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

Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

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

  • #61
    Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

    Technically that is how it is, but in practice they tend to conform to positions except in cases wherein there aren't alternatives Joe Johnson is a, what 6 time all-star (not that he didn't deserve it some years, but in years where he was putting up 21 ppg on less than 53-54 TS% in more than 39 minutes per game, which covers basically the last 4 times he made the team you can bet he got a boost from the 2 guard position being weak behind Wade instead of the 3, or the 1). Jameer Nelson made the All-star game one year largely due to his position and team etc... It still matters, it's just they won't stick to it so closely that it means snubbing someone who is clearly superior. In the case of 2 comparable players though having less competition at the position can make a difference.

    Paul George putting up 14-16 ppg 6-7 rpg 2-3 apg with 2 or so steals per game while maintaining his reputation as a defensive stud on a strong team will certainly benefit from playing the 2 guard, instead of the 3, for example and would have a very compelling case for the All-Star game when it comes down to the coaches vote. Ditto to Roy Hibbert and Danny Granger.

    I also don't get the assertion that Roy didn't deserve his spot last year over Chandler, remember at the time of the All-Star game Roy Hibbert was averaging

    13.8 ppg
    9.6 rpg
    1.7 bpg

    .512 from the field in 30.8 mpg (16.4 ppg 11.44 rpg 1.98 bpg per 36 minutes) on one of the conferences top teams.

    Whereas at the same point Chandler was averaging

    11.7 ppg
    9.5 rpg
    1.3 bpg

    on .703 from the field in 33.5 mpg ( 12.5 ppg 10.2 rpg 1.4 bpg per 36 minutes) on a team that was massively underperforming and was out of the playoff picture)

    Hibbert was more productive in less minutes on a better team scoring more, blocking more and rebounding more even in terms of raw numbers in 3 less minutes per game. I don't see the how Roy didn't earn it over Chandler on his own merits, it wasn't a pity vote, or just a team accomplishment vote, he had a very strong case based on his merits. Chandler is the better defensive player, but Roy is a good defender too, and Roy is infinitely more valuable offensively, since you can actually run an offense through him, as opposed to Chandler who has no post game other than put backs or dunks gift wrapped from pick and roll action.
    Last edited by daschysta; 10-08-2012, 05:20 PM.
    Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

      Joe Johnson is a good player and was a top 5 guard in the conference for many years.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

        Curveball - Gerald Green makes the AS team instead.

        Mind blown.

        How? Good numbers paired with highlight dunks to get attention. The good enough numbers seem very unlikely of course, but since we are wildly speculating about the quality of every Eastern player next season before games are even being played...

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          Curveball - Gerald Green makes the AS team instead.

          Mind blown.

          How? Good numbers paired with highlight dunks to get attention. The good enough numbers seem very unlikely of course, but since we are wildly speculating about the quality of every Eastern player next season before games are even being played...
          Danny's knee's worse than we think, misses the first half of the year. PG slides to the 3, Green plays 34 minutes a night at the 2...

          Pacers Digest servers crash under the weight of DANNY'S HOLDING US BACK threads...

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

            Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
            Danny's knee's worse than we think, misses the first half of the year. PG slides to the 3, Green plays 34 minutes a night at the 2...

            Pacers Digest servers crash under the weight of DANNY'S HOLDING US BACK threads...
            I think that I would have a conniption fit. Not because of GG, that would be awesome, but because of anti-danny threads.

            To be fair it would be amazing for the team if GG really broke out and we could trade Danny+ other parts for a star point all while saving tons of cash on GG's steal of a contract, but the idea that Danny is somehow holding us back is both asinine and pervasive in this forum. Danny has his limits, but he and PG can absolutely play together. It isn't a coincidence that our starting 5 was so statistically dominant, and that Danny was by far our best player in terms of on/off. Even when he wasn't playing well in the Miami series people should be able to get the point when looking at how badly we got creamed when Danny left game 5 with his injury...

            I think GG could open some eyes for sure though, kid has serious skills and was seen as a guy with star talent at one point, when he's on he can be so deadly.

            Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

              Also, for those only interested in numbers, 82games.com provides some numbers comparing the two players in question.

              http://www.82games.com/1112/11PHI7.HTM
              http://www.82games.com/1112/11CHI9.HTM

              If you scroll down, Iggy held opponents to an effective FG% of .404. Deng held opponents to an effective FG% of .456.

              Everything else should have been in the form of a p.m., thank you
              Last edited by mattie; 10-09-2012, 12:59 AM.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                Really?

                http://mySynergySports.com...

                edit: come on now mods... if you're gonna tamper with my posts you can at least give me a reason why

                FWIW mattie, i never called you a "jackass". That was your word describing NBA coaches. I just simply asked a question and left it up to the readers to decide.
                Last edited by CJ Jones; 10-09-2012, 01:48 PM.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                  Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                  I think Deng deserved to be on the All Defense team, but Iguodala should've gotten Kobe or Ibaka's spot IMO.

                  re Deng-Ibaka, I'd probably take Deng on Melo, Kobe or Paul Pierce, someone big, great individually and with a solid post up game. But if I have to defend a smaller guy, and especially a playmaker (Wade, Harden, Rose) it's Iggy.
                  But tbh, you are fine just tossing a coin defensively, their offense is the difference. Do you want someone who will stretch the floor, or a far better creator.
                  Yeah I think they both deserved it, there just wasn't enough room for both. The only reason I take Iggy over Deng is his ability to turn you over. You can't go wrong with either one though.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                    82games assume that if you play at SF, your counterpart is the opposing SF, which isn't really true in case of stoppers who defend multiple positions. Deng did it, but especially Iggy did it, he defended the best 1-2-3.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                      Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                      Yeah I think they both deserved it, there just wasn't enough room for both. The only reason I take Iggy over Deng is his ability to turn you over. You can't go wrong with either one though.
                      well, i looked at the votes yesterday when you guys started discussing it, and Kobe had several votes less than Iggy - but Iggy didn't get the spot because he's a "forward". Although in real life, he's as much a SG as he is a forward, and he'll play mostly SG this year.
                      It's a shame that the voting system lacks flexibility so much. They should've given the SG spot to Iggy, and SF to Deng.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                        Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                        82games assume that if you play at SF, your counterpart is the opposing SF, which isn't really true in case of stoppers who defend multiple positions. Deng did it, but especially Iggy did it, he defended the best 1-2-3.
                        I tend to agree with this, although fans of the site and I'm pretty sure the site itself claim they watch every play, but I have my doubts. Synergy's my stat website of choice.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                          Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                          I tend to agree with this, although fans of the site and I'm pretty sure the site itself claim they watch every play, but I have my doubts. Synergy's my stat website of choice.
                          i don't know about fans, but the site is very open about it, it's written on the site somewhere.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                            http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/sam-y...-prove-himself
                            Vogel doesn't believe Young to be the team's best small forward defender. Paul George, who is longer, quicker and younger, gets that nod. Danny Granger will get opportunities as well
                            Looks like we can put to rest the idea Paul's not strong enough to guard SFs in the league. As well as Danny's stats say he played last year the coach still recognizes Paul's our best option.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                              Vogel doesn't believe Young to be the team's best small forward defender. Paul George, who is longer, quicker and younger, gets that nod. Danny Granger will get opportunities as well
                              Sam Young is by far the young-est player on this roster.

                              I think I'd still put Granger on LeBron or Paul Pierce types, strong/skilled guys who like to post up. But it depends on what George has done over the summer.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                                Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                                Sam Young is by far the young-est player on this roster.

                                I think I'd still put Granger on LeBron or Paul Pierce types, strong/skilled guys who like to post up. But it depends on what George has done over the summer.
                                Sam's 27

                                I agree about Danny's post D, but post play is nearly non existent these days for wing players. In nearly 80 games both Paul and Danny were posted up less then 1 time per game, and if you go back and watch them half of those are basically just post isos where the guy receives the ball in the mid post area then faces up to make his move. There were very few legit post plays where the offensive player overpowered Danny or Paul. Being able to defend in space and having the speed and quickness to play help D and still get back to your man (Danny's main weakness) is much more important for a wing then post D IMO.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X