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

2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

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

  • 2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

    WITNESS THIS!



    -VS-



    Game Time Start: 7:00 PM ET
    Where: The Fieldhouse, Indianapolis, IN
    Officials: T. Washington, O. Poole, Z. Zarba

    Media Notes: Indiana Notes, Miami Notes
    Television: FOX Sports Indiana / Sun Sports / ESPN
    Radio: WFNI 1070 AM / WAXY 790 AM
    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


    27-19
    Home: 17-3
    East: 15-10
    29-13
    Away: 11-10
    East: 14-8
    Feb 04
    Feb 05
    Feb 06
    Feb 08
    7:00pm
    7:00pm
    7:00pm
    7:00pm
    HIBBERT
    WEST
    GEORGE
    STEPHENSON
    HILL
    BOSH
    DJANGO
    JAMES
    WADE
    CHALMERS


    PACERS
    Danny Granger - left knee tendinosis (out)



    HEAT
    Nada




    Fill in the blank: ESPN doubleheader

    What do we make of the four teams heading into Friday night's national spotlight (ESPN,
    7 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. ET)? Our team thinks deep about the Heat, Lakers, Pacers and
    Timberwolves, as well as the league at large.

    1. The Miami Heat are __________.

    Danny Chau, Hardwood Paroxysm: Counting down the days until April. If there is any
    team with a legitimate on/off switch, it's the Heat. The team has the fourth-best record
    in the league, but it feels like a disappointment. But when the playoffs arrive -- when
    the team will be able to devise team-specific strategies and matchups -- we'll start
    seeing the genius of last season emerge again.

    Aaron McGuire, Gothic Ginobili: Coasting. Some defending champions emerge from
    their championship primed to obliterate the league in their title defense. Miami is
    emphatically not one such team; they prefer the Phil Jackson route. Of course, it barely
    matters. They're still great enough to take half the nights off and stay healthily atop a
    poor Eastern Conference. Still coasting, though.

    Benjamin Polk, A Wolf Among Wolves: Biding their time. The season is long; the
    Eastern Conference is soft; the champs know this. As these Heat jaunt through the
    playoffs, I would not be the least bit surprised to see their defense slowly become the
    suffocation machine that it was last season.

    Jared Wade, 8 Points, 9 Seconds: The only team in the East worth taking seriously.
    The Knicks were great early, the Nets have been riding a wave since they canned
    Avery Johnson, the Pacers have a world-class defense, and the Bulls could beat
    anyone if Derrick Rose comes back healthy. But all these "contenders" are a clear tier
    below the reigning champs.

    Michael Wallace, ESPN.com: Right on schedule. What other team that has been in
    first place in either conference this season has been as criticized as much as the Heat?
    Yes, the defending champs will have bouts of boredom, stints of less-than-stellar play
    and a few mind-boggling losses. But as long as they remain relatively healthy through
    the rigorous regular season, they're fine.

    2. The Los Angeles Lakers are __________.

    Chau: Making some riveting television. Kobe has assumed a new character, and things
    were going remarkably well with the increased ball movement. But like any good
    drama, it never lasts, and the last few minutes are never predictable. Every game has
    become a matter of life or death in the standings and it's must-see TV, no matter
    where your allegiance lies.

    McGuire: Blundering. What else do you call a team that thoroughly outplays the West's
    best team one night and gives up a 21-4 run to squander a 13-point 4th-quarter lead
    against one of the worst teams in the league not two days later? Inconsistent,
    incoherent and tough to crack.

    Polk: Really hoping that Dwight Howard's shoulder is OK. It's true that Howard is
    nowhere near the MVP-caliber destroyer he was before his back surgery and also
    that he hasn't exactly assimilated into the cutthroat, grim-faced culture of Kobe Bryant.
    But its also true that, without Howard, the Lakers' defense goes from mediocre to
    nightmarishly bad.

    Wade: Toast. If they weren't in the West, they might have a chance to turn this
    around, limp into the playoffs and advance to the conference finals. But even if the
    Lakers do play a postseason series in April, it will be against a heavyweight team they
    can't beat.

    Wallace: Disjointed. Disappointing. Disturbing. Pick a word that starts with "d" and it
    probably applies. Well, with the exception of "defense." At this pace, the Lakers
    will produce the most disappointing season in recent pro sports history, based on
    expectations. When Michael Beasley is lighting you up, all hope is gone.

    3. The Indiana Pacers are __________.

    Chau: Ready for Danny Granger to return. There's no guarantee his incorporation
    will be a smooth one, but the team needs him. Whether it means Lance Stephenson --
    a pleasant surprise for Indiana this season -- being demoted to sixth man, or Granger
    assuming that role himself, the Pacers are in dire need of a boost in their weak second
    unit.

    McGuire: Plodding, above all else. The Pacers have been many things this season.
    Disappointing to shocking. A punching bag to an elite unit. Dominant to docile. Through it
    all? They've been one of the slowest-paced teams in the entire league, a plodding bunch
    that grinds out tough wins and kills their opponents' spirit.

    Polk: In desperate need of...CONTINUE READING 5-ON-5 AT ESPN

    Kyle Soppe: Correlation Between NetRtg and Quarter

    What quarter deserves the most attention when trying to draw a link between NetRtg
    (points scored per 100 possessions minus points allowed per 100 possessions) and
    dwinning? What does it take to be number one?

    In each season, beginning with the 2007-2008 campaign, the most linked quarterly
    Rtg (offensive or defensive) was the first quarter. A poor DefRtg in the first 12 minutes
    resulted in the highest Loss Correlation in each of the past five seasons.

    Also, fans like to obsess over the fourth quarter scoring (How often have you heard,
    “Kobe is the most clutch player of all time” or early in his career “LeBron freezes up
    down the stretch and couldn’t finish a game is his life depended on it”?), but is that
    really all that important? The average Win Correlation for OffRtg (how directly tied the
    game result is to the number of points scored per 100 possessions) is lower in the
    fourth quarter than the average of quarters one through three in every single season
    since 2007. This stat indicates that the offensive efficiency prior to the fourth quarter
    is consistently more crucial to winning that what a team does in the final 12 minutes.

    In fact, if you’re still going to look at the fourth quarter as the most crucial of quarters,
    you’re better off looking at the defensive efficiency. In three of the five seasons studied,
    the average Loss Correlation for DefRtg was higher in the fourth quarter than the average
    of the first three quarters three times.

    When analyzing the data from the past five seasons, it becomes obvious that games are
    won in the early going, as opposed to the final few minutes. Success is ultimately
    determined by victories and the wins leader (Lakers with 277) has the greatest
    cumulative first quarter NetRtg (48.2) over the last five seasons. Coincidence? I think not.

    The total number of wins by the quarterly NetRtg leader decreases as you progress
    through the game. But this trend isn’t only true for the elite teams, it holds true for the
    NBA as a whole. The top 17 teams in terms of wins over the last five seasons are the
    exact same 17 teams that lead the way in cumulative first quarter NetRtg. Here is a look
    at how each team stacked up in total wins and cumulative NetRtg by quarter since 2007.










    Further disproving the myth of fourth quarter efficiency and its overall importance is the
    overall trend of the top teams in NetRtg and the bottom teams in NetRtg . Now, one must
    acknowledge the fact that blowouts do play a role in the late game data and not the early
    game stats, but with five years of games (394 games per team), the vast majority of
    games are competitive throughout. Even during a game which has for all intensive
    purposes been decided with considerable time left on the clock, both teams will turn to
    their reserves, thus not skewing the data a whole lot. Take a glance at the trend of the
    best team/worst team in terms of cumulative NetRtg by quarter.




    As you can see, the worst team in the league (in terms of cumulative NetRtg) improves as
    the game progresses while the best team gets worse. The gap from the best team to the
    worst team shrinks from 94.5 in the first quarter to 59.4 in the fourth stanza, a 37.1%
    drop off.

    With all of this data surrounding...CONTINUE READING AT HARDWOOD PAROXYSM




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


    Heat
    Brian Windhorst @windhorstESPN
    Tom Haberstroh @tomhaberstroh
    Ira Winderman @iraheatbeat
    Joseph Goodman @miamiheraldheat
    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

    man i have been too busy lately couldn't pay attention to the team for a week now. finally it's over. so excited for this game. go pacers!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

      "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

        Brian Windhorst ‏@WindhorstESPN
        At 42%, Pacers' Roy Hibbert has lowest FG% of any center who has played at least 20 games this season.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

          This is a big game, the Pacers are wearing pinstripe unis!
          "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

            Django...lol

            Can't see us winning this game tbh.
            Never forget

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

              Why do they punish us with Jon Barry?

              I'm sure there will be plenty of Miami Heat circlejerking tonight, we're just lucky we're not playing Chicago...
              PSN: bhm184

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

                Obviously I want us to win, but I think we'll be lucky if this game is close. Expecting a big game from LeBron.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I hate the fact that even though I have league pass, I'm forced to endure Jon Barry... Ugh.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

                    I'm flipping back and forth between sunsports and espn until I decide which one to stick with.
                    "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

                      The Heat will want a win tonight. They aren't going it to make it easy.

                      We have to do what we did in the previous game. Take advantage of the interior and out-rebound them like hell. Some big 3s would help as well.

                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

                        With the way Miami has been playing lately I don't expect this game to be close, I also expect 20+ TO's for the Pacers, lets see.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

                          1st TO for the Pacers.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            1st TO for the Pacers.
                            1st TO for the Heat.
                            "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 2/1/2013 Game Thread #47: Pacers Vs. Heat

                              David West versus the Heat.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X