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

Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

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

  • #16
    Re: Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

    I think they are in good shape, you didn't sign a shot creator who takes minutes at the small wing slot, but you did leave open an opportunity for Paul George to get a full shot of minutes and grow. Also, you have a rotation that allows Lance to make a place for himself and if that doesn't work, I think you have minutes open up for AJ Price.

    I see this as very positive from a strategic standpoint. Those 3 guys could not be up to the task/minutes, but I want to know, I want to see it.

    If DC is as improved/more comfortable, whatever you want to call it. George Hill is a player who can score, maybe in crunch time. Granger proved his mental toughness to me, in the Chicago series. West has been here before and not afraid to take and make a crunch time shot (did it to the Pacers not long ago).

    Then maybe you are way better served to go with those fellas and maybe you have something.

    My point, I honestly don't see not getting Crawford/Mayo as a negative, necessarily. We'll see.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

      I didn't see how numbers 1 and 3 could be solved with this years FA class. A tough rebounding big man and a pass first pg who plays did is pretty rare and its not like you can just trade for them without giving up significant pieces in return.

      This years draft I think we go after a pg depending on how Collsion is doing and a tough rebounding center. Those would be my top priorties in this talent loaded draft class.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

        Originally posted by Speed View Post
        I think they are in good shape, you didn't sign a shot creator who takes minutes at the small wing slot, but you did leave open an opportunity for Paul George to get a full shot of minutes and grow. Also, you have a rotation that allows Lance to make a place for himself and if that doesn't work, I think you have minutes open up for AJ Price.

        I see this as very positive from a strategic standpoint. Those 3 guys could not be up to the task/minutes, but I want to know, I want to see it.

        If DC is as improved/more comfortable, whatever you want to call it. George Hill is a player who can score, maybe in crunch time. Granger proved his mental toughness to me, in the Chicago series. West has been here before and not afraid to take and make a crunch time shot (did it to the Pacers not long ago).

        Then maybe you are way better served to go with those fellas and maybe you have something.

        My point, I honestly don't see not getting Crawford/Mayo as a negative, necessarily. We'll see.
        I think Chauncey Billups would have solved a lot of problems for us: good distributor, leadership, clutch shooter at end of games, great defender.

        I wished we'd have thrown up to $10 million per year at him for a year or two. That addition could have allowed us to compete for a conference championship, imo.
        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
          I think Chauncey Billups would have solved a lot of problems for us: good distributor, leadership, clutch shooter at end of games, great defender.

          I wished we'd have thrown up to $10 million per year at him for a year or two. That addition could have allowed us to compete for a conference championship, imo.
          We could only offer him a one year contract since he was a amnesty player. The problem with Billups is that he only sovles the pg problem for one year and his getting old. At max I see him having 2 more years as a starter then he will be like Fisher (to slow to guard anyone).

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

            Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
            I didn't see how numbers 1 and 3 could be solved with this years FA class. A tough rebounding big man and a pass first pg who plays d is pretty rare and its not like you can just trade for them without giving up significant pieces in return.
            And I think we tried to snag this with Rondo too but it just wasn't in the cards .

            All in all, if all we do this off-season is sign a tough, All Star PF who already works fantastically with our current PG; A defensive minded, tough as nails guard, that backs down from no one, from a veteran team who can play both the 1 and 2; the best possible assistant coach known to bring discipline to a squad whom Kobe credits as helping him develop and is also from a winning franchise and a contract to a young coach who re-instilled confidence in our Blue & Gold...

            Well then to me, this has to be a success.
            I don't want to sound condescending, which means to talk down to you by the way

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

              I'm with you but from a different angle. I'm happy that the FO is doing steady, reasonable moves considering the market but I don't see anything so far that was a big curve ball genius move.

              You needed more PF/C help, scoring preferred, and you had Nene, West and Chandler as the main FAs on the market. That's not a tough line to draw there.


              Hill was a bit more of a surprise in that it was available but it's not mind blowing either.


              And most notably, the idea that it's "great work" to simply let Dun and TJ walk as FAs or to amnesty Posey for cap space/roster spot (if you use it) is just wrong. That's the old Chris Rock "people want credit for something they are supposed to be doing".

              It took long enough to stop piling on bad deals and letting JOB run the team that maybe it feels like a victory now that its over, but this is just what rational, smart FOs are doing.



              My main credit to the FO this year goes to only doing 2 years with West for now just in case and for (so far) not going money crazy in a FA market that's not that good.

              The team had a lot of potential and to me Bird started letting that come through by finally moving Troy and then not doing deals that would have brought more contracts back that the team couldn't handle. And then finally removing the coaching issue which was really hurting (and was allowed to go on too long).

              Maybe he went too far in trying to insist that Memphis take Rush, but at least that's got a logic to it which is "no more salary just because we have room".

              Oh, and Shaw. The Shaw hiring is huge.


              My only concern remaining currently is if Bird is banking too much on Lance, which should be considered a cheap gamble rather than a big potential win. I hope that's how he's viewing it rather than thinking that's an issue that's been addressed and solved (playmaker PG).



              Bottom line from all this now is that the team is in a position that it should ONLY be dealing from a strategic on-court view now. Nothing needs to be forced, salaries don't have to be dumped or swallowed, and nothing has to be done "right now". For the next few years it should only be the kind of adjustments McKeyFan is getting at.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                I'm with you but from a different angle. I'm happy that the FO is doing steady, reasonable moves considering the market but I don't see anything so far that was a big curve ball genius move.

                You needed more PF/C help, scoring preferred, and you had Nene, West and Chandler as the main FAs on the market. That's not a tough line to draw there.


                Hill was a bit more of a surprise in that it was available but it's not mind blowing either.


                And most notably, the idea that it's "great work" to simply let Dun and TJ walk as FAs or to amnesty Posey for cap space/roster spot (if you use it) is just wrong. That's the old Chris Rock "people want credit for something they are supposed to be doing".

                It took long enough to stop piling on bad deals and letting JOB run the team that maybe it feels like a victory now that its over, but this is just what rational, smart FOs are doing.



                My main credit to the FO this year goes to only doing 2 years with West for now just in case and for (so far) not going money crazy in a FA market that's not that good.

                The team had a lot of potential and to me Bird started letting that come through by finally moving Troy and then not doing deals that would have brought more contracts back that the team couldn't handle. And then finally removing the coaching issue which was really hurting (and was allowed to go on too long).

                Maybe he went too far in trying to insist that Memphis take Rush, but at least that's got a logic to it which is "no more salary just because we have room".

                Oh, and Shaw. The Shaw hiring is huge.


                My only concern remaining currently is if Bird is banking too much on Lance, which should be considered a cheap gamble rather than a big potential win. I hope that's how he's viewing it rather than thinking that's an issue that's been addressed and solved (playmaker PG).



                Bottom line from all this now is that the team is in a position that it should ONLY be dealing from a strategic on-court view now. Nothing needs to be forced, salaries don't have to be dumped or swallowed, and nothing has to be done "right now". For the next few years it should only be the kind of adjustments McKeyFan is getting at.
                He went out and got George Hill. A player in the exact same position as Lance (SG, trying to convert to PG) Then he went out and got Darren Collison's basketball soul mate.

                Despite what Larry says, his actions show he's not banking on Lance being the team's future at PG.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

                  I wonder if the "guy who can get a shot at the end of games" concept has been overrated a tad. Not that it isn't great to have that guy, but I think its possible that there are more ways to score at the end of a game than running an iso play.

                  Who was that guy on the 90s Pacers? We had to run Reggie off screens to get him shots, essentially, the whole team was working at the end of games to get a shot.

                  I think it was someone in another thread who said something about "Keeping the defense honest". If you have guys 1-5 who are all true threats to score, all you may need is a well designed play to get that end of game shot. All you really need is enough talent to prevent the opposing defense from completely loading up on one or two guys.
                  "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


                  • #24
                    Re: Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

                    I don't really see a need for another "scorer". As long as we have ball movement and player movement there isn't really a need for someone to create their own shot.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

                      Sure we didn't get the "create his own shot at the end of games" guy , but we do have now 5-6 guys who can ALL hit a big shot and force the defense to stay honest. Dc, gh, pg, dg, dw, and Roy can all score. I think that's more important than having one "guy".

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

                        Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                        I think the best lineup will be:

                        Hill
                        George
                        Granger
                        West
                        Hibbert
                        ...

                        That's a team that can win a lot of games. I'd say 45-50 in a regular 82 game season. They aren't as good as Miami, Chicago, or Boston. I still think New York and Orlando (with Howard) are better, and the Hawks are pretty comparable.

                        We should be in contention for a 5-6 seed. If things shake out perfectly, I could see us sneaking into the 4th seed over New York and Orlando, but I really think New York is a much better team. I think the ideal scenario is trying to get into that 4 vs. 5 match-up and hope you're playing the Knicks. That's the only way I see this team having a shot at making it to the 2nd round. Baby steps.
                        I agree with your post, for once.

                        I do think that Collison will be the PG starting out, but would not be surprised to see Hill take over the starting role at some point in the season.

                        If I were pushed for where the Pacers would finish right now, I would also pick 5-6. However, I believe that our depth might enable us to bypass New York and Orlando and capture a 4th seed.

                        If we are able to do that, and assuming Hansbrough, Hibbert and George continue growing at a rapid rate this season, then I can see the roster as is competing with the EC's big three the following season. A front court banger picked up between now and then will only strengthen that belief.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          For those of you saying that our multiple scoring threats plus a well-designed play will be enough to score against good defense in end -game situations, you're basically saying that things are going to happen this year that didn't happen last year.

                          Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk
                          "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                          - Salman Rushdie

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

                            Originally posted by OakMoses View Post
                            For those of you saying that our multiple scoring threats plus a well-designed play will be enough to score against good defense in end -game situations, you're basically saying that things are going to happen this year that didn't happen last year.

                            Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk
                            So you wouldn't say that our scoring threat has improved with Hill & West?

                            Also, you expect our offense to be exactly the same as the simplified one Frank drew up to replace the previous mess?

                            That's two HUGE changes right there.
                            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


                            • #29
                              Re: Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

                              Last season, David West shot 49% in clutch situations - last 5 minutes, neither team ahead by more than five points - a very good figure. He may help us more at the end of games than some are suggesting here.

                              In the following analysis of clutch players, he ranks quite a bit higher than any of the current Pacers and any of the guys the Pacers have been reported to be pursuing: http://www.82games.com/1011/CSORT11.HTM

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Our signings thus far have been excellent but not exactly strategic

                                Originally posted by OakMoses View Post
                                For those of you saying that our multiple scoring threats plus a well-designed play will be enough to score against good defense in end -game situations, you're basically saying that things are going to happen this year that didn't happen last year.

                                Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk
                                Didn't you notice how much better we were at executing out of timeouts once Frank took the helm (with the notable exception of end of game situations vs. Chicago in the playoffs)? I know that the shortened season and training camp doesn't allow the coach to fully implement his vision, but I tend to think that with more scoring options and a full off-season Vogel can build on what appeared to be a budding strength last season. I suspect that those end of game meltdowns in the playoffs vs. Chicago may actually be helpful to Vogel has he moves forward looking for ways to avoid them by employing an increased number of scoring threats in the future.

                                So yeah, a lot is different this year in terms of coaching staff and players, so I am indeed expecting different results. Not all positive, mind you - but different for sure.
                                "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

                                "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

                                "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X