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

5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks

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

  • 5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks


    WAITING TO PANIC?


    -VS-



    Game Time Start: 8:00 PM ET
    Where: The Fieldhouse, Indianapolis, IN
    Officials: M. McCutchen, D. Collins, B. Salvatore, J. Tiven


    Television: FOX Sports Indiana FOX Sports South
    Radio: WFNI 1070 AM / WCNN 680 AM, 93.7 FM
    Media Notes: Indiana Notes, Atlanta Notes
    NBA Feeds: NBA Audio League Pass (available free to NBA All-Access members)


    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


    2
    51-34
    Home: 32-11
    2
    46-39
    Away: 19-23
    May 03
    May 05
    TBD
    TBD
    HIBBERT
    WEST
    GEORGE
    STEPHENSON
    HILL
    PETRO
    HORFORD
    SMITH
    HARRIS
    TEAGUE


    PACERS
    Danny Granger - left knee surgery (out)



    HAWKS
    Zaza Pachulia - sore right Achilles (out)
    Lou Williams - torn ACL, right knee (out)




    Jared Wade: Pacers’ Road Struggles Hopefully Won’t Cost Them Series

    Despite the evidence to the contrary over the past two games, I still expect Indiana to
    win this series. I know, I know. There are certainly multiple reasons for Pacers’ fans to
    be worried.

    But Paul George probably summed it up best when asked about Indiana’s struggles
    away from home after Game 4: “It’s night and day. And it shouldn’t be like that.”

    He is right about two things: If definitely shouldn’t be like that. It’s sad really, and it
    starts with George himself. He, like the whole team, has been night and day at home
    and on the road this year.


    On the one hand, he’s a young player.

    On the other, he’s a three-year vet who has started 164 regular season games, now
    appeared in 20 playoff games and played in one All-Star Game — during which he
    scored 17 points. LeBron James, Kevin Durant and Carmelo Anthony were the only
    three players to take more shots than George did in that midseason exhibition.

    You would think such a career stepping stone would help eradicate any trepidation
    about playing anywhere. But so far in this postseason, George has been — let’s be
    kind and say — “not good” away from home.


    He was magnificent in Games 1 and 2, starting the postseason off by living at the line
    and recording a triple double. Grown-man All-Star stuff. Then, in the second game at
    The Fieldhouse, he hit 10-of-17 shots inside the arc. If he had not missed three free
    throws, he would have had a 30-point game. Beast.

    When it comes to first-time All-Stars debuting in the playoffs, George was DMX:
    dropping two classics in rapid succession right out the gate.

    Then, on a plane ride to Atlanta, he seemingly lost all his powers — like Dark Man X
    minus the white lines
    .

    A less esoteric metaphor: It’s like he’s a superhero called Indiana Man, capable of
    leaping large buildings and decimating foes of any strength — but he loses all his
    otherworldly powers when he crosses state lines.

    It’s a problem.

    But, really, his struggles are just a microcosm for how badly the whole team played
    in Atlanta. George Hill’s lines in Games 3 and 4 were much, much worse. He scored
    15 points in two games on 5-for-23 (21.7%) shooting, including 0-for-9 (you do the
    math) from behind the arc. Lance Stephenson was equally terrible (1-for-7 shooting)
    in Game 3 while David West uncharacteristically spent half the game being more
    upset at the...CONTINUE READING AT 8p9s

    Kris Willis: Hawks' defense smothers Pacers in Atlanta

    The Atlanta Hawks held serve at home, now they have a chance to seize control of
    the series.


    Mission accomplished for the Atlanta Hawks as they successfully hold serve at home
    against the Pacers and send the series back to Indiana for Game 5 tied at 2-2. Many
    pundits predicted this would be a short series but they clearly overlooked Atlanta's
    recent dominance over the Pacers at home. The Hawks have now defeated Indiana 13
    straight times at Philips Arena dating back to 2006.

    Indiana was a below .500 team on the road this season but the Hawks were able to
    flip the script thanks to their improved defensive play. Indiana made 46 percent of
    their field goal attempts combined in Games 1 & 2 and saw that percentage plummet
    to just 33 percent in Games 3 & 4. That stat is no doubt skewed slightly by the Pacers'
    27 percent shooting performance in Game 3.

    Taking it a step further Indiana made 65 percent of their shots at the rim in Game 1
    going 22-34. Game 2 was a similar story as they connected on 57 percent going 20-35.
    Atlanta adjusted for Game 3 holding the Pacers to 46 percent shooting at the rim on
    28 attempts. Indiana was able to get to the basket more in Game 4 but still only
    converted 48 percent of the time. So if Atlanta is to carry anything on the road with
    them in Game 5 it is that they need to continue to contest the Pacers inside at the rim
    and turn them primarily into a jump shooting team.

    The Hawks found something when they turned to Josh Smith to guard Paul George and
    they were able to slow him down considerably after his performance in Games 1 & 2.
    George averaged 25 points a game over the first two in Indianapolis and converted at
    the rim 9-12 times. When he wasn't converting at the rim he was getting to the free
    throw line where he was 21-25 over the first two games.

    In Atlanta with Smith primarily...CONTINUE READING AT PEACHTREE HOOPS

    Matt Moore: Hawks know Josh Smith shouldn't take jumpers, but that's life

    The Sunday afternoon film session wasn’t necessary. The Indiana Pacers knew they’d
    departed from normal in their Game 3 loss to the Atlanta Hawks in real-time, as they
    were being pushed around the floor at Philips Arena.

    If you want to see something really funny, watch a Hawks home game and wait for
    that moment when Josh Smith catches the ball on the perimeter and hesitates. The
    minute that he looks at the rim, the entire arena, or at least the percentage of Hawks
    fans there (which often isn't very high), will produce this murmur of discontent, as if
    to say, "Josh, don't shoot that."

    Then, when Smith gets later in the shot clock and it becomes evident he's taking that
    mid-range jumper or 3, a loud and audible "Noooooo!" can be heard. It's about the
    shot itself, where Smith is never great from. It's his biggest weakness and what keeps
    him from being a truly great player. And, apparently, the Hawks are aware as well.

    To set the scene, here's Smith's shot chart from Game 1.


    And that's a good game. Four-of-11 from mid-range and beyond is a "good" game for
    Smith. Here's a quote from Al Horford after the game via NBA.com:
    “This was definitely one of those ‘ooh, aah' moments with Josh,” Al Horford
    said. “He gives you those ‘oohs' and then those ‘aahs.' It's kind of a ‘Yes'
    and then ‘No' thing going on. That's the way it is. I think [the fans]
    obviously want Josh to be successful. Everybody loves him here.
    Sometimes we do question his shot selection. But tonight he hit
    some big shots down the stretch, made some huge plays for
    other guys down the stretch and made plays to help us win this
    game. I know it might drive some people a little crazy. But it
    works for us and that's just the way it is.”

    via Smith Fuels Hawks As They Pull Even With Pacers « NBA.com | Hang Time Blog.

    When it works, it's great.

    The problem is, so often...CONTINUE READING AT EYE ON BASKETBALL




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


    Hawks
    Chris Vivlamore @ajchawks
    Co Co @cocoqt81
    Jason Walker @JasonWalkerSBN
    Kris Willis @Kris_Willis
    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks

    official strategy:

    what to do:
    score more points than ATL
    win the game

    what not to do:
    lose

    I'm guaranteeing a W if we just follow my game plan
    //

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks

      I'm starting to think that Vogel should try going big tonight, with Tyler at the 3 and Paul at the 2. Bring Lance off the bench. Not sure how that would affect our transition defense (which hasn't been very good anyway), but it should help against Atlanta's front court a bit.

      Plus, I want to see Tyler get in Korver's grill.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks

        MANNNNN. NBAAAATVVV FTLLLLLLLL. I don't understand why they don't stream the playoff games if they are on NBA TV. SO DUMB. Be progressive and put the game on youtube NBA.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks

          Originally posted by Shade View Post
          I'm starting to think that Vogel should try going big tonight, with Tyler at the 3 and Paul at the 2. Bring Lance off the bench. Not sure how that would affect our transition defense (which hasn't been very good anyway), but it should help against Atlanta's front court a bit.

          Plus, I want to see Tyler get in Korver's grill.
          Don't like that idea at all. Imagine Tyler trying to close out on Korver at the 3 point line
          //

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks

            I have ESPN on at work (I work for Sling Media so we have a lot of TVs on here) and you'd think the Knicks/Celtics game is the only game tonight, seriously they are mentioning it every 5 minutes but *zero* coverage of our game (or of OKC/Houston for that matter). smh

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks

              Originally posted by Pace Maker View Post
              Don't like that idea at all. Imagine Tyler trying to close out on Korver at the 3 point line
              Yeah I like the idea of going big but I'm not sure we have the right personnel for it in this case. I could see Vogel trying it for a short stretch though depending on who ATL has on the floor at the time.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                Originally posted by Shade View Post
                I'm starting to think that Vogel should try going big tonight, with Tyler at the 3 and Paul at the 2. Bring Lance off the bench. Not sure how that would affect our transition defense (which hasn't been very good anyway), but it should help against Atlanta's front court a bit.

                Plus, I want to see Tyler get in Korver's grill.
                Oh god that would be a bad idea.

                They would just play zone on us and pack the middle.

                We would have no one to push the ball (Hill and PG aren't as great as Lance at that field). Don't kill Lance's confidence
                "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                  Just saw it's Paul George's birthday tomorrow...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                    Originally posted by Shade View Post
                    I'm starting to think that Vogel should try going big tonight, with Tyler at the 3 and Paul at the 2. Bring Lance off the bench. Not sure how that would affect our transition defense (which hasn't been very good anyway), but it should help against Atlanta's front court a bit.

                    Plus, I want to see Tyler get in Korver's grill.
                    I would start Sam in the big lineup over Tyler fwiw.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                      I am hoping for a total demolishing of the Hawks to make me feel less sick about the last two games. A guy can dream.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                        I understand they've gone bigger the last two games, but really, shouldn't Roy be able to beat up on Petro? Roy was an all-star last year, he should be able to take advantage of playing against a career back-up!
                        Trying to enjoy every Pacers game as if it is the last!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Let's see what we're made of...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                            Originally posted by pacersgroningen View Post
                            I understand they've gone bigger the last two games, but really, shouldn't Roy be able to beat up on Petro? Roy was an all-star last year, he should be able to take advantage of playing against a career back-up!
                            Roy unfortunately isn't Shaq, he isn't a big body that can just abuse another big. Petro is just there as a big guy to prevent Roy from getting easy looks on his hooks.
                            Last edited by immortality; 05-01-2013, 07:59 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 5/1/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #5: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                              Atmosphere worse than game 2 but better than game 1.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X