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

Indiana-Toronto Postgame

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

  • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

    Originally posted by PurduePacer View Post
    While ideally he would play D better, I can live with it. Who else would've scored 14 in the 4th? On the other hand, a lot of guys can step up their D.

    Basically: West is about the only guy who can take over on offense while we have several good defenders.
    I'm not saying you're wrong. It's just a personal belief.

    I believe defense can overcome offense. I mean by a little bit. What I'm saying is because the Pacers don't have LBJ, Durant, Dirk etc, they can't possibly EVER have an elite offense. However, with the right personal, they can have an ELITE defense, to go along with a pretty good offense. Basically, if they have an elite defense theoretically they could beat the best. I want to see that. As long as West is at the 4 that will never happen. (unless Thibbs was here, he could cover up West. I mean **** he can cover up Boozer)

    Comment


    • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

      Originally posted by mattie View Post
      I'd rather have all defense and rebounding and make up for the offense else where honestly.
      \

      Its all opinion but I don't agree with that at all. Take away your best offensive player... (And by best, I mean he and Hill have been the only two good offensive players in the fourth quarter since they arrived, and they were brought here because we previously didn't have anyone that could play offense in the fourth quarter.) Replace him with a defensive/ rebounding banger... we'd have been outscored in the 4Q tonight 15-12 instead of winning the fourth quarter 27-17 in that scenario.

      But I'm more concerned with team defense and team rebounding. Unless we actually know the game plans, our speculation of who's playing good team defense or filling their rebounding roles is just speculation anyway. So i don't concern myself much with an evaluation of individual defense or rebounding stats.
      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


      • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

        Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
        \

        Its all opinion but I don't agree with that at all. Take away your best offensive player... (And by best, I mean he and Hill have been the only two good offensive players in the fourth quarter since they arrived, and they were brought here because we previously didn't have anyone that could play offense in the fourth quarter.) Replace him with a defensive/ rebounding banger... we'd have been outscored in the 4Q tonight 15-12 instead of winning the fourth quarter 27-17 in that scenario.

        But I'm more concerned with team defense and team rebounding. Unless we actually know the game plans, our speculation of who's playing good team defense or filling their rebounding roles is just speculation anyway. So i don't concern myself much with an evaluation of individual defense or rebounding stats.
        Danny has actually been the best 4th quarter scorer. Easily.

        A lot of the "West kicks *** in the 4th he's clutch" comes from some real nice shots he made early on when he got here. Since then the narrative won't die.

        It's not necessarily bad either. West is a good scorer and a good option, whether it is the 1st or 4th quarter. Doesn't matter. But no Danny has consistently scored the most in the 4th for the Pacers. You can look it up on 82games.com

        Edit - of course we dont know what would happen in any hypothetical situation, but the reasoning can be used to argue any point. I.e., maybe the Pacers wouldn't have outscored in the 4th their opponent, but then again, maybe they wouldn't have been down in the first place.

        I'll try to find the numbers showing that defense has actually been slightly more important than offense. Zach Lowe I think just wrote about it, but i can't find the numbers.
        Last edited by mattie; 11-01-2012, 12:23 AM.

        Comment


        • I was very impressed overall with how well the starters played as a unit - lots of quick, smart, extra passes, guys knowing where to find an open or cutting teammate. The second unit ground the game to a halt at times offensively, but thats to be expected for a couple games. I'd like to see a shorter leash for some of those guys, but it seems as if Frank is gonna stick with his egg timer and baptize these guys by fire (which I can live with). For as impressive as Paul George looked, I am concerned that he was largely MIA in the last 3 quarters offensively. He was all over the glass, and I thought he made nice passes despite the turnovers. If he can become more consistent we're in serious business. Same can be said for Hibbert as well. I'd like to see him be a little more assertive down the stretch. Roy is a very emotional player, and when things are going well for him he feeds off it. I wonder if some of his prolonged time on the bench disrupted that tonight.


          Toronto is gonna be a fun team to watch when they're hot. Also, props to the Toronto fans - that sounded like a playoff atmosphere tonight.

          Comment


          • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

            See? Green can easily replace Granger.
            Originally posted by Piston Prince
            Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
            "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

            Comment


            • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

              Originally posted by mattie View Post
              Rewatching the game.

              First note: Ian Mihinmi should be the first big off the bench. No matter what the situation.

              And you can't say it isn't possible because the rotation is identical to the 90's Pacers. We have a center who can't play a lot of minutes and West/Davis played similar minutes. AD came in no matter who had to come out. Ian should too.
              Yeah, I agree with this. When West got that 2nd early foul.....Hans was the 1st Big to come in....and he was in for a long period of time after that. I don't see why Mahinmi can't be that 1st Big Man to sub in for whoever. I have always assumed that one of the reasons why Hans is the 1st PF to come in is because of his scoring....but I'd rather see more of Mahinmi / Hibbert in the frontcourt if West sits...or vice versa.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                Originally posted by yoadknux View Post
                See? Green can easily replace Granger.
                Freezing up in the first (few) game(s) of the season? Yeh, sounds about right. Just wait until Green gets acclimated.
                witters: @imbtyler, @postgameonline

                Originally posted by Day-V
                In conclusion, Paul George is awesome.
                Originally posted by Slick Pinkham
                Our arena, their arena, Rucker park, it just doesn't matter. We're bigger, longer, younger, faster, and hungrier.


                Comment


                • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                  We won, so I will accept this as it is our first game, but PG and Big Roy need to be scoring more in the second half. They could have gone for close to 30 last night. Given that PG was a monster on the boards. Maybe if he played SF all the time he could average a double double every night.
                  Hopefully our bench gets better too.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                    Good comeback win and strong showings from West and Hill in the 2nd- and Paul and Roy in the 1st half. The bench unit was dismal, but they'll get there once they feel comfortable playing with each other. Quick question from someone who didn't watch the preseason or any Dallas games - is Mahinmi generally as bad a ballhandler? I thought he fumbled every pass which totally interrupted the offensive flow. But he played hard and is definitely a physical force out there, so I remain optimistic.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                      Originally posted by mattie View Post
                      Vogel does a lot of things well, but also makes some huge mistakes with rotations. He needs to figure this out or he'll stunt the growth of the team.
                      Can you expand on this?
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                        Originally posted by mattie View Post
                        I like West. Awesome dude. But no matter how well he does on the offensive side of the court, he doesn't rebound or defend. That's extremely frustrating especially from a Big. I'd rather have all defense and rebounding and make up for the offense else where honestly.
                        I hear ya. But I don't think that necessarily works. And I think having one great scorer who is also a liability is a common prescription for champions. You've got to have that one scoring go-to guy, especially on the lower block. For power forwards, think McHale, Aguire, and Barkley.

                        We have some super good defenders to close the gap on West's liabilities. It can work. West's artistry last night was absolutely fantastic.
                        Last edited by McKeyFan; 11-01-2012, 06:54 AM.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                          Originally posted by Eddie Gill View Post
                          I was very impressed overall with how well the starters played as a unit - lots of quick, smart, extra passes, guys knowing where to find an open or cutting teammate. The second unit ground the game to a halt at times offensively, but thats to be expected for a couple games. I'd like to see a shorter leash for some of those guys, but it seems as if Frank is gonna stick with his egg timer and baptize these guys by fire (which I can live with). For as impressive as Paul George looked, I am concerned that he was largely MIA in the last 3 quarters offensively. He was all over the glass, and I thought he made nice passes despite the turnovers. If he can become more consistent we're in serious business. Same can be said for Hibbert as well. I'd like to see him be a little more assertive down the stretch. Roy is a very emotional player, and when things are going well for him he feeds off it. I wonder if some of his prolonged time on the bench disrupted that tonight.
                          Agreed. I made the same observation in the Odd Thoughts thread.
                          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                          Comment


                          • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                            Originally posted by Eddie Gill View Post
                            I was very impressed overall with how well the starters played as a unit - lots of quick, smart, extra passes, guys knowing where to find an open or cutting teammate.
                            Man, this is a great point. Excellent awareness from the starting unit, 80% of which was like a well-oiled machine in terms of passing. It'll take Green a while to fit into that group, but if he does we'll be in excellent shape.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                              Originally posted by funnyguy1105 View Post
                              18 TO's?
                              You can't lay all the blame on the coach for those turnovers. Most of them were unforced and should be blamed on laziness by the players. I thought we ran some nice sets and shared the ball well last night.


                              As for the players, I thought everybody made positive contributions during the game. I wouldn't say anybody played terrible. It was sloppy, but you can partially blame the refs for that. They swallowed their whistle on at least a dozen obvious foul calls causing several of our turnovers.

                              few thoughts:

                              Green played great D throughout the game. He played under control and didn't force anything. I thought he took good shots, he just missed some he'll usually make. We missed him on at least two alley oops which would of made his line look better. At least 3 of his 6 turnovers can partially be blamed on Hill. Twice for nonchalantly coming to the ball and letting his man cut off the pass and another for throwing a bullet pass when Green was expecting an alley. Then you can blame another one on the ref for tripping him. Some of it's on him, and he's got to be stronger with the ball, but I was happy with the way he played. Definitely wasn't as bad as some are making it sound.

                              Stephenson and Young both gave us good minutes off the bench. Lance got beat a couple times on defense, but his length caused a couple turnovers and stops. I thought he played a good game for the most part. Young was solid on both ends as I expected. We're going to need these guys to play like that consistently while Danny's out.

                              Mahinmi was solid defensively. He didn't get any favors from the refs tonight. I counted at least 3 times he was fouled and it went uncalled. Once on his only shot (beautiful play by Lance btw), and at least two more slaps on the arms and wrists that led to turnovers. The Raptors were getting away with murder last night. That Lowry call that went against him in the 4th was terrible, too. Overall a frustrating but solid game for Ian.

                              Overall, I was happy with everyone's game. No one was perfect, but everyone contributed and played hard. Honestly, I wasn't expecting a win last night. It's not easy beating any team on their floor during opening night. Their crowd was crazy, and I don't think anyone will disagree that Toronto's an improved team. That big mans a beast. Any player, let alone a rookie, tough enough to go at D. West earns my respect. He's going to be a good one.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Indiana-Toronto Postgame

                                Originally posted by Noodle View Post
                                Rotation on defense. He was burned with poor rotation several times. The guy has skills, but zero basketball IQ.
                                I don't agree with this.

                                Lance has good instincts on defense. His spacing between his man, the ball, and the basket, is usually excellent. He may need to learn some defensive schemes a bit better, but that's not a knock on his innate BBall IQ.

                                I also think he sees the game on the other side of the floor with excellence. What seems to be going on, to me, is that he is harnessing his desire (and ability) to go turbo crazy with scoring, penetrating, and distributing (aka Iverson) and that has him a bit stilted right now. If he ever locks in, it could get real interesting.
                                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X