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

Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

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

  • #16
    Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

    Originally posted by Netweeny
    Originally posted by Kstat
    I think you guys need a center with a nice mid-range game, can score in the 15-18ppg range and can pass a little too.
    Just like Ben Wallace!! :P

    I get his point to be "Just like Brad Miller." Trying to work up a BM controversy to get a jump on his "Most Hated" title defense.......




    You typed "work up a BM", heh, heh.....
    PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

      Jeff's perfect for the team, he looked to be a little more aggressive on the offensive end during the second half of the season. He has a pretty wack jump shot for a white boy though.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

        Originally posted by Charles
        Jeff's perfect for the team, he looked to be a little more aggressive on the offensive end during the second half of the season......
        Jeff was much improved finishing around the basket last season. His jumper looks good, but it's generally not a good idea for him to shoot one.....

        PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

          We got killed on the boards in the playoffs. JO would still have to play some center. Yes we had trouble scoring against the pistons, but who didnt? We got out rebounded by even Miami. Getting dampier means that Jo doesnt have to play center, and there wont be many rebounds that get by Dampier and JO. Dampier can block shots to, Foster cant. Our interior defense and rebounding improves greatly with the addition of Dampier. We could use our MLE to sign somebody like Q-rich or Jackson. Freddie could even start, he has improved greatly. We could trade Scott and Harrington for Dampier.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

            I'd add the one drawback with dampier instead of foster is perimeter defense. I remember we had a field day in the finals forcing shaq's slow *** out to the 3-point line with pick and rolls, and he was always too slow to recover defensively. I can certainly imagine Dampier having similiar problems.

            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

              Originally posted by Kstat
              I'd add the one drawback with dampier instead of foster is perimeter defense. I remember we had a field day in the finals forcing shaq's slow *** out to the 3-point line with pick and rolls, and he was always too slow to recover defensively. I can certainly imagine Dampier having similiar problems.
              Dampier isnt as slow as Shaq but he isnt as quick as Foster. I would still take Dampier over Foster anyday.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

                I'd say dampier and shaq would probably tie in a footrace. Good rebounder and post scorer, but not much in the way of lateral mobility.

                It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

                  I'm not sure that adding Damp really improves our rebounding that much. I mean, he was good last year, but Foster's been good for a long time.
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

                    Originally posted by Anthem
                    I'm not sure that adding Damp really improves our rebounding that much. I mean, he was good last year, but Foster's been good for a long time.

                    He was 4th in rebounds per game and 1 in rebounds per 48 minutes, yeah I would say he is an okay rebounder, maybe average(sarcasim)

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

                      Jeff's one of the top 5 offensive rebounders in the NBA, IMO. Offensive rebounding requires speed and anticipation, which foster does very well. However defensive rebounding requires strength and technique, which foster isnt as strong at. Foster's a pretty average defensive rebounder.

                      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

                        Originally posted by Kstat
                        You need offense from either the SG spot or center spot. I'll leave it at that.
                        That, I'll disagree with.

                        Whether or not we get any offensive from the center position, we absolutely MUST have consistent production and perimeter shooting from the SG position.

                        I think that even you would admit that had the Pacers even had one player able to consistently hit perimeter shots, the Pistons series with the Pacers might have ended differently.

                        I agree that we could use another big body on our interior, I just believe that a consistent perimeter shooter is a more important acquisition at this point in time.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

                          Scot Pollard and Al Harrington for Dampier. That still leaves Jeff to guard Odom and Sheed. But we still needed more rebounding and that is what Dampier gives us, he can also block shots and score a lot better than Foster. I dont think we need to get rid of Foster. I just think that he would be better coming off the bench and in some cases come in and play more minutes to guard guys like Odom and Rasheed.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

                            The fact that this question even needs to be asked makes me wanna

                            Could we all get past the Brad Miller thing? If you guys don't want us to tell you about Brad would be better than this or that would you please drop the entire line of Jeff/Brad comparisons?

                            You are kidding yourselves if you think anybody outside the fan base of the Indiana Pacers thinks that Jeff Foster is better than Brad Miller at anything.

                            I am posting the following Uncle Buck Quote for a reason. "I realize Jeff will never be an allstar".

                            My reason is simple, it is not my opinion that Brad Miller is an All-star it is a fact. In two differant Conferances no less.

                            According to Uncle Buck, Jeff is much better than Brad at defense. I think that's a joke myself, but there is no way for me to prove this. However I will say this, also according to U.B. defense wins ball games. Yet, Foster, who is supposedly better at defense than Brad could not get off of the bench for more than 4 min. in the deciding game of the E.C. finals.

                            Does anybody on here right now want to come forward & tell me that Brad Miller would not have started vs. the Pistons in every game assuming he was not injured? (there are you happy I put the injury thing in there for those who want to tell us how Brad was injured all of the time)

                            I don't care if it was a special circumstance, it was a real circumstance & it will be one that will be repeated again next season (hopefully) & I want to know how Jeff will react then?

                            Part of being good on defense is being good on offense. What the hell am I talking about, you ask. Simple, if your man has to spend zero energy guarding you on the offensive end then he can put all of his energy in to scoring. For the most part, you are not going to stop scorers every time from scoring in all games. At some point in time they are going to hit their shots. Ron Artest being one of the rare exceptions of people who can do this. But if you notice Ron also will wear his man down on the offensive end of the floor as well.

                            Sorry everybody, I think some of you will have to give me some credit. I have kept out of the Miller thing since the end of the season & never even mentioned that I thought that Brad would have been a deciding factor vs. the Pistons because I thought we all had moved on.

                            But I swear to God, to read how Foster is better at defense, rebounding, cat petting, chili eating, etc., etc. makes me wanna lose my mind.

                            Brad Miller is an F'n all-star. You do not get to be an F'n all-star by just being an offensive player only, at least not when you are voted on by coach's. Fans are a differant story.

                            If an offense was all it took then Jalen Rose would be at least a 2 time all-star & he has not even cracked the team.

                            :shakehead::shakehead:

                            Here let's all just do this.

                            Jeff Foster>>>>>>>>>>>>

                            Ok, now that I have that off of my chest....

                            I'm perfectly fine with Jeff Foster being the center. The price is right & so far there just aren't that many big men in the east yet that I fear Jeff being bolled over. I think he will eventually be overtaken by some of the younger stronger guys, but for now they won't hurt him.

                            He does need to improve his offense. I would like to see him be able to hit a jumper, but if he can't then I would like to see him at least come up with some form or offense. Being able to hit a layup would be nice.

                            Defensively, for now, he compliments O'Neal fairly well. However some day there may come a time when a team produces two big men & then I'm not sure what's going to happen.

                            I'll tell you one thing though, without getting a scoring guard we will be in deep crap if Jeff can't come up with some form of offense.

                            I would much rather see us get a shooting guard than worry about center.

                            BTW, I'm interested to see how many people even aknowledge the fact that I am saying that I am fine with Jeff Foster as center & even now give a nod to Donnie for making probably a wise financial move, or how many people will just blow up on the Brad Miller comments?

                            I'd rather have Brad, but I'd rather have Jeff than Scott Pollard.

                            [edit=110=1088405167]looking[/edit]


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

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

                              Brad Miller? whats all this about Brad Miller? I was referring to Rik Smits:P

                              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Are you satisfied with Jeff Foster starting and finishing

                                Originally posted by beast23

                                Buck -

                                I agree that Jeff is a very mobile center on both ends of the floor. But, mobility or not, we had problems covering both Ben and Rasheed, and keeping both off the boards.

                                I think our interior defensive presence needs to be more physical. Perhaps in time Harrison can provide that. I do believe that either of Dampier or Foyle could provide that.

                                Jeff plays about 23-25 minutes a game. That's half a game. Plenty of opportunity for another center, whether a starter or bench player, to make a major contribution. I just want that player to be a big physical defender who is capable of hitting a 10 foot shot if left open.

                                As for Jeff, there is only one thing about Jeff that irks the hell out of me. He absolutely must improve to 70% from the line. Until he does, he has no business finishing games for us.

                                first, then to step back and see what can be done to acquire the center.

                                Agree with part and disagree with part.

                                Jeff was very close to shooting 70% from the FT line. I'll check the stats, but I think he was over 65% for sure.

                                I don't agree with you about any trouble keeping Ben and Sheed off the boards. Not when Jeff and a healthy J.O were in there, no problem at all.

                                I do agree that I would have no problem with a better center than Pollard being brought in, but if AL is still around there aren't many minutes.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X