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

Opinion, Please

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

  • #16
    Re: Opinion, Please

    Mark,

    As noted previously, Danny is posting improvements, and, in some cases, career highs in Points, Assists, Blocks, Three Pointers (Made, Attempted, and %), and FT's (Made, Attempted, and %). His FT attempts are up to almost 7 per game, and again, he's hitting a career high .885.

    Per 82games.com, he's fourth in the league in 4th quarter scoring, just behind James, Bryant, and Wade, and ahead of Brandon Roy, Devin Harris, and Chris Paul.

    http://www.82games.com/0809/QTR4S11.HTM (could not find 2007 numbers for comparison, but I'll keep looking.

    However, I did find one thing that you may not know. It's also from 82games, and it has to do with their "Game Winning Shot" stat.

    http://www.82games.com/gamewinningshots.htm

    First, a brief explanation, per 82games:

    Game Winning Shot Opportunity = 24 seconds or less left in the game, team with the ball is either tied or down by 1 to 2 points.

    Why use this definition?

    1. With 24 seconds or less, then it truly is a "last possession" situation potentially
    2. With a margin from tied to down 2, the team can take the lead with a made basket (including 3's)
    3. By excluding a down 3 situation, we don't have the "gimme two point buckets" that defenses will sometimes yield to the quick bucket/intentional foul strategy option you often see exercised.

    Obviously though this definition means a shot may not actually be a game winner -- it may only tie a game (if down two points) or it may allow enough time for the opponents to get a game winning shot of their own. Still it seems a reasonable compromise.
    The data sample was for 5 years, and Danny was down on the list. However, they did note the year by year leaders:

    '08-09
    Granger 5-7
    Roy 4-7
    R.Mason 3-3
    Durant 3-8
    Felton 3-8

    How does this work into the case for most improved? Prior to this season, Danny had missed all 7 of his opportunities for such shots.

    This is stat heavy, primarily because I couldn't pretend to have a better view for the softer, intangible attributes than you do. However, from my perspective, I think some weight should be given to Danny's evolution to the face of the franchise. Where Devin Harris has Vince Carter in New Jersey, and Paul Millsap has Deron Williams, Carlos Boozer, and even Andrei Kirilenko, Danny is unquestionably the most recognizable and most popular Pacer. This, despite being the sixth man and often a fourth or fifth option a scant two years ago.

    It's true my view is only as an outsider and a fan, but I certainly believe the grace and aplomb with which he has accepted this mantle should be of great credit to him. While this may not be of importance to the larger NBA community, I don't think the Pacers could have asked for a more perfect player to represent the franchise as they try to emerge from under the dark cloud that has hovered for the past few years. He has an uncommon combination of natural skills, impeccable work ethic, thirst for improvement, dignity, and charisma.

    Also, while this is a one year award, I would think you could make a case for a lifetime achievement of improvement. Danny's career has been marked by a continuous and steep learning curve. While others may have made comparable (or arguably bigger) leaps this season, this type of improvement is really what Danny does, and he should be rewarded for it.

    Hopefully, you can find something in that gibberish that can be of use to you.

    Thanks, count

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Opinion, Please

      If I was making a case for Danny Granger I'd want to take a look at his role this year versus last year and look at some changing perceptions. Last year he had Mike Dunleavy to help shoulder the load. This year he was put into a position where it was his load alone. I'd say he certainly excelled with his scoring as well as steadily improved his ability to knock down some clutch shots and there were several opportunities. Just because we didn't win the game doesn't mean Danny didn't hit a huge 4th qtr shot (or get to the line) in crunch time that put the team into position to have a shot at winning. I don't have the stats in front of me but he had several 30 point games, even with the defense knowing Danny was the Pacers lone All-Star and go to guy.

      I think Danny's confidence and swagger have improved immensely over the course of this season as compared to last. That can't be overlooked. Especially when so much was put on his shoulders and expected of him this season in the first place... and moreso when Dun was basically a 'no show' for the majority of the season. He's seemingly embraced the role as leader and I certainly get the feeling he has the respect of his teammates. Even with his expanding role and prominence on the team I've seen nor heard of any issues or jealousy (or over-inflated ego) driving a wedge in the team's chemistry (tho you'd know better than most of us about the validity of that observation).

      Danny has clearly established himself this season as THE franchise now and for the foreseeable future. There was still some debate last season about whether Danny and Dun duplicated each other too much and which one you might be better off trading to improve the team. Not only thru loss, but in each's value to bring something back to the team in trade. It seems pretty clear that Danny has used the opportunity to silence the last smidge of that debate because few would consider losing Danny now except for one of the true faces of the NBA out there.

      It seems like he's accomplished an awful lot in just one year. From a question mark all the way to solidifying himself as the heir apparent to Reggie as well as a viable All-Star candidate for some time forward.
      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

      ------

      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Opinion, Please

        The pro-Granger points I would make are the following:

        1) He is much stronger, aggressive and successful than last year going to the bucket. This appears to be a combination of improved conditioning (strength) and an improvement in handling the basketball. This makes him much more difficult to guard.

        2) He has improved his leadership skills. Mike Dunleavy was probably the better player last year and Danny may have deferred to him a bit. Now Danny takes it upon himself to "take over" when needed and he has made numerous clutch shots. He also challenges the great players in the league like Lebron. All things considered, I believe Danny has made this his team over the last 6-12 months.

        3) His consistency has been very impressive. Just the last three games he has gone 32, 31 and 31. He never seems to have an off night.

        4) A lot of weight has been placed on his shoulders with Dunleavy being out. This has allowed teams to focus more of their defense on Danny, yet Danny has responded.

        5) His free throw percentage has risen to an elite level....closing in on 90%. This may seem like a small point, but important games come down to free throws. He has always been a good shooter, but now he is nearly automatic at the line.

        6) He has shown a level of toughness not seen last year and probably not seen in Indy since Ron Artest. He has quickly rebounded from injuries and continued to produce. He did not have these same challenges last year.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Opinion, Please

          Originally posted by granger33 View Post
          Danny is going to be the 1st player in NBA history to bump his ppg up 5pts 3 years running. thats pretty impressive to me. His improved every year.
          That's what I was going to add if someone else didn't beat me to it. Also, were any of your other candidates drafted as low as he was? Or even nearly as low? He's probably done the most to exceed expectations of any of the other candidates. Not only because of where he was drafted, but just how he was generally viewed by the league before now.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Opinion, Please

            Hicks,

            Please elaborate on your point regarding draft status. My position is that a player establishes a base line as a rookie and is evaluated, at least in terms of improvement, based on his work in subsequent seasons. I don't see how draft position is relevant in terms of this discussion.

            Am I missing something?

            MJB

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Opinion, Please

              In my area of work, I have to be objective. Looking solely at the numbers, it would be hard to put Granger at the top of the list. After looking at IU Sears' first post in this thread, to me the case is made against Granger, as it is not hard to realize that Granger's scoring has been improving at a fairly good rate over the past several years. Because his improvement has been ongoing, it's hard to make a case that he is most improved. Maybe if there was a HUGE increase in other statistical categories, (and maybe I've missed something), but he actually went down in RPG and FG%. Now last year, one could have actually made a case based on stats, because he improved significantly in just about every category.

              On the other hand, this is the year when he clearly ascended to a leadership role, speaking through actions. Leaving the teeth on the floor during the Celtics game, and coming back with stitches to close out a fantastic game against the Bulls last night...I'd have to say he is most improved in terms of maturity and other intangibles. But statistically, it's hard to put him ahead of even someone on his own team in terms of most-improved player (e.g., see: Murphy, and all those double-doubles this year).

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Opinion, Please

                Originally posted by mboyle1313 View Post
                Hicks,

                Please elaborate on your point regarding draft status. My position is that a player establishes a base line as a rookie and is evaluated, at least in terms of improvement, based on his work in subsequent seasons. I don't see how draft position is relevant in terms of this discussion.

                Am I missing something?

                MJB
                Is it not typical to have higher/lower expectations for a player based upon whether they were drafted, say, top 5 or top 10, versus lower? If that doesn't matter to you, then I guess there's nothing else to say. If it does, I would think it's another way to view Granger having exceeded expectations with his performances.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Opinion, Please

                  Mark:

                  I think I read or heard that Danny Granger is the only NBA player to raise his average at least 5 points per game in each of the past four seasons: 7.5 to 13.9 to 19.6 to 25.1 (as of right now).

                  You could also make a mild argument for Troy Murphy, who bounced back from a very mediocre (at best) season a year ago to be 3rd in the league in rebounding (as of right now), have his highest scoring average in three years, and is nearing the Pacers' record for double-doubles in a season.

                  Peace, man.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Opinion, Please

                    I just have to note that this thread is exactly the kind of reason why I love this place...

                    I think Danny is the Most Improved Player simply because of his growth as a leader and developing such a high level of poise. He absolutely established to me what went wrong with Jermaine and his "leadership" of the team. Reggie Miller 'gave' the team to JO, or 'stepped aside' so JO could lead...supposedly. Nobody told Granger he was the new leader. Nobody gave him the team to run. He just went out and did what he does, and people followed.

                    THAT is leadership.

                    He gets my vote!



                    RESIDENT COUNTING THREAD PHILOSOPHIZER

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Opinion, Please

                      To me he improved statistically as much this season as he did last season, AND added the leadership, toughness, and clutch shooting which this team desperately needed. I've been watching other teams in the last few years, and wishing we could get that type of player and now we have it. Something else nobody has mentioned, he had this improvement under the pressure of living up to a big contract extension. Some players expect that money to roll in. Danny worked his tail off for it, and turned that money into one of the biggest bargains in the NBA.

                      And I agree with count about loving this place for this type of thread. It's usually something like this that turns into the Thread of the Year.
                      Last edited by travmil; 04-01-2009, 11:19 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Opinion, Please

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        Is it not typical to have higher/lower expectations for a player based upon whether they were drafted, say, top 5 or top 10, versus lower? If that doesn't matter to you, then I guess there's nothing else to say. If it does, I would think it's another way to view Granger having exceeded expectations with his performances.
                        its not really about expectations or draft position though, its about improvement from one year to the next. If Marvin Williams, drafted second in the same draft as Danny, came out next year and is an all star and vastly improves multiple facets of his game, he will be a candidate for MIP. Monta Ellis, who i believe won 2 years ago, was a second round pick, but most likely would have won regardless if he was the 31st pick or the 10th pick. Hedo Turkoglu, the 16th pick, won last year and was almost 30 years old, no one was probably thinking about whether he was picked 16th or 36th.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Opinion, Please

                          At the end of last season, Danny had a string of what, 3 out of 5 games where he scored 30 or more each night? Danny really shown a great deal of intensity during those games. More those in particular than any other game last season.

                          It was great that it somewhat carried into this season. I would bring his toughness into the mix here, because out of any player on this year's team, he has played through some trying injuries, and to be consistently hitting within the 30's many times this season, it shown that his work paid off. (Unfortunately, we aren't higher than we are, but soon...)

                          It stinks that I was just now able to get into this conversation, because many other people have already stated the obvious, or at least very important points that sum up why Danny deserves MIP.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Opinion, Please

                            Originally posted by ReginaldWayne View Post
                            its not really about expectations or draft position though, its about improvement from one year to the next.
                            Yeah, I guess you're right.

                            Then again, that also negates the "first player to improve PPG by 5 X years in a row" argument, too.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Opinion, Please

                              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                              Yeah, I guess you're right.

                              Then again, that also negates the "first player to improve PPG by 5 X years in a row" argument, too.
                              It does, and it doesn't. Significant improvement in previous years doesn't diminish this year's improvement, and it would seem intuitive that this year's 5 pt improvement was by far the hardest to attain. At least the most rare.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Opinion, Please

                                2 things: keep in mind Danny is getting the best defensive assignment against him. Other teams are (at least better teams) trying to concentrate their defense on him, and yet he still scores 25ppg. Also, connected to that, his scoring is very effortless. For example, while watching yesterday's game, I though Danny had a poor shooting game, only to find out he had 31. You don't notice his scoring until the end, which I think is very telling that his game has grown leaps and bounds.
                                Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X