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

Pacers/NJ postgame thread

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

  • #31
    Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

    Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
    For the season Lopez is averaging 6.1 rpg in 35.3mpg. Roy is averaging 7.7rpg in 27.5mpg.
    That is one of the reasons why I had suggested pursuing Kris Humpheries in the offseason to fill Foster's role as backup PF/C. He can easily play next to Hansbrough and Hibbert to be that guy that does nothing else but pull down rebounds.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

      Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
      For the season Lopez is averaging 6.1 rpg in 35.3mpg. Roy is averaging 7.7rpg in 27.5mpg.
      Ehh, fair enough point.

      But that just makes Roy a better rebounder. It doesn't at all make him tougher.

      http://www.nba.com/statistics/player...DD=All%20Teams

      Those are the rebounds per 48 minutes. Roy is is in the top 25 in rebounds.

      But there's an awful lot of players below him in that top 50 that are far tougher.

      I guess the point is I'd still rather have Roy. And yes he's a better rebounder this season than Lopez.

      But whether or not he's tougher, that's up for debate. Rebounds don't necessarily prove toughness.


      Mind you, I still think Roy is much tougher than Lopez. I'd rather have Roy any day.
      Stop quoting people I have on ignore!

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

        I think Roy is a better interior presence on defense than Lopez.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

          Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
          Whew 2 game lead on Bucks and Bobcats!

          Win at Charlotte would be HUGE. That would put us up 3 games, technically 4 if you count the tiebreaker, with 10 to play.
          Don't pay attention to the games behind column this time of year. We've played two more games than Milwaukee and Charlotte have, so that throws the games behind column off.

          THE STANDINGS
          Pacers....31-40
          Mil.........28-41
          Char.......28-41

          Effectively, one loss by us and we are all tied in the all important games loss column. So the loss column is where to look, and there we are only one game ahead.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

            So p***** about the 3 that was a 2, considering the injury I think the refs can use that time of break in the action to go review a questionable shot.


            I didn't hear the postgame stuff so maybe they admitted it, but I'm completely convinced that the DC runout on the jump ball was a designed play due to the timing. DC went as soon as the ball went up and Danny was looking as soon as he got the ball. (maybe Mackey and Aesop agree) To me that's either Vogel or DC/DG preplanning. Great freaking play, especially considering how Tyler punked the whiny Sasha to get the jump in the first place.


            Good to see Hibbert take advantage of Brook. Good to see Danny hitting some "Danny" types of jumpers in the 2nd half. Good to see Rush find the 3 at all finally.

            Darren had the assists. He wasn't great, certainly not at the level the assists would imply, but better.

            Here's the funny thing, all the people saying "hey Josh and Rush were nice tonight" and yet I'm the fanboy about to say the following....

            Josh and Rush WERE great until about the early 4th or so. At some point both of them started looking gassed. Rush stopped being able to keep up with Sasha V which included giving a foul to Josh as he came over to help. Josh also had a couple of tough plays down the stretch where he looked a bit tired. Morrow crushed that one rebound out of his hands from behind, for example.

            I get why Vogel wanted to go with them given the level of defense they were playing, like Rush closing out Sasha in the corner to annihilate his shot, but as the minutes piled up they both started losing a step.

            I actually thought Tyler and Paul were the go-to guys starting around 4-5 minutes left in the 4th. Tyler was able to make that jump ball play where I don't think Josh was showing that kind of energy by that point.


            What does kill me is that anyone doesn't think Josh is on par with Tyler in terms of overall talent. Tyler can "drive" the ball, but he doesn't have that below the waist dribble that Josh used to drive, stop and then flip in that one shot. When NJ trapped DC Josh was able to easily help break it. When Josh got snuck up on out top trying to get the ball to DC he put a nasty spin move into a dribble drive down the lane.

            And then even funnier to me is that Tyler come up with the "Josh line", ie less points, not a ton of shots, lots of boards, good +/- while Josh had the "Tyler line" going 6/7 but only 3 boards and a poor +/-.

            If that doesn't speak to how balanced they are I don't know what does. I love having them as a combo right now, that and wing are the areas I wouldn't worry about at all for now.



            Speaking of Tyler, it seemed odd but it was almost like with Roy rolling they backed off the high PnR with Tyler. He got the ball up top on some reversals, but that doesn't really give him space to shoot. Thus his low FGA and scoring in general. Matchup maybe?


            Humphries put a nasty spin on Tyler one time. Hopefully Tyler learns about showing your balance when you lean on guys in the post. If they feel it off balance or feel you getting flat footed they'll kill you.



            When I watch Lance all I see is a bunch of flashy bounce step dribbles with random shakes thrown in that all end up adding up to very little advantage on defenders. Plus he often doesn't seem to have anything in mind if he does get space, other than his own shot.
            Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 03-22-2011, 03:39 AM.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

              Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
              DC did make the smartest play I've seen him make all season tonight when he leaked out off that jump ball for the layup. Granger got credit for the pass during the broadcast, but DC was the one who made it happen.
              I feel like I saw them talking right before the jump ball, perhaps planning out the play.


              The whole game I'm watching, wondering how the hell they score so many points in the fourth quarter. MA-CHINE!!!!!!
              You Got The Tony!!!!!!

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                I prefer the latter. If Rush consistently shot 10 times a game he would most likely average no less than 10 ppg, and probably closer to 14. Yeah his shot has been off lately, but we all know he is normally an excellent shooter.
                Exactly. The kid has gone full seasons shooting 40% from 3, ie just as good as Reggie or Danny.

                He blocks shots on the perimeter and his rebound totals are built on mostly very legit in-traffic grabs where he fights off opponents to get them.

                When people stop waiting for him to be 20 ppg scoring machine they'll start to find out he's fine as a 20mpg 6-7th man type player. He's in a horrible slump lately, but his defense and rebounding have remained solid and he's attempted to have a balanced offense - driving and taking open 3s. He's just not making them.

                Considering the last month or so of Granger's shooting, I think Rush should get a little slack on this.



                Frankly if you put out a lineup next year of Rush, George, Josh/Tyler, Roy you are going to get a lot of defensive stops. Paul and Tyler are making awareness mistakes, but that should end with playing time. George tips enough passes to suggest the potential of Gerald Wallace in terms of steals/disruption.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                  A win is a win is a win. And any win is a good win.

                  But I'm not gonna do any cartwheels over a win vs a team full of
                  what are, sans the overated Lopez, essentially NBA backups.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                    Originally posted by mattie View Post
                    Dribbling off his foot isn't a case of him having a low basketball IQ. It's a case of him needing to improve upon his basketball handling skills.

                    No matter how long you repeat the mantra that DC has a low basketball IQ it still will never change the reality of who he is as a basketball player.

                    Night in and night out DC shows he understands the game of basketball game well by attempting to run PnR's, find his big men in the post, and attempting to break down the defense and find open shooters/cutters. It doesn't matter how many mistakes he makes, that doesn't suddenly mean he has a low basketball IQ. That might mean he plays a little out of control, or maybe he plays careless... There could be a number of issues that cause him to make mistakes.

                    I'd say he is like most point guards that have ever played the game in the last 50 years and that is they usually take longer than two years to turn into a solid starter. But that's just me.
                    I should have made the 2nd part of that post a whole new post apparently because the point missed the mark. I did not mean to imply that his lazy/poor ball handling has anything to do with his basketball IQ.

                    He shows he understands the game by attempting to run pick and rolls? That is maybe the most elementary play you can possibly run. Last night he did a better job, but rarely does he do a good job finding big men in the post, he does an even worse job of driving and distributing. Night in and night out he does those things? I watch every night, and I don't see that.

                    You can take the wait and see approach, that's fine. Maybe he will get better. But I'm basing my assessment off of what I've seen from him, and right now he looks like a shooting guard stuck in an extremely undersized point guard's body, with good athleticism but poor basketball IQ.

                    Originally posted by AesopRockOn View Post
                    I feel like I saw them talking right before the jump ball, perhaps planning out the play.
                    Like Seth mentioned, I considered that it perhaps was a set play off the jump ball. You have to figure Tyler is going to win that over Sasha, so if it was, it was well planned, and perfectly executed.

                    Huge play when they needed it.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                      What I liked about the game was the Pacers defense to start the 3rd quarter - it was close to playoff caliber. Other than thatI thought the Pacers overall performance was average.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                        I think the difference in the game is that Danny Granger stepped up in the second half. He hit several big buckets when the game could have gone their direction.

                        Danny's got clutch in him. It's nice that we've been able to see it a couple of times in the last week.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                          Danny's got clutch in him.
                          He needs to engage it in the first half.
                          PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                            Part of the problem with pg's is that the bigs do not present themselves or position themselves well to get the pass. Last night I saw a little improvment with Roy. The pg
                            through a much quicker pass to Roy to counter the double team. Slow lobs are a recipe for disaster.
                            {o,o}
                            |)__)
                            -"-"-

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                              I thought DC played really well in the second half. He had a whole different energy about him. He made some really great plays, and his defense was actually better than usual.

                              I have to ask though..does anyone know if DC is ADD? I mean that seriously. He just seems unfocused sometimes (Like when he dribbles the ball off his foot). One time they were huddled and DC was actually facing another direction and I think it was Danny that literally turned him around. He just seems to have a very "la la la" personality on the court.

                              Lance..he wasn't good. But I don't know what anyone would have expected out of him. Shooting guard playing point, hasn't played in real minutes in a while, and the night before didn't expect to be playing. Not surprising.

                              A huge problem, for all the PGs, is what I've been harping on. The offense gets REALLY stagnant because guys don't move. They literally just stand and look at the guy holding the ball, while Hibbert tries to post up. That's it. It's really hard for a point guard to try and run an offense, other than calling a PnR, with that.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Pacers/NJ postgame thread

                                Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                                Lance..he wasn't good. But I don't know what anyone would have expected out of him. Shooting guard playing point, hasn't played in real minutes in a while, and the night before didn't expect to be playing. Not surprising.
                                Yeah , I will second that

                                I wonder if Lance has run set plays at any level. I think his problem is he was so good on the High school, College scene that he could beat most defenders off the dribble, so they let Lance create with the ball and make plays

                                However, the type of ball played at the Ruckers tournament rarely works in the NBA. Somehow he need to know when to shake and bake , but keep the offense flowing
                                Sittin on top of the world!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X