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

Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

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

  • #46
    Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

    Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
    Lance didn't fall to the second round because of lack of talent.
    To a certain extent yes, but at the same time people are usually willing to take risks on head cases if they truly are superior talents. Stephenson really isn't. He may have been a late 1st round talent, but he wasn't going to go in the top 20 even if he wasn't considered a head case. He excelled in high school, but he really didn't do anything to stand out in college.

    It wasn't like the year when Price was drafted where there were tons of talented players at his position entering the NBA, and he was coming off of an injury. We are talking about a draft class where Cousins went in the top 5.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

      Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post

      When you realize how top heavy the NBA draft is, and how pathetically bad 2nd round picks fare in the NBA, you get a pretty good gauge on what NBA GM's think of guys when they fall that far. Sure there are exceptions, but most of them garner playing time immediately and contribute. Van Exel, 13 points and 6 assists his rookie year, Arenas 10 points, 3 rebounds and 4 assists his rookie year. Manu had 8 points, 2 rebounds and 2 assists. Boozer had 10 points and 7 rebounds.
      I just happened to know that there is a player playing PG, who was undrafted even at 2nd round and waived by two teams.
      Recently, in the last 8 games stretch, this particular player is playing at all-star level, racking 20+ PPG, 7+APG like number.

      And that sound like a player people said we need before Pacers can be a title contender.

      OK, I am just nitpicking.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

        Lance fell for a few reasons, being a headcase is only one of them. Quite frankly he came out too early. Cousins was ready to go to the NBA. Lance wasn't. Lance didnt have an amazing season at Cincy either. His transition from high school ball to college was tough, he never fully made it. another season or two at cincy would have done wonders for him.

        Lance is rather talented. There is a reason Bird said he is the most talented guy on the team. Do i believe that? No, Paul George is. But Lance could be a very, very good player for us. He has the best vision of anyone on the team. Its incredibly good. He forces things right now. Why? Because thats what he has done his whole life. He is learning the game still.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

          Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
          You mean like the rest of the NBA? Sure, I'll hang my hat in with that group. In the NBA 2nd round picks that work out are exceedingly rare. The very fact that he slid that far tells me everything I need to know about the NBA's opinion of him.

          Just for reference here are what guys drafted 40th overall (like Lance) averaged from 1989 to 2008. This is no small sample. The average career is as follows ...

          134 games, 11.5 minutes per, 4.3 points per, 1.7 rebounds per, and 1.0 assists per. 25% of those picked never even played in the NBA.

          When you realize how top heavy the NBA draft is, and how pathetically bad 2nd round picks fare in the NBA, you get a pretty good gauge on what NBA GM's think of guys when they fall that far. Sure there are exceptions, but most of them garner playing time immediately and contribute. Van Exel, 13 points and 6 assists his rookie year, Arenas 10 points, 3 rebounds and 4 assists his rookie year. Manu had 8 points, 2 rebounds and 2 assists. Boozer had 10 points and 7 rebounds.

          So yes, I think the same of him as the rest of the NBA GM's and I'll take my chances with that side more often than not.
          5 minutes a night with 2 different lineups aren't really giving him the chance to impress, especially when the point-guards don't want to let him touch the ball. In garbage time, He's feeding Pendergraph and Amundson for missed shots, not padding his stats.

          Lance could still be a junior in College and gets himself a highlight reel play almost every game, even with his limited minutes. The kid is just fun to watch and even on the bench, you can tell how much he loves the game. The scouts said his issue was that he couldn't play defense, now he can. Why you gotta hate?

          If they condense the rotations and he looses his minutes later in the season its won't come as a shock, however you would have to be blind to not be able to see the passing and ball skills he posses's. I could care less where he was drafted. My theory is that if Lance were to be given more minutes, he would find his rythym, loose the nerves, and his shot would come around. This has not been proven or dis-proven. The coach can sort the minutes out, but you seriously underrate Lance's potential.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

            Originally posted by Graham Mernatsi View Post
            FEWER.

            You people are going to be the death of me.

            The avatar calling the kettle black?
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

              I don't care who is playing better right now, I am looking towards next year, when we might actually have a real possibility of making noise in the playoffs. In order for us to do that, we need Lance to get where a lot of us think he has the possibility of getting, and that's borderline all-star. AJ is what AJ is. A good, serviceable backup PG that won't hurt the team. I like AJ. But as a fan of the Pacers, I need Lance to keep developing, and let's be honest, his ceiling is WAAAY higher than AJ's. The only way for that to happen is to keep playing him. Price helps us short-term, Lance long-term. Short-term we have no chance at going deep in the playoffs, long-term we do. Play Lance.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

                If some of you guys don't see the talent in Lance, then you're freaking blind. When he creates 6-8 ft of space for a 15ft jumpshot, you should instantly put that opinion to bed. It's just ridiculous.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

                  Originally posted by HickeyS2000 View Post
                  I don't care who is playing better right now, I am looking towards next year, when we might actually have a real possibility of making noise in the playoffs. In order for us to do that, we need Lance to get where a lot of us think he has the possibility of getting, and that's borderline all-star. AJ is what AJ is. A good, serviceable backup PG that won't hurt the team. I like AJ. But as a fan of the Pacers, I need Lance to keep developing, and let's be honest, his ceiling is WAAAY higher than AJ's. The only way for that to happen is to keep playing him. Price helps us short-term, Lance long-term. Short-term we have no chance at going deep in the playoffs, long-term we do. Play Lance.

                  How poorly does Lance have to play for people to start realizing Lance is not a special talent?

                  How well does Price have to play for you people to realize how good of a player he is?


                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  If some of you guys don't see the talent in Lance, then you're freaking blind. When he creates 6-8 ft of space for a 15ft jumpshot, you should instantly put that opinion to bed. It's just ridiculous.
                  Creating space is useless if you can't make the jumper.
                  Last edited by Eleazar; 02-24-2012, 10:04 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

                    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                    If some of you guys don't see the talent in Lance, then you're freaking blind. When he creates 6-8 ft of space for a 15ft jumpshot, you should instantly put that opinion to bed. It's just ridiculous.
                    Has anyone noticed how many times Lance has hit Amundson who is all of sudden wide open, right under the basket, but Lou can't handle it? This isn't all Lou's fault as he isn't ready for that type of play from Lance, but you can see how Lance finds spaces in the game most players don't see.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

                      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                      Creating space is useless if you can't make the jumper.
                      In the last 10 games he's shooting 43%.

                      EDIT: And BTW, Lance's career shooting % is 37%. AJ's? 38%
                      Last edited by Since86; 02-24-2012, 10:24 AM.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

                        Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                        How poorly does Lance have to play for people to start realizing Lance is not a special talent?

                        How well does Price have to play for you people to realize how good of a player he is?
                        Did you read my post? AJ has already reached his potential as a player. The only way for him to get better is to improve consistency. Lance has reached about 35% of his potential. And they aren't that far apart right now! If you can't see that, then you have an obvious bias against Lance and possibly for AJ.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

                          Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                          I'm avoiding opinion issues with Lance for obvious reasons, but if you're going to quote statistics to bash AJ Price ....

                          Lance has made 34 out of 88 shots for 78 points.
                          AJ has made 33 out of 89 shots for 99 points.

                          AJ also has more assists in those fewer minutes. He also averages less turnovers per minute.

                          I seriously have no idea what anyone has seen in a game to make them believe Lance has 'earned' his time. I really could care less about practice, if you don't perform in games.
                          Lance has not been playing PG, Hill was the back up PG and then Price was when Hill went down. Price has been dominating the ball when he is in there.

                          You wouldn't compare PG's assist numbers to DC's

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

                            I would love to see AJ start at PG. Bring Collison off the bench. Even if you play Collison more minutes. I think AJ does way more for our half court game which is the bread and butter of our starting unit. I really wish we could see what AJ does with that first unit. He can hit the outside shot and would probably look to score a little less in the first unit. In the second unit, I hope Collison gets as many shots as possible. AJ is a much better defender as well, even if that isn't saying much.

                            I think we should utilize Price as a little bit bigger minute player. If that gives us the extra flexibility to make a trade to improve our back court we should. I really like Collison, but IMO we have like four backup PGs. AJ is probably not good enough to garner starter minutes. Collison's defense is consistently bad, so when he doesn't score 15+ points, it hurts us. But on the second unit, he is a perfect player to push the tempo and score against other second units. He is a perfect backup PG and would be the best backup in the league. Hill I would start if we didn't need him to play SG so bad. Hill I would start because he sets up the offense well and plays fantastic defense. But is his best fit being a starting PG, probably not. Stephenson has the handles and is big and strong and passes well, but he makes so many dumb mistakes, as a kid his age does normally. I also don't know that he would convert to PG defensively, even with his size.

                            I would trade any two of those guys for one guy who you know how to use with our rotation. I really love Hill's versatility, defense, and maturity, so he would be the one I would like to keep, but not at $7M per year. Price would be a good, cheap long term backup. What can we get for Collison and Stephenson, and maybe DJones, Hansborough, and/or a pick?
                            "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

                              Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                              Never bought that. Not for one minute. Didn't stop Demarcus Cousins. Rasheed Wallace, Ron Artest or any other crazy that's made his way to the NBA from being drafted high.
                              Cousins is a center that has HOF potential. Wallace and Artest are both DPOY players. We all know Lance is not that kind of player. A crazy SG is always going to fall lower than a crazy C. And Cousins was on one of the best teams in the country, while Lance was at Cinci. Bad comparison.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Another twist to the rotation/ Mike Wells

                                Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
                                5 minutes a night with 2 different lineups aren't really giving him the chance to impress
                                Stopped reading right there.

                                It's like he's a victim or something to you. You make it sound like it's so tragic that he isn't getting more of a chance. You sound like Asher99 for Tyler. There's a reason he's only playing as much as he is. There's a reason he's only getting the ball as much as he does. And it's not because Vogel is a hater, or the players are freezing him out.

                                It's because he can't handle more than he's being given. Honestly, I would say he isn't even handling what he's getting very well.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X