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 Injury Update

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

  • Re: Injury Update

    Originally posted by PD GameBattles 2k13 View Post
    get out of here with this bs
    A little sense of humor will help the medicine go down, mate.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • Re: Injury Update

      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
      A little sense of humor will help the medicine go down, mate.
      It would help if it was actually funny.

      Comment


      • Re: Granger Injury Update

        Time to hit the cellar for Zeller!!
        Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

        Comment


        • Re: Granger Injury Update

          https://twitter.com/MikeWellsNBA/sta...45610938699779

          The Pacers have already reached out to the agent of free agent swingman Mickael Pietrus as a possible replacement in the lineup
          Pietrus is a solid wind defender and 3pt shooter....but the guy has a low basketball IQ and poor shot selection.

          Are there other FA options?
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • Re: Granger Injury Update

            Guys, Paul isn't the one that has to step up his game. Hill and Roy are the 2 making the big bucks. Time to start playing like you are worth the $$
            Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

            Comment


            • Re: Granger Injury Update

              Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
              Time to hit the cellar for Zeller!!
              Yeah...I doubt that the Pacers do that.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • Re: Granger Injury Update

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                Um...didn't we draft a shooter?

                If you really need spacing, far more than you need to avoid other issues like rookie mistakes or awareness errors at either end, then it's time to let Orlando take some jumpers.
                He's definitely a shooter, but apparently not a maker.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • Re: Granger Injury Update

                  Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                  He's definitely a shooter, but apparently not a maker.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Granger Injury Update

                    Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                    Guys, Paul isn't the one that has to step up his game. Hill and Roy are the 2 making the big bucks. Time to start playing like you are worth the $$
                    It's a team sport. Better midrange and outside shooting opens up the floor and allows Hibbert and West some space to do their work.

                    Given that the whole offense is predicated around feeding the post, this poses a problem. The team hasn't adjusted to that yet. In the first game of the season, there was a lot of beautiful ball movement in the first quarter, especially by Hibbert and George... and then once the defense recognized that our outside shot was broke, they capitalized on this and took us completely out of our game plan.

                    Rewatch the games this season so far carefully, and you'll see teams defensively loading the box, forcing poor ball movement and lots of outside shooting early in the clock.

                    Looks like Beckley Mason agrees:

                    http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/pos...-danny-granger

                    Comment


                    • Re: Granger Injury Update

                      Mike Wells‏@MikeWellsNBA

                      The Pacers have already reached out to the agent of free agent swingman Mickael Pietrus as a possible replacement in the lineup
                      "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Granger Injury Update

                        As I've stated before, I view this team without Granger the same way I view this team before we got David West: Not a playoff team, and in for some rough times. West and Hibbert make a good scoring pair, but I think realistically for us to get good spacing and offensive flow we need all three on the court, and our replacement level players in green and Young are definitely not up to par, at least in my opinion. I think we're gonna see some rough ball, some stuff that might remind you of the he who shall not be named era of play. I don't think our offense will be good enough without Granger. For better or worse, we could always give him the ball and expect some type of shot to come out. Now, who can we give the ball to do create offense? With that in mind, I think we'll look for spacing (yes, the s word) to try to create.

                        In another sense, I'm also worried that without Granger, we might find some other flaws with our players. I think if we ask Hill, Hibbert, etc to take a lot of offensive load, we will find out what kind of players they are. Maybe we'll see the press to hard, maybe they'll lose their shot or their confidence. I say that especially to Hibbert, who has been inconsistent and if he plays poorly without Granger, I'm not sure if the negativity won't get to him. Hill I'm less worried about, since he went through the pressure cooker that is coach Pop, but sometimes I worry that if his shot goes he might not do well in other areas of the game. And then the offensive pressure on George is going to be pretty high, and we'll see what kind of load he can bear. In this sense some of this might be a blessing because we get to see what they can do.

                        In a sense, having these young guys playing without Granger is pretty nice when we know that now he isn't going to be back for 3 months. Now that we know, we have to play through it and see what we really have. I still think we can make the playoffs with this team, although I don't think we should, and at the very least we could use that confidence boost.

                        Random thought:

                        This is also probably the last year of the David West era, at least in my opinion. I appreciate what he's brought to our team and he's done a great job, but this is the last year of his contract, and going by the types of players that Pritchard has brought in, as well as his track record (Mahinmi, Augustin, Green) he seems to value athletes. West is on the decline in that perspective and I'm not quite sure we would want him back, especially since we'll have around 10 million in cap space this offseason (give or take, depending on draft position, hansborough QO, etc etc) to make a run for Josh Smith. I view Smith as someone that Pritchard will go after hard, because of his ability to defend multiple positions, someone who can switch off on guarding Lebron and Bosh. Pritchard is a smart GM, he sees that, and while I appreciate what West has brought to the team and would have loved to make a good run with him, I think we're definitely going to see the end of the West era, and this is a rough way to go, with Granger out. I bring this up because I wouldn't be surprised to see Pritchard try to make a move to get an asset back for West, maybe a pick or something, if we continue to slide.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Granger Injury Update

                          Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                          Time to hit the cellar for Zeller!!
                          Yeah. Pacers and Bulls both hit the lottery due to injury to their primary scorer. Guess which one would get the actual #1 pick. Go on. Guess.

                          I'll give you a hint.

                          N_t _ndia__.

                          Another hint?

                          _ulls
                          BillS

                          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                          Comment


                          • Re: Granger Injury Update

                            Originally posted by BillS View Post
                            Yeah. Pacers and Bulls both hit the lottery due to injury to their primary scorer. Guess which one would get the actual #1 pick. Go on. Guess.

                            I'll give you a hint.

                            N_t _ndia__.

                            Another hint?

                            _ulls
                            You are funny
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Injury Update

                              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                              Well, this just means that PG has to grow up much sooner than we thought. He may not want it...but he's going to have to be "The Man" now.

                              Frankly, I don't think that PG is ready nor willing to be "The Man".

                              Can someone give him the same stuff that West and GH takes before the start of each game so that he's more aggressive?

                              Honestly, if that's true that's sad.

                              Winners always want the ball. Always want to be the man. Always want to take charge, lead, win, etc. No matter their age or situation, etc.

                              If PG isn't willing to be the man he will never be... and will be the type of guy who just quits when the going gets tough (ala Vince Carter for example).

                              I hope you're wrong.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Granger Injury Update

                                George Hill is the player most capable of picking up a majority of the scoring load. He has a great mid-range game that he rarely takes advantage of, but if he decided to he could score 15-17ppg.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X