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

Is Danny Granger overrated?

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

  • #31
    Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

    great players actually improve their team...yes, danny granger is overrated by the vast majority of pacers fans. danny granger is the perfect #3 option.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

      As a player NO, not tough enough / Thug Enough Maybe, but that’s his Up Bringing, don't think you will find a more placid dude on the court and I respect that, he asks for a lot from his teammates and thats like most people in the workplace, I can't stand my lazy colleuge that leaves earlier then me and has a longer lunch breaks...

      I have no quails with the way he plays and as far as the Good Player on a bad team compare this list and who would you rather>>

      Even Paul Peirce would struggle with this team and he did for years with a rubbish Boston Teams..


      High Scorers On Loss Leaders

      Name>>

      PPG>>

      Year>>

      G>>

      W-L>>

      Johnston, Phi >>

      22.3 >>

      '52-53 >>

      70 >>

      12-57 >>

      Brand, Chi >>

      20.1 >>

      '00-01 >>

      74 >>

      15-67 >>

      Carter, Phi >>

      20.0 >>

      '72-73 >>

      81 >>

      9-73 >>

      Kojis, SD >>

      19.7 >>

      '68-69 >>

      69 >>

      15-67 >>

      Mercer, Chi >>

      19.7 >>

      '00-01 >>

      61 >>

      15-67 >>

      Jackson, Dal >>

      19.2 >>

      '93-94 >>

      82 >>

      13-69 >>

      Mashburn, Dal >>

      19.2 >>

      '93-94 >>

      79 >>

      13-69 >>



      *Max 15 wins, min. 55 games played>>

      Just got this from the daily dime when comparing Durant and the Thunder..
      Last edited by GO!!!!!; 01-05-2009, 04:43 PM.
      Ya Think Ya Used Enough Dynamite there Butch...

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

        Originally posted by croz24 View Post
        great players actually improve their team...yes, danny granger is overrated by the vast majority of pacers fans. danny granger is the perfect #3 option.

        If Granger wasn't playing, we'd have 5 wins at most. He definitely makes this team better.

        #3 option? How many #3 guys are even capable of putting up 25 a game bad team or not? Maybe Ray Allen (2-3 years ago), but the Celtics are crazy talented.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

          Originally posted by croz24 View Post
          great players actually improve their team...yes, danny granger is overrated by the vast majority of pacers fans. danny granger is the perfect #3 option.
          List teams with 3rd options better than him.

          Also how many teams have 2nd options better than him? I bet not more than half. So if at worse he is an upper-level robin or a poor batman then that sounds pretty good to me.
          Report: 82% Of Wiseguys Think They're Real Funny

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

            One thing about Danny that I've noticed is that he seems seriously pissed off all the time. I don't think I've ever seen that guy smile on the court. Even back in his rookie year when I was lucky enough to go to a few games close to the Pacer bench he would glare.. even scowl at the crowd during the timeouts. At first I thought he was mad at a fan or something but I think that's just his natural game face. He is a very serious player.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              Yes, and everytime the Pacers lose a close game he's in the post game thread talking about how "unclutch" he is and saying how Danny couldn't carry Caron's jockstrap etc.

              Basically saying he dislikes Danny because of the treatment he gets on this board. Who has the audacity to praise a Pacer player, on a Pacer's fan site? Seriously, people.
              thats not true at all, i didn't even bring up the Tough Juice thing, sum1 else did. And i wasn't the only one who believed Butler was better either.

              But yes, i think he is overrated because he can't win big games consistently, he scores a decent amount of points in "garbage time" (scores maybe 6 or 7 straight when team is down 15 in 4th) and because he disappears in the 4th quarter 80% of games.

              Would i welcome him to the Wizards? OF COURSE!

              Would I want him as a first, or even second option? NO
              STARBURY

              08 and Beyond

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                Originally posted by Robertmto View Post
                But yes, i think he is overrated because he can't win big games consistently, he scores a decent amount of points in "garbage time" (scores maybe 6 or 7 straight when team is down 15 in 4th) and because he disappears in the 4th quarter 80% of games.
                1. You won't win a lot of games if you don't have a strong supporting cast. The number of losses can't be blamed on Granger.

                2. We are typically right there every game during the fourth. We just haven't been able to close out. So the down 15 in the 4th comment doesnt apply very often.

                3. Completely untrue. I'm tired of reading this "disappearing in the 4th" comment that seems to be used all the time by his doubters. After about 2 minutes of research, I found that Danny is the 4th leading scorer in the league in the 4th quarter. Courtesy of 82games.com

                http://www.82games.com/0809/QTR4S11.HTM

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                  Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
                  Danny is not overrated at all. My only knock on him is this: He might not be a great teammate.
                  Based on.... ?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                    Yeah, I've never understood the "disappears in the 4th" comment. I figured Danny was up there. After I a little more research I discovered Granger's highest average points per quarter is the 4th.

                    He averages 6.4 points in the 1st, 5.9 in the 2nd, 5.4 in the 3rd, and 7.2 in the 4th.
                    Last edited by Trader Joe; 01-05-2009, 05:18 PM.


                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                      Originally posted by Indy View Post
                      Yeah, I've never understood the "disappears in the 4th" comment. I figured Danny was up there. After I a little more research I discovered Granger's highest average points per quarter is the 4th.

                      He averages 6.4 points in the 1st, 5.9 in the 2nd, 5.4 in the 3rd, and 7.2 in the 4th.
                      he also takes ALOT more shots in the 4th than any other quarter, especially alot more (missed) 3s
                      STARBURY

                      08 and Beyond

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                        So now he doesn't disappear, but he shoots too much? Who would you rather take those shots?

                        I'm a bit confused.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                          Originally posted by WetBob View Post
                          At the risk of alienating myself from members of this board, which I have come to really enjoy lurking on for some time and now that my Colts have once again shattered my hopes and dreams, I plan on contributing much more, but I feel like this is a question that needs to be asked.

                          There is no question that right now Danny is the best player on the team, it remains to be seen whether that will continue to be the case with the hopefully imminent return of Mike Dunleavy, but it just seems to me like there are too many people here who think that he is a great NBA player because he has been scoring consistently this season. In my opinion, Danny is not a great player. He's good, but no where near the level that some posters here seem to believe.

                          What does he do really well? He's a fantastic spot up shooter. He's a decent shooter off of one dribble. He's shown the ability to block shots from the help side. Beyond that? I don't see it. He's an extremely sub-par ball handler, a worse passer, but more than anything, what really bothers me is he doesn't seem all that tough. Now, I'm sure I will be lambasted for that comment, and maybe it's just. People will point to the Celtics' game and the broken teeth issue and what not. But does that really make him tough? Sure he plays hard, its great seeing the best player on your team diving on the floor for loose balls late in a blowout game, but to me that was one instance. More an anomaly then the rule. At Memphis, he leaves the game with what is called a concussion and doesn't return. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that a "concussion" that mild is nothing more then a headache. If he was tough, would he have ever left the floor at all? Against the Knicks he takes a knock and acts like someone shot him in the leg. Now, credit should be given where credit is due, and he finished the game, shot the free throws and hung in there. But, Danny is our best player!! He's our leader. He needs to lead by example. Suck it up, don't show weakness. Lead the team.

                          Perhaps I'm being overly critical, as I'm sure I will be told numerous times, but we are at a point in the season where we can't afford to be so soft. We need to get tougher!! It is a good thing we were able to close out the games in New York and against the Kings because if we hadn't I fear we may have gone 0-for January. Our schedule this month is brutal. We have 15 more games to go in January, if we win 4 or 5 of those I will be pleasantly surprised. Obviously getting Mike back will help, but unless we show more toughness then we did the first 2 months, it isn't going to make enough of a difference.

                          In my personal opinion, that toughness needs to improve immensely, and it starts with Danny Granger.
                          Where's that "stir the pot" smiley when you need one?

                          At first I thought you were serious, but when I read the "concussion is another name for a headache" I started laughing. This is so good... I want to frame this post.

                          Roaming Gnome, I salute you!

                          EDIT:
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                            The Pacers very rarely have garbage time in the 4th. I don't know where you're getting that he scores in garbage time.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                              Originally posted by HeartlandFan View Post
                              So now he doesn't disappear, but he shoots too much? Who would you rather take those shots?

                              I'm a bit confused.
                              he does disappear, or maybe it just seems liek that because he misses most of the shots (even if he does score more)
                              STARBURY

                              08 and Beyond

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                                I think it depends on who's rating him...and that's all over the board.

                                This is January and Danny is 5th in the league in scoring after many people said he would never be much of an offensive player. I find that pretty impressive considering his strength was supposedly defense. Now that his offense has gotten harder to criticize, people criticize his defense. No, he is not as good as the top echelon talent in the NBA such as DWade, Lebron, Kobe, etc...but I don't think anyone reasonably believes that. He fits in the second tier somewhere with players like Joe Johnson, Brandon Roy, Caron Butler, etc. Not a bad group of players.

                                Considering scorers like Joe Johnson, Kevin Durant, Caron Butler, Brandon Roy and Carmello Anthony trail him significantly in some cases on the offensive side of the ledger...I find him just about fairly rated by most commentators.

                                Of course King James overshadows him, but James overshadows everyone. I don't think there is another SF in the East that is significantly better than Granger, if at all.

                                Edit: BTW, if you haven't been watching, his toughness is much better this year. If he gets burned now or is particularly focused, he is getting to the rim and being fouled quite a bit. Often converting the shot. He is so much better at that this year.

                                Edit: Yes, he can be shut down if defenders surround him because his handle is not great. It is his weakness. However, he has improved that area and I do believe other supposed all-star SF's are not particularly strong at that skill.
                                Last edited by BlueNGold; 01-05-2009, 05:37 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X