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

Danny Granger is a platypus

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 4
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 template Next
  • #1

    Danny Granger is a platypus

    This is a great read from a blog. Sorry if it's already been posted.

    http://www.nbamate.com/2009/01/09/wh...danny-granger/

    What is Danny Granger?
    January 9th, 2009, Author: robd

    There is a natural tendency for NBA fans and media to categorize players into certain molds to help better understand what they are and what they’re trying to do. To translate an unknown quantity into something a little more familiar. You only need to look at a scout report for any young player and you’ll undoubtedly find mention of their basketball forefather. You can spend hours reading about his skills, his tendencies, his career highlights. But a one-liner like “he’s the next Dwyane Wade” is all you really need to conceptualize him.

    Herein lies my problem. I cannot conceptualize Danny Granger. I have trouble quantifying him. He doesn’t want to fit in any of the molds. What the hell is Danny Granger?

    “I’m in awe right now, but it’s important not to be a spectator when he gets the ball.
    Down the clock, I’m not worried when the ball is in his hands.”

    I have seen Danny Granger play only six times in my life. Last season I watched every single Pacers-Pistons game (all four of them) and I distinctly remember my impression of him: this guy spends way too much time on the perimeter for someone who is 6-8 - how bout you go get a rebound! Antawn Jamison is pulling down twice as many boards as you! But I also distinctly remember my other impression of him. This guy is 6-8 and he moves like a cat. He’s like Josh Smith except you can’t leave him open on the perimeter, and he can cross you over. And he can run a fast break. The Pistons easily won all four of those games so I wasn’t too worried about Danny Granger, and I promptly forgot about him. Until recently.

    There is always a premature scoring front runner at the start of an NBA season. Someone who’s average balloons way beyond what seems possible, but who ultimately reaches equilibrium and drifts off the charts. Remember when Flip Murray was a Top 10 scorer back in early December 2003 averaging 21 points per game? No, of course you don’t. No one does. And that’s what I thought would happen to Danny Granger this season. He came flying out of the gates scoring 33 in a season-opening loss to Detroit (another game I watched) and followed it up with five straight 20+ point games. Impressive, even if he was jacking up WAY too many threes. But then he started to slip. A few sub par games and some flu-like symptoms saw his scoring average dip a couple of points during a stretch where the Pacers lost five of six. It was happening. The Ronald Murray of 2008.

    But then it didn’t, and he dropped 32 on Kobe and the Lakers (killer game) and went for three LONs in a row and one third of the way through the season Danny Granger is sitting amongst the top five scoring elite (along with The King, The Mamba, The Flash and The German) and will remain there until 2008-2009 plays itself out. Danny Granger is not the Flip Murray of 2008. He’s just one of the best scorers on the planet.

    “He’s an incredible player. He’s turning out to be one of the
    top players in the league. He’s a very difficult guard.”

    If he wasn’t on your radar then you’re not alone (but if he was then I hate you and your fantasy team). A lot of people had high expectations for this guy - the words “future” and “all-star” were sometimes put next to each other in sentences to describe him. But I don’t think anyone thought he’d explode into a 25+ppg stat stuffer so soon, not on this Pacers team, not with so much more of his game to develop. And how bout that game?

    He strokes the three-ball as well as any big in the league not named Rashard Lewis, except if you get out to him he can go around you and embarrass you. He’s not Rashard Lewis.

    Defensively he’s extremely active - second in blocks per game amongst all small forwards behind Andrei Kirilenko. But AK-47 has never lead his team in scoring. He’s not Andrei Kirilenko.

    He’s athletic enough to surprise you every now and then, but he’s not flashy and he’s not dunk-happy, which kinda reminds me of Paul Pierce. But then again The Truth never threw one down on Lebron’s head. He’s not Paul Pierce.

    His game is by no means perfect, but when he improves his post-up game a little more he will command a truly awesome offensive arsenal. Kinda like Carmelo, but with a better three point shot. He’s not Carmelo Anthony.

    What exactly is he? He’s been called the next Shawn Marion. The next Josh Howard. Some have even labeled him the next Scottie Pippen (that’s actually impossible, see “Scottie Pippen-type Player“). But he’s none of those. He’s not going to be the “next” anything. The mold hasn’t been set yet. There is only one thing Danny Granger reminds me of.

    And that is a platypus.

    The platypus fell down the evolutionary tree of biology and hit every branch on the way down. It is the Swiss army knife of animals. It is covered with fur, has webbed feet, a tail, a beak (with nostrils in it!), a poisonous venom spur and muscles that generate electric fields to locate their prey (I am not making this up). It looks like a beaver, a duck and a walrus all at the same time. It’s ****ing weird. But it’s also a biological miracle, a creature that simply has no peer. A creature that fits no mold.

    Danny Granger is a platypus. Not in the “oh isn’t it furry and cute!” kinda way, but in the “you won’t find an animal that can swim, crawl, breath underwater, look cute and kill you at the same time” kinda way. I imagine most animals that swim past a platypus probably think “what the **** is that thing?” and have a little chuckle to themselves. Little do they know the platypus is going to come back to poison and electrocute them in a swift yet elegant move before strolling up onto the beach where no one can follow him. That is the Danny Granger way. Not everyone has heard of him, but underestimate him, taunt him, and he will damage you. Damage you in style.

    You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

    After dumping 37 on the Suns yesterday to go with the miracle buzzer-beating shot, Pacers coach Jim O’Brien was perplexed. “If Danny Granger isn’t an All Star, then I don’t know what an All Star looks like”.

    All Stars don’t look like Danny Granger, Jim. Nothing does.

    Except maybe a platypus.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Danny Granger is a platypus

    Well, that is a different comparison. I kind of like it though.

    He is one of a kind basketball player.

    I would rather be the hammer than the nail

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Danny Granger is a platypus

      That's hilarious.

      -- Steve --

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Danny Granger is a platypus

        I'm speechless.
        Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Danny Granger is a platypus

          I liked it but who was the author quoting?

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Danny Granger is a platypus

            Some have even labeled him the next Scottie Pippen.

            Cue Naptime Seth:
            And I won't be here to see the day
            It all dries up and blows away
            I'd hang around just to see
            But they never had much use for me
            In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Danny Granger is a platypus

              That's great. We have a new nickname for Danny.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Danny Granger is a platypus

                That was a pretty good read.

                "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Danny Granger is a platypus

                  A platypus is a freak of nature. Danny doesn't resemble nor plays like a freak of nature. Terrible description to label Granger. Can you just hear Slick, Clark, Quinn, or Chris dub him with the nick name "the platypus" on the radio or tv? He'd be the laughing stock of the NBA. It's one thing to be mentioned as a bulldog like Jack has been, but a platypus for Granger! How embarrassing. The whole idea is plain repulsive.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Danny Granger is a platypus

                    Good stuff.
                    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Danny Granger is a platypus

                      We could call him the knife (Swiss Army)

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Danny Granger is a platypus

                        awesome read.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Danny Granger is a platypus

                          Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                          A platypus is a freak of nature. Danny doesn't resemble nor plays like a freak of nature. Terrible description to label Granger. Can you just hear Slick, Clark, Quinn, or Chris dub him with the nick name "the platypus" on the radio or tv? He'd be the laughing stock of the NBA. It's one thing to be mentioned as a bulldog like Jack has been, but a platypus for Granger! How embarrassing. The whole idea is plain repulsive.

                          While I can't say I'm necessarily repulsed by calling DG a "platypus", I would
                          have to concur that it is kind of a silly comparison.

                          As far as the animal kingdom goes, I would personally rate a platypus as
                          being pretty wimpy compared to many other animals out there nearer the
                          top of the food chain.

                          As for the NBA, DG is far from wimpy, and getting much closer to the top
                          of the food chain than a platypus.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Danny Granger is a platypus




                            Does this mean Danny is poisonous?
                            Last edited by duke dynamite; 01-26-2009, 02:03 PM.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Danny Granger is a platypus

                              Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                              Cue Naptime Seth:
                              Drat. Too late to the thread.

                              You take Pip, you give him a 3, you lower his assists/steals, you improve his blocks/rebounds. Pip was the SG version of an SF, Granger is the PF version...with the 3. That's about it.

                              However right now Danny bites on fakes and gets burned one on one that I don't ever recall seeing Pippen do. That's next summer's improvement I'm assuming. Then it will be complete.

                              If that looks like a Platypus to you then fine. Frankly the fangs that Dental Plan Dan was sporting vs Boston suggest something more carnivorous than that.

                              edit - well I didn't really know this part so maybe I spoke too soon
                              Little do they know the platypus is going to come back to poison and electrocute them in a swift yet elegant move
                              Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 01-26-2009, 02:03 PM.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 template Next
                              Working...
                              X