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

Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

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

  • #16
    Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

    Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
    Doc Rivers (Celtics): $7 million
    Mike D’Antoni (Knicks-resigned): $6 million

    Gregg Popovich (Spurs): $6 million

    Nate McMillan (Trail Blazers): $5.5 million
    Rick Adelman (Timberwolves): $5 million
    Flip Saunders (Wizards-fired): $4.8 million
    Rick Carlisle (Mavericks): $4.5 million
    Mike Brown (Lakers): $4.5 million
    Stan Van Gundy (Magic): $4.5 million
    Scott Skiles (Bucks): $4.5 million

    I know an up-and-coming coaching star when I see one and Vogel is one. Since Popp and Carlisle are likely never coming here, I'd take Vogel over every one of those guys and take my chances. Indy got lucky on this one.

    I look at Vogel as a future Olympic coach.

    Do you mean as the head coach? Or as an assistant?

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
      Do you mean as the head coach? Or as an assistant?
      Either one? At least an assistant, maybe head coach down the road.
      There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

        Hmm. It's the team's (and Granger's) job to believe they're the best team in the NBA.

        It's our job as fans to interject some reality.

        From that perspective, I'm disappointed that Granger's not making the case for why they aren't the best team in the East.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

          I disagree. The truly great coaches take a lousy roster and get them to 0.500. (Then they get replaced and somebody else gets the credit. Think: Hubie Brown, Kevin Loughery (for the old guys), Fratello, Larry Brown, etc.)

          The truly great coaches take an average roster and get them to 50+ wins. (Then they get replaced and somebody else gets the credit. Think: Larry Brown, Don Nelson, Rick Carlisle, George Karl, etc.)

          I don't see Doc in that type of category. He's gets out of his team what is expected.

          I think you guys are really overselling Vogel. Let's see what he does in his second full season. This has been the nemesis for many coaches in the past. Even in the Pacers history, it wasn't clear after one season just how bad Zeke and Versace were going to turn out to be, as they took average teams and led them to 0.500 records. (It was later that we discovered they had already used all their coaching "tricks" and there was nothing more in reserve.)

          Its too early to make the call, and while I think he's been a great leader I'm still not 100% sold on his coaching during the 48 minutes that comprise a basketball game. Time will tell.
          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
          And life itself, rushing over me
          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

            Originally posted by docpaul View Post
            Hmm. It's the team's (and Granger's) job to believe they're the best team in the NBA.

            It's our job as fans to interject some reality.

            From that perspective, I'm disappointed that Granger's not making the case for why they aren't the best team in the East.
            To be clear the original quote said he thinks they are a top 2 team in the East. So that gives it a different meaning than 2nd best. Its saying we are one of the top 2 teams.
            You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

              Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
              I think you guys are really overselling Vogel. Let's see what he does in his second full season. This has been the nemesis for many coaches in the past. Even in the Pacers history, it wasn't clear after one season just how bad Zeke and Versace were going to turn out to be, as they took average teams and led them to 0.500 records. (It was later that we discovered they had already used all their coaching "tricks" and there was nothing more in reserve.)

              Its too early to make the call, and while I think he's been a great leader I'm still not 100% sold on his coaching during the 48 minutes that comprise a basketball game. Time will tell.
              See, I'm the opposite, I've see enough from a guy who by all means is still "green" to know that he has the traits to be an exceedingly great coach --- he's confident, he's a fantastic communicator, the players respect him, he's a fantastic motivator, he promotes chemistry, and he's proven that while his coaching tactics might still be raw, he learns from his mistakes and makes adjustments. He's smart enough to know to surround himself with great assistants and he works well with them. He's willing to change his plan to fit the players. The only reason his X's and O's are less than perfect is because he has barely two years of actual head coaching experience and was only an assistant before that, and he's still very very young. I'd say for a first-time 30-something coach, he has tremendous innate coaching ability that will only become stronger with more experience.

              I'm not saying he's a top 3 coach right now --- I'm saying he's top 10 and give him 5 years and he will be a top 3 or top 2 coach. Indy needs to hold on to this guy.
              Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 08-07-2012, 01:41 PM.
              There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

                As for the original post, I can see it happening. We may not have the star power of the others, but we have a very solid roster one through ten. The way the team is built, which is on length, size, strength, rebounding, defense... you can expect regular-season near-domination, and then that style also translates well in the playoffs. Their one flaw is a lack of a go-to scorer against tough playoff defenses. I still think that will be their achilles heel this year, but we'll see.

                I agree though that everyone except Miami (and really even Miami) should not want to play Indy this year. There is no team in the East that is clearly better than Indy except Miami.
                Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 08-07-2012, 01:42 PM.
                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

                  Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                  I disagree. The truly great coaches take a lousy roster and get them to 0.500. (Then they get replaced and somebody else gets the credit. Think: Hubie Brown, Kevin Loughery (for the old guys), Fratello, Larry Brown, etc.)

                  The truly great coaches take an average roster and get them to 50+ wins. (Then they get replaced and somebody else gets the credit. Think: Larry Brown, Don Nelson, Rick Carlisle, George Karl, etc.)

                  I don't see Doc in that type of category. He's gets out of his team what is expected.

                  I think you guys are really overselling Vogel. Let's see what he does in his second full season. This has been the nemesis for many coaches in the past. Even in the Pacers history, it wasn't clear after one season just how bad Zeke and Versace were going to turn out to be, as they took average teams and led them to 0.500 records. (It was later that we discovered they had already used all their coaching "tricks" and there was nothing more in reserve.)

                  Its too early to make the call, and while I think he's been a great leader I'm still not 100% sold on his coaching during the 48 minutes that comprise a basketball game. Time will tell.
                  I agree on Vogel. This season will be his first real test if you ask me, because this will be his first season to really put his stamp on the offense and defense. I think he can be a damn fine coach, but let's give it some time first.
                  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


                  • #24
                    Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

                    Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                    I disagree. The truly great coaches take a lousy roster and get them to 0.500. (Then they get replaced and somebody else gets the credit. Think: Hubie Brown, Kevin Loughery (for the old guys), Fratello, Larry Brown, etc.)

                    The truly great coaches take an average roster and get them to 50+ wins. (Then they get replaced and somebody else gets the credit. Think: Larry Brown, Don Nelson, Rick Carlisle, George Karl, etc.)
                    Your criteria for a great coach describes to a "T" what the young guy coaching the Pacers achieved in less than two full seasons (our win total projected over a total season would have exceeded 50 last year). He did that without having a full first season, being handed JOB's train-wreck, and having never head-coached before.

                    I think you all will realize what we have in a few years. I understand that he hasn't achieved it yet, but you'll see. It'll happen. Vogel will be the reason we start to attract big free agents in the next few years.
                    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

                      Why does everybody think the Nets are going to be so good? Yeah, I know they got a little better, but they basically just added Joe Johnson. I think they'll make the playoffs for sure, but not going to a top 4 team in the East. I'm still not completely sold on the Celtics either, they've gotta slow down sometime with their best guys being so old.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

                        I fully agree with the Nets.. But I think the Celtics could be the best team in the East.. If KG gives them another solid post season performance, I could easily see the Celtics making the Finals. But, that's the kind of If you are talking about of course.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

                          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                          I disagree. The truly great coaches take a lousy roster and get them to 0.500. (Then they get replaced and somebody else gets the credit. Think: Hubie Brown, Kevin Loughery (for the old guys), Fratello, Larry Brown, etc.)

                          The truly great coaches take an average roster and get them to 50+ wins. (Then they get replaced and somebody else gets the credit. Think: Larry Brown, Don Nelson, Rick Carlisle, George Karl, etc.)

                          I don't see Doc in that type of category. He's gets out of his team what is expected.

                          I think you guys are really overselling Vogel. Let's see what he does in his second full season. This has been the nemesis for many coaches in the past. Even in the Pacers history, it wasn't clear after one season just how bad Zeke and Versace were going to turn out to be, as they took average teams and led them to 0.500 records. (It was later that we discovered they had already used all their coaching "tricks" and there was nothing more in reserve.)

                          Its too early to make the call, and while I think he's been a great leader I'm still not 100% sold on his coaching during the 48 minutes that comprise a basketball game. Time will tell.
                          You don't remember his Coach of the Year coaching job with Orlando (prior to TMac) do you? This was the one where he got a bad team to .500 and just missed the playoffs by half a game.

                          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando...y_Hardaway_era
                          In 1999, the Magic, under General Manager John Gabriel, who was later named Executive of the Year, hired rookie-coach Doc Rivers. Gabriel dismantled the previous team trading their only remaining superstar Anfernee Hardaway to the Phoenix Suns for Danny Manning (who never donned a Magic uniform), Pat Garrity, and two future draft picks. The Magic were then a team composed of virtually all no name players and little experience which included team captain Armstrong, Bo Outlaw and a young Ben Wallace, along with Coach Rivers led the Magic to a 41–41 record, barely missing out on the playoffs. At the end of the season Rivers was named Coach of the Year. That year was characterized by the slogan "Heart and Hustle", as the team was known for its hard-working style.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

                            Originally posted by PGisthefuture View Post
                            Why does everybody think the Nets are going to be so good? Yeah, I know they got a little better, but they basically just added Joe Johnson. I think they'll make the playoffs for sure, but not going to a top 4 team in the East. I'm still not completely sold on the Celtics either, they've gotta slow down sometime with their best guys being so old.
                            Same thing I've been wondering. They finished 12th in the East last year. Joe Johnson is a very good player, but I don't think he's going to take the Nets from 12th place to 2nd in one year....

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

                              Naptown, I thought he was great that season in Orlando. I like Doc, liked Doc as a player, but I haven't seen a lot of progress from him beyond that first season in Orlando. Reminds me of my favorite player of all time. You know, Rookie of the Year in 86-87. Great shooter, could score from anywhere inside of a four-block area bordered by Meridian Street, Maryland Street, New York Street and College Ave. CLUTCH. Even rebounded as a rookie. And he probably also plateaued as a rookie. Just like Doc as a coach.

                              I think Doc is as smart as any coach out there. Enjoy his press conferences. But I don't think he gets results above and beyond what his roster would give any coach. Secretly wish he was still broadcasting.
                              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                              And life itself, rushing over me
                              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Granger: Pacers 2nd best in East

                                Originally posted by Mr.ThunderMakeR View Post
                                Same thing I've been wondering. They finished 12th in the East last year. Joe Johnson is a very good player, but I don't think he's going to take the Nets from 12th place to 2nd in one year....
                                I agree that he won't take them from 12th to 2nd, and I honestly feel that D.Will is somewhat overratted. But I think they'll see a good raise in the standings because of more than just Joe Johnson. Brook Lopez was out for a lot of the past 2 years. A front line of Brook, Humpries, and Wallace is pretty good; as they fit rather well together (with Wallace being the defender/slasher, Humphries the rebounder/banger, and Lopez the post presence offensively)

                                Also Brooks now becomes their 6th man/scorer off the bench. This probably benefits him as all he needs to worry about is scoring. They also added CJ Watson, who is a pretty good backup PG and is strong defensively. They don't have much else, if anything else at all, but they are a decently balanced team. Probably the most balanced team D.Will has played on.

                                I see them being in the 4,5,6 range depending on injuries and how quickly they can mesh together.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X