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

just how talented is Danny Granger?

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

  • #16
    Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

    Good enough to make a shot like Nestle's Quik.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

      Originally posted by Bball View Post
      The Pacers used to do an excellent job of getting Reggie open AND getting him the ball in late game situations. Everyone in the building, coaches, vendors, fans, opposing players, etc KNEW Reggie was getting the ball and the shot and more times than not we got him open and he got a good look.

      Soooooo are we really doing those things for Granger?

      -Bball
      There is not a lot of experienced talent around Danny as there was for Reggie. Give it time.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

        [QUOTE=Will Galen;825250]

        Our trouble is we can't stop anyone at the end of games. /QUOTE]



        No, the trouble is that the Pacers can't stop anyone during the whole game. 20 games of teams scoring 100 or more points with other teams winning 18 of those games. When the Pacers keep their opponents 99 points or less, they have won 80% of those games. If this team was playing "D" the whole game, other teams wouldn't be in a situation where they can win games in the last 3 minutes or less.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

          Anyone remember Sharif-Abdul Rahim?

          Year Team GP GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% RPG APG SPG BPG PPG
          1999–00 Vancouver 82 82 39.3 .465 .302 .809 10.1 3.3 1.1 1.1 20.3
          2000–01 Vancouver 81 81 40.0 .472 .188 .834 9.1 3.1 1.1 .9 20.5
          2001–02 Atlanta 77 77 38.7 .461 .300 .801 9.0 3.1 1.3 1.0 21.2
          2002–03 Atlanta 81 81 38.1 .478 .350 .841 8.4 3.0 1.1 .5 19.9

          He's the definition of a reasonably talented player putting up stats due to being the only good player on bad teams. I'll withhold real judgment on Danny for when we aren't terrible.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

            Honestly I feel like if Danny improved his ball handling and agility a little bit then he would be nearly unstoppable, and would be mentioned as a superstar by most people. I have noticed that he's great at coming off screens and getting that open shot, and he can drive if someone gives him a little space, but at times he struggles with his dribbling and seems to be looking down at the ball when he's trying to get around someone.

            I also feel like he would be even better if he was on a better team because he is such a great shooter and defender, and it's not like he's just jacking up a lot of shots to try and get 25 per game..he's taking good shots and knocking them down. I only see him take maybe 3 bad shots a game.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

              Originally posted by Indy View Post
              Jarrett Jack is a big fan of having a vice grip on the ball in late game situations, unless the target of his pass is the opposing team.
              IMO, that's the only thing holding Danny back. After last night's game and the loss to the Clippers I couldn't help but wonder if the Pacers would've won if Diener was on the floor to finish the game.

              As far as the question of this thread is concerned... Danny is as good as Andre Igoudala, Richard Jefferson, Josh Howard, Michael Redd, Vince Carter, Caron Butler, Shawn Marion, and the current bad back version of TMac. He's actually better than most of those guys because I don't think the Pacers would be getting equal value if they traded him for any of those guys.

              He's close to being as good as Pierce, Joe Johnson, and maybe Carmelo (only because Melo's defense is still lacking) but I'd put him on that same level. I guess I'd say he's in the tier below superstars like LeBron, DWade, and Kobe.

              However, it's the fact that we can even have this debate that shows how talented Danny is. He's been a wonderful bright spot for the Pacers this season and we should be glad to have him.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
                IMO, that's the only thing holding Danny back. After last night's game and the loss to the Clippers I couldn't help but wonder if the Pacers would've won if Diener was on the floor to finish the game.

                As far as the question of this thread is concerned... Danny is as good as Andre Igoudala, Richard Jefferson, Josh Howard, Michael Redd, Vince Carter, Caron Butler, Shawn Marion, and the current bad back version of TMac. He's actually better than most of those guys because I don't think the Pacers would be getting equal value if they traded him for any of those guys.

                He's close to being as good as Pierce, Joe Johnson, and maybe Carmelo (only because Melo's defense is still lacking) but I'd put him on that same level. I guess I'd say he's in the tier below superstars like LeBron, DWade, and Kobe.

                However, it's the fact that we can even have this debate that shows how talented Danny is. He's been a wonderful bright spot for the Pacers this season and we should be glad to have him.
                Melo is so overrated. Danny Granger is already better than Melo, Melo just has more publicity. Melo's defense isn't lacking, its non existent. Granger is also better than all those players you mentioned on the top. I agree that Pierce and Johnson are better at this point with their ability to close games, once he can prove to do that, I'd only put him behind Bron, Wade, and Kobe.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                  Talented?

                  Danny Granger is mid-level in the NBA judging strictly on talent. Reggie Miller was too.

                  Danny is talented "enough."

                  What he is is fundamentally sound, has his head in the game, and gives effort and works hard. His real strength though is his fundamentals which are better than about 85% of the players in the league.
                  The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                    Originally posted by Franchise55 View Post
                    Melo is so overrated. Danny Granger is already better than Melo, Melo just has more publicity. Melo's defense isn't lacking, its non existent. Granger is also better than all those players you mentioned on the top. I agree that Pierce and Johnson are better at this point with their ability to close games, once he can prove to do that, I'd only put him behind Bron, Wade, and Kobe.
                    Carmelo was drafted by a team that was in the basement. Ever since, the Nuggets have made the playoffs every single season in the Western Conference and he's been the best player on the team. He's been on Team USA since 2004 and been one of the 3 or 4 best players on the team each time he's played. He's a multiple time all-star who's been voted in by the COACHES each time.

                    He's overrated if you want him to be Lebron or Kobe. Otherwise, he's the best player on a perennial playoff team. It's amazing how much hate guys like Carmelo get for being very good, but not the best.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                      Originally posted by d_c View Post
                      Carmelo was drafted by a team that was in the basement. Ever since, the Nuggets have made the playoffs every single season in the Western Conference and he's been the best player on the team. He's been on Team USA since 2004 and been one of the 3 or 4 best players on the team each time he's played. He's a multiple time all-star who's been voted in by the COACHES each time.

                      He's overrated if you want him to be Lebron or Kobe. Otherwise, he's the best player on a perennial playoff team. It's amazing how much hate guys like Carmelo get for being very good, but not the best.
                      Carmelo Anthony - 34 MPG, 21 PPG - .431 FG%, 7.5 RPG, .96 SPG, .31 BPG, 3.5 APG, 3.5 TOPG

                      Danny Granger - 36 MPG, 25 PPG - .455 FG%, 5.1 RPG, 1 SPG, 1.33 BPG, 3.2 APG, 3.1 TOPG

                      Now, I'm not saying Melo is bad - but he is a scorer - thats it. He is not the superstar that everyone makes him out to be. I'm not faulting him for being compared to LeBron, I'm saying he simply got so much hype out of college and high school, that when he puts up 21 ppg, everyone acts as if he is amazing. Had Jamaal Crawford gotten the same hype, we'd be talking about him in the same sentence. Carmelo Anthony doesn't play defense at all, and while he may have been one of the best scorers on Team USA, he wasn't close to being the best player.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                        Originally posted by Franchise55 View Post
                        Carmelo Anthony - 34 MPG, 21 PPG - .431 FG%, 7.5 RPG, .96 SPG, .31 BPG, 3.5 APG, 3.5 TOPG

                        Danny Granger - 36 MPG, 25 PPG - .455 FG%, 5.1 RPG, 1 SPG, 1.33 BPG, 3.2 APG, 3.1 TOPG
                        Denver Nuggets: 20-11 record with Carmelo Anthony as their leading scorer AND best player. He's doing something right.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                          Originally posted by d_c View Post
                          Denver Nuggets: 20-11 record with Carmelo Anthony as their leading scorer AND best player. He's doing something right.
                          The team is 3-1 without him, 4-1 if you include the game he only played 14 minutes. I think most anyone whos been paying attention realizes that Chauncy Billups is easily the most important player on that team.

                          Also, Chauncy Billups was the best player on a team that constantly dominated the Eastern Conference, does that make him better than LeBron James? Of course not, he simply had a much better supporting cast.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                            Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                            Talented?

                            Danny Granger is mid-level in the NBA judging strictly on talent. Reggie Miller was too.

                            Danny is talented "enough."

                            What he is is fundamentally sound, has his head in the game, and gives effort and works hard. His real strength though is his fundamentals which are better than about 85% of the players in the league.
                            Define talent. Athleticism? Speed? Intelligence? Other?

                            Because when I see Danny being an offensive weapon (a work in progress), a very good shooter, starting to be a good passer, someone who fluxuates between average and very good defensively, and a good rebounder, I think of that as a lot more than a "mid-level" talent.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                              Originally posted by Franchise55 View Post
                              The team is 3-1 without him, 4-1 if you include the game he only played 14 minutes. I think most anyone whos been paying attention realizes that Chauncy Billups is easily the most important player on that team.

                              Also, Chauncy Billups was the best player on a team that constantly dominated the Eastern Conference, does that make him better than LeBron James? Of course not, he simply had a much better supporting cast.
                              Yeah, I continue to detest knocking a player based on what the TEAM he is on is achieving. The best players of course play a key role in winning, but they're never the sole reason a team wins.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                                Originally posted by Franchise55 View Post
                                The team is 3-1 without him, 4-1 if you include the game he only played 14 minutes. I think most anyone whos been paying attention realizes that Chauncy Billups is easily the most important player on that team.

                                Also, Chauncy Billups was the best player on a team that constantly dominated the Eastern Conference, does that make him better than LeBron James? Of course not, he simply had a much better supporting cast.
                                This is the same Chauncey Billups who is a career 41% shooter and is shooting right about there this season. Take out Carmelo for longer than some 4 game stretch and the Nuggets would go right down the toilet.

                                Chauncey Billups is an excellent player, but it's Carmelo Anthony who is the focal point of every opposing team's game plan when they play against the Nuggets. It's Carmelo who draws the double/triple teams and Carmelo who they throw the ball to every time they need a bucket down the stretch of a close game.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X