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

12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

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

  • 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

    SILENCE THE THUNDER!



    -VS-



    Game Time Start: 7:00 PM ET
    Where: Chesapeake Energy Arena, Oklahoma City, OK
    Officials: K. Mauer, N. Buchert, D. Guthrie

    Media Notes: Indiana Notes, Oklahoma Notes
    Television: FOX Sports Indiana / FOX Sports Oklahoma / SNET 1 (Canada)
    Radio: WFNI 1070 AM / WWLS 98.1 FM
    NBA Feeds:

    REMINDER: Per PD policy, please do not share a link to, describe how to search for, request a link to, or request a PM about streaming video of a NBA game that is not coming directly through the NBA. Not even in a "wink-wink, nudge-nudge, know-what-I-mean" round-about sort of way. Thank you


    10-10
    Away: 5-7
    West: 6-5
    16-4
    Home: 10-2
    East: 8-2
    Dec 09
    Dec 12
    Dec 14
    Dec 15
    8:00pm
    7:00pm
    7:00pm
    7:00pm
    HIBBERT
    WEST
    GEORGE
    STEPHENSON
    HILL
    PERKINS
    IBAKA
    DURANT
    SEFOLOSHA
    WESTBROOK


    PACERS
    Danny Granger - left knee tendinosis (out)




    THUNDER
    Perry Jones - left ankle sprain (day-to-day)



    Jared Wade: Breaking Down a Broke-Down Offense

    This week, the Pacers have edged out a win in Chicago and out-classed Portland at
    home to bring their record on the season above .500 for the first time since
    November 3. Given how depressing this team looked over its first 10 games of the
    year, that is actually a big step forward. But for a franchise that entered the season
    expecting to have home-court advantage in the first round of the playoffs, this
    season has still been a disappointment.

    I always tell everyone that November in the NBA is glorified preseason. New players
    are still meshing with the old guard, guys are recovering from injury, some players
    need to get into game shape, and the collective rust of the offseason must be shed.

    Still, with 19 games of evidence, it’s officially fair to say it: the Pacers’ offense is
    horrible.

    Everyone I talk to asks me why. Why can’t a team with four capable scorers in its
    starting lineup put any points on the board? How is that a team whose starting
    unit(s) produced some of the best numbers in the league last year (especially in
    the playoffs) get so, so, so very bad just by losing Danny Granger, who hasn’t
    made an All-Star team since 2009?

    The short answer is: I don’t know. The longer answer is: I can identify some of
    the problems.

    We’ll get to those soon.

    First, just take a look at their game log so far this season in terms of the Four
    Factors. Cumulatively, the Pacers have put together the second-to-worst offense
    in the league this season (in front of only the Wizards). Somehow, it looks even
    worse if you break it down by game. They have finished only 4 games out of 19
    that with an above-league-average offense.



    The only reason they have 10 wins is because they have the league’s second best
    defense (and best in eFG% against). And more than that, the only way they have
    been able to eek out, let’s say, four of these wins is because excellent play down
    the stretch by...CONTINUE READING AT 8p9s


    JA Sherman: Durant and Westbrook are passing the test

    Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook continue to evolve as playmakers.

    The Thunder offense has a new look this year. Forced to abandon the iso-heavy
    offense that carried the day a year ago, the Thunder have made great strides in
    executing actual offensive sets with intelligent playmaking, and the transition is
    beginning to take hold on a regular basis. The Thunder have run off five
    consecutive wins (3 against potential playoff teams) by an average winning
    margin of 22 points. What has made these wins satisfying is that in a way, the
    Thunder are still learning to play consistent offensive basketball, but because of
    the way they are learning to play, their offensive talent is better leveraged even
    when they play a good defensive team like the 76ers. The result is that the
    Thunder offense is improving and better yet, the team passing is one the rise.
    OKC is now 7th in the league at 22.7 assists per game, whereas in the past they
    had been almost always dead last.

    There were two passing plays in particular in the Thunder's win over the Hornets
    that I felt were indicative of this positive growth. In fact, these plays are
    becoming a regularity so I feel that it is important to point them out now
    specifically because if you are coming late to the Thunder party, you might not
    know that these plays rarely worked in the past. Basic sets like pick-and-rolls
    would get rushed, fast break opportunities would get wasted, and we were left
    wondering what would happen when the young Thunder would fix these
    fundamental issues. Our patience is being rewarded now.

    1. Dragging the Net

    In this first pass, Kevin Durant collects the rebound and brings the ball up the
    court himself, much like LeBron James might do. It is not a fast break opportunity,
    as the Hornets are all in good defensive position. What Durant does once he gets
    to the 3-point line is an extremely subtle but noticeable playmaking read; he does
    what I like to call 'dragging the net.' Here is the video sequence, first
    uninterrupted and then with some annotation.



    Even though Durant can see that the Hornets are back in time, he also sees that
    there is nobody protecting the rim. If he can break down one defender, an easy
    basket awaits.

    In the past, (and probably still in the future), Durant would drive hard at the rim
    himself. In this case, he eyes an opportunity to break down both his own man as
    well as his teammate Thabo Sefolosha's man, Greivis Vasquez. After a nifty move
    to elude Al-Farouq Aminu, Durant sets his sites on Vasquez and engages with this
    second Hornets defender. By dragging his fishing net across the Hornets' perimeter
    defense, Durant has occupied 2 different players who are chasing him horizontally,
    thereby freeing up Sefolosha to cut straight to the rim. Durant's playmaking
    created the space and Sefolosha read the play by cutting as soon as Durant made
    his move.

    The biggest key...CONTINUE READING AT WELCOME TO LOUD CITY


    Danny Chau: Why We Watch - Perry Jones III, The Next

    Perry Jones III is an uncommon talent. Everything else about him is unfinished.
    What better reason to watch could there be?



    For most my life I thought I would be able to escape the trappings of a life built
    around superstition. My father is the most logical man I know; my older brother
    falls in the same quadrant. But my mother could not be more attuned to signs and
    coincidences, to fate and faith. I am the last link in the chain, so I figured it’d only
    be a matter of time before I confirmed my own suspicion that a servitude to mystic
    semiotics is an inheritable trait. I always was a momma’s boy.

    My tentative relationship with the supernatural reached a weird zenith, quite
    logically if also a little weirdly, during the 2012 NBA Draft. Perry Jones III was
    freefalling down the draft board, as all the reporters and draftologists had
    predicted. Apparently his reticence on the court during his two years at Baylor—
    a dazzling moment or stretch of moments; longer stretches of self-conscious
    invisibility—had induced a parallel reticence in NBA executives. Or maybe it was
    the word around the league, amorphous but all the more menacing for it, that
    Jones wouldn’t last five years because of some previously undisclosed knee issue.
    Here was a ticking time bomb, a player whose hindrances cast a long shadow
    over his potential as a transcendent NBA player. Teams just didn’t want to take
    the risk.

    They didn’t want to take the risk 10 years ago, either.

    ***

    Qyntel Woods was a top-five lottery talent in 2002. Everyone agreed. He was the
    first “next Tracy McGrady”, which makes sense, considering that McGrady was
    already 22 when Qyntel declared for the draft. Surely the next McGrady couldn’t
    have arrived any sooner. It’s hard to embrace the next when we were just getting
    settled in with the original of the species. But Woods’ stock took a significant dip by
    draft night. Maybe it was his attitude. Maybe it was the junior college stigma at the
    time, with JuCo trailblazers like Kedrick Brown ruining it for everyone thereafter.
    Whatever the case, he fell to the 21st pick, and the Portland Trail Blazers.

    And so a decade later, watching Perry Jones III’s descent, I felt an alien rush of
    revelation. I had become a messenger of a 10-year prophecy. Jones was to be
    picked 21st; he would begin the cycle anew as a tale of redemption, only this time
    with a more fortunate timeline. He would be the redeemer of Woods’ ill-fated
    career, a decade on, a world different.

    Fixating on imaginary career narratives...CONTINUE READING AT THE CLASSICAL




    Pacers
    Mike Wells @MikeWellsNBA
    Jared Wade @8pts9secs
    Tim Donahue @TimDonahue8p9s
    Tom Lewis @indycornrows


    Thunder
    Darnell Mayberry @DarnellMayberry
    Royce Young @dailythunder
    Welcome To Loud City @WTLC
    John Rohde @RohdeOK
    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

    Gonna be interesting to see the Paul George vs. Kevin Durant matchup.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

      We can win this...

      Paul George for another great game, and Hibbert for the best game offensively of the season

      COME ON PACERS

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

        Originally posted by PGisthefuture View Post
        Gonna be interesting to see the Paul George vs. Kevin Durant matchup.
        I think a better description will be humbling. We are getting torched by 20...

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

          I can see K-Mart going for 30 on our bench wings and Lance.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

            Anything under 20 points and I call it a success.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

              Win or lose... and reality is very likely lose, I just want to see Hibbert dunk the ball a few times. Dude's never been an offensive savant but he simply can't be THIS bad either. He needs to put on his man pants, remember he's the biggest dude on the floor nearly always and command the paint, with force. If I see that, even in a 20 point loss, I'll be satisfied, because him remembering that he's huge would mean a whole lot more than a loss to the Thunder would to our season.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

                The starters keep it close but Vogel brings in all five bench players and we never recover from that.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

                  Gonna be an ugly one tonight, sorry for being a realist.
                  Larry Bird and Ryan Grigson- wasting the talents of Paul George and Andrew Luck

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

                    Looking forward to a Win

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

                      If games are won and lost on a calculator and piece of paper, then why do we bother to play them?

                      @LetsTalkPacers

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

                        I'm annoyed that it annoys me that Roy hasn't won an opening tip this season.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

                          Originally posted by Magic P View Post
                          I'm annoyed that it annoys me that Roy hasn't won an opening tip this season.
                          Maybe we want 2nd/3rd quarter possessions?
                          If games are won and lost on a calculator and piece of paper, then why do we bother to play them?

                          @LetsTalkPacers

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

                            Originally posted by PD GameBattles 2k13 View Post
                            Maybe we want 2nd/3rd quarter possessions?
                            That's something Roy would claim.Truth is he can't jump high enough.
                            Never forget

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 12/9/2012 Game Thread #21: Pacers Vs. Thunder

                              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                              I think a better description will be humbling. We are getting torched by 20...
                              Why so down?
                              Originally posted by IrishPacer
                              Empty vessels make the most noise.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X