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

2012-2013 Butler Basketball

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

  • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

    Originally posted by Johanvil View Post
    Watched it live (around 6 a.m. when it ended I think, couldn't sleep) and couldn't believe both the inbound pass gift and the winner. Love watching the crowd storming the court after some winner (although not much appropriate until it is a final or something).
    In this case I can live with the students storming the court. Hinkle doesn't host many top 10 teams. Add to that the students being whipped into a frenzy by having Gameday in the house and broadcasting all day, and that kid hitting that amazing half court shot to win the contest on Gameday. Also playing a tough game like that without their injured best player. And if all that wasn't enough, the game goes down to the wire and they win on a buzzer beater after a turnover that made it look like a sure loss. It would be hard not to rush the court after all that.
    Last edited by travmil; 01-20-2013, 09:38 AM.

    Comment


    • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

      I watched the game at BW3 and I literally ran around the restaurant after the shot. The whole place went nuts. What a game. Gameday was incredible as well
      Smothered Chicken!

      Comment


      • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

        ESPN really did this game justice all day long and for it to pay off like that....wow. Just wow.

        Comment


        • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

          Roosevelt Jones has been quoted in a few recaps of the game that he overheard Gonzaga's play being called by one of their coaches and knew it was coming. Says he heard one of their coaches call the lob to Olynyk.
          Last edited by travmil; 01-20-2013, 10:52 AM.

          Comment


          • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

            Another one bites the dust...

            Comment


            • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

              I love college basketball because it is still a game that just often enough rewards hard work, preparation, sacrifice, team play and grit. Butler basketball personifies all of those attributes and when you pair that with the best coach in the game special things happen.

              I hope Steven's never leaves. This is the perfect situation for him and his approach. If he were at Duke or IU could he ever recruit a kid like Roosevelt Jones? That guy is the perfect Butler player. So often the best player on the court but with his unorthodox style and less than ideal size/athleticism will play all 4-years and win this program many big games.

              Comment


              • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                Just an amazing game and what a finish!

                Butler continues the magic. It's pretty remarkable that this team continues to answer the bell with new faces, coaches, etc. Butler is evolving into a truly elite basketball program right before our eyes.

                Comment


                • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                  I haven't yet taken the time to put my thoughts on the game into words but this does a pretty good job of summing up my thoughts. Particularly the last line.

                  http://royhobbson.tumblr.com/post/41...-that-happened

                  Originally posted by Roy Hobbson
                  A normal, non-deadbeat sports fan gets to experience maybe one of these nights per lifetime, in person — perhaps two if you’re lucky, although nothing is guaranteed. An event where you genuinely take pause and marvel at what is unfolding in front of you, as it is unfolding, even when it’s just the surroundings you are marveling at and the game has just begun.

                  Hinkle Fieldhouse was an electrified movie set well before tip-off. All it did througout the night was continuously and unrelentingly become more so. More electric, more ficticious-feeling, more artfully directed and crazed and very very obvious that its plot line was headed toward only one, inescapable conclusion. And when it finally did — good Lord. (NO WORDS, SHOULD HAVE SENT A POET, ETC., ETC.!!) The apparently inevitability of it all did not lessen its impact, and whether John Williams scored that final climatic scene or Rosie Jones, it hardly mattered. None of it seemed real, but less of it seemed contrived. It was the single greatest basketball game I have ever experienced first-hand.

                  And as we cartwheeled into the euphoric warzone of Broad Ripple soon thereafter, I got a text from my friend Nate Dunlevy: Tell me that being at that game was every single bit as amazing as I imagine it was.

                  Totally.
                  "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                  -Lance Stephenson

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                    Pretty funny write-up on Butler Gonzaga

                    http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...s-in-the-house

                    The Hardcourt Shuffle: That Old Butler Magic, Cuse is in the House
                    By Shane Ryan on January 21, 2013 12:36 PM ET
                    Michael Hickey/Getty Images

                    Let's begin by delving into the realm of the imagination. Pretend it's November 1, 2012, and you and I are real-life acquaintances. Pretend we're having a conversation on a park bench near a vacant outdoor court. The wind is whistling, and it's far too cold to even consider playing, but we can't help stare longingly at the torn net hanging from the bent rim. The wind dies down for a moment, and I tell you that I've had a vision. There will be a number of buzzer-beaters this year, I say, but only one of them will be truly peculiar. You'll watch the replay over and over, but you still won't quite be able to wrap your mind around how it all happened. And tell me, I continue, as the wind begins to howl, tell me which team is involved. More than that, tell me which team wins.

                    We both know what you'd say, even without the benefit of a mystic vision. "Butler." Of course you'd say Butler. It's always Butler.

                    Back to the present. If you haven't seen the strangest ending to a college basketball game this season, watch it now. We pick up the action just after Kelly Olynyk makes two free throws to put Gonzaga up 63-62 with 4.6 seconds left:

                    There are so many thoughts rushing through my brain right now that I need numbers to make sense of it all. So,

                    1. I still have no idea if Roosevelt Jones got the shot off in time. To be clear, I have absolutely no problem with the decision the referees made. I would've done the same thing. But I don't know if it's right. All of which indicates what many college basketball fans have feared for weeks: The ghost of Sabatino Chen is going to haunt this entire season.

                    2. Let's talk about that inbounds pass by Dave Stockton, son of all-time NBA assists and steals leader John Stockton. On the surface, it looks pretty poor; he just throws a lob straight to Rosey Jones. But look closer and you'll notice that at the time he releases the ball, or milliseconds before, Kelly Olynyk has good body position on Jones. The physics of Stockton's pass make sense (we'll get to the philosophy in a second), and if Olynyk had just stayed, it would've been an easy thing to make the catch.

                    3. Except that one of two things happened. Either Olynyk broke away right as Stockton threw the pass, a miscommunication that led to the gift turnover, or — OR — Jones shoved Olynyk at the perfect moment, a classic push-off that led to the turnover. I've watched the video over and over and still can't tell. My gut says it's some combination of the two; Jones definitely had his forearm in Olynyk, but I also think the Canadian dashed away at the worst possible moment. Or, if you prefer, Stockton threw the pass too soon.

                    4. However, here's some evidence in favor of the push-off. In this interview, Jones drops this nugget:

                    "I heard the coach tell Stockton to lob it up to Olynyk, so I played behind him. And Stockton actually lobbed it too far, and it fell right in my hands."

                    In other words, he knew exactly what was coming. And, in all likelihood, knew exactly when a little shove would do the most damage.

                    5. Which brings up another point: When discussing strategy at a crucial point in the game, DO NOT share that strategy with an opposing player. Inadvertently or not.

                    6. Especially if the strategy is bad. With 3.5 seconds remaining, inbounding the ball with a one-point lead, the thing you definitely want to avoid is giving the ball to a guard near midcourt with room to run. So why lob the ball into that area? Gonzaga could have done almost anything else — including passing the ball to a Butler player under the far basket — and forced a desperation heave. Stockton's orders, with no timeouts, should have been as follows: Pass the ball to an open player on a cut, so that the pass can't possibly be intercepted. If that fails — and it shouldn't, since inbounding is a relatively simple task, even under intense road pressure — lob the ball toward the other hoop and make Butler go the length of the floor. The two things you cannot do are to lob into no-man's-land, or take a five-second violation. That's it. Why over-think it by designing a modified post-up near half court?

                    7. Moving on, I'm now convinced that Butler is virtually unbeatable in close games. Without looking it up, I can think of eight high-profile games that Butler won by fewer than three points. I mean, there are three already just this year — Marquette, Indiana, and now Gonzaga. They always find a way. As for close games they lost? I can think of one.

                    8. But let's get more scientific. In games decided by five points or fewer in the past four years, Butler is 26-9. In postseason elimination games (conference tournament, NIT, NCAA), Brad Stevens is 6-1. Those numbers are incredible, and it's tempting to use it as more evidence for the idea that Stevens is a basketball genius. Which he probably is. But what's really remarkable to me is how lucky they've been. This year, you had Rotnei Clarke's desperation 3 and Dave Stockton's ill-advised pass. In the 2011 tournament, you had a series of favorable tips and bounces that led to another buzzer-beater against Old Dominion, the indescribably weird ending against 1-seed Pittsburgh in the round of 32, and a collapse by Florida. In 2010, the games were just close without being borderline supernatural, but winning three games by eight points has to be considered its own kind of luck. We already knew the Bulldogs were the ultimate Cinderella, but it looks like their clock never strikes midnight.

                    9. One thing I really love about Brad Stevens is how totally composed he remains on the sideline in scenes of complete mayhem. In this grainy shot from the Marquette game, you can see him in the lower-left hand corner calmly walking to shake Buzz Williams's hand after Clarke's prayer falls. Watch the Gonzaga video again and focus on Stevens at around the :53 mark; he crosses his arms, watches the steal, takes two steps toward Mark Few as Jones launches the shot, and puts his head down just after it goes down as he moves in for the handshake. It's insane. He never reacts. There may be some inconclusive video evidence that he once sort of pumped his fist, but I can't be sure. So, considering the fact that he wins a lopsided percentage of close games — some of them in bizarre fashion — and never seems surprised, my question is this: What does he know??

                    10. The explanation is probably just that Brad Stevens is a genius. As usual, he managed to rein in a high-powered offense and dictate the tempo and style of play. As usual, his team was physical, tough, resilient, focused, relentless. As usual, Butler survived a rough patch — in this case, an 18-11 start by Gonzaga — erased the deficit, and turned the game into a war of attrition. Notice how the game finished with 58 possessions for each team, 10 fewer than Gonzaga's average. Notice how for the second time this season, the Butler bigs held a talented center (Zeller, Olynyk) well below his season average. Notice how the guards, especially Jones, attacked the basket, resulting in Butler going to the line almost twice as often as the Zags.

                    In the end, this game followed the formula of so many classic Butler wins over the last four years: Scout the hell out of the opponent and take away what they like to do, refuse to be out-muscled on defense, keep the game close, and then get lucky in the final minute. Even with 3.5 on the clock and a 1-point lead, Mark Few had spent the final 30 minutes of the game watching Stevens make all the important choices. Gonzaga had been dragged down from the level of beautiful offensive execution into a frustrating tug-of-war. No matter what happened on the final play, they were already beat.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                      Originally posted by Foul on Smits View Post
                      Pretty funny write-up on Butler Gonzaga

                      http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...s-in-the-house

                      I loved #9 especially. If I'm looking at the replay right (it's kind of blurry though), it does look like he hardly even pays attention to the final shot. Which fits right in with what he was saying after the game about only caring about process and not results.
                      You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                        Saw this on FB, thought of you guys

                        Congratulations to Kevin Schwartz, BUTLER 2014 on sinking his recent game day half court shot. Schwartz, who is a junior at Butler, had 5 chances to shoot from half court for a chance to win $18,000 in scholarship money. However, he decided he only needed one.

                        Schwartz broke an 0-for-32 drought for the half court shot on "College Game Day" on his first try and has been all the buzz on ESPN this weekend.


                        http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=b4yVL0a5mOY

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                          Originally posted by vapacersfan View Post
                          Saw this on FB, thought of you guys

                          Congratulations to Kevin Schwartz, BUTLER 2014 on sinking his recent game day half court shot. Schwartz, who is a junior at Butler, had 5 chances to shoot from half court for a chance to win $18,000 in scholarship money. However, he decided he only needed one.

                          Schwartz broke an 0-for-32 drought for the half court shot on "College Game Day" on his first try and has been all the buzz on ESPN this weekend.


                          http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=b4yVL0a5mOY
                          I met this dude in Maui earlier this year. He went out for the tournament. By himself.
                          "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                          -Lance Stephenson

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                            I've thought this team was a Final Four team all year. If you're a 1 seed, and Butler is in your bracket, you might as well just stay home.

                            (If Butler wins their league and tournament, they should be a 1 seed)

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                              Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                              I've thought this team was a Final Four team all year. If you're a 1 seed, and Butler is in your bracket, you might as well just stay home.

                              (If Butler wins their league and tournament, they should be a 1 seed)
                              Of course we're way ahead of ourselves, but I think it'd be better for Butler (and IU for that matter) to be a 2-3 seed in the Midwest at Lucas Oil than a 1 out West. If somehow they were to get through the rest of the conference with 2 or fewer losses and get at least to the championship game of the A-10 tourney, it's hard to see where they wouldn't have one of the 4 best resumes in the country.

                              If Butler wins both their games this week, at a pretty good LaSalle without Rotnei Clarke, and hosting Temple, I will be extremely impressed.
                              "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                              -Lance Stephenson

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2012-2013 Butler Basketball

                                Has Butler passed IU in the rankings yet? I expect them to do exactly that.....

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X