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

Is the 2013 team better, worse, or the same as the 2012 team?

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

  • #46
    Re: Is the 2013 team better, worse, or the same as the 2012 team?

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    That is an interesting point. Let me make sure what you are suggesting here. Are you saying that in the playoffs all defenses are essentially the same. In other words sure the pacers are a much better defnesive team in the regular season than the Rockets, but once the playoffs begin the Rockets will step it up and be essentially as good or at least almost as good as the Pacers?

    is that you point? If that is your point I 100% disagree. habbits are formed in the regular season and those habbits cannot be changed just for the playoffs.

    Or is your point more - every team plays better defense in the playoffs than in the regular season, so even though the pacers defense will improve lets say for sake of discussion by 20% , the Rockets will improve by 50%. Pacers still better but the gap isn't as wide as the regular season. if that is your point I can agree for the most part.

    One thing I will say is in the playoffs a team's ability to manufacture offense against a locked in defense when the defense takes away your first 3 options on a play, or a team's ability to give the ball to one of their players and just have them create somehting is hugely important. And that is a problem for the pacers.


    I think this year's team is better by a decent margin. More experienced. Starting point guard who has bene the starter all season. Much healthier and better West. I think Roy's defense is better. PG obviously is much better - hard to even suggest how that has changed the team.

    Also worth mentioning is Lance. I won't suggest that Lance is better than Danny - not at all. But he brings something to the team that neither Danny or Paul bring. A swagger, an agreession, playmaking, ability to push the ball up.
    The bolded part is what I meant. I think regular season defense is not the same as playoffs defense. What I say is, well, maybe the Pacers are disciplined and coached in a way that they play tough defense during the regular season, but when the playoffs start then everybody's going to get physical, everybody's going to give their 100% on defense, and yeah, Pacers could possibly still be the best defensive team in the NBA even in the postseason, but like you said the gap will not be as big.
    Originally posted by Piston Prince
    Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
    "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Is the 2013 team better, worse, or the same as the 2012 team?

      We are better. And so are the Heat, Knicks, and other low-grade to mid-grade teams. 76ers, Hawks, Boston and the Bulls took steps back. All in all we gained a little on our presence in the East. The West grew stronger than we have though.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Is the 2013 team better, worse, or the same as the 2012 team?

        Originally posted by yoadknux View Post
        The bolded part is what I meant. I think regular season defense is not the same as playoffs defense. What I say is, well, maybe the Pacers are disciplined and coached in a way that they play tough defense during the regular season, but when the playoffs start then everybody's going to get physical, everybody's going to give their 100% on defense, and yeah, Pacers could possibly still be the best defensive team in the NBA even in the postseason, but like you said the gap will not be as big.
        Except that I would point out that disciplined defense requires habits, and if pressed teams that did NOT focus on defense during the season can and often do fall back to what they did during the year.

        I think the level of INTENSITY of defense goes up for the playoffs, but I think a team that didn't play a solid defense in the regular season isn't suddenly going to click just because it is the first game of the first round. There has to be something for that intensity to build on.

        I guess it would be easier to say that you might see one-on-one defense improve, because a lot of that is focus, but team defense requires coordination formed by practice and usage, and that won't improve much.
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Is the 2013 team better, worse, or the same as the 2012 team?

          Defenses are more likely to take the night off in the given season. Having said that our offense will struggle, even if our defense is better. We have yet to see our offense take the next step under Vogel. The defense has, but not scoring. The next level is when a good defense comes at us we can arise past their best and still bring what is needed.

          I don't think our defense compared to other defenses is the problem. It is our offense that has not shown a pattern of consistency in the face of a real defense. The opponents best defense.

          And when I suggested this and said for people to "slow your roll" I was marked a hater. When I said that people were fickle and riding the high too high and the low too low I was marked a cynic. Funny how we call the general fan base fickle when we are so easily swayed by the emotion of the day.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Is the 2013 team better, worse, or the same as the 2012 team?

            I think a healthy Danny, healthier David, much improved Lance and Paul would all add up to this years team being better. However, I feel it is just as good, despite not having Danny.

            The things this team could have done with a healthy Danny all season...people forget just how good he was.

            So, I say "just as good." Although, I can absolutely see the argument for "better".

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Is the 2013 team better, worse, or the same as the 2012 team?

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              I also think that Paul george is a better creator than Danny Granger was.

              For comparison sake it is probably more useful to compare Paul this year with Danny last year and lance this year with Paul last year.
              I can go with that. Although I would echo Trader Joe's sentiments that Lance is better this year than PG last year, and PG is better this year (as an all around player) than Granger was last year.

              The offensive gap in the offense left by Granger, in my opinion, is largely made up by West being significantly improved from last year.
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Is the 2013 team better, worse, or the same as the 2012 team?

                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                Except that I would point out that disciplined defense requires habits, and if pressed teams that did NOT focus on defense during the season can and often do fall back to what they did during the year.

                I think the level of INTENSITY of defense goes up for the playoffs, but I think a team that didn't play a solid defense in the regular season isn't suddenly going to click just because it is the first game of the first round. There has to be something for that intensity to build on.

                I guess it would be easier to say that you might see one-on-one defense improve, because a lot of that is focus, but team defense requires coordination formed by practice and usage, and that won't improve much.
                I agree with you.

                But I do think there is some merit in the notion that lets take a team like the Bulls. I think most will say that they play harder more often in the regular season than any other team. If you disagree, OK, but for sake of discussion, go with me. The Bulls have less to improve on in the effort department than some other team that doesn't play as hard in the regular season. A team can only play so hard, and the Bulls are maxed out.

                That is why if someone made me answer the question. Is talent more important in the playoffs or in the regular season. I would say the playoffs. Because there are fewer variables in the playoffs. no back to backs, no crazy travel, teams play harder in general. Players are more able to set aside personal agendas.......In NBA level team can win a lot of games in the regular season with effort, it is more difficult to do that in the playoffs.

                Keep in mind I am talking in broad generalities.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Is the 2013 team better, worse, or the same as the 2012 team?

                  Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                  Although I would echo Trader Joe's sentiments that Lance is better this year than PG last year, and PG is better this year (as an all around player) than Granger was last year.
                  Lance hasn't been able to put together a single month of production better than PG last season. Lance's best month this season was Feb, where he averaged 11.2pts 4.2rebs and 3.2 assists. Compared to PG's full season of 12pts 5.6rebs 2.4 assists. Lance's ceiling is as high as his brain/emotions will allow him to go, but he's not there yet.


                  The teams are about equal, maybe this year is a little better because there's more reliable options down the stretch. This team would be significantly better than last years, and I'd take this bench over last years in a heart beat.

                  Next season should be really, really fun.
                  Last edited by Since86; 04-01-2013, 03:24 PM.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Is the 2013 team better, worse, or the same as the 2012 team?

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I agree with you.

                    But I do think there is some merit in the notion that lets take a team like the Bulls. I think most will say that they play harder more often in the regular season than any other team. If you disagree, OK, but for sake of discussion, go with me. The Bulls have less to improve on in the effort department than some other team that doesn't play as hard in the regular season. A team can only play so hard, and the Bulls are maxed out.

                    That is why if someone made me answer the question. Is talent more important in the playoffs or in the regular season. I would say the playoffs. Because there are fewer variables in the playoffs. no back to backs, no crazy travel, teams play harder in general. Players are more able to set aside personal agendas.......In NBA level team can win a lot of games in the regular season with effort, it is more difficult to do that in the playoffs.

                    Keep in mind I am talking in broad generalities.
                    I see what you are saying, but if a team plays hard and maxes out their individual talent they are still going to be overcome by a team that plays hard and also can maximize their team defensive strategy. I think the latter is not going to happen with a team that had no solid team defensive strategy in the regular season, or even one who tried to implement one late in the season. If it didn't click in the regular season I don't think it is going to suddenly click in the playoffs.

                    In your example, while the Bulls individually aren't going to improve as much as another team that doesn't play as hard in the regular season, the solidity of their team defense is going to trump any amount of "play hard" improvement from any team who does not already also have a solid team defense.
                    BillS

                    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Is the 2013 team better, worse, or the same as the 2012 team?

                      Originally posted by yoadknux View Post
                      The bolded part is what I meant. I think regular season defense is not the same as playoffs defense. What I say is, well, maybe the Pacers are disciplined and coached in a way that they play tough defense during the regular season, but when the playoffs start then everybody's going to get physical, everybody's going to give their 100% on defense, and yeah, Pacers could possibly still be the best defensive team in the NBA even in the postseason, but like you said the gap will not be as big.
                      I understood what you meant. I just disagree with that. BillS did a good job presenting my view.

                      Some teams that have shown the ability to play good D with their current core but tend to coast or rest in the RS (like the Heat and the Celtics) will certainly improve their defense a lot. I have no doubt about that.

                      But teams that are playing mediocre D throughout the season and have not shown the ability to be a dominant defensive team with their current core like the Rockets, the Lakers, the Jazz, the Knicks and the Nets are not going to suddenly step it up and become dominant defensively. They will improve but not by a ton.

                      Because they simple lack the basis for it. They lack the habits that BillS mentioned. And most importantly, most of them lack a defensive identity.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Is the 2013 team better, worse, or the same as the 2012 team?

                        I say the only difference is that the 2012 team had Granger
                        Smothered Chicken!

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
                          I say the only difference is that the 2012 team had Granger
                          Genius. Thought Provoking. Why don't you work alongside Chris Broussard?
                          There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Is the 2013 team better, worse, or the same as the 2012 team?

                            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                            I agree with you.

                            But I do think there is some merit in the notion that lets take a team like the Bulls. I think most will say that they play harder more often in the regular season than any other team. If you disagree, OK, but for sake of discussion, go with me. The Bulls have less to improve on in the effort department than some other team that doesn't play as hard in the regular season. A team can only play so hard, and the Bulls are maxed out.

                            That is why if someone made me answer the question. Is talent more important in the playoffs or in the regular season. I would say the playoffs. Because there are fewer variables in the playoffs. no back to backs, no crazy travel, teams play harder in general. Players are more able to set aside personal agendas.......In NBA level team can win a lot of games in the regular season with effort, it is more difficult to do that in the playoffs.

                            Keep in mind I am talking in broad generalities.
                            I think it is important to note that playing hard, efficiently, takes some practice, time and discipline. The Bulls and Pacers will have practiced and fine-tuned the art of playing at high capacity. Teams that just gear up for the playoffs don't have that same advantage.
                            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X