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

On the bright side of things

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

  • #16
    Re: On the bright side of things

    Originally posted by Speed View Post
    I like what I've seen so far with AJ. He's aggressive, sees the floor, good handles.

    I think he'll have a night, this year, where he's hitting those shots and he'll drop 30 on someone. Watch.

    If he works more on his shot, I think he has a pretty high ceiling.
    I've honestly been suprised that he's on such a poor streak of shooting. He'd have an off game here or there, but not like this.

    However, he jumps really high on his shots, and I think more than anything he just needs to get used to the back to backs and adjust to that. His legs are probably tired. At least the midrange shot, which was automatic for him in college, was falling last night.

    I'm glad he keeps shooting though. He needs to work himself out of it. In college if he missed one or two it was like "I'm not able to score now, it would be better if I set someone else up" And honestly, I think JOB would put him on the bench for it.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: On the bright side of things

      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
      I've honestly been suprised that he's on such a poor streak of shooting. He'd have an off game here or there, but not like this.

      However, he jumps really high on his shots, and I think more than anything he just needs to get used to the back to backs and adjust to that. His legs are probably tired. At least the midrange shot, which was automatic for him in college, was falling last night.

      I'm glad he keeps shooting though. He needs to work himself out of it. In college if he missed one or two it was like "I'm not able to score now, it would be better if I set someone else up" And honestly, I think JOB would put him on the bench for it.
      This question is directed to Sookie ( as well as anyone else that paid attention to his game in College ); but was AJ more of a shooter, scorer or neither in College?

      To me, there's a difference between a shooter and a scorer. I get the impression that as the floor leader of a very solid UCONN Team....I'd guess that he can put up points and hope ( and ) that any shooting/scoring funk that he is in is a bi-product of NBA-Rookie-shock or the ineffective way that JO'B uses him on the offensive end ( mostly sharing the floor with another primary ball-handler that has to wait for the ball to get to him while standing at the 3pt line ). As you have suggested......I just hope that it's a matter of time when he starts figuring out his shot in the NBA.

      As for the prediction that AJ becomes the Starter by next year....I doubt it. My prediction ( which is more of a "duh" since Diener won't be renewed ) is that he'll be the 1st PG off the bench no later then the start of the 2011-2012 season. I am hoping his "floor" is a solid Backup PG while that his ceiling is a Starting Caliber PG ( a la Steve Blake...which isn't a bad thing ). Given our luck and the way this team is run....I'd hope for the latter ( Starting PG ) but wouldn't be surprised ( nor disappointed ) if he turned out to be the former ( a solid backup PG ).
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: On the bright side of things

        Originally posted by sportfireman View Post
        i didn't see all the game last night but he was 5-11 how many were jumpers?
        3 were 3s. I think he is streaky, but I think that guys coming into the NBA can absolutely become improved pretty quickly too. I mean you see guys who are horrible college (Kidd/Rondo) become guys you have to guard (at least some) and you see guys who are good in college become outstanding (Redd/Rip). So I think he can become very very good, but more important, consistent.

        I'll defer to the guys who saw him in college, but the two games I saw of him start to finish, he was the best player on the court.

        Just a side note, I think I remember from when we drafted him that he was a pretty explosive athlete who got injured and had become hesitant to take it to the hole, but was rounding back into that game.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: On the bright side of things

          Yeah, we all just need to see AJ on the floor more before we can make any judgements on whether he can be that guy. Would love it if he was, no doubt. I like that he is aggressive, I just need to see more of him.
          Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: On the bright side of things

            He shot I believe 40 or 41% from both the field and from 3 last year in college, so I think he should become a decent jumpshooter for us, but probably not a slasher/finisher. Especially for a 2nd rounder, I can live with that if he can shoot around 40% from long range and be at least okay on D.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: On the bright side of things

              I'd rather have him backing up John Wall.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: On the bright side of things

                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                This question is directed to Sookie ( as well as anyone else that paid attention to his game in College ); but was AJ more of a shooter, scorer or neither in College?

                To me, there's a difference between a shooter and a scorer. I get the impression that as the floor leader of a very solid UCONN Team....I'd guess that he can put up points and hope ( and ) that any shooting/scoring funk that he is in is a bi-product of NBA-Rookie-shock or the ineffective way that JO'B uses him on the offensive end ( mostly sharing the floor with another primary ball-handler that has to wait for the ball to get to him while standing at the 3pt line ). As you have suggested......I just hope that it's a matter of time when he starts figuring out his shot in the NBA.

                As for the prediction that AJ becomes the Starter by next year....I doubt it. My prediction ( which is more of a "duh" since Diener won't be renewed ) is that he'll be the 1st PG off the bench no later then the start of the 2011-2012 season. I am hoping his "floor" is a solid Backup PG while that his ceiling is a Starting Caliber PG ( a la Steve Blake...which isn't a bad thing ). Given our luck and the way this team is run....I'd hope for the latter ( Starting PG ) but wouldn't be surprised ( nor disappointed ) if he turned out to be the former ( a solid backup PG ).
                That is a really really tough question to answer. The guy never got a year in college where he wasn't trying to bring himself back from something.

                His junior year may have been his best statistically. That year, he was more of a scorer. He'd make 3's when needed, but it wasn't a strong part of his game, most would say he was a "solid" three point shooter. That year, had he not been injured and had decided to leave school for the draft, he would have been a first round pick.

                But he was injured. (ACL) And he came back, first half of the year..he was..inconsistent. Which is expected. The most consistent thing about him was his three point shot. He was a shooter his senior year. Did he have his off games..sure he did. Most of his senior year he was around 42% from three point land, which is very good, especially since he was the only three point shooter on his team. *and I mean only. When Jerome Dyson went down, the other three players who supposedly could make threes, went 4 for 59 the rest of the regular season. Craig Austrie 1, Kemba Walker 2, and Stanley Robinson 1.* So to shoot that high of a percentage when you are the only player teams need to bother to guard, well clearly he was a shooter.

                Early on, with the exception of the first preseason game. AJ was shooting fine. It's just as of late that he's missing. But like I said. He has good form on his shot, but he does jump quite high when he shoots. There have been a mass of games lately, and my guess is it's more of a Rookie's legs trying to adjust, rather than a "he's a really streaky shooter"

                The interesting thing to me, is that he seems pretty comfortable, in fact a lot more comfortable, slashing to the basket. His explosiveness and quickness should be fully returned by about March. They say it takes about two years with ACL injuries.

                Honestly, AJ Price is just "good" at everything. He's a good shooter, a good passer, a good defender, a good ball handler..ect...He is excellent at the pick and roll, very smart, was clutch in college, and has the leadership intangibles..that my guess is we won't see too much this year..unless JOB fully hands the team over to Price, Hibbert, and Tyler. He's not outstanding at one particular thing. But he's not bad at anything either.

                personally, I think he'll end up a starting caliber point guard, but not if you want your point guard to be a star. And he's also the type of player that fans don't get annoyed with, because rarely does he do anything stupid.
                Last edited by Sookie; 01-04-2010, 03:21 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: On the bright side of things

                  I'm happy to see JOB give a future PG in A.J. more time as Earl's backup.

                  I think Brandon is still finding his "true" role in the rotation. He's a great SG and has been better lately which is great to see for future reference. I see him here for more years to come.

                  I honestly think even when Danny, Troy, and Tyler all return, it won't be enough to pull us into the playoffs. The whole team hasn't been stepping up in anyone's place.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: On the bright side of things

                    When everyone returns healthy it will be just enough to drop 5 draft positions. Green.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: On the bright side of things

                      Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                      Brandon Rush will develop into a better defensive player over time though with some occassional explosive offensive nights. Honestly, he's the extra piece that will keep other teams honest, because he'll hit the open jumper or make teams pay for double teaming Hibbert/Granger/Hansbrough. Roy Hibbert IS the center of the future. The jury is still out on Tyler Hansbrough, but I'm liking his game thus far this season. The more and more I think about it, Tyler should REALLY model his game after Karl Malone. I had made the comment earlier kinda serious kinda not, but I watched some Karl Malone videos on youtube, and I was like...yeah...that's we need at the PF spot.

                      i think and hope rush can and will turn into a bruce bowen type player........ a smart good defensive minded player that can hit the open shot.... and a key part of our championship team.


                      EDIT: if u look at their style its kind of similiar..........bowen isn't and attacker on offense, neither is rush but bowen will hit the open jumper when given to him...... not the in transition jumper, the half court offense im in the corner open jumper. thats what i think rush can develop into.

                      but on defense bowen is aggressive thats what i see in rush he likes playing defensive......he and all the rest of our players are just too tired from running up and down the floor with obriens offensive style that he can't play defense as effective as he can
                      this post made me think about rush and his game....so i posted my thoughts on rush's game in the "Is Rush a Shooter" thread........and im bringing it here to get some of you all opinions....if you don't mind.
                      I'm not perfect and neither are you.

                      Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the esteem of Elohim,
                      Ephisians 4: 32 And be kind towards one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as Elohim also forgave you in Messiah.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: On the bright side of things

                        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lf7jFxx91Ek
                        Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: On the bright side of things

                          Originally posted by sportfireman View Post
                          another bold predition by a.s.break jim will change his mind on the vets

                          UNLESS we are trying to showcase them.
                          Doubtful.

                          The rest of the league already knows they're mediocre at best.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: On the bright side of things

                            I think success for the next year-and-a-half for the Pacers is pretty simple:

                            -- Keep Danny Granger healthy.
                            -- Play Hibbert, Hansbrough, Price and Rush at least 25 minutes a game.
                            -- Surround them with players on one-year deals, a la Head and Watson, and Dunleavy and Murphy next year. Surround them with players who play hard, a la Jones and Foster.
                            -- Add no more long-term salary.
                            -- Draft well.
                            -- Did I mention playing Hibbert, Hansbrough, Price and Rush at least 25 minutes a game?

                            I suppose I didn't mention winning or coaching. Funny how that works.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: On the bright side of things

                              Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                              Also on the bright side, the Knicks game has to be pretty near rock-bottom, right?

                              It can only get better, one would hope, getting routed by a team that has no particular interest in winning this year but is biding time until lots of bloated contracts expire.

                              We're playing without our #1 scoring option (Granger), our #2 scoring option (Murphy), our veteran rebounding center (Foster) and our power forward of the future (Hansbrough). Mix in our $8-million dollar man (TJ Ford) who is proving to be a bust, and it's no wonder we're getting drubbed....four starters + Tyler are missing in action! If that isn't enough, Dunleavy is gassed from not being in game shape yet. No team could be competitive under these conditions.
                              Last edited by NashvilleKat; 01-04-2010, 06:28 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: On the bright side of things

                                Originally posted by NashvilleKat View Post
                                We're playing without our #1 scoring option (Granger), our #2 scoring option (Murphy), our veteran rebounding center (Foster) and our power forward of the future (Hansbrough). Mix in our $8-million dollar man (TJ Ford) who is proving to be a bust, and it's no wonder we're getting drubbed....four starters + Tyler are missing in action! No team could be competitive under these conditions.


                                Don't forget we are paying tinsley.... There's another start player we could have with that money

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X