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

NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

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

  • #31
    Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

    Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
    West can score in more ways, but I don't really think he is a better overall scorer. Roy doesn't take the long jumper much at all, but he can hit 15 footers with consistency. He does do most of his work in the post and on the offensive glass.

    Roy has consistently been scoring for us in the post and our offense runs great through him since he is an excellent passer. Why should he take less shots when he is shooting the best % of anyone on the team?

    Taking the ball out of Roy's hands so West can take a shot or two more a game is a terrible idea.
    If you have more ways to score I would say that automatically makes you a better scorer. Also its not as much taking the shots away from Roy as its taking them away from Danny. But as far as Roy goes he's shooting 58.8% from the field against the 6 worst teams in each league over 18 games and just 44.0% against the upper 60% of the league in 14 games. He's still a work in progress when it comes to the prime time lights and come May I want the ball in West's hands as much as I can get it.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
      Good thing he is not talking about West's D.
      It helps when your backup is even worse at it than you are.


      Comment


      • #33
        Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

        Originally posted by TheDavisBrothers View Post
        Again when like half your posts involve him, I think that says something...
        It says that he has a player crush on him. That's not the same thing with having an agenda.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

          Originally posted by TheDavisBrothers View Post
          I didn't know that every post you make is automatically a BIG DEAL... That's just asinine... Again when like half your posts involve him, I think that says something...
          When you call someone out about something they post when nobody else is talking about it, then its undoubtedly making it a big deal. And the fact you keep going on and on about it is only making it even clear how much you're making it a big deal when nobody seems to care in the slightest.

          Yes My post total about Tyler does say something, It says he's my favorite player on the team! A fact that I've made very clear in one of my first post here and something I've never hid in the couple months here. Seriously do really think you've unearthed some big unknown secret here or something?

          You are literally hijacking the thread over an additional comment about Tyler that has nothing to do with him getting more shots or anything that would benefit him. Then you're going on and on about this agenda in a thread that where I'm looking for the guy Tyler backs up to get a bigger chunk of the offense which could cost him time!

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

            Originally posted by Asher99 View Post
            When you call someone out about something they post when nobody else is talking about it, then its undoubtedly making it a big deal. And the fact you keep going on and on about it is only making it even clear how much you're making it a big deal when nobody seems to care in the slightest.

            Yes My post total about Tyler does say something, It says he's my favorite player on the team! A fact that I've made very clear in one of my first post here and something I've never hid in the couple months here. Seriously do really think you've unearthed some big unknown secret here or something?

            You are literally hijacking the thread over an additional comment about Tyler that has nothing to do with him getting more shots or anything that would benefit him. Then you're going on and on about this agenda in a thread that where I'm looking for the guy Tyler backs up to get a bigger chunk of the offense which could cost him time!
            I've written like a paragraph on the subject in total and you've written like an essay, and I'm the one hijacking the thread! I think you're love for Hans has blinded your reality... I actually find your obsession humorous, I'm not complaining, like you are. If it really bothers you so much then don't comment, simple as that. The only person that's bothered here is you...
            Did you know Antonio and Dale aren’t actually brothers?

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

              Does anyone else think that barring injury that David West will be even better next season?

              A summer to get in better shape, more time with the team, doesn't have to get in shape during training camp, no rehabilitation on his ACL...

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

                Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                Does anyone else think that barring injury that David West will be even better next season?

                A summer to get in better shape, more time with the team, doesn't have to get in shape during training camp, no rehabilitation on his ACL...
                West will no doubt come back better next year! He got off to a slow start with his shot this year after basically getting back into game shape during live action. He's also a little off when forced to play on back-to-back nights, That shouldn't be a issue next year coming in stronger and then not having to deal with this years grueling condensed schedule.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

                  Originally posted by docpaul View Post
                  BTW, here is the data the article alludes to:

                  http://basketballvalue.com/teamunits...-2012&team=IND

                  These are actually fairly startling data, which expose our relative lack of depth.

                  It's also interesting to see how playing Hill at the 2 seems perhaps more effective than George... however there's a small sample size there, and George's game has really come on here lately.
                  I had a plus minus thread earlier in the season which I haven't updated. The lineup with George Hill at the 2 was played mostly early in the season (because Hill has been injured until recently) and has since been overtaken by other lineups in total minutes. But with Hill healthy again we could see more of that lineup.

                  I think the only conclusion to draw from plus-minus right now is that we have a very good starting lineup, dominating even, but we've been struggling with an inconsistent bench. All of which are probably evident even without looking at plus-minus

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

                    He's a great fit. And he's 11 months away from an 18 month injury -- if a full recovery happens at all. Plus, David is moving better now that he was at the start of the season.

                    Love watching him play. Smart and never panics. Always moves to the right spot.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

                      I think you can make a very strong case that West is our most valuable player. He is what I like to call the guy that makes everything work. He more than any other player brings the team together, he makes the pieces fit together, it is our glue guy. And it has been quite awhile since we've had a glue guy. The only real way to understand and see his value to our team is to take him away from the court, locker room, the planes, practice, walk throughs, meetings, huddles, bench if he wasn't on our team we would not be nearly as good.

                      Even though I alluded to it in the paragraph above, let me just say point blank he is our team leader. he has sacrificed his game for the good of the team, and he's made his teammates better and he is a huge reason why we have the 5th best record in the NBA right now.

                      You'll notice I have not and will not mention any stats in this post. His value cannot be captured by stats.

                      I mentioned this after seeing him play a game or two in a Pacers uniform. Wow he really knows how to play. He is a fully formed NBA player. He's not a young guy who is trying to learn how to play, he already knows how to play. A player like that gives the rest of the team a lot of confidence.

                      (sure I wish he was a better defender, I wish he had the athleticism of a young KG)
                      Last edited by Unclebuck; 03-01-2012, 09:35 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        Good thing he is not talking about West's D.

                        I cannot believe I am going to post this, but there is more to the NBA than defense. No, no one has hacked into my account. West does everything else so well for the Pacers I can live with his defense the way it is.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

                          Originally posted by jeffg-body View Post
                          Numbers and stats aren't everything and DW makes such an impact on the floor and has unselfishly passed up shots that he would have taken to make that extra pass to get us in a better shot. I have been pleasently surprised with the leadership that DW has integrated in this team. He has been a team player through thick and thin.
                          That, but really from what I've seen of him on the floor (how he talks to Roy) and what Hibbert himself has said about their relationship, it almost sounds to me like we can thank David West for getting Roy to this all-star level; I think it's been huge for him. A great offensive fit on the floor, and a great mentor / 'big brother' in terms of teaching him, encouraging him, that kind of thing.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

                            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                            I cannot believe I am going to post this, but there is more to the NBA than defense. No, no one has hacked into my account. West does everything else so well for the Pacers I can live with his defense the way it is.
                            This sounds great and all but if he keeps playing the same type of defense he has been playing until now we won't be moving pass the 1st round, his D is horrible, his offense is not that great either.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

                              The Pacers aren't going to make it out of the first round, because of how badly DWest is on defense?

                              Here, waste your time with this instead. Pee away.

                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: NYT: Stats Fail to Show West’s Impact on Pacers

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                This sounds great and all but if he keeps playing the same type of defense he has been playing until now we won't be moving pass the 1st round, his D is horrible, his offense is not that great either.
                                DW is worth every penny we payed him, and I'll tell you why (don't kill me for this until you take the time to understand what I'm saying): From a mentorship standpoint, David West has been like the David Robinson to Roy Hibbert's Tim Duncan; that is something that is invaluable to a guy like Roy.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X