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

2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

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

  • 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

    RIP THE CLIPS!



    -VS-



    Game Time Start: 7:00 PM EST
    Where: The Fieldhouse, Indianapolis, IN
    Officials: B. Salvatore, H. Workman, Z. Zarba

    Media Notes: Indiana Notes, Los Angeles Notes
    Television: FOX Sports Indiana / Prime Ticket
    Radio: WFNI 1070 AM / KFWB 980 AM, KWKW 1330 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


    36-21
    Home: 24-5
    West: 13-9
    41-18
    Away: 18-12
    East: 14-8
    Mar 01
    Mar 03
    Mar 06
    Mar 08
    7:00pm
    8:00pm
    7:00pm
    7:00pm
    MAHINMI
    WEST
    GEORGE
    STEPHENSON
    HILL
    JORDAN
    GRIFFIN
    BUTLER
    BILLUPS
    PAUL


    PACERS
    Roy Hibbert - Getting Lance lined up for some sweet Entertainment 720 cash (out)



    CLIPPERS
    Eric Bledsoe - Sore Left Calf (day-to-day)
    Trey Thompkins - Left Knee Bone Bruise (out)




    Avi Friedman: The Evolution of Lance Stephenson

    While the whole world speculates whether Danny Granger’s return will slow down the
    juggernaut that is the Indiana Pacers, at least one person has no concerns. The team’s
    leader doesn’t think there is any chance that the return of the team’s captain will disrupt
    anything — either chemistry-wise or on the court.

    Last year Lance Stephenson hardly played at all. This year he’s played a large role in
    helping the Pacers gain the second best record in the Eastern Conference and has done
    a far better job of replacing Danny Granger than anyone would have expected.

    In the 2011-2012 season Lance had the 11th most minutes played on the Pacers with
    just 10.5 minutes per game (442 in total) in the regular season. He played no more than
    12 minutes during any game in the entire playoffs. This season he has already tripled
    those 442 minutes with just 29 games left in the season while logging 28.9 minutes per
    game.

    In many ways Lance has been able to make Danny’s absence nearly unnoticeable on the
    court.

    He is one of the main reasons the Pacers are on track to nearly replicate their winning
    percentage from last season (.618 now compared to .636 last year.)

    Stephenson had a storied high school career, becoming the all-time scoring leader for a
    school where Stephon Marbury and Sebastian Telfair both played. Lance won four
    straight New York City high school championships in division AA, an unprecedented feat,
    and by scoring 2,946 points in his career, became the all-time leading high school scorer
    in New York state.

    Despite the fame, championships and ungodly point totals, Lance had minimal success in
    college. Many attribute this to similar off-court problems to the ones he had in high
    school. In his one year with Cincinnati, he failed to make the NCAA tournament and
    decided to enter the NBA draft after one year of college.

    Going into the 2010 NBA draft, Lance was predicted to go early in the second round. He
    slipped all the way to to the tenth pick in round two. The Pacers were on the clock and
    couldn’t pass on the potential.

    For a long time, that’s all they had drafted: potential.

    Lance hardly played at all his first season, and we’re only now getting a chance to see
    him live up to his amateur hype. Based on the 53 games he has appeared in this season,
    he has arguably been...CONTINUE READING AT 8p9s

    D.J. Foster: Looking at the Clippers' Lineups

    Here’s Jacob Frankel checking in with a look at some lineup data for the Clippers this
    season. How are the two starting lineups performing? Who should play in crunch time?
    Jacob has it all here:


    The trade deadline has come and gone and—despite the rumblings—the Clippers abstained
    from a trade. This is the team Los Angeles will be going into the playoffs with and whether
    or not it will be able to beat San Antonio and Oklahoma City is the looming question. We
    can break this roster down into sub-units: lineups. Vinny Del Negro’s oft-criticized rotation
    methods have been fairly successful this season. What are the keys of some of the
    Clippers’ most used lineups and how can these translate to the playoffs and against the
    Spurs and Thunder?

    LA’s most used lineup is obviously their starters, but there are really two versions of this
    lineup: with Chauncey Billups or without (where Willie Green starts on a Finals caliber
    team). Due to his injury, we only have a limited sample of data on the first lineup (114
    minutes). It posts an insane offensive efficiency of 119.3—NBA average is 106.3—but has
    trouble on the other end of the court. The defensive efficiency of 107.6 is easily the
    highest among all the Clippers’ units with 100+ minutes played and would rank 27th in the
    league. Of course, both the stellar o-rating and ugly d-rating are both somewhat functions
    of the teams the Clippers have played since they’ve had Billups back.

    To get a more balanced sample size, lets look at this lineup’s stats from last season. In
    2011-12 this unit’s offensive rating was lower, but one that would still rank 1st in today’s
    NBA. The defensive efficiency posted would be percentage points better than Indiana’s
    league best mark. It’s fair to say with more minutes, this unit’s statistics will even out and
    fit more into what we’ve seen in the past.

    The Green unit posts a lesser offensive efficiency, albeit one that would still rank 3rd in the
    league, and a better defensive efficiency (than this year’s lineup). Again: the Billups lineup’s
    statistics will likely regress on offense and improve on defense as the season goes on.
    Billups is obviously...CONTINUE READING AT CLIPPERBLOG

    Blake Murphy: DeAndre Jordan and the Crunch Time Conundrum

    DeAndre Jordan is a worse free throw shooter than some players are three-point shooters.

    With a 44% career free throw rate, Jordan is a huge liability late in close games, enough
    so that coach Vinny del Negro has to be wary of playing him in such situations.

    In fact, Jordan averages 26.5 minutes per game but has played just 4.5 minutes per fourth
    quarter
    , well below what you’d expect for a starter and one of a team’s core players. He’s
    been protected on the offensive end such that he’s actually yet to take a free throw in the
    fourth quarter, and has only been afforded 0.5 field goal attempts per fourth quarter.
    Basically, when Jordan plays in the fourth, he is there for defense only.

    I was interested to see if Jordan (a) is in a unique situation with limited fourth quarter
    minutes and (b) should be a better free throw shooter given his shooting rates elsewhere.

    Is this unique?

    For the first point, I used NBA.com’s Advanced Stats Tool to find players in “crunch time”
    (last five minutes, ahead or behind five points) who had the lowest usage rate.

    We are, of course, dealing with very small samples at this point in the year, so Jordan is
    one of many players with a miniscule usage rate in small crunch time minutes. He’s
    certainly not unique in this regard, but it warrants further and more detailed study
    controlling for FT%, position, etc.

    Should he be better?

    For the second part, I had planned to compare Jordan’s shooting percentages from
    different distances and come up with a sort of “expected FT%.” However, Jordan shoots
    so exclusively inside of five feet that the exercise would have been pointless.

    Just how limited is Jordan’s range? Well, he’s taken just 23 shots outside of five feet this
    season, and just five outside of nine feet. He’s a 65% shooter within five feet and shot
    66% from there last year (when he took just 32 shots outside of five feet and just 10
    outside of nine feet). It makes sense for him to stay there since he’s so effective, and the
    samples are too small to know if he’d be any good from elsewhere (anecdotally, I doubt
    he would).

    Are they right to bench him?

    So the question for the Clippers...CONTINUE READING AT HOOPDATA




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


    Clippers
    Brad Turner @BA_Turner
    Kevin Arnovitz @kevinarnovitz
    Steve Perrin @clippersteve
    D.J. Foster @fosterdj
    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

    Gonna need Ian to step up.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

      This is a game that scares me, the Clippers have some amazing talent.

      Fortunately, so do the Pacers!

      Roy or no Roy, let's protect our court!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

        Rivalry game for me AND we're bringing out the ABA throwbacks for this one.

        I'm giddy as hell right now.

        EDIT: Guess no throwbacks after all.
        Last edited by Goyle; 02-28-2013, 07:48 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

          Containment and blockouts. Paul and Lance should have a huge night. Especially, Paul, they have no answer for Paul. Butler can't stop him.
          Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

            Protect our home, guys. Ian, we need you today.

            Leggoooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

              I wanna see David West make a MVP statement tonight.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

                This is an even bigger statement game than the Warriors contest.

                The Clippers are a legit championship contender and the Knicks are only a 1/2 game back in the standings.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

                  Who said we were wearing throwbacks?
                  There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

                    WELP here we go


                    @Coupe460

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

                      Tonight will be the night Roy Hibbert earns his pay check. It will become very obvious why he is needed.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

                        Originally posted by Goyle View Post
                        Rivalry game for me AND we're bringing out the ABA throwbacks for this one.

                        I'm giddy as hell right now.

                        EDIT: Guess no throwbacks after all.
                        You must have confused this game for the one last year where the ABA throwbacks were worn.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

                          Mahinmi showing why he is a backup.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

                            Not a very good start for Ian

                            Nice pass, though.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 2/28/2013 Game Thread #58: Pacers Vs. Clippers

                              We are thin in the front court.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X