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

  • #31
    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.
    So what is it that makes Melo's Nuggets so much better than Granger's Pacers? Is it the less efficient scoring? The inferior defense? Or could it be, you know, that whole 'team' concept, where teams wins and loses depend on the entire makeup of the team and not just one player?

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
      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.
      Originally posted by Quis View Post
      So what is it that makes Melo's Nuggets so much better than Granger's Pacers? Is it the less efficient scoring? The inferior defense? Or could it be, you know, that whole 'team' concept, where teams wins and loses depend on the entire makeup of the team and not just one player?
      The Nuggets roster is chalk full of players many people on many boards (not just this one) have said that they wouldn't even want on their team. I've read it many times before. They don't want Carmelo. They don't want JR Smith. The don't want Kenyon Martin. They think Nene is overrated, overpaid and a done nothing.

      Either Carmelo is really that good or a lot of these other players who people say they don't want to touch with a 10 foot pole are a lot better than they've been described.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

        Originally posted by d_c View Post
        The Nuggets roster is chalk full of players many people on many boards (not just this one) have said that they wouldn't even want on their team. I've read it many times before. They don't want Carmelo. They don't want JR Smith. The don't want Kenyon Martin. They think Nene is overrated, overpaid and a done nothing.

        Either Carmelo is really that good or a lot of these other players who people say they don't want to touch with a 10 foot pole are a lot better than they've been described.
        They don't want Melo because he is one of the worst defenders in the NBA, with a **** poor attitude, and a huge ego. They don't want Martin because he has one of the worst contracts in the NBA. The don't want Nene because of his injury history. They don't want Smith because of his **** poor attitude and ego.

        They all have red flags, but that has nothing to do with their talent level. We don't want Tinsley, but he is talented. We didn't want Jackson, but he is talented. There is two sides to every story, your simply looking at it from one angle.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

          Personally I don't want guys like Smith or Martin because of their attitudes and/or salaries, not their talent.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

            Originally posted by Franchise55 View Post
            They don't want Melo because he is one of the worst defenders in the NBA, with a **** poor attitude, and a huge ego. They don't want Martin because he has one of the worst contracts in the NBA. The don't want Nene because of his injury history. They don't want Smith because of his **** poor attitude and ego.

            They all have red flags, but that has nothing to do with their talent level. We don't want Tinsley, but he is talented. We didn't want Jackson, but he is talented. There is two sides to every story, your simply looking at it from one angle.
            I never talked about liking any of these guys and their attitudes. I just said they're 20-11, so at least a few of their players must be pretty good.

            They're getting the job done (where it counts) on the basketball floor and none of their players are shooting up clubs or punching people in the stands. Personally, I don't like a lot of the players on that team myself, but I give credit where it's due.

            Comment


            • #36
              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.
              Give us Billups and you can replace Denver Nuggets and Carmelo Anthony in that sentence with Indiana Pacers and Danny Granger.
              2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                Originally posted by d_c View Post
                I never talked about liking any of these guys and their attitudes. I just said they're 20-11, so at least a few of their players must be pretty good.

                They're getting the job done (where it counts) on the basketball floor and none of their players are shooting up clubs or punching people in the stands. Personally, I don't like a lot of the players on that team myself, but I give credit where it's due.
                You pretty much took the same argument I had against you and reworded it.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                  Danny Granger is quite possibly the most all-around talented Pacer in the NBA era. He might not be there yet, but he has a great chance of getting there. I thought JO had the ability to be so but bad luck and injuries got in his way.

                  Reggie was a great, great player but like others have said, the offense was designed for him and a good portion of his talent was utilized through incredible intangibles. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but Danny is probably the more gifted player. And I should note that I absolutely love Reggie and I don't think any Pacer will ever replace him as my favorite.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                    d_c, if anyone here has said they didn't want those players, it's for reasons that go well beyond their talent level.

                    I haven't seen anyone say they wouldn't want Melo, just that he's overrated, and even then I think that has a lot more to do with a perceived lack of respect for Granger than Melo. I'm not one who feel Melo is overrated nor do I think Granger is disrespected, for the most part.

                    J.R. Smith is a headcase. After years of Artest, Tinsley, and Jackson, do you really expect the fans to welcome the idea of adding someone like J.R. Smith to the team? It has nothing to do with his talent level. We don't want guys who run stop signs, especially when it results in death.

                    Nene was overpaid and injury prone ...up until this season. It's not like he's averaging career highs in PPG, RPG, BPG, FG%, and FT% or anything...... If the Nuggets are looking to move him, I'm sure Bird and Morway would be all ears, as well as about 28 other GMs.

                    Kenyon Martin is a good player, he just has a horrific contract, something we're trying to rid ourselves of. Again, it has nothing to do with talent level.

                    The Nuggets are a talented team, as their record shows, they're just not the type of team the majority of Pacer fans are looking for. We want a winning team full of classy, respectable players. It looks like we've got a good start towards the later, hopefully in time they can achieve the former as well.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                      Apparently I picked the wrong sample space, his stats in the last 7 games seems to look most impressive. 30 pts, 5.7 boards, 4.3 assists. Figures the day after I create this thread a new article about danny on the pacers website...

                      "No debate about Granger's All-Star credentials"
                      Pacers: Caught in the web
                      Conrad Brunner

                      First came the broken teeth, and then the viral infection that sent him to the hospital. Most recently was a concussion that sent Danny Granger wobbling to the locker room in Memphis.

                      Playing without wingman Mike Dunleavy hasn't helped, either. Though Marquis Daniels has played very well as Dunleavy's stand-in, he doesn't have the ability to spread the defense and create driving lanes for teammates.

                      Somehow, though, Granger has managed to do more than take the next step on his career path toward stardom. He's taken several while avoiding the aforementioned potholes.

                      It's to the point now that there really isn't much of a debate about his All-Star credentials.

                      "He's really becoming quite a basketball player," said Coach Jim O'Brien. "I hope the rest of the league recognizes it because if there are people more deserving of being an All-Star than Danny, I don't know who they are. He's been terrific for us in every phase of the game."

                      The league is noticing.

                      "He’s going to be a superstar," said Hornets Coach Byron Scott after Granger scored 34, 15 in the fourth quarter, Sunday night. "Every time I see him shoot, I think it’s going in and he is going to be the face of this franchise.”

                      "With the kind of basketball he’s capable of," said David West, "you need to prepare for him just like you are going to prepare for (Tracy) McGrady or somebody like that.”

                      His last seven games have been remarkable. He has averaged 30.0 points, 5.7 rebounds and 4.3 assists, shot .493 from the field and .439 from the 3-point line. Of particular note are his increases in assists and free throw attempts (8.7 per game in the last seven, up from 5.1 in the previous games). Those are prime indicators of the continued expansion of his game.

                      "I'm definitely growing it," Granger said. "I'm trying to create more, pass the ball more, drive more. There was a stretch when I wasn't getting to the line as much. I've tried to change that and I've been getting to the line a lot lately."

                      Free throws aren't sexy, but they are absolute gold for scorers. In Granger's two biggest games (42 against the Pistons and 41 against the Warriors), for example, he went 30-of-30 from the line. In the Golden State game, he shot 11-of-27 from the field but reached 41 by making all 17 of his free throw attempts, a career-high.

                      "I don't think through any fault of his own he stopped getting to the foul line a few games ago," said O'Brien. "It's just that we haven't had the ability to necessarily space the court as much as we did last year. When you space the court you get more one-on-one opportunities and more one-on-one opportunities lead to more foul shots.

                      "When Danny catches the basketball now and he sees everybody on defense loaded up in the lane against him, he knows we do not want him to dribble into traffic and as a result of being one-on-three or one-on-four, it doesn't give him the chance to be aggressive. If he's not aggressive, foul shots become a difficulty. So that's why not having Travis (Diener) and Mike's 3-point shooting has really challenged Danny and challenged our offense."

                      Another significant adjustment Granger has made in those situations is the ability to use the defense's focus on him to create opportunities for his teammates, hence the increase in assists.

                      "Any time Danny can have a positive assist-turnover ratio, then that's growth," O'Brien said. "He has been asked to be not only a scorer but also a playmaker because when (a good shot opportunity) is taken away from him he has to see the open guy, which I think he's doing a very good job at."

                      His scoring average of 24.9, if maintained, would rank as the highest by a Pacers player since Billy Knight's 26.6 in 1976-77. He is on course to post career highs in assists and blocked shots.

                      So what's next on the list of things to do?

                      "Becoming one of the best defensive players in the league," said O'Brien. "Sometimes because we have played Marquis on the other team's best perimeter player, I think players mistakenly think we're protecting them so maybe they don't have to be as aggressive defensively. We always need him to be aggressive defensively. We need him to be equally successful at the defensive end as the offensive end."

                      Sounds a little much to ask. The funny thing is, he's fully capable.
                      Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 12-29-2008, 11:39 PM.
                      "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                      - ilive4sports

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        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.
                        That's not talent. Those are all skills.

                        Talent is a natural ability. A skill is the possession of an art or craft.
                        The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                          Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                          That's not talent. Those are all skills.

                          Talent is a natural ability. A skill is the possession of an art or craft.
                          What natural abilities are you thinking of?

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                            natural ability... like physical ability? Like having a good 40 time and jumping high? Lots of guys with that kind of talent don't amount to squat in the NBA.

                            Nobody comes out of womb with the ability to shoot the basketball, its a skill, a learned skill. For everyone.

                            This is something Iv'e always wondered about, I think some people put too much stock in pure athleticism when it comes to evaluating talent. Did Larry Bird lack talent? Or did he just have lots of "skills"?

                            I think the only way you can evaluate talent is taking in a wide spectrum of factors, these include mental toughness, heart, skills, in addition to pure athleticism.
                            "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                            - ilive4sports

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                              Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                              natural ability... like physical ability? Like having a good 40 time and jumping high? Lots of guys with that kind of talent don't amount to squat in the NBA.

                              Nobody comes out of womb with the ability to shoot the basketball, its a skill, a learned skill. For everyone.

                              This is something Iv'e always wondered about, I think some people put too much stock in pure athleticism when it comes to evaluating talent. Did Larry Bird lack talent? Or did he just have lots of "skills"?

                              I think the only way you can evaluate talent is taking in a wide spectrum of factors, these include mental toughness, heart, skills, in addition to pure athleticism.
                              Yeah, speed, leaping ability, agility... I categorize that as athleticism not talent. Talent is practical application of that natural ability.

                              Sounds like semantics but I think a player can be athletic and not very talented. Look at Stromile Swift for example. Likewise a player can be talented without a lot of athleticism.

                              When it comes to Granger, guys that have and/or had talent in the national media along with coaches of opposing teams always comment on how "talented" he is.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: just how talented is Danny Granger?

                                Granger is a great, GREAT, jump shooter off the catch. He is a decent jump shooter off the dribble. Unfortunately, he doesn't do much else. He rarely attacks the basket. His ball handling is atrocious. He doesn't defend as hard as he used to. He's a talented player. But if he's the best player on the team (he is right now) it's going to make for a long season.
                                "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                                -Lance Stephenson

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X