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: Misery vs the Nets

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

    I look at it like this, we were lucky to make it as close as it was. We just looked lethargic and for lack of a better term uninterested during the first half of this game. If it wasn’t for Jeff Pendegraph running wild in the first half I think we might have been down by 10 at the half, but as it was he totally shell shocked both the Nets and the Pacers.

    Look we’re not about making excuses but honestly I wonder if fatigue isn’t catching up a little bit here? We have played a LOT over the past couple of weeks, now if you want to be a championship team you have to overcome that but I wonder if some of that didn’t come into play.

    Also let’s be honest here the Nets do match up pretty well to us and right now they actually have both the size and physicality to cause us disruption. Paul George had a bad night, some of that was bad shooting but most of it was because Gerald Wallace is one hell of a defender who would not allow Paul to just go wherever he wanted. Since David West basically couldn’t play (and should not have played) that meant that Reggie Evans could do his thing and not be forced out of the game due to lack of defense. Brooke Lopez just destroyed Roy Hibbert or more to the point on the offensive end Brooke Lopez destroyed Roy Hibbert on the defensive end Roy Hibbert destroyed Roy Hibbert. Lance did good but in the end just isn’t long enough to bother Joe Johnson and well George Hill did what he could but at the end of the day we just had another bad game.

    I understand that Paul fouled out of the game but why the last two games (which of course have both ended in losses) Frank has chosen to stick D.J. Augustine in the game is beyond me. Why do we have Sam Young on the roster then? I mean poor George Hill all 6’2” of him had to guard Joe Johnson 6’8” in the post for the last shot in regulation. Did anybody not think this was going to end up in score for Joe?

    Sigh…. Well at least the Bulls won so they didn’t gain anything on us.

    On another bright note, if Danny does come back on Wednesday then at the very least we won’t have to hear anyone complaining about him ruining a winning streak or team chemistry if we do lose (which we better not). It’s always good to look for the good right? Right?

    Tonight were just going to hit some bulletpoints because I don’t really even feel like talking about this game much.

    • This had to be one of the worst attended games of the year. Honestly it did surprise me a little because I thought Brooklyn might be more of a draw than they are I guess. But yea 11,672 is very pathetic. On the bright side if nobody saw it then they can’t hold it against us.
    • I’m only going to talk about Roy briefly because I don’t want to go overboard but I’ll just say it. For whatever good he did you on defense tonight he more than countered that with his putrid offense production. I’ll state this very clearly, Roy Hibbert hurt the Indiana Pacers when he was on the floor tonight. You can disagree all you like & I am not a Roy basher and acknowledge all of the good he does on defense all year, but not tonight.
    • Our offense was beyond stagnate and stale tonight which is largely due to the defense of the Nets wing players but we settled for bad shots tonight.
    • What little crowd there was on hand really tried valiantly to get the team going in the end of the 4th but it was all for naught.
    • Gerald Green may be the single dumbest player I’ve ever seen. One pump fake almost sent him to the moon to block a shot that wasn’t even there. BTW, I don’t just mean from tonight’s game. His body of work from this season is pretty rare in how many bonehead plays he makes. Oh well we will always have the dunk vs. the Cavs.
    • Speaking of which if you weren’t there and judging by the attendance you weren’t, in the layup line tonight a dunk contest broke out between Green, Young, George and believe it or not both Hansbrough. Believe it or not Young probably won that dunk off. Although in fairness to Green had he hit a bounce the ball catch it put it between the legs and behind the back dunk it would have been epic but it bounced off.
    • Look I like Reggie Evans and am always impressed when I see a pure rebounder at work, but if David West would have had his normal game then he wouldn’t have even been in there for all of those boards because he can’t guard him. But fortunately for him West was blind tonight. It’s a lot easier to grab rebounds when you are not even slightly involved on the offensive end and you cheat off of your man on defense. West hits his normal shots then Evans doesn’t have the impact that he did.
    • You know I look at Mahinmi stats and it seems okay but I don’t know he just didn’t seem to have the impact on the game that I would like for him to have. Not sure why I didn’t think he had a great game but I didn’t.
    • We shot a total of 18 free throws tonight; the Nets actually converted 23 free throw shots. Just another sign to me that we were settling for jumper’s way to often.

    Well if ever there was a time Danny needs to make a comeback this is it. He doesn’t solve all of our problems but in a game like tonight I think he would have solved a lot of them.



    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

    Originally posted by Peck View Post
    • Gerald Green may be the single dumbest player I’ve ever seen.
    I've heard this comment, from different people, at least 10 times this season. I almost take pride in it at this point. A lot of teams win championships, but not everyone can sign the dumbest player of all time to a long term deal.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

      This loss goes to Vogel. From going small at the end of the game on defense. To playing David "One-Eyed" West in the second half. To wasting Pendergraph's Disney movie-esque increase in skill. To looking as lethargic as most of the players, especially compared to PJ Carlisimo, who was screaming like the Internet when Chris Brown is mentioned. He was neither flexible nor assertive. Coaching performance not recommended.
      You Got The Tony!!!!!!

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

        It is starting to get scary how we fare against potential Eastern Conference playoff teams. I think we are 0-2 against Brooklyn, 1-2 vs. Atlanta, 1-2 vs. Milwaukee, 1-1 vs. New York, 0-1 vs Boston. These are all possible opponents in the first (two) rounds. (I do know that we are 2-0 vs. Miami and Chicago)

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

          Vogel probably tried to not let West back in the game, but West is too big of a hardass to not come back in. The only way he isn't coming back is if he can't walk.
          Super Bowl XLI Champions
          2000 Eastern Conference Champions




          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

            As someone that's had a scratched eyeball more than once in my life... How was it treated during the time he was out? Closed and pressure might've went a long way towards it being better in the 2nd half. ...if it could get better...

            And I don't know how he played with it as it was... 'cause until it starts feeling better an eye injury can really suck. You could clearly see it bothering him.
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

            -John Wooden

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

              Was Sam Young hurt/sick tonight? Surely Frank could have atleast gone offense/defense subs down the stretch. There was no way that Hill should have been defending Joe Johnson on that play.

              I saw complaints on twitter about the two foul calls on what Pacers fans saw as jump balls, they were both borderline, but PG has got to have better game awareness than to foul out there. That is the play of a young guy who is still learning in the league.
              Last edited by skyfire; 02-12-2013, 03:56 AM.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

                I guess it was a Fung Shwe thing or something, because Augustine's defense, though usually terrible, wasn't all that bad on Taylor when he hit those two circus shots that basically caused us the game.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post

                  • I’m only going to talk about Roy briefly because I don’t want to go overboard but I’ll just say it. For whatever good he did you on defense tonight he more than countered that with his putrid offense production. I’ll state this very clearly, Roy Hibbert hurt the Indiana Pacers when he was on the floor tonight. You can disagree all you like & I am not a Roy basher and acknowledge all of the good he does on defense all year, but not tonight.
                  But but but he only averages 2.8 points less than last season. He can't be that bad, right....? *smh*
                  Anyway, it's not just him who was really bad last night. Paul and West, for different reasons each, gave you a combined of 12 points. Don't look very far from that as it was probably the main reason we lost.
                  Really bad performance and result. 2 home losses that are gonna hurt us.

                  Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                  I guess it was a Fung Shwe thing or something, because Augustine's defense, though usually terrible, wasn't all that bad on Taylor when he hit those two circus shots that basically caused us the game.
                  Couldn't believe it at the time. Was 5 A.M. in the morning here and was screaming (heavy liquor consumption before helped that tbh). Dude was like "let's just get rid of the ball before the clock runs out" in the first shot and the other one was no less crazy.
                  Never forget

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

                    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                    I guess it was a Fung Shwe thing or something, because Augustine's defense, though usually terrible, wasn't all that bad on Taylor when he hit those two circus shots that basically caused us the game.
                    I thought the same thing while watching the game. Sometime this season Orlando Johnson or somebody else from the bench will hit two crazy circus shots that win us a game and a fan of the other team will say "I can't believe Orlando Johnson hit some crazy shots to beat us."

                    I didn't really mind losing this game. We put ourselves in a good position and couldn't quite put it away. What worries me is blowouts. The Pacers have only been really beaten down 3 times (Boston, Orlando, Portland) in the last two months. Every other loss has been decided in the fourth quarter by a pretty small margin, more than a few of those on some pretty crazy flukes.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

                      Yes Sam Young was unavailable. I forget why - either sick or injured.

                      While I know there have been plenty of games this season where the Pacers really need Granger, this game was the first game were it was that obvious. Sure offensively, but even more defensively. Perhaps the biggest keys to the game late and in OT: with Paul George fouled out, the Pacers had to defend Joe Johnson with George Hill and it seemed as though either JJ scored or was the Pacers were forced to double team and leave shooters wide open. Granger could have guarded JJ and the pacers could have played their normal defense.

                      I thought the Pacers bench played well - they brought the energy especially in the second quarter that erased a 10 point deficit.

                      disappointing game, but nothing that has me worried long term. No red flags

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

                        Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                        I thought the same thing while watching the game. Sometime this season Orlando Johnson or somebody else from the bench will hit two crazy circus shots that win us a game and a fan of the other team will say "I can't believe Orlando Johnson hit some crazy shots to beat us."

                        I didn't really mind losing this game. We put ourselves in a good position and couldn't quite put it away. What worries me is blowouts. The Pacers have only been really beaten down 3 times (Boston, Orlando, Portland) in the last two months. Every other loss has been decided in the fourth quarter by a pretty small margin, more than a few of those on some pretty crazy flukes.
                        As a playoff team, aren't the close ones the ones that you want to win? More often than not, in the playoffs--the games are extremely close. Losing all these close games against either short-manned teams, or less talented teams is a bad thing to me.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

                          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                          I guess it was a Fung Shwe thing or something, because Augustine's defense, though usually terrible, wasn't all that bad on Taylor when he hit those two circus shots that basically caused us the game.
                          I thought DJA played OK last night. His shooting seemed off a little, don't know the stats, and his defense was good enough. He lacks size and nothing's going to make that better, but his play was good. I think Frank likes his offense and ball handling. DJA is an NBA player that can be counted on to do the right thing at the right time. That is an important thing to a coach, IMO.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

                            Originally posted by Peck View Post
                            I understand that Paul fouled out of the game but why the last two games (which of course have both ended in losses) Frank has chosen to stick D.J. Augustine in the game is beyond me. Why do we have Sam Young on the roster then? I mean poor George Hill all 6’2” of him had to guard Joe Johnson 6’8” in the post for the last shot in regulation. Did anybody not think this was going to end up in score for Joe?
                            My understanding is that he puts DJ in at the end of the game because he isn't as carefree of a player as Lance....My guess is that he has some of the best handles on the team, and they want to limit turnovers and protect the ball as much as possible in the final minutes of the game....
                            http://www.nba.com/gamenotes/pacers.pdf

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: Misery vs the Nets

                              Originally posted by ejwallace View Post
                              My understanding is that he puts DJ in at the end of the game because he isn't as carefree of a player as Lance....My guess is that he has some of the best handles on the team, and they want to limit turnovers and protect the ball as much as possible in the final minutes of the game....
                              That's my guess as well. He trusts DJ more than he trusts Lance right now. Can't say I blame him, but right now there's no ideal choice.

                              Now, with Danny back on the other hand, hopefully we don't have to see that.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X