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

Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

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

  • #46
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

    Originally posted by D-BONE View Post

    I want the coaching staff to tell him they want him to be a defensive stopper, and I mean a true stopper: able to play off the ball as well as on and the passing lane. Guy could be a defensive force, DPOY type. That's where his impact identity lies, so tell him to focus on that.
    Sounds like McKey 2.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

      Originally posted by beast23 View Post
      I've said all along that this is George's crap or get off the pot year. I think the Pacers have easily determined which post they need to hitch to. Granger is the SF, period. From my perspective at least, that question has already been decided. For me, it is now a question of who shall you keep. Do you re-sign West and know that you have your PF slot manned for another 3 years or so with an excellent player? Or, do replace West and the following year spend the bucks to keep George and continue to hope that you might have your SG slot covered? I suppose that it is entirely possible that the Pacers re-sign West and continue to wait on George, knowing they may have to trade one of the two by next year's trade deadline.

      P.S. If I were Paul George, I would get out some old tape of Ron Artest's Pacers games if I wanted to know how a player is to be guarded away from the ball.
      I am more inclined to believe that the FO would re-sign PG to an extension ( or matching whatever he gets on the RFA market ), re-signing West and then looking to trade Granger between now ( unlikely ) and the 2013-2014 Trade Deadline is the most likely scenario. This isn't because Granger isn't the better Player....it's more that this is the more cost effective option than signing Granger and West ( both older Players ) to big contracts and the simply moving PG ( a SG ) for another SG ( that is cheap ).
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

        Originally posted by Peck View Post
        Paul George: F-
        His trade value will never be higher.
        I was tempted to just leave it at that but his game is so putrid right now that I feel the need to add this. I never want to hear another word about moving Granger so Paul George can play his natural position of small forward. I knew at the time his 37 point game was pyrite and I said so after the game. Will he get better? Well frankly he has to, I don’t know if it’s possible to play worse. Hell Roy in his worst games of the season still somehow scored a point. He’s starting to make me miss Brandon Rush and I don’t even like Brandon Rush. Here’s a fun fact, he has now played in 17 games and has only shot a total of 33 free throws.
        When PG had his 37 point night, we were at the game and of course it was exciting. But when my girlfriend said something about how great it was, I told her I would trade those 37 points on 3's for a 20 point game all going to basket in a second.

        His play in the Warriors game was about as bad as it gets for a guy with his talents. Your shot not falling? Get to the basket and play great D. Yet he still floated around the arc and Klay was killing us.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

          Originally posted by beast23 View Post
          P.S. If I were Paul George, I would get out some old tape of Ron Artest's Pacers games if I wanted to know how a player is to be guarded away from the ball.
          I would also ask Ron how a terrible dribbler gets to the rim.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

            Paul George is a slightly more skilled Derrick McKey, sure I would trade him in the right package

            The problem Peck and a lot of other people are having is they thought Paul would lead us in scoring even though that never really seemed in the cards. Peck, I believe you said Paul would average 19-20 per game at the forum party, so I can see why you are upset, but I told you then at Perkins that it wasn't realistic. If he continues to still gives us 14 ppg, 7 rpg, and 3 apg, with a couple steals and a blcok night, he is still one of the better two way wing players you will find, especially on a rookie deal. Sure, I would shop Paul, but right now I would shop pretty much anyone on the team in the right deal, Paul gives great production for his current contract, so if you're upset with him, well I think you just need to look no further than what were probably unrealistic expectations in the first place. The guy is most likely never going to average 18-20 ppg, that is hard to do in the NBA, Danny Granger is able to do it barely and his offensive game is miles ahead of Paul's.


            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
              Funny how the Danny Grangers fan club members and Danny Granger excuse makers are the ones that want to trade Paul George because "is enough of excuse making" lol, yeah let's trade the guy with the must potential and let's keep Danny and West for the future because "they are guys that play like old mans so they should be able to play for at least 5 more years" .....


              At this point I'm hoping they trade him for another "old man game" type of player to see what this same people are going to say when Paul George is kicking a$$ on another team and the Pacers are in rebuilding mode once again.
              Paul will never "kick ***" on another team. I think Paul is largely who he is at this point and THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT. The problem is that because he was a tall athletic guy on the wing he somehow drew Tracy McGrady comparisons which were INSANE. Paul barely scored 16 ppg in the WAC on really bad percentages. He's just not an offensive dynamo.

              There's a reason a lot of us drooled over the potential of a wing combo involving a healthy Eric Gordon (a pipe dream at this point obviously) and Paul George. Gordon is really good at all the stuff is not good at, while also being pretty good in the areas Paul is really good at. Health, and personnel situations have rendered this pairing impossible, but a healthy Eric Gordon and Paul George would probably be the best wing combo in the NBA, but like I said just not going to happen.

              The point isn't that Paul sucks or is sucking, yes he's had a bad pair of games offensively, but that is the type of player he is and always will be.

              Instead of people just admitting that they set the bar for Paul WAY TOO HIGH, they would rather say Paul isn't living up to his potential, well I vehemently disagree, and I'm sad to see this happening because I said it would happen when people started tossing the T-Mac comps around. Paul is EXACTLY the guy I thought he would be back in the Chicago series, a really decent two way wing, who can get hot from outside and give you 30 point nights, but for the most part is a really average offensive player that plays smothering D rebounds better than any other 2 in the league pretty much and is also an above average passer when you put him in low pressure passing situations. Don't blame the player if you're mad at Paul, blame your expectations that were just way off base. And Vnzla, this is not directed at you, I was just replying to your post since it is not a Danny Granger vs. Paul George thing, it is an unreasonable expectations Paul Goerge vs. Real Paul George thing.

              And Paul may still explode and become a 20 ppg guy, but that should be a surprise for anyone who has watched him, not what is expected.
              Last edited by Trader Joe; 12-02-2012, 09:56 PM.


              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                Agree with a lot of the frustration with PG... but then, I saw this:

                http://instagram.com/p/SwdgUunMqA/

                Originally posted by Paul George
                Put up 500 jump shots.. #NewRoutine gotta get my s*** back!

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                  Originally posted by docpaul View Post
                  Agree with a lot of the frustration with PG... but then, I saw this:

                  http://instagram.com/p/SwdgUunMqA/



                  Ugh, I bet they were all 3's! I'd be more excited by 500 layups.

                  Trader Joe, you say people shouldn't be disappointed because their expectations are high. Then you go and say he's exactly what you thought he'd be, and that includes playing "smothering D." Considering that often has not been the case, I'd say you should count yourself among the disappointed (or change your statement).

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                    Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
                    Ugh, I bet they were all 3's! I'd be more excited by 500 layups.

                    Trader Joe, you say people shouldn't be disappointed because their expectations are high. Then you go and say he's exactly what you thought he'd be, and that includes playing "smothering D." Considering that often has not been the case, I'd say you should count yourself among the disappointed (or change your statement).
                    His D at times has been good, but overall it's inconsistent, effectively like the rest of his game. Personally, I'd prefer he establish consistency on defense first. Make his defense his calling card. Aspire to develop into a DPOY candidate. This would mean better off the ball D, of course. His highest ceiling given his skills set is on the defensive side of the ball. Offense should only be looked at as complementary and he should be told to take the ball to the basket more frequently and ditch the 3 and develop his midrange game.
                    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                    -Emiliano Zapata

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                      Originally posted by xtacy View Post
                      said this before and gonna say it again. his problem is lack of mental toughness and that killer instinct. it has nothing to do with age. you either have it or don't.
                      I don't believe for a second that you can't become mentally tougher as you age. In fact, I think most players become more more mentally savvy as they get older. Part of being tough mentally is having confidence, and getting experience and succeeding over a period of years is going to give you more confidence.

                      I'm too young to have watched the Pacers when we had the Chuck Person - Reggie Miller tandem. But if IIRC, ChicagoJ has mentioned before that Reggie lacked killer instinct in the early part of his career and that it was Chuck Person who would take the big shots. Sorry if I'm putting words in ChiJ's mouth, but I'm pretty sure he has said that multiple times.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                        Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                        His D at times has been good, but overall it's inconsistent, effectively like the rest of his game. Personally, I'd prefer he establish consistency on defense first. Make his defense his calling card. Aspire to develop into a DPOY candidate. This would mean better off the ball D, of course. His highest ceiling given his skills set is on the defensive side of the ball. Offense should only be looked at as complementary and he should be told to take the ball to the basket more frequently and ditch the 3 and develop his midrange game.
                        It seems like when he's struggling offensively he lets it affect his defense. It drives me crazy.

                        People are overreacting to Paul's play early on this season. He can easily be an 18-20 ppg scorer in his prime if developed the right way. I believe his problems are mostly mental. He still has all the tools to be a really good/borderline all-star player in this league. Just think... he's never had the opportunity to play with a real PG, SG, or any good passers besides our bigs. He was dicked around by Jimmy the first half of his rookie season. His only full season he had 19% usage rate and was the last option on offense. He still rarely has plays called for him, and even when one is called the play is so obvious or the screen never gets set, and it doesn't works properly. When's the last time we saw Paul come off a pin down screen for an open mid range jumper like Curry and Thompson were getting last game? Yeah never.

                        He's got to get tougher minded if he want's to be as good as he can be, but like the guy above me said, that will come with age and experience.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Warriors came out to play

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          I don't believe for a second that you can't become mentally tougher as you age. In fact, I think most players become more more mentally savvy as they get older. Part of being tough mentally is having confidence, and getting experience and succeeding over a period of years is going to give you more confidence.

                          I'm too young to have watched the Pacers when we had the Chuck Person - Reggie Miller tandem. But if IIRC, ChicagoJ has mentioned before that Reggie lacked killer instinct in the early part of his career and that it was Chuck Person who would take the big shots. Sorry if I'm putting words in ChiJ's mouth, but I'm pretty sure he has said that multiple times.
                          Forget players, plenty of people in all walks of life get more mentally tough. In fact discipline, perseverance, and a greater sense of personal responsibility are all trademarks of moving from the early 20's to the early 30's, even without having kids.

                          I don't think Reggie lacked the guts, he always was brash and thought highly of his own game. But when he met the ego that was Rifleman he took a back seat and it was very clear that Chuck was the alpha dog. See the 1991 Pacers-Celtics series, see the Chuck head nodding back-peddle after dropping a bomb.

                          We might well get to a day where everyone remembers this as how Paul George was always the man and how they all knew and always said "he had that special knack".

                          As far as I can tell this board is about 35% full of people that would have traded Reggie for Glen Rice in 1992 and never looked back, and I mean people that are now frustrated that Paul isn't more like Reggie.


                          Paul IS inconsistent, his mind wanders during games, he's not always careful with the ball or with his coverage. But he does work hard and isn't really lazy, just careless. He's not killing it, but it's way too early on for him to have a "light bulb" moment. I'd expect it closer to March of this season, or maybe not even till 2-3 months into next season. Now if we are still discussing this in 16 months then I'm much more open to the criticism.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X