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

5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

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

  • 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks


    MAKE YOURSELVES AT
    HOME...PLEASE...


    -VS-



    Game Time Start: 7:00 PM ET
    Where: Philips Arena, Atlanta, GA
    Officials: T. Brothers, R. Garretson, Z. Zarba, K. Fitzgerald

    Television: 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


    3
    52-34
    Away: 19-23
    2
    46-40
    Home: 29-16
    May 05
    GAME 7 - 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: The Double Dribble Handoff - Indiana’s New Go-To Play

    On their best road trip of the year, when Indiana went 4-0 winning in Houston, Dallas,
    Phoenix and Los Angeles (Clippers), they broke out a play that I hadn’t seen before. I’m
    not saying they never ran it — I miss a lot of things — but it definitely stood out.

    Against the Hawks, in the postseason, they went to it again last night, though with less
    successful results.

    We’ll get to that.

    But to start, let’s look at the two ideal outcomes they got against the Rockets and
    Mavericks.

    In back-to-back wins, they twice found themselves with a possession to end the first
    half. And they set up a crafty little way to get Lance Stephenson the ball moving at full
    speed. Essentially, the recognized his best attribute — running down hill when he can
    use either his physicality to finish strong or his keen decision making to find the open
    man — and they tried to turn a half-court possession into a virtual fast break led by
    Stephenson.

    The Play Used in Houston


    It is fast and impressive in real time.

    Let’s break down the set they used to get Lance the layup.


    They set up the inbounds play with everyone in a line at the foul line extended.


    The two bigs run to the weak side to join Stephenson on the wing, leaving just George
    Hill (with the ball) and Sam Young on the right side of the court.


    Hill dribbles towards Young. Young moves towards Hill.


    Young takes the handoff and dribbles across the top of the key. Stephenson begins to
    start spinning his wheels as he approaches Young.


    Young stops, hands the ball to Lance and — this is key — gets in the way of Carlos
    Delfino, who is covering Stephenson.

    It is almost like a crossing route in the NFL. It’s definitely a lot like a moving screen
    in the NBA...CONTINUE READING AT 8p9s

    Jason Walker: How the Hawks lost Game 5....in the second quarter

    The box score shows the Hawks were still in the game into the fourth quarter, but the
    game was lost in the second quarter when Josh Smith picked up his second foul and left
    the game -- physically and spiritually.


    On a night where Josh Smith, not Al Horford, was the best player on the floor for the
    Atlanta Hawks, Smith got The Horford Treatment (TM: Bret LaGree/Hoopinion) upon
    receiving his second foul of the first half, a capital offense that cost Smith the rest of
    half, his own personal mojo and the Hawks any chance of taking Game 5 in Indiana
    Wednesday night.

    When Smith reached and fouled David West, there was 6:49 left in the second quarter
    and the Hawks held a one point lead.

    Smith had been charging the Hawks with some high energy, getting four steals to that
    point and scoring 11 points. The Pacers were making the Hawks big men earn their
    buckets, with Smith making four of 11 shots to that point, but Smith's willingness to
    battle in the post and havoc created on the defensive end had given the Hawks the
    lead and brought the Hawks faithful to envision the possibility of stealing home court
    advantage.

    Almost as soon as Smith left the game, the lead left the Hawks, never again to return
    as the Pacers ended the half with a 20-11 flourish, a prelude to a typically jump-
    shooty, noncompetitive Hawks road playoff effort in the second half.

    After the Hawks had forced the Pacers into 10 turnovers with Smith on the floor,
    Indiana didn't turn it over a single time with Smith riding the Hawks bench for the
    remainder of the half.

    The game was never the same, and while Larry Drew amazingly left Smith in the
    game in the third quarter after acquiring his third, fourth and fifth fouls, they were all
    acquired while the Pacers enjoyed a double-digit lead and had calcified their already
    stingy defense inside against the Hawks.

    Given, Josh Smith had played every single minute to the point of getting that second
    foul and was probably due rest, but not six minutes worth. The time to be bold was
    when the game was still very much in question, not in desperation.

    Look around the league at this time of the season and you'll see even geriatrics like
    Paul Pierce logging 45 minutes -- playing a player like Smith or Horford 46 minutes in
    a game shouldn't even be worth a second thought.

    The Hawks aren't going to win a road game in the playoffs without going all-in long
    before the desperation point of a contest. They certainly won't win by jump shooting
    their way past the Pacers, as yet another chapter in the book of "Can't beat a physical
    team by backing away and firing long two-point shots" illustrates.

    The Hawks disintegrated...CONTINUE READING AT PEACHTREE HOOPS

    Tom Ziller: Hawks vs. Pacers and crushing NBA hipster guilt

    I like watching the Warriors and Nuggets. I've written about the Bucks a lot. I know
    Greivis Vasquez's favorite moves. But Lord, I cannot get into Hawks vs. Pacers. Am I
    a bad NBA hipster?


    First, there's guilt. "You haven't watched enough of the Pacers-Hawks series. Put on
    the Pacers-Hawks game. It's a contested series!" I put it on. Then there's the ennui.
    "God, I can't watch this." I go back to something glamorous, in this case the halftime
    show during Knicks-Celtics.

    I am supposed to love all pro basketball. I am not remotely attracted to Hawks vs.
    Pacers. What is wrong with me?

    If I spoke to a therapist, the therapist would surely say that I need to put my
    happiness first. I need to love myself before I love all pro basketball generally, and
    Hawks-Pacers specifically. And so long as I feel guilt at not loving Hawks-Pacers, I
    am not loving my sense of self. So I need to learn that it's okay to not love Hawks-
    Pacers.

    I don't know why I feel guilty in the first place, to be honest. This series has been
    pretty awful from a competitive standpoint. Sure, it's 3-2 after Indiana's Game 5 win
    on Wednesday, but every game has been won by double-digits. The average margin
    has been 17. Where other series have featured crazy comebacks, Hawks-Pacers has
    nothing. Here is the formula for Hawks-Pacers: home team asserts will and
    dominates. The lead holds. Game over. There's no drama. There's no conflict. It's
    competitive only in the macro sense. There have actually been few possessions in the
    series in which a game has been competitive.

    Maybe it's because I actually watched Game 3, which I figured would be an
    entertaining affair. Indiana had been dominant at home in the first two games, so I
    figured that Atlanta's own home court advantage would improve its performance and
    lead to a tight battle. Instead, the Pacers decided to score 30 points in the first half.
    30. I summoned all of my bravery to dip into Hawks-Pacers, and Indiana rewarded me
    with 27 percent shooting, 22 turnovers and 69 points.

    When you mix the lack...CONTINUE READING AT SB NATION




    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: 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

    .
    I know "Sleeze" is spelled incorrectly. I spell it this way because it's based on a name.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

      Let's win.


      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

        I got to agree with the boring series part of that last article. I'm not even pumped up about tonights game, what is wrong with me. lol I'll be watching it from tip off at the bar regardless hoping we finally break the trend and finish this series.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

          Originally posted by DJVendetta View Post
          I got to agree with the boring series part of that last article. I'm not even pumped up about tonights game, what is wrong with me. lol I'll be watching it from tip off at the bar regardless hoping we finally break the trend and finish this series.
          Every game has been a blowout. Plus the upside if the pacers win this series is almost nothing, we are expected to win - so the excitement isn't there. But a loss would be really bad, so the pressure is there though

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

            Since it's game 6, I'd like to say how the NBA completely ruined the 1st round by making it 7 games. These series have been terrible.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

              Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
              Since it's game 6, I'd like to say how the NBA completely ruined the 1st round by making it 7 games. These series have been terrible.
              I don't agree. Most series don't really get good until the 6th game. I love the back and forth and the adjustments. As it tiurns out only the heat and Spurs proved that best of 7 wasn't needed.

              Bottonline It has been 11 years, it isn't going back to 5 games, so why do people keep whining about it
              Last edited by Unclebuck; 05-03-2013, 03:51 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                I believe that we will win!
                Go Pacers!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                  Hoping the lessons learned can be brought south. Will have to track the first half on the phone, have to work until 8 tonight. I feel a win coming for the Pacers.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                    I'm getting ready for a game 7.
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                      If we win tonight, we'll probably win the series.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        I'm getting ready for a game 7.
                        Between the Knicks and Celtics?.....me too
                        I know "Sleeze" is spelled incorrectly. I spell it this way because it's based on a name.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                          Please bring the defense from Game 5 tonight! Also if there is room, Game 5 David West would be cool also
                          //

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                            The bench has to show up *gulps* that means you Gerald Green

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 5/3/2013 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #6: Pacers Vs. Hawks

                              Originally posted by Magic P View Post
                              The bench has to show up *gulps* that means you, ANYONE FROM THE BENCH
                              FIXED.

                              I will be happy with one of them showing up and doing something.
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X