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

Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

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

  • #16
    Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

    Buck, I'll give JOB credit on several things tonight. Two specific were:

    Ty Thomas killing them, he fetched Josh after him and you notice that Ty's output/impact diminished quite a bit after that.

    Bulls pressed the in-bounds and Danny nearly through it away on a long bomb to Josh. JOB called over TJ and Jack and fixed that. At one point I saw him have Jack watch the Bulls players, back to the ball, so that they couldn't come up and make a sneak move. Their press didn't really work after that and they eventually went away from it.



    You just have to deal with the chicken-egg situation here. I say that when JOB coaches better the team is more likely to win, whereas I think you feel like people just go in swings based on the results as though the effort/coaching remains constant and sometimes it just doesn't pan out.

    Maybe that's not correct, but to me that's the vibe I get from you sometimes when you are countering the complaints about JOB (or various players).

    But let's just be fair here, this rotation featured a lot 5 man groups that haven't seen much PT this year, and Jack-Rush-Roy as the starters isn't exactly the standard for this season. My complaint all along was that apart from teaching them the game, there was benefit in the chances to win right away by playing those guys.

    So to me seeing these rotations/starters and the subsequent strong play goes hand in hand and only strengthens the earlier complaints that he needed to be doing this all along. However, since my goal is to see the team win and since this is the rotation now I'll hope he recognizes the benefit and sticks with it on into next season.

    If he does that I think the team will win more, and therefore he'll be kept around as coach. If he goes off in some other direction and the team struggles then he's going to be done. And our opinions of his abilities won't alter those 2 outcomes I don't think.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

      Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
      How about that Josh Mcroberts?
      Not bad, man, not bad...

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        He also said this is the best locker room he's been in during his 8 year career
        That's a lot to say, even though he was with the Warriors the first few seasons...

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

          Originally posted by IndianapolisPacer View Post
          It may have been lucky, but that's his kind of shot.
          He shouldn't have risked the game like that. We could have found a much better shot. It kills me that O'Brien probably told TJ "Just go out, work one on one, and shoot the ball". On that last shot. It's bull**** how bad his out of bound plays are.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            Buck, I'll give JOB credit on several things tonight. Two specific were:

            Ty Thomas killing them, he fetched Josh after him and you notice that Ty's output/impact diminished quite a bit after that.
            This is one of those things. Every time I see someone say "we need an athletic PF who focusus on defense blabla... Josh seems to already be one of those kind of guys. A guy who does the dirty work that doesn't show up in the stat sheet. Even when he isn't directly involved in the play he is out there setting screens and whatnot.

            I think his rebounding should have been better, but mostly... I am happy with how josh mcroberts lived up to the hype i have been providing him with. Its rewarding.
            "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


            • #21
              Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

              That shot is a shot that Ford takes and hits quite often. Not lucky at all.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

                Originally posted by IndianapolisPacer View Post
                It may have been lucky, but that's his kind of shot. Conseco was amazing those last few minutes though. From when BRush passed on the three to Danny's shots and the last two possessions. It was electric, especially with all the chicago fans in the area. Great time for $1.50.

                I've said this the last couple of home games, just watching in my living room. I'm very proud of our crowd and fans. We may be small, but we are mighty!!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

                  I'm not quite sure where to start. This was a nice win. I gave up on the playoffs a long time ago, but I still want them to win every night. There's probably something wrong with me.

                  Rush - After missing most of the last 2 games, I was hoping for another big offensive night from Brandon. I was impressed with his efficiency, but he seemed to freeze up a bit in the 4th. It really looked like he did not want to be the guy taking the shots down the stretch. I think that was exactly the case on the play Seth mentioned above. His defense on Gordon, however, was fantastic. I think Ben Gordon is probably one of the top 10-15 scorers in the NBA. Rush shut him down early and made him clearly uncomfortable all game long. The Bulls announcers were noticing that Gordon was passing up shots he normally takes. They didn't give Rush any credit, but it's still a telling sign. So in the past 4 games we have Rush scoring 11 points while guarding D-Wade during a 5-24 shooting game, two 29 point games, and Rush scoring 11 while guarding Gordon during a 5-18 shooting game. Pretty impressive.

                  A side note, why did O'Brien have Jack guarding Gordon when he hit the game-tying shot? At least he wised up and put Rush back on him at the end.

                  Another note, did anybody else notice Brad Miller's do-si-do screen of Brandon on the last play. Seriously, they had their elbows locked and Miller was spinning him around. Thankfully Danny did an excellent job on the switch.

                  Ford - TJ played an excellent game. He still does some infuriating things, but he was nearly unstoppable at times. As for the last play, any time you watch an NBA game, the last play is an iso for the best player about 90% of the time. I don't have any problem with the final play last night. Ford is our best scorer in a one-on-one situation.

                  Jack - His shot wasn't falling, and Chicago was defending him really well. He had a strong 4th quarter with some of the best passing I've seen from him. The four steals were also nice.

                  McRoberts - I thought he was bad/ineffective in the first half. He played great in the 4th quarter. I'm all for giving the kid more minutes, but it was apparent last night that he's not some all-star that we've got sitting on the bench. He's an athletic kid with a lot of energy who's pretty smart, but hasn't quite put it all together yet.

                  Granger - I think my expectations are too high for him. I watch the game and I think he's shooting poorly. I check the box score and see that he went 11-19 and 4-10 from the arc. I think to myself, "But he missed so many easy shots..."

                  It was nice to have Murphy back, but we needed Foster last night, if only so we didn't have to watch Rasho play.

                  Did anyone else notice that Joakim Noah cannot set a legal screen? He either moves into or leans into the guy he's screening every single time. I'm really surprised he doesn't get called for it more often.
                  "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                  - Salman Rushdie

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

                    I was able to go to the game, it was good stuff. Crowd seemed lively, even if not a full house.

                    Granger is impressive, man... this was the first game I've been to this year, he looks visibly more athletic and powerful this year, something I didn't catch watching the games from my living room. His shot is so sweet. And I noticed this --- when Granger catches the ball out behind the line, the entire crowd builds up just like we used to do when Reggie used to catch and set behind the line. You just have this feeling you're about to have 3 more points on the board. It's nice to feel that again.

                    Rush looks like he belongs out there, he's quickly becoming a favorite of mine. It was nice to see McRoberts get some meaningful playing time. I just wish Diener had made it out there, I love that kid.
                    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


                    • #25
                      Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

                      Looking at jack's stat line does not tell you what he did do in the game. He was active even though his recent production was down.

                      Ford was fouled on that last shot. Ty fell into him, that is why it looked uglier than usual. Ford has broke down Rose reguarly this season. I have no issues giving him the ball late in the game. It was not a bad out of bounds play. It was excuted for the win, even though it wasn't ideal. It was a win. We trailed going in and McBob gave us the energetic spark needed to overcome the energy of the Bulls.

                      Our intenistiy grew, were as earlier in the year when faced with a hightened intensity we folded and gave up leads. This team is growing and developing. There are exactly the place I thought they would be going in. I did not expect Dun to be out like this. But I did not expect Daniels and Jack to pick up the slack.

                      All in all there still is a postive vibe exiting this year. Bird has to build upon that for next season and we could see great things from this team.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

                        Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                        All in all there still is a postive vibe exiting this year. Bird has to build upon that for next season and we could see great things from this team.
                        I agree. Assuming the Pacers are able to keep Jack, we could head into next season with this lineup:

                        Jack, Rush, Granger, Murphy, Hibbert
                        Bench: Ford, Dunleavy, Foster
                        If needed: Diener, Graham, McRoberts

                        That's a solid 8 man rotation. If we can grab another Rush/Hibbert level player from this draft, we'll really be in a pretty good position. Also, I think we're in a pretty good position to be able to draft any player on the board, which is exactly where you want to be heading into the draft. I'd flinch a bit if we drafted a single-position C or SF, but it wouldn't be terrible.
                        "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                        - Salman Rushdie

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

                          This year we need to draft talent. Talent even if we draft another PG.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

                            Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                            I'm not quite sure where to start. This was a nice win. I gave up on the playoffs a long time ago, but I still want them to win every night. There's probably something wrong with me.
                            Same here.
                            BillS

                            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                            Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

                              Originally posted by BillS View Post
                              Same here.
                              Me three

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Post Game Thread: Pacers beat Chicago

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                I hope a lot of you were able to hear Troy Murphy after the game.

                                He gave the coaching staff a lot of credit for keeping the team prepared and playing hard. He also said this is the best locker room he's been in during his 8 year career
                                He also didn't say because it's pretty embarrassing - "this is the winningest team I've ever been on in the NBA".

                                Not quite, but darn close. Dun's situation is obviously virtually the same. It's dumbfounding to think that these are guys who have yet to play in 38 wins in one season, let alone see their team with or without them go over .500.

                                W-L in games played by Troy (team W-L while with team)
                                GSW
                                01-02 21-61 (same)
                                02-03 37-42 (38-44)
                                03-04 13-15 (37-45)
                                04-05 30-40 (34-48)
                                05-06 30-44 (34-48)
                                06-07 10-16 (19-20)
                                INDY
                                06-07 14-28 (15-28)
                                07-08 33-42 (36-46)
                                08-09 26-40 (32-43)

                                Few losses Troy has experienced in a season - 44. If the Pacers can avoid losing more than 1 game the rest of the way he can tie that.

                                A reminder that the roster of his best team so far:
                                Arenas
                                Jamison
                                Jason Richardson
                                Dun (natch)
                                Boykins
                                Sura

                                Seems like a roster that could eventually score plenty of points.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X