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

Let Lance give it a whirl just once

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

  • Let Lance give it a whirl just once

    We all know we need a fresh injection of offense, particularly in the second unit.

    Can we pick up a pass first point guard to change things around and let Collison be the offensive surge with the subs? Probably not before this summer.

    Can we find a Vinnie Johnson microwave pickup at the 2 spot before the deadline? Probably not.

    Well, I would like to try an experiment at least once to see if the help we need is staring right in front of us.

    I'd like to see one game where Lance is allowed to shoot 15 times. Put it in his hands, let him drive, pass, or shoot. Let's see what happens.

    I know, it's likely he's not ready yet, much less born that way. But I happen to think there is, say, a 20 percent chance that, given the reigns and the freedom to make some mistakes (like miss a few shots and make a few turnovers), that the overall outcome could be really great.

    I'm not saying give him the reigns to the team for a while. I'm saying give him the reigns to the second unit FOR ONE GAME. Let's see what happens.

    If it fails, I'm good. Curiosity satisfied. Possible fallout: one loss.

    But with as much as we've invested in Lance so far, I think it's worth the experiment.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference


  • #2
    Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

    One game? It depends. Is this about Lance driving and dishing? Would it hurt or help the team concept?

    Personally, I would like to see Lance start with the first unit and be able to dish to guys who can convert. We are loaded in the starting unit with offensive talent. We just don't have a guy who can see the floor and has the size to deliver the ball.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      One game? It depends. Is this about Lance driving and dishing? Would it hurt or help the team concept?

      Personally, I would like to see Lance start with the first unit and be able to dish to guys who can convert. We are loaded in the starting unit with offensive talent. We just don't have a guy who can see the floor and has the size to deliver the ball.
      Yes, it's about driving and dishing.

      I don't think it hurts the team concept. I think it would potentially help. I have reason to believe from what I've seen that Lance is more interesting in good passes and team ball than getting his own shot off. But he needs the freedom to shoot and get the defense's respect in order to do so.

      If Lance is loosening things up and getting guys the ball where they need it, it is the opposite of watching the shot clock wind down to 8 or 7 while we pass it around the perimeter, then someone throws up something quick. It is arguable that Lance with the ball in his hands would improve the team concept, not hurt it.

      In regards to trying him in the first unit, I think that is too political. Just the real world. Now, if he turns out to be successful doing it in the second unit, you might later consider trying him in the first unit, but that would take some time.
      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

        If this experiment was to happen, the Pacers play Charlotte, NOLA, and Charlotte in a row this month. If it works in the 1st Charlotte game, then there are 2 other games to continue the experiment. Both teams, Charlotte 3 wins and NOLA 4 wins, I wouldn't believe should cause a problem with trying the experiment.

        AT THIS POINt, I'M ALMOST WILLING TO SEE ANYTHING TRIED TO KEEP PRICE OFF THE COURT!!!!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

          People that want to write him off or pigeon hole him into a certain position seem to forget he's the same age as Paul, but getting less than 25% of the minutes Paul gets. Naturally, It's gonna take him a lot longer to develop getting less than 10 minutes a game to work with. The man needs more time on the court if we ever want to truly evaluate his game.

          I'd love to see Lance get a chance with the starters. The height alone would be intimidating. When's the last time a team had that big of a starting 5?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

            Lance isn't ready. He needs to establish himself as a consistent bench player before anything else.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

              Yep I agree with Hicks I don't think he is ready, maybe next year but right now he is not ready. Not to say that I wouldn't mind him been the first PG off the bench.
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                We already have a much more consistent backup point guard.

                A.J. Price is shooting 23% from the field and 19% from the 3 point line while averaging 4.5 assists per 36 minutes.

                Jeremy Lin wasn't ready either!
                Last edited by Larry Staverman; 02-11-2012, 12:30 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                  Lance is clearly not playing his game right now via instruction. He's not ready to play a team game but he's ready to play his game.

                  I don't see how our bench could be much worse offensively. We're not scoring because we have 2-3 defensive guys, 1 guy who's not a one-on-one player (Tyler) running isos almost exclusively now, and 1 guy who is a playmaker (Lance) trying to facilitate the isos.

                  If he's our best passer, then let's see him with the ball in his hands. That's what I'd like to see, but I'm OK with Lance learning to facilitate and not play his game as long as we're winning.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                    Lance isn't ready. He needs to establish himself as a consistent bench player before anything else.
                    Like I said, 20 percent chance. I think your comment has an 80 percent chance of being right.

                    The thing is, he HAS established himself as a somewhat consistent player who stands in the corner on offense. But we all know that's not his game. Why wait until next year to find out if he's a mutherload when given major minutes with the ball in his hands?

                    Again, all I'm asking for is a one game test.
                    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                      Lance isn't ready. He needs to establish himself as a consistent bench player before anything else.
                      Yes, yes. He's not ready. You've determined this by watching him play 9.7 minutes per game, during which he's instructed to get out of the way and stand on the wing while our great, slashing, "best bench in the NBA" combo of Hansbrough, Amundson and Foster strike fear into the opposing defense with their array of ISOs and embarrassing jump shots.

                      Surely he should be doing something to earn your favor in such limited playtime. Like a triple double, perhaps. Meanwhile, Darren "0 assists is more likely than double digit assists" Collison* gets the longest leash ever, right?

                      I mean, I'm not surprised. Two weeks ago people here were saying AJ Price needed more PT because he was almost serviceable for a few games in the playoffs.

                      Fact is, we have nothing to lose by letting Lance get more burn before George Hill returns. It worked for the Knicks, and Lance is more physically gifted than JLin. I'm not sure what it is exactly that people have against Stephenson, but I wish they would come right out and say it, instead of making vague suggestions that the tiny sample size is enough to make any kind of negative judgement of his current capability...especially on a team where up til a week ago the coach wasn't even running more than 2 plays for the team's best overall player.

                      * I actually like DC. But any delusions that he's anything more than mediocre are just that: delusions. He's a poor passer, capable of being a 16 and 5 type guy in a system that required a shoot-first point guard. Unfortunately, he's in a system that is begging, pleading for a pure passer. There's no reason this starting 5 should be 18th in the league in scoring. And it wouldn't be, with a decent passer. They brought in his biggest weapon (West) from the one time in his career he was productive and he's still not doing any better on the offensive end. In fact, statistically (aka factually) he's regressed this year. Passing/vision isn't something you learn at the NBA level. You can improve on it, but either you've got the ability or you don't. And he really doesn't.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                        I would just be happy if we allow Lance to be on the floor with Paul George instead of subbing him in for Paul George. I think Lance should come in for colliosn and the only problem anybody ever had with Dahntay was him being a black hole and that has gone away for the most part so i'd be fine with Dahntay coming in for Danny otherwise I think the PF - C rotation is pretty much where it needs to be.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                          Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
                          Yes, yes. He's not ready. You've determined this by watching him play 9.7 minutes per game,

                          ...

                          Surely he should be doing something to earn your favor in such limited playtime. Like a triple double, perhaps.
                          This is condescending, and you are projecting opinions onto me that may not necessarily reflect how I feel about Lance or what I'm looking to see out of him to determine if I think he's ready for something more.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                            I'd like to see this happen against Charlotte.

                            About passing/vision/running an offense now. You can learn to pass. You can learn to run an offense. There's not a single reason that an NBA PG cannot run a pick and roll. Everyone in Europe does it. The only thing that you cannot learn is court vision. That's innate, I'll agree. But the other two qualities are not innate.

                            PS: And I blame college and high school coaches who morhp most of their PGs into Scoring PGs. We need some pass first PGs, guys.

                            PS II: Frankly, I don't believe that the Pacers need a pass first PG right now. It's not how our offense is run at the moment.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                              Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                              Yes, it's about driving and dishing.

                              I don't think it hurts the team concept. I think it would potentially help. I have reason to believe from what I've seen that Lance is more interesting in good passes and team ball than getting his own shot off. But he needs the freedom to shoot and get the defense's respect in order to do so.

                              If Lance is loosening things up and getting guys the ball where they need it, it is the opposite of watching the shot clock wind down to 8 or 7 while we pass it around the perimeter, then someone throws up something quick. It is arguable that Lance with the ball in his hands would improve the team concept, not hurt it.

                              In regards to trying him in the first unit, I think that is too political. Just the real world. Now, if he turns out to be successful doing it in the second unit, you might later consider trying him in the first unit, but that would take some time.
                              I agree with this post. At the same time, his chances of making a spectacular showing are better with the starting unit. He just has so many other weapons to leverage. Also, I think he's more likely to play within the team concept in terms of passing with the starters and he has more respect for the opposition.

                              But I agree we should give him significant burn for not just one but a couple games. All at the PG position. JMHO.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X