is trying to play offense like the Suns of the past and the defense like the current Celtics. That is tough to do. I am getting really tired, so not sure I'm still making sense. But the Nets of '02 and '03 comes to mind as a team that was able to do both, run and still play good defense. Rick Carlisle has discussed this topic several times
                            I agree. It's very difficult if that's truly his goal. I don't think we can play that way with our talent level. Great teams like the Lakers of the 80's could do it, but mere mortals tend to get burned...particularly when they have no presence in the middle on defense..
                            Last edited by BlueNGold; 12-27-2008, 12:50 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              No, the best way to slow down a fast break team is with a very controlled offense and when a coach talks about slowing down a pure run and gun team the coach is talking about doing so with a controlled offense - because that is the only way to do it. A coach cannot control how quickly the other team is going to shoot, but he can control how quickly his team is going to shoot


                              I think that O'Brien quote is being taken out of context - no actually it is simply being misinterpreted - Peck did it after the game last week and made a big deal about it, I just let is slide then.

                              Peck did not. Peck only put up Jim O'Briens quotes and Peck only provided a puke face after the direct quotes.

                              Yes, that's right Peck is talking about Peck in the third Person. Peck seems to miss Jalen Rose interviews.

                              Obviously I did not see the game vs. the Grizz. I'll just say this. I think we all knew this season was just about building. Why do you think Roy is getting startst when O'Brien is saying he doesn't deserve them. I think Larry has already determined that this season is lost for any form of deep playoff run and has issued (although they will never admit it) the order that the rookies and younger players need to play.

                              I am fine with that to be honest with you. If we are not going to be anything of consequence this season (and it is looking more and more like that every day) the I really don't care to see much of Murphy, Foster, Rasho up front. McBob, Roy, Brandon and maybe even Graham need to be evaluated for next season and the seasons beyond.

                              As to JOB I will say this.

                              He has every excuse in the world going for him right now. Injury's, illness, lack of talent, etc., etc.

                              So honestly even though I know many of us don't want to, we have to give him a little bit of a break here.

                              However I will state this. I do NOT believe that he emphasizes defense more than any other coach we have had (except maybe Thomas) it's just that he pays it much more lip service. Lip service may be a little to harsh but I don't think he pays it any more attention than say Carlisle, Bird or Brown did. I just think he talks about it more. Honestly what basketball coach doesn't come in and talk about defense? It's just nothing but coach speak IMO.


                              Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Pacers Vs Grizzlie Post Game Thread

                                Since the theme of turning the ball over at the worst times seem to be a recurring one with Jack, would you want Jack in as a finisher at the end of the game whether we are ahead or not?

                                I understand that at this point, due to injuries, we were forced to have him in the lineup.....but assuming that all things are equal ( ie, everyone is healthy )....should he close out games or not?

                                One of the things that the RealGM Blazer fans did warn me about when we acquired him was that he was a good player to have on the floor if you wanted to drive to the hoop and draw a foul....but he also had a tendency to cough the ball up at the worst times....something that we have seen.

                                I'm guessing that it maybe on a situational basis, but I suspect that the answer is probably not unless he is absolutely owning the other team AND we have a solid ball-handler in the lineup with him ( such as Ford, Diener, Marquis or even Dunleavy ) so that he is not handling the ball so much.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X