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

Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

    It’s probably to early in the season to call any game a disaster but I will say this, had we lost that game I would have probably considered it a disaster because in effect it would have negated the victory vs. the Hawks.

    Yes I know that you should never take any NBA team lightly but let’s be honest there are times you look at the schedule and go that games going to be a struggle, that game is winnable if we play right and don’t have any bad luck, this game is a lost cause and this game is one we should take.

    Well I’m sure when all of us looked at the schedule and saw the upcoming games we have this is the one game where I’m sure most of us went “we should take this one”.

    Whew…. Skin of our teeth for sure in that one but we’ll take it. Look this isn’t your older brothers Raptors, these guys actually defend and Casey should be given very high marks as a coach for getting a pretty motley cru of players to actually be a very tight defensive unit.

    That being said we also have to give our own blue & gold high marks for being a tenacious team that doesn’t quite. A lot of this has to do with coaching but the players also have to buy in and right now I think they do, well it’s more than think our record speaks for itself.

    We keep winning, we win ugly, we have to scrap by and sometimes you wonder when the other shoe is going to drop. But maybe that’s just the character or our team. Maybe we will overcome with team ball. In fact as I look around the NBA this season a few things stand out to me. Three of the best teams in the NBA are great teams and have no real true superstar on any of them. Philly, Indiana & Denver all are true teams and each have very good players but there is no Derrick Rose or LeBron James on any of these teams.

    Now time will tell if this can hold but I for one long for a time when actual team basketball was still a viable option to winning and I think that right now it is.

    Our schedule is going to get tougher as far as the competition goes but that’s perfectly fine, because if we are going to be a good team we have to beat good teams.

    Let’s do tonight’s version of odd thoughts by way of grading the players.

    Darren Collison: B+ He pulled this one out of the fire btw. His grade for the first quarter would not have been pretty but as time went on Darren started to get up on Calderon and often times the Raptors were initiating their offense with about 10 seconds left in the shot clock and they were doing it 30 feet from the basket. This was due to Darren locking in. He still let him get by him to often and his shooting was atrocious but he hit his free throws and did not turn the ball over.

    Paul George: B He played very good defense and he did help out on the boards, but he has got to be more aggressive in getting his shot. There was no Danny there tonight to blame for him not being able to get shots so he needs to make himself more a part of the offense. Also while I’m at it I’ll say it now he is being too cute with his layups. I don’t know if this is a no dunk policy because it’s passé thing or not but these flip underhanded layups are not good shots. I’m not asking him to tomahawk windmill it over someone I’m just saying when your at the rim take the 100% shot of dunking it instead of watching it go long off of the glass. But I’m not complaining too much, he still had a good overall game.

    Roy Hibbert: B Ok so I jinxed him, in my last odd thoughts I pointed out that he did not have one single foul vs. the Hawks. He was just saving them up for tonight. I give Casey a lot of credit for Roy’s problems tonight, Roy never really had much of a chance to go one on one and when he did they did a good job of cutting off the baseline on him. Now Roy did not help matters by turning the ball over to much but I’ll say this, if we are at the point with Roy where we are saying that a game where he scores 15 points & grabs 9 rebounds is a down game for him, well there is only one symbol for that. $$

    David West: B+ I’d really like to give him two grades one for the overall game which would probably be a B at best but then I’d like to give him an end of the 4th quarter grade which would probably be an A+. Even his accidental foul of Magloire ended up paying huge dividends. Games like these are why he is here and why he is so valuable. He did nothing flashy, nothing you’re going to see in a highlight but he made all of the right plays. His offensive production at winning time (stealing from Ahmad Rashad) is why the Celtics wanted him and why we are very lucky to have him.

    Danny Granger: F Idiot

    George Hill: A+ We don’t win this game without George Hill. I can’t say it any other way. On both sides of the floor this guy was the boss. I mean for the love of God he had 5 steals to go along with his 22 points and this is the production you are getting from your backup guard. You wonder why our record is 8-3? Wonder no more because our bench comes in and outplays the other team’s starters often times. We all cheered at the draft party we had when the trade went down and I’m telling you that as the season progresses we will all be cheering a lot more.

    Tyler Hansbrough: A- Ok I promised the last time that I wasn’t going to give him any higher grades than a B until he got an assist, well since then he now has 5 and he got 2 more tonight so I’ll go ahead and give him a little higher than he probably deserves. One was a great kick out to Paul George who sank the 3 pointer and honestly I don’t know how he got his 2nd one but I guess he must have. That rebound he secured (after Paul George kept it alive) of the missed West free throw put the game out of play because we all knew that Tyler was going to hit his free throws. He hasn’t had the explosive game lately like he started the season with but he is settling into a nice role on the team and he is still finding ways to contribute.

    Lou Amundson: B He does exactly what you want your back up backup center to do. He plays with energy, is physical on defense and is always trying to rebound. It’s not pretty but I’m telling you over the course of the season his contributions, however small, will help in the overall winning. Also for a guy who can’t shoot very well he is not half bad at the free throw line (not counting the knuckleball he threw at the Atlanta game).

    Lance Stephenson: C Not really a good or bad game from Lance and in fact I’m a little surprised that he didn’t play a little more but I think they might have been afraid of his defense in the second half. Nice to see though that he is now actually hitting some shots.

    Dahntay Jones: C+ Like Lance he really was just there. Not a bad game and at the very least he didn’t stall out the offense, in fact I think over the past week and a half he has done a very good job of trying not to do that. But he is who he is and it will occur on occasion.

    I would like to give a special shout out to Larry Bird and David Morway. Our two off season acquisitions really pulled our fat out of the fire tonight.

    Also another special shout out to Jamaal Magloire for making Chris Dudley look like Mark Price.



    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

    When you are unable to watch the game it really makes you appreciate these Odd thoughts threads.

    Thanks Peck
    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

    • #3
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

      I saw it also asked in the game thread so I checked and the other Hansbrough assist came from stealing the ball and passing up to Paul George who took that awkward shot on a 3 on 1 break.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

        Originally posted by Bball View Post
        When you are unable to watch the game it really makes you appreciate these Odd thoughts threads.

        Thanks Peck
        I second that. Thank you for these. I really wish I had DVR...or that the NBA had some sort of VOD service.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

          Thanks Peck, good read. George Hill has arrived.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            .....
            Also another special shout out to Jamaal Magloire for making Chris Dudley look like Mark Price.....
            TWO airballs?!!? I yelled to my wife that's the worst FT shooting I've seen since I witnessed George McGinnis shoot one over the backboard.

            Chris Dudley once went to the line to shoot six free throws (there were 4 lane violations) and he missed them all.
            Don't thank me, I'll kill ya.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

              I'd like some more thoughts on Granger's F.

              But, yes, George Hill is turning beastly. I wrote in the postgame that we can win, apparently, without Granger, but I don't think we can win without George Hill.

              George Hill plays the game the right way. He pulled up at the foul line on a 3-2 fast break for the high percentage shot. (I haven't seen a Pacer do that in years.) He is money at the free throw line. He finds the teammate in the post immediately, while our other players wait until 8 seconds left on the shot clock. He knows when to set up the offense and when to go strong to the hoop. This guy is just fantastic.
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

                Originally posted by Knucklehead Warrior View Post
                TWO airballs?!!? I yelled to my wife that's the worst FT shooting I've seen since I witnessed George McGinnis shoot one over the backboard.
                For guys like BBall who didn't watch the game, they weren't just airballs. He missed the rim short by one or two feet. You can't make it up.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post
                  when your at the rim take the 100% shot of dunking it instead of watching it go long off of the glass.
                  Unless your Darren Collison, then you should just lay it in.
                  "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                  - Salman Rushdie

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

                    Oh, and George Hill's defense on Barbosa was good in the second half.

                    That guy is a great scorer.
                    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

                      Originally posted by Knucklehead Warrior View Post
                      TWO airballs?!!? I yelled to my wife that's the worst FT shooting I've seen since I witnessed George McGinnis shoot one over the backboard.

                      Chris Dudley once went to the line to shoot six free throws (there were 4 lane violations) and he missed them all.
                      Do you have a link for the McGinnis one? lol I'd love to see that.
                      First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

                        Hill is much more comfortable. His overall shooting percentage is above his career now. He's been on fire of late.

                        PG needs to step it up offensively, and stop getting lazy on passes and these girly layups. You are about 6'10, he should be dunking those. At least with a dunk attempt you have a higher chance of getting fouled than with a layup.

                        I don't know how Hibbert now sneaks up on you with these 15 and 9 games. If that is quiet, hot damn! Gotta feed Hibbert more (if he can cut down on the TOs...6 last night!).
                        First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

                          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                          Oh, and George Hill's defense on Barbosa was good in the second half.

                          That guy is a great scorer.
                          That's all that guy can do and he does it very well.
                          First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

                            Please do not quote the entire post if all you are going to add is a oneliner, people who read this far have read the opening post. (a)
                            Very good grades Peck, I totally agree with you especially on Granger.
                            Last edited by able; 01-14-2012, 11:05 AM. Reason: no need for quoting the whole thing, ppl less fortunate want to read the thread too

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: Stuffing the Raptors

                              Chuck hayes is not anymore alone.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X