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

O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

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

  • O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

    http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsider/

    (Mike Wells blog)
    HOUSTON - I got some emails from people complaining about Ford dancing around outside the team plane when he thought he was going to be traded.

    Can you blame him for being happy about possibly being traded?

    He would have went from a team headed to the lottery to one that could be headed to the playoffs.

    We'll push Ford possibly being traded to the side until this summer.

    He carried the Pacers down the stretch in their victory over Rockets while playing in front of a lot of friends and family members. He was part of 16 of the Pacers' final 20 points.

    "We were calling his number every time," Pacers coach Jim O'Brien said. "They were having difficulty guarding our spread pick-and-roll game. T.J. was either scoring or finding open people and we were knocking down shots."

    Ford looked comfortable out there looking for his shot and his teammates. His three assists came late when the Pacers were pulling away.

    "It always means a lot to me to come back to Houston and have a big game in front of family and friends," he said.

    *********************
    Speaking of point guards, O'Brien plans to continue to leave rookie A.J. Price on the bench for the time being while he rolls with Ford and Earl Watson.

    "(Price) will get his minutes," O'Brien said. "Earl and T.J. by far give us defensively what every coach would want, and I think defensive intensity is a key ingredient for us."

    Price hasn't played since Feb. 6, but he's keeping a positive outlook about the situation.

    "I have to handle it like a professional," he said. "It's how it goes sometimes. I know as a rookie, especially, things are going to be up and down. I'm just trying to stay professional and ready and take it for what it is."
    Found this to be an interesting read posted by Mike Wells.

    EDIT: Another good read by Wells.

    http://www.indystar.com/article/2010...rn-in-rotation

    HOUSTON -- Indiana Pacers rookie point guard A.J. Price will play again this season.

    Coach Jim O'Brien plans to put Price, who already has turned into a fan favorite, back in the rotation at some point during the final 27 games of the season.

    When that's going to happen is anybody's guess right now.

    O'Brien said he prefers to stick with veterans T.J. Ford and Earl Watson for the time being because he likes the defensive intensity the two bring.

    "(Price) will get his minutes," O'Brien said. "Earl and T.J. by far give us defensively what every coach would want, and I think defensive intensity is a key ingredient for us."

    Price got his shot in the rotation when Ford was demoted from starter to third string in late December.

    Price showed the Pacers may have gotten a steal in the second round when he averaged 9.3 points and 2.6 assists in 21 games while in the rotation.

    His spot in the rotation became complicated when Ford played well in the two games before the All-Star break while Watson was away dealing with a death in the family.

    Price hasn't played since Feb. 6 at Milwaukee.

    "I have to handle it like a professional," he said. "It's how it goes sometimes. I know as a rookie, especially, things are going to be up and down. I'm just trying to stay professional and be ready and take it for what it is."

    The Pacers were impressed with the way Price ran the pick-and-roll.

    Two things that stood out, according to O'Brien, is Price's defense and assist-to-turnover ratio (1.68-1). O'Brien said Price needs to get better defensively, which will come with more playing time.

    "He showed some positives and some negatives," O'Brien said. "He showed the ability to shoot the basketball and space the court. I think he got some good experience playing some good guards in the league. He's ahead of the program for where he was drafted."

    There's no reason to believe Price won't get back in the rotation, especially since the Pacers are on their way to having a lottery pick in this summer's draft.

    "Playing did a lot for me," he said. "It did a lot for me on how I'm perceived by the organization and the rest of the league. It showed I'm able to play in this league."
    Last edited by Trophy; 02-22-2010, 02:04 PM.

  • #2
    Re: O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

    I hate to get into this. But, look at this:

    Speaking of point guards, O'Brien plans to continue to leave rookie A.J. Price on the bench for the time being while he rolls with Ford and Earl Watson.

    "(Price) will get his minutes," O'Brien said. "Earl and T.J. by far give us defensively what every coach would want, and I think defensive intensity is a key ingredient for us."
    Mike Wells says O'Brien plans to leave Price on the bench, and then immediately quotes O'Brien saying "Price will get his minutes."


    Why should we trust what Mike Wells says? I'm losing confidence in his ability to fairly and fully communicate what is happening in the locker room.

    And what I'm complaining about may be the difference between a blog post and a newspaper article. There's a noticeable difference is depth, balance and thoroughness..



    .
    Last edited by Putnam; 02-22-2010, 02:39 PM.
    And I won't be here to see the day
    It all dries up and blows away
    I'd hang around just to see
    But they never had much use for me
    In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

      As soon as our ***-clown of a coach is gone I'll be happier...
      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


      • #4
        Re: O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

        If TJ and Earl give every coach what he expects defensively, then WTF were you doing sitting TJ in the first place?


        What JOb does, makes zero sense.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

          So I guess Watson and Ford play good defense now? It doesn't matter if the team doesn't make it to the defensive side of the floor for the rest of the season, we aren't making the playoffs Jim! Play Price and get him some experience!

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

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

            Originally posted by Putnam View Post
            I hate to get into this. But, look at this:

            Mike Wells says O'Brien plans to leave Price on the bench, and then immediately quotes O'Brien saying "Price will get his minutes."


            Why should we trust what Mike Wells says? I'm losing confidence in his ability to fairly and fully communicate what is happening in the locker room.

            And what I'm complaining about may be the difference between a blog post and a newspaper article. There's a noticeable difference is depth, balance and thoroughness..



            .


            JOB is saying before the season is out Price will be back in the regular rotation

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              If TJ and Earl give every coach what he expects defensively, then WTF were you doing sitting TJ in the first place?


              What JOb does, makes zero sense.
              I don't think JOB has free reign, Front Office tells him what to do. This is the reason he has not been fired. I feel the Pacers have been tanking the season to secure a better draft pick due to the benching of Ford, & Tyler's mysterious injury prone rookie campaign. Face it kid has never been hurt till we drafted him!! Granger missing tonights game for personal reasons with no return date seals the deal for me.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                If TJ and Earl give every coach what he expects defensively, then WTF were you doing sitting TJ in the first place?


                What JOb does, makes zero sense.

                Exactly...
                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


                • #9
                  Re: O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  If Ford and Watson give every coach what he expects defensively, then WTF were you doing sitting Ford in the first place?
                  According to JO'B before....it was to see what AJ could do....they got an idea....then decided to go back to his regular rotation of Watson/Ford.

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  What JOb does, makes zero sense.
                  What makes sense to us may make total sense to JO'B. But let's approach this from an objective POV.

                  If all of you were to rank the individual Offense of each of our PGs ( Watson, Ford, Price, Diener ), who would be the best and who would be the worst?

                  If all of you were to rank the individual Defense of each of our PGs ( Watson, Ford, Price, Diener ), who would be the best and who would be the worst?

                  What I'm trying to get at is....is the individual Offense and ( especially ) Defense of Watson or Ford so much better then AJ's Offense and Defense that JO'B has a legit argument to play them ahead of AJ in the PG rotation?

                  I'm guessing that there isn't much argument when it comes to Watson being the Starting or Backup PG and it will come down to whose Offense and Defense is better.....Ford and Price. Although I would love to play Price ahead of Ford.....the problem is that unless I can see very strong arguments to suggest that Price is "heads and shoulders" better then Ford on the Offensive and ( most notably ) the Defensive end....it's difficult to say that one is clearly better then the other ESPECIALLY in the eyes of JO'B who clearly takes factors into consideration ( such as his preference to play a Veteran over a Rookie and knowing that JO'B and the FO is trying to put the best lineup out there to WIN GAMES...not to DEVELOP our young Players ).
                  Last edited by CableKC; 02-22-2010, 03:36 PM.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    JOB is saying before the season is out Price will be back in the regular rotation
                    And that's a logical conclusion for JOb to make because of what exactly?

                    What's the point in playing TJ, if you admit that Price will be taking his spot over again eventually? To make TJ happy? You just tried trading the guy and then just came out and said his spot will be taken from him in the future. I doubt that's going to make him any happier.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

                      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                      According to JO'B before....it was to see what AJ could do....they got an idea....then decided to go back to his regular rotation of Watson/Ford.


                      What makes sense to us may make total sense to JO'B.

                      Let's approach this from an objective POV.

                      If all of you were to rank the individual Offense of each of our PGs ( Watson, Ford, Price, Diener ), who would be the best and who would be the worst?

                      If you were to rank the individual Defense of each of our PGs ( Watson, Ford, Price, Diener ), who would be the best and who would be the worst?

                      I guess what I'm trying to get at is....is the individual Offense and ( especially ) Defense of Watson or Ford so much better then AJ's Offense and Defense that JO'B has a legit argument to play them ahead of AJ in the PG rotation?

                      I'm guessing that there isn't much argument when it comes to Watson being the Starting or Backup PG and it will come down to whose Offense and Defense is better.....Ford and Price.

                      Although I would love to play Price ahead of Ford.....the problem is that unless I can see very strong arguments to suggest that Price is "heads and shoulders" better then Ford on the Offensive and ( most notably ) the Defensive end....it's difficult to say that one is clearly better then the other ESPECIALLY in the eyes of JO'B who clearly takes factors into consideration ( such as his preference to play a Veteran over a Rookie and knowing that JO'B and the FO is trying to put the best lineup out there to WIN GAMES...not to DEVELOP our young Players ).
                      I understand all that. What doesn't make any sense is JOb then coming back and saying at some point in time AJ will take TJ's spot again?
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

                        O'Brien is just a bad, bad coach...It makes no sense at all what he's saying. Could you guys in Indy please start bringing some signs or whatever showing your dissatisfaction when you attend a game?

                        They won't fire him, I know, but TPTB should at least know what we fans think about how this organisation is handled.

                        Maybe he's tanking, but how can we develop our young core (who is supposed to be here longer than the Murphys, Fords or Watsons) if they are rotting on the bench?

                        How can Price get his minutes when Obie believes that Watson and Ford are the best options and he obviously doesn't want to use 3 PGs in one game?

                        It's impossible...O'Brien gets on my nerves!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

                          Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
                          I don't think JOB has free reign, Front Office tells him what to do. This is the reason he has not been fired. I feel the Pacers have been tanking the season to secure a better draft pick due to the benching of Ford, & Tyler's mysterious injury prone rookie campaign. Face it kid has never been hurt till we drafted him!! Granger missing tonights game for personal reasons with no return date seals the deal for me.
                          Well thats one theory, i guess. I think that everythings with this team is so out of place right now that it only seems that we are tanking. And if the front office is telling our coach what to do, then why are we loosing, why are the things that Bird are saying that need done not being done? I mean they see the money figures.....i dont know........

                          I just wish we had an answer from the front office on this one! What is the team doing???
                          I CANT SPELL!

                          THERE ARE THOSE THAT HAVE AND THOSE THAT WILL!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

                            oh just let this season come to an end already, confusionville is getting old!
                            Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: O'Brien talks about Price, PGs

                              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                              And that's a logical conclusion for JOb to make because of what exactly?

                              What's the point in playing TJ, if you admit that Price will be taking his spot over again eventually? To make TJ happy? You just tried trading the guy and then just came out and said his spot will be taken from him in the future. I doubt that's going to make him any happier.
                              Ford is playing rather well right now, so that is why he is playing. JOB is not admitting that AJ will take over TJ's spot. Who knows Earl might be benched, or they may start playing 3 pts.

                              Who knows

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X