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

Do-it-all forward Granger has tough to-do list for Pacers

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

  • Do-it-all forward Granger has tough to-do list for Pacers

    http://www.nba.com/seasonpreview/2010/IND/index.html
    By Steve Aschburner, NBA.com

    Not sure if this was posted before or not

    It happens time and again in every walk of life and initially it can seem a little unfair: The person already doing the most, already giving plenty, gets asked to do and give more.

    Doesn't seem right, does it? How fair is it, in a basketball context, to expect a team's best player to boost his or her current level of performance when others on the roster can get by making smaller contributions in more narrowly defined roles?

    Or to get specific, how much more can -- and should -- the Indiana Pacers ask of one-time NBA All-Star forward Danny Granger?

    Apparently, a good deal more.

    Granger, the Pacers' best player for about the past four seasons, was solid again in 2009-10. He averaged 24.1 points, becoming the first Indiana player to score that much in consecutive seasons since Billy Knight. He rained in 158 three-pointers, the first Pacer since Reggie Miller to do that. That he could do those things while being targeted by most opposing game plans -- it's not like Indiana had all sorts of Plan Bs and Plan Cs -- was especially laudable.

    Yet Granger missed 20 games to injury. His shooting accuracy dropped. He did not make it to Dallas for All-Star Weekend, and there were no signs of improvement as a defender or a rebounder.

    So do the Pacers expect more from Granger in 2009-10? You betcha. Untapped potential and $50 million due over the next four seasons can raise the bar even for a team's best player. Maybe especially for the best player. It's the old coach-teacher-boss thing: If Granger weren't capable of giving more, the Pacers wouldn't be asking.

    Pacers coach Jim O'Brien may have gotten an assist in nudging a little more out of his best player thanks to Granger's summer experience with the U.S. national team that won the FIBA World Championships.

    Obviously playing time wasn't going to be divvied up equally among the elite NBA players who participated, but Granger wound up mostly watching for legit reasons. His averages of 9.7 minutes and 4.1 points were the third and second fewest on the squad, respectively. In two of the nine games, Granger did not play at all.

    It became clear to those participating and watching that USA coach Mike Krzyzewski and his staff were emphasizing defense, and rewarding with playing time those who provided it. Heckuva thing, being chosen to represent one's country on a global stage and then getting humbled in the process. But it seemed to take.

    "I can be a good defensive player," Granger told the Indianapolis Star after the tournament. "Am I a better defensive player than Andre [Iguodala, the Philadelphia forward who saw more action]? I don't know. We won the gold and that's all that mattered. I'd go back again if I was asked because it was a wonderful experience."

    O'Brien thinks Granger can benefit from another lesson with Team USA. As they spin their wheels, coming off the franchise's first 50-loss season in more than 20 years and waiting for some salary-cap relief to kick in next summer, the Pacers need all the leadership they can get. Rather than relaxing even a little and tilting toward poor work habits, the club and its coach need Granger setting the highest example for Indiana's younger players.

    "Danny mentioned Chauncey Billups by name as being a tremendous leader on and off the court," O'Brien said in a recent telephone interview. "I would agree with him -- I've known Chauncey for years, we drafted him in Boston. For Danny to see the impact of a Chauncey Billups on a team should be a great lesson on him, from the standpoint of how he's doing as our leader."

    Said Granger at the start of Pacers camp: "Playing with guys like Chauncey Billups, who's done so much in the NBA, you're just watching him and some of the things he does and the way he handles himself, the way he talks to other players. Everybody really had to take something from that."

    Now it might seem a stretch to find any more lessons in Granger's summer-break travels, but O'Brien -- who, in newly acquired point guard Darren Collison and hard-working third-year center Roy Hibbert, has two more solid pieces alongside Granger -- found some anyway. He suggested that Team USA striving to dominate the planet bore a real resemblance to his crew searching for respectability near the bottom of the Central Division.

    "Danny played with a group that very few people gave a chance to win the gold," O'Brien explained. "People were saying they didn't have enough experience, they didn't have enough firepower up front, they didn't have that imposing figure in the lane. What he did was what we're going to have to do: Danny was part of a group that didn't buy what other people were saying. Our strengths are perimeter-oriented ourselves, other than Roy Hibbert. And nobody's picking us to do anything."

    So let's see if we've got this straight: Granger needs to keep impressing Krzyzewski, O'Brien and others with his defense, rebounding and all-around game. If he does, the Pacers can expect to hear the sounds of a victory tune playing each night.


    DEFENSE MUST IMPROVE -- A LOT
    Over the past three seasons, teams have shot better than 45 percent vs. Indiana. When the Pacers have forced misses, they give up rebounds. Or just foul in first place.

    BLANK AT PF GETS FILLED
    Troy Murphy was a perfect fit for Jim O'Brien's offense, a big who could step all the way back to 3-point range. That and his double-doubleness will be tough to replace.

    COLLISON MAKES PG SPOT HIS OWN
    Chris Paul's backup, in 37 games, looked ready for prime time. Now O'Brien has to let him play without "system" training wheels.
    Sittin on top of the world!

  • #2
    Re: Do-it-all forward Granger has tough to-do list for Pacers

    He mentions missing 20 games, but the guy played about 40 very hobbled. Like I said in an earlier post. The guy put up 24 pts on basically jumpshots for the first half of the season due to his foot. Thats still pretty impressive.

    I look forward to Danny coming out and showing the league whats what.
    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Do-it-all forward Granger has tough to-do list for Pacers

      Idk why I thought of this... but it just kinda hit me what a HUGE deal it was the Danny made the All-Star team... and team USA. Holy $h!t.. Who woulda thought that when we drafted him? I always thought it was a possibility that he would one day be an All-Star.

      Guy had his worst season last year.... kinda and he averaged 24 pts. He's gonna be back this year, as will the Pacers. Paul George is so legit
      Reggie Miller is a God. Period.

      Passion. Pride. Pacers.

      It's ALWAYS Miller Time.
      #31 & Only

      Comment

      Working...
      X