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

What exactly is our problem?

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

  • What exactly is our problem?

    I spent some time going through the team stats trying to figure out where we've had problems this year.

    FG Pct 43.9% (26th in the league)
    Turnovers/game 15.5 (27th)
    Assists/game 19.5 (29th)
    Ast/Turnover Ratio 1.26 (28th)
    Steals 7.1 (Tied 19th)
    Opponent Turnovers 13.7 (Tied 19th)

    Offensively, the Pacers still average a decent 99.3 ppg (15th) but our playmaking has gotten more inefficient over the last 2 years. Some of this is the coaching change, some is due to DC struggling with the new offense. But what we didn't have this year is a 2nd playmaker on the roster. In 2009, we had TJ, Jack and Diener in the rotation and we finished 9th in the league in assists. In 2010 we had TJ and Earl and finished 15th. This year we have DC and AJ and we sit at 29th.

    Defensively, our pts allowed has improved from 103.8 to 100.8 since last year (from 23rd to 17th) but we are not good at pressuring the ball and forcing turnovers.

  • #2
    Re: What exactly is our problem?

    Offense:

    Not nearly enough distribution of the ball.
    Not nearly enough consistency from our scorers.

    Defense:

    Not nearly enough personal accountability.
    Not enough individual talent (we have some, but not enough, and our best two defenders are both wings; our bigs needs to improve, and our point guards really need to improve).

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: What exactly is our problem?

      The pacers are what they are a 35-39 win team. We don't have the players to be any better. Maybe in a couple of seasons if the younger players improve, we could be better, but right now we are what we are.

      So my point is there is no problem this is what this team is.
      Last edited by Unclebuck; 03-28-2011, 09:24 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: What exactly is our problem?

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        The pacers are what they are a 35-39 win team. We don't have the players to be any better. Maybe in a couple of seasons if the younger players improve, we could be better, but right now we are what we are
        do you think the 1990 version of larry brown could squeeze more out of this current club? i think he could and would. the only question is with his hesitation to play young players i'm not sure how exactly this squad would look.
        "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: What exactly is our problem?

          - I think we have a below average roster. Our SG and PF starters for example are probably not good enough to start for any playoff team this season. They may develop later but we're talking about this season.

          - Our #1 guy isn't good enough to carry the team on his own, and it's hard to say we have a true number 2 option on offense- sometimes its Hibbert, lately it has been Tyler, and rarely it's DC/Rush. Lack of consistent scoring options affects how our main guy plays, also makes us easier to stop. and that affects how well we shoot from the field.

          - Our starting point guard is a 2nd year player. his backups are another 2nd year player and a 1st year player. They haven't been clicking too well, especially lately.

          - We have no real leader, maybe chemistry problems between players, and coaching change which resulted in a first year head coach...
          Originally posted by Piston Prince
          Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
          "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: What exactly is our problem?

            INHO our backcourt situation is our open sore right now. Hopefully DC and George will show some progress in the offseason. It would also help to get a productive 3rd guard in the rotation, one that is a solid defender and playmaker, similar to Jack back in 2009. I'd be willing to deal the 2011 1st round pick to make that happen.

            BRush has no business being in the rotation. A role player that only shoots 3s might be ok if we already have 3 all-stars in the starting lineup (see: Spurs), but of course that isn't the case in Indy.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: What exactly is our problem?

              Our problem is consistency. All of our "best" players are also our most inconsistent players on this team. People complain about Rush's inconsistency which is non-existence compared to the inconsistency we get from Granger, Hibbert, Collison, and Price. In fact Rush is one of the more consistent players on this team along side of Foster and McRoberts. Both Hansbrough and George could be considered inconsistent, but I don't think either of them are beyond expected inconsistencies of players with their experience.

              To a certain extent it should be expected for a team with the Pacers experience and talent to play down to the level of their opponents, but it goes beyond that. They go from competing and beating some of the best teams in the league, to being blown out by some of the worst. It isn't like they only did it against one team with a good match-up, or only did it once or twice, not they have competed with most of the best teams. Teams without any talent, like some people on here seem to think is the case with this team, do not do that. Teams without talent may get lucky once or twice, but will get blown out almost every time. This team seems to get blown out more by teams with less talent than teams with more talent.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: What exactly is our problem?

                We just suck.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: What exactly is our problem?

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  We just suck.
                  ................

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: What exactly is our problem?

                    I really think it's a mental thing.

                    There's a few games where the whole team is motivated and pumped up to work together and win and then the next game everyone just shuts down.

                    We also can use some talent and leadership.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: What exactly is our problem?

                      I have been to several games this year and I can honestly say when this team decides to play they are much better than the record indicates. However, there has been far to many games (like the last two) where the Pacers simply did not show up. To play the Bulls and Heat like they did then get their doors blown off by the Queens and Pistons is unacceptable.

                      In the games I have been too, I can honestly say that Tyler and Dante were the only players that brought it every night. I honestly believe they are the only two players on the roster that has any heart whatsoever. PG is a little young and inexperienced to make that judgment about. But I would trade anyone else on the roster for a decent player at their position.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: What exactly is our problem?

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        ................

                        ..........
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: What exactly is our problem?

                          i chalk it up to a handful of things to be honest..

                          First off .. the main overlying factor .. is that this team is very YOUNG . and very ENEXPERIENCED ..

                          Also , this particular season, is the 1st season in which we have pretty close to having our future main core of guys..

                          That being said .... What I think it is , is that throughout this season, one or a few of the factors were usually always going on concurrently in turn affecting the play of the team...

                          Factors include :

                          young, enexperienced
                          coaching change/system
                          inconsistancy/slump
                          leadership
                          developing chemistry/chemistry problems/growing pains
                          mental fatigue

                          I could probably name more, but for the sake of keeping it short and getting to the point, I will stop there..

                          Sometimes all these factors pile up at once on our guys, and we see games like the last 2 .. or the 6 loss streak we had where it seemed the wheels fell off ..

                          Then, when we are winning , when everything starts clicking for us , we see how freaking scary-good this team COULD BE .. That is what is so damn frustrating..

                          I am however kinda worried with Danny... it seems like he WANTS to be the leader of this team, and feels he is... but sometimes he don't .. but he also don't wan't anyone else to take over the leadership of this team neither...

                          I kinda get the feeling that the chemistry issues we are seeing stems from this, and that we got too many wanting to be the "alpha dog" .. if that makes sense..


                          Does anyone else see this too?


                          .
                          "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: What exactly is our problem?

                            Youth............... Boy it is great to be young when all things are clicking right you feel invencible and when things start to go wrong the wheels fly off quickly when it starts to hit the fan.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: What exactly is our problem?

                              We started the season with a coach and system that should've been long gone and player roles re-evaluated during the past summer league and training camp. We allowed that same coach to clear his bench of potential qualified replacements thus making his firing harder and the followup interim regime very much a question mark.

                              So that right there means this season is going to have some bumps in it because we've had players drilled in bad basketball for over 4 years and nobody with much experience to turn to for the interim HC role. Even if Vogel's personal preferences and resume' did include something besides Pitino and O'Brien it would be hard to undo all of the prior 3 plus years all of a sudden and at midseason.

                              Then factor in some obvious chemistry issues that don't even quite make sense from the outside looking in. Why would Granger be down on the team? He could not have been an O'Brien fan and Vogel is certainly more of a player's coach than O'Brien... PLUS the team is in a position to make the playoffs... and lastly... the team in all likelihood will have a new coach next season and you'd think Granger would have some input in that process. So there are some things going on that defy even speculation right now.

                              Something did seem to change around the time of the leaked trade that didn't happen... and the insertion of Lance into the regular rotation. But I'm not sure that is the complete answer or root of the problem at all.

                              Maybe those things were seen as some writing on the wall for some players? Dunno...

                              At least the front office can sort some of this out as well as see the young players playing consistent roles which should help with decisions moving forward.
                              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

                              Working...
                              X