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

Charley Rosen

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

  • Charley Rosen

    http://msn.foxsports.com/story/3118948

    I accidentally read a Charley Rosen article.... man this guy makes me mad. I read the Indy and Detroit reviews, what a load of BS. Since when does Detroit "coast"?
    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

  • #2
    Re: Charley Rosen

    He seems to be a little bitter



    Central Division preview
    Story Tools: Print Email
    Charley Rosen / Special to FOXSports.com
    Posted: 17 hours ago



    Cleveland Cavaliers

    Even in the cutthroat Central Division, the Cavaliers have a decent chance of qualifying for the playoffs.

    Ready for Fantasy Basketball?

    Get a FREE Basic Hoops team and be the GM of your own pro basketball roster.
    Want a bigger challenge? Try these other games:


    Fantasy Hoops –
    Live Draft, $100 league prizes

    Fantasy Hoops Commish –
    Customize and run your league

    Ultimate Hoops –
    Competetive, $26,000 in prizes

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Looking for help on draft day?
    Access our Fantasy Hoops Draft Kit and dominate your draft!
    With the aging, yet still capable Eric Snow added to the mix, and Jeff McInnis on hand from Day 1, there's less pressure for LeBron James to be Superman during his second go-round through the league. Their backcourt lacks a dependable scorer (Dajuan Wagner is too short, too streaky and too defenseless), but is still potent enough to hold its own against most opponents.

    Zydrunas Ilgauskas has become an underrated presence in the paint on both ends of the court. He could always score, but his rebounding and shot-blocking have significantly improved. And with more shots available with Carlos Boozer elsewhere, look for Ziggy to finally get the props he's earned.

    The biggest hole is at power forward. Absent Boozer, Drew Gooden will be plugged into the gap. This guy is strictly a finesse player whose talent level simply doesn't measure up to most of the other starting power forwards in the NBA. That's why the Cavs need to be surprised by Anderson Varejao and/or Luke Jackson — an unlikely possibility.

    Moreover, the bench is thin, and the Cavs lack the board power to run. An injury to any player in the normal rotation would knock Cleveland back into the pack of playoff pretenders.

    Young player to watch: Who else except LeBron? His inconsistent hand mechanics make every jump shot an adventure. But in his sophomore season, the game-time action should slow down so that his understanding will encompass a wider and deeper view of the court.


    Chicago Bulls
    This team just doesn't fit together.

    Take the big men, for example — a combination of confused youngsters (Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler), a weary-legged Antonio Davis, and the distinctly mediocre Othella Harrington, whose primary advantage is his left-handedness.

    The point guard, Kirk Hinrich, is talented, young and eager.

    At the skill positions (the shooting guard and small forwards), the Bulls must rely on too many inexperienced players — Andres Nocioni from Argentina, plus a pair of rookies, Luol Deng and Ben Gordon. Because the Bulls are so dependent on so many untried players getting the proper experience in a hurry, the team is doomed to another season of unfulfilled potential.

    Young player to watch: Of Hinrich, Chandler and Curry, it's Curry who can possibly make the biggest impact. He's an instinctive and multi-dimensional scorer in the low post. But can Curry get his body and his mind in gear?


    Milwaukee Bucks
    In order to keep playing into May, Michael Redd, Keith Van Horn and the rapidly aging Toni Kukoc must routinely fill the hoop from the outskirts. The trouble is that having to make so many perimeter shots puts an enormous burden on the shooters. Also, over the course of a long season, shooters do tire and suffer slumps. Such prolonged misfiring would be disastrous for the Bucks.

    Also, the Bucks don't have the monster glass-eaters to provide put-backs and second-chance shots.

    That's why Milwaukee desperately needs T.J. Ford to make a complete and timely recovery from his severe back injury. The speedy Ford can trigger fastbreak opportunities that can create easy buckets and take the pressure off the Bucks shooters. Ford's replacements are Mo Williams and Mike James, both of whom are strictly stopgaps.

    Last year, the Bucks overachieved on defense, and to equal their success they must reprise that same scrappiness, awareness and all-out hustle. This might be a difficult undertaking unless Milwaukee gets off to a quick start — something that's hard to imagine sans Ford.

    Teams that live or die by the jump shot, usually suffer a painful demise.

    Young player to watch: Ford is quick as a wish, and eventually coach Terry Porter will tinker with his jump shot until the young man becomes a decent shooter. But when, and if, Ford returns to action, will his back miseries cost him a step or two? If this is the case, then he'll be just another shot-stricken, almost-good-enough runt.


    Indiana Pacers
    Is their brief stint as serious contender already over? There are signs that this might indeed be the case.

    Last season's playoffs proved that Ron Artest is not only unreliable, but a bona fide head case. Reggie Miller is reduced to doing a bad imitation of himself. Jermaine O'Neal has yet to convince serious NBA watchers that he's ready to be a responsible go-to scorer. Jamaal Tinsley continues to make poor decisions with the ball. Austin Croshere is short on talent and short on too many of his jump shots. Jonathan Bender has yet to string together two solid rotations. Stephen Jackson is wild as the wind.

    The Pacers' defense is good enough to routinely strangle the league's weak sisters, overcome most middle-of-the-road teams, and beat a sufficient number of powerhouse teams to raise false expectations for postseason success.

    And if Rick Carlisle's body language reveals that he really doesn't believe in his players, how can they believe in t themselves?

    Young player to watch: Bender is an injury-prone, seven-foot, long-distance shooter who would rather dance away from contact than bang and be banged. Is he a powerless power forward, or a giant-sized small forward? Will he keep his body parts intact long enough for anybody to find out?


    Detroit Pistons
    All reigning champs look invincible and Detroit is no different. That said, there are unavoidable pitfalls to their repeating.

    The champions have a tendency to play in cruise control — Hey, we're the champs! That means we can turn our game on whenever we need to. The truth is that in order to win successive titles, the top dogs have to play hard all the time, simply because every other team in the league will be pointing to their encounters with them. Beating the champs gives an opponent instant credibility and self-esteem.

    A huge reason why the Pistons triumphed last year was their admirable team chemistry. But chemistry is always a delicate entity in the existential world of the NBA.

    And the Pistons' chemistry was significantly altered during the off-season.

    Subtract Corliss Williamson and add Antonio No-dyess, who's made whatever reputation he has by putting up good numbers with bad teams. Another newcomer with an even more powerful personality is Derrick Coleman. Already on his last legs, will DC sublimate his monstrous ego or call too much attention to himself?

    And can the holdover players continue to deal with Larry Brown's constant yipping and habitual cynicism? Both will be in full operation as Brown tries to prove that last year was not a fluke, that he's not to blame for the fiasco in Athens, and that he is, indeed, a genius.

    Chemistry works only as long as the W's greatly outnumber the L's. So it would behoove the Pistons to avoid any possible internal dissent by roaring out of the gate.

    Still, the Pistons are the champs until somebody beats them.

    Young player to watch: Can Tayshaun Prince sustain the plastic-man defense he sicced on Kobe? Will his 6-foot-9, 215-pound frame hold up under a full season of pounding? (Look for Brown to limit Prince's daylight.) And will the rest of the league ever stop biting on Prince's fakes right, and take measures to keep him from spinning left?


    Charley Rosen, former CBA coach, author of 12 books about hoops, the next one being A PIVOTAL SEASON — HOW THE 1971-72 LA LAKERS CHANGED THE NBA, is a frequent contributor to FOXSports.com.


    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Charley Rosen

      Wow, what a moron.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Charley Rosen

        Man there's an argument for birthcontrol.
        If this was written before the start of last season I could have seen his point but how can anyone call Artest a headcase after last season?
        No mention of the best record in the leauge. No mention of the reliability of Foster. No mention of the vastly improved play of Artest as well as the fact that he became the DPOTY.

        Then again, this little waste of human life is writing for Fox Sports which is kinda like the national enquierer of sports.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Charley Rosen

          I have re-read what he wrote, and what in the world does he mean about Rick Carlisle's body language. That is just a strange comment

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Charley Rosen

            I dunno after the Injury to Reggie was announced I noticed a diffrent tone in our play in the Game last night and Rick looked alittle puzzled and concerned ..maybe that was just my observation.

            I'm really worried about how well these guys that have not had much playing time will react to getting alot more mins , there conditioning. Pollard played what 31-32 mins last night and I think it really showed he wasn't used to playing that much time.
            Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Charley Rosen

              Originally posted by efx
              Man there's an argument for birthcontrol.


              This space for rent.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Charley Rosen

                Subtract Corliss Williamson and add Antonio No-dyess, who's made whatever reputation he has by putting up good numbers with bad teams.
                So does that mean if we picked up Elton Brand, that'd be a crappy idea too?

                We picked up a better shotblocker than corliss, a stronger player, a better inside player, and a great rebounder.....ah well......

                The champions have a tendency to play in cruise control — Hey, we're the champs! That means we can turn our game on whenever we need to
                Cause, as we all know, the Pistons are well-known for thair coasting.....

                The truth is that in order to win successive titles, the top dogs have to play hard all the time
                Apparently Rosen was vacationing on Mars from 2000-2003....

                And can the holdover players continue to deal with Larry Brown's constant yipping and habitual cynicism?
                You know, since Larry always burns his players out after one season, and all....

                Both will be in full operation as Brown tries to prove that last year was not a fluke, that he's not to blame for the fiasco in Athens, and that he is, indeed, a genius.
                Agreed. If the Pistons don't do well this year, Larry Brown may not get into the hall of fame. Oh wait.....

                Chemistry works only as long as the W's greatly outnumber the L's. So it would behoove the Pistons to avoid any possible internal dissent by roaring out of the gate.
                ......so he's saying that losing teams don't have good chemistry? Captain obvious strikes again!

                It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                Comment

                Working...
                X