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

If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

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

  • If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

    Over the past 24 hours I have read tons of comments like, if Vogel sticks with the young guys. If he plays the young guys. If he starts to play the young guys

    I want to know specifically what those phrases mean to you. What does Vogel have to do to hit the mark in playing the young guys.

    First, tell me who the young guys are and are not. Then tell me how many minutes you want each guy to play.

    This is not in anyway a trick question. I would just like to know everyones opinion because I think it means very different things to different people. Go on the record

  • #2
    Re: If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

    Not to derail the thread, but MG just said Vogel would be on 1070 around 11:20.
    Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

      youngins: Ty, PG, McBob, AJ, and Lance

      Ty=30 minutes or more per game
      AJ= 10 minutes or more per game
      PG= 30 minutes or more per game
      McBob= 15 minutes or more per game
      Lance = 10 minutes or more per game

      I didnt include DC, because he is not treated like a young player. He has been given consistent minutes from day 1
      Sittin on top of the world!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

        Minutes will be fluid, I understand that. I'm not worried about per-minute totals, exactly.

        But I'll be happy if Posey never again plays ahead of McRoberts or Tyler at PF. If TJ never plays ahead of AJ at PG. If Foster doesn't play ahead of Roy at C (I don't mind Foster playing ahead of Solo).

        As far as the wing rotation, that's a bit dicier. It's no secret that I've been begging for the Pacers to move Dunleavy since he got here, so I'll cry no tears if Dunleavy drops out of the rotation. But I don't think you can totally justify that based on his play. I'd love it if George started at SG and Rush backed up both wing spots, but I won't be upset if that doesn't happen.

        My best-case scenario is that we're able to leverage Dunleavy/TJ (and maybe Rush and Foster) for value at the trade deadline.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

          I feel its not nessicarly about how many minutes each guy should or should not play. I think its about the combinations that work on the floor against differnt styles of play each opposing team has. I think we work on our combinations that work, and hey if a young guy is having an outstanding game let him play the whole game and contunie to work him in other games.

          I am very interested to see how we adjust from this point forward!
          I CANT SPELL!

          THERE ARE THOSE THAT HAVE AND THOSE THAT WILL!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            Minutes will be fluid, I understand that. I'm not worried about per-minute totals, exactly.

            But I'll be happy if Posey never again plays ahead of McRoberts or Tyler at PF. If TJ never plays ahead of AJ at PG. If Foster doesn't play ahead of Roy at C (I don't mind Foster playing ahead of Solo).

            As far as the wing rotation, that's a bit dicier. It's no secret that I've been begging for the Pacers to move Dunleavy since he got here, so I'll cry no tears if Dunleavy drops out of the rotation. But I don't think you can totally justify that based on his play. I'd love it if George started at SG and Rush backed up both wing spots, but I won't be upset if that doesn't happen.

            My best-case scenario is that we're able to leverage Dunleavy/TJ (and maybe Rush and Foster) for value at the trade deadline.
            How would you feel about trading Dun/Rush/1st for Iggy to thin out that wing rotation a bit? Your primary rotation becomes Granger/Igodaula/George with room for Lance to get some minutes as well.

            If they are really talking trades I hope something like that is on the table.
            "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

            - ilive4sports

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

              Per Vogel: "Lance will be inactive tonight."
              Passion. Pride. Patience. Pacers

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

                Young guys to me are:

                DC - He's your starter, he needs to play free and aggressive. I think he'll benefit more than anyone from Obie's departure. It think Vogel will give him near cart blanche to run the team and I think he'll thrive.

                Paul George: he makes mistakes, but he also does positive things much more often. My deal with him is that he needs a steady diet of minutes to play through the mistakes.

                Hansbrough and JMac: I'd comprise all 48 minutes of the PF position with those two. What they give you helps Roy. Both can guard other teams if they go small or even if they can't completely guard them, they can pound them in other ways to make up for it. I want a traditional PF in the game at all times.

                Roy: Steady diet of minutes regardless of slump or match up. Maybe give him shorter spurts on the floor, if he's struggling.

                Brandon: I'd take a harder line approach with his minutes, when he's disappearing, let him not play. However, give him a shot every night, to see which BRush you are getting. This could work to 5-6 mins if he's not the BRush. I think we've seen enough of the passiveness to make this adjustment.

                Lance: I'd play him as a combo guard, but not every game. I'd play him with AJ or TJ who are neither pure point guards and allow him to be an offensive point guard on the pick and roll, but guard the other teams 2 guard, so he doesn't get torched by a speedy guy. I'd do this based on match up.

                AJ - I think he needs time every game. You have to know he can back up DC going forward. Basically you have to know if is the answer there going forward.

                You get PF minutes easily by not playing Posey at all and Danny at the PF. You get back court minutes by reducing Dunleavy to 20 mins a night and allow him to play off the bench, as I think he's best suited for and should have all along.

                You're main minutes for youngster should be this.

                Roy 24 - 30

                DC 32

                Paul George 26-30 (which Obie was doing at the very end)

                Hansbrough/Jmac - 24/24 with slight variances on who's hot.

                Brandon - 5 to 20

                AJ - 10 to 20

                Lance - 10 to 20, but only when the match ups allow.

                Look, you just have to live with the bonehead stuff to get to the good stuff.

                The very biggest problem for Vogel to me, is who closes and how they do it.

                I really don't know the answer to this one. I'm not sure they have the answer on the bench.

                If I had to say.

                To close.

                Collison
                Dunleavy
                Danny
                Jeff
                Tyler or Josh

                I really don't want Dunleavy in that spot, I'd rather have George. I think it's good training for him for the future. I'm just not convinced he's ready to finish.

                If you really want honesty, TJ is your best closer, as much as I don't want it to be true. You can't play DC and TJ together though and you need DC to develop into that guy. You're best play to end a game is TJ taking his guy off the dribble, it just is, I don't like it either.

                It's a conundrum.

                I think Solo and Posey are the odd men out. Solo has played well for him, it's just not in the cards for me.
                Last edited by Speed; 01-31-2011, 12:29 PM. Reason: forgot to include DC; easy to forget he's a youngster

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

                  Traditional PFs with Tyler and Josh splitting the 48 minutes. Josh getting some minutes at C behind Roy. Basically Roy, Tyler and Josh as a 3 man rotation up front. Scraps to Jeff.

                  Split the 96 wing minutes among Danny, Brandon, Mike and Paul. For some reason JOB didn't think 96 was divisible by 4. I'd give more minuted to Danny and less to Paul if everyone is healthy. But all 4 would play significant minutes.

                  Darren, TJ, and AJ all playing and splitting the 48 minutes at PG. Maybe 30 for Darren and 9 for the other two. That could change if AJ plays well.

                  Minutes for Lance as you can work him in. We need to see him in a game or two before we can consider giving him extended minutes.

                  I'm not wanting to see the young guys get X minutes. But I want them to get consistent minutes and a chance to prove that they deserve more.

                  You don't need to move Danny to PF and bench Josh just to find minutes for Paul. That's silly. No more small ball.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

                    I really think playing Lance with AJ could really be successful. Let AJ play 2 guard on offense. Let Lance play the Point. Switch on D. I know I said that above, but I really like that idea. (trying to figure out how to thank myself )

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

                      Originally posted by Speed View Post
                      I really think playing Lance with AJ could really be successful. Let AJ play 2 guard on offense. Let Lance play the Point. Switch on D. I know I said that above, but I really like that idea. (trying to figure out how to thank myself )
                      I agree bro but I would do the opposite

                      AJ at the point, Lance at the two
                      Sittin on top of the world!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

                        I've enjoyed watching A.J. at the two. He can certainly create his own shot.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

                          Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                          I agree bro but I would do the opposite

                          AJ at the point, Lance at the two
                          Flip on offense/defense, though.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

                            Top me, the "young guys" are from Danny on down. That would be DG, DC, PG, Tyler, Roy, Josh, AJ, Brandon, Lance ... and, oddly, Solomon Jones.

                            Now, I'll accept that whole "... who are going to be part of our future" general wisdom and leave Solo out (though I think he is a serviceable bench big man and could easily be in the future in that role).

                            Playing Time to me means they see the floor for at least a minimal amount of time and consistently get time IF their play warrants it. I do NOT believe that you leave guys on the floor to make the same mistake over and over and over - they aren't going to get better from that. However, I also don't think you sit someone when they make the first mistake UNLESS it is a critical point in the game and you are putting someone clearly better back on the floor. Even the young guys need to learn that games are for winning, not for educational experiences alone.

                            What I'd like to see is a better job of pulling a guy when he is clearly locked into mistakes or playing badly/wrongly, then putting him back in later on to see if he has cleared it up.
                            BillS

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

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: If Vogel "sticks with/plays the young guys". What does that phrase mean to you

                              Originally posted by Speed View Post
                              I really think playing Lance with AJ could really be successful. Let AJ play 2 guard on offense. Let Lance play the Point. Switch on D. I know I said that above, but I really like that idea. (trying to figure out how to thank myself )
                              I think if we're going to try and play Lance at the point, you have to play him with AJ. Lance is going to need the ball in his hands, and AJ's the only point that can be effective without it.

                              Price actually did a lot of that as a senior at Uconn. Kemba needed the ball in his hands, so AJ ran the team without it. (Now, it's actually Kemba doing that, because Shabazz Napier needs the ball in his hands..so Kemba is playing off the ball.)

                              When it becomes obvious to the coaching staff that Lance at the point doesn't work, they can easily just switch places. But Lance will still be able to be ball dominant, because AJ doesn't need it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X