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

Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

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

  • #46
    Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

    Originally posted by yoadknux View Post
    I don't get this Granger hate. Do people forget he's the only reason we made the playoffs during 10-11 and 11-12? He should start because he's the much better all-around player, and if he isn't healthy and Lance proves he can play better then Lance should start. People here fall inlove with young potential and forget what a vet like Granger could bring to the table.
    Granger is the only reason we made it to the playoffs in 11-12? That's a pretty big stretch. The additions of West and Hill, as well as the all-star season from Hibbert, might have something to say about that....

    Don't get me wrong, he played good that season, but we were a very well rounded team that year. It's not like Granger carried us to the playoffs as a one man show averaging 25 PPG that year.

    I don't think that many people here "hate" Granger. But it's just reality that the team went further last year without him than it ever did with him. That's not meant to say that he was holding us back or anything like that, but it does show that the team was plenty good without him. Some people don't like to talk about it, but odds are that we'll have to choose between Granger and Lance next off-season. To me, it doesn't make much since to part with a budding young talent so that you can keep an aging player with knee issues. Now if Danny has an incredible season this year and is a major factor in a deep playoff run, then we will certainly have to look hard at keeping him.

    Something's gotta give at some point. Hibbert, West, and Hill are all making bank. PG is about to be maxed out. Granger and Lance are both up in the summer. There's almost certainly going to be an odd man out, and it's obviously going to be either Lance or Granger if it comes to that.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
      To me, it doesn't make much since to part with a budding young talent so that you can keep an aging player with knee issues.
      Wait.... Why do you think that who starts will determine who gets kept after this season?
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

        Originally posted by yoadknux View Post
        I don't get this Granger hate. Do people forget he's the only reason we made the playoffs during 10-11 and 11-12? He should start because he's the much better all-around player, and if he isn't healthy and Lance proves he can play better then Lance should start. People here fall inlove with young potential and forget what a vet like Granger could bring to the table.

        Yeah, Granger won't be as quick as Lance and won't handle the ball like Lance does. But Granger makes our lineup bigger, physically stronger and can space the floor for George, David and Hibbert. When Lance goes for 20 once in every 10 games people think "Wow, look at that young player, he could be a star". Granger used to average 20 on every given night, and yeah he's gotten older and injured but he's probably still the much better scorer.

        So, by default Granger should start, and if Lance wants to start then he'd better prove he's the better choice.
        I am just worried about his health. I agree with that he does stretch the floor and makes our lineup bigger
        Smothered Chicken!

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          Wait.... Why do you think that who starts will determine who gets kept after this season?
          I don't think that. I could fully see a scenario where Granger starts, but the team ends up keeping Lance.

          I was just explaining to yoadknux that my position wasn't out of "hate". I am admittedly biased towards Lance and I feel that the spot has to be legitimately taken away from him since he played so well last year, but I don't really care who starts because the team is going to be a monster either way. I have complete trust in our excellent coach to make the move that he thinks is best for the team. My Lance/Danny thoughts are more concerned with what happens next summer. But obviously we have an entire season to get through and hopefully another playoff run. So it's not a huge deal right now. But it's the dog days of summer and there really isn't much to talk about right now, and this is definitely going to be one of the biggest narratives regarding our team in the coming year.

          The problem with Bird is that he has done such a good job of stockpiling talent that now the team will be facing difficult financial decisions. But that's a good problem to have....

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

            Originally posted by RamBo_Lamar View Post
            How about starting both Lance AND Danny (povided he is healthy)
            then have PG come off the bench for either one of them??
            I get your joke there. However, it may not be beyond the pale to see in the playoffs, even at the end of games:

            Hill/Lance/PG/Danny/Big man
            Last edited by McKeyFan; 09-11-2013, 12:49 PM.
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

              Originally posted by RamBo_Lamar View Post
              How about starting both Lance AND Danny (povided he is healthy)
              then have PG come off the bench for either one of them??

              Paul George would give the bench that offensive boost that it needs so badly.
              This space for rent.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                Originally posted by yoadknux View Post
                When Lance goes for 20 once in every 10 games people think "Wow, look at that young player, he could be a star". Granger used to average 20 on every given night
                Granger, a volume shooter with a lower fg percentage than Lance, was given the green light to try and score 20 every night. Lance was rarely given that opportunity, in fact I don't know if he ever was. He was just so good some nights he happened to score 20.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                  Lance's FG% would plummet if he was given free reign to shoot.


                  I've been a Lance defender since day one, I've always though he had talent coming out of his ears, but he's not a scorer like Danny nor should he be.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                    Granger, a volume shooter with a lower fg percentage than Lance, was given the green light to try and score 20 every night. Lance was rarely given that opportunity, in fact I don't know if he ever was. He was just so good some nights he happened to score 20.
                    Danny's FG% may be lower, but his TS% is higher, by a lot. Although Lance does have a better eFG% than Granger's last full season, but Lance's eFG% is similar to where Granger was when he received similar attention as Lance did last season.



                    P.S. based on regular season statistics Granger is a slightly better rebounder than Lance. They are similar on defensive boards, but Granger is better on offensive.
                    Last edited by Eleazar; 09-11-2013, 01:29 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      People are living in the past if they think Granger will be better than Lance this year. We will not see the same Danny Granger as we did pre-injury...ever again. Not just because of the knee but because he's moving out of his prime years. He is still a very good shooter. But defensively, folks, he's not going to be as good. ..and he wasn't that good pre-injury.
                      How ironic is it that you make this statement with David West's picture under your name?

                      Yes. If Danny has to play with crutches under his arm, then Lance will be the starter. If not, and if Danny is back to the same Danny he was before, then Danny has proven he is the better player by far at this point. I think Lance will continue to get better, but he is no where near Danny's level. IF he somehow makes a huge stride this summer, then that's great but I'm not going to assume that is going to happen. That's not fair to Lance. I'm also not going to assume that Danny is suddenly going to be a worthless player, because he has proven otherwise and it wouldn't be fair to him.

                      We don't know how good someone is going to be, just how good they have been recently. Again, see David West as an example.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                        Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                        but he's not a scorer like Danny nor should he be.
                        True. Other than being the top scorer in the history of New York City, he has no track record for being a scorer. Nor should he even consider such a thing.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                          True. Other than being the top scorer in the history of New York City, he has no track record for being a scorer. Nor should he even consider such a thing.
                          Yep, comparing high school and the NBA is a greatt exercise.

                          The Pacers should call up Ryan Creighton, as he's #2 on the list and only 150pts behind Lance. They're the same age, so we'd have 3 great young players in Lance/PG/Mr Creighton to build around.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                            Just because some think that Danny is not what he was does not mean the hate him. And just because they don't think he was the main reason we made it to the 6th game with the Heat in 11-12 does not mean they think he is worthless.

                            Just because some think Lance is inconsistent and out of control at times does not mean they think he is pointless.

                            Your player is your player. And he doesn't have to be my player to be your player. This is the biggest debate right now. And I love that it is, considering the Tyler vs. McBob, JOB haters vs JOB apologists, and My Draft Prospect vs. the drafted player debates over the last few years.

                            THis is a breath of fresh air.
                            Last edited by Major Cold; 09-11-2013, 03:36 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                              Originally posted by MnvrChvy View Post
                              How ironic is it that you make this statement with David West's picture under your name?

                              Yes. If Danny has to play with crutches under his arm, then Lance will be the starter. If not, and if Danny is back to the same Danny he was before, then Danny has proven he is the better player by far at this point. I think Lance will continue to get better, but he is no where near Danny's level. IF he somehow makes a huge stride this summer, then that's great but I'm not going to assume that is going to happen. That's not fair to Lance. I'm also not going to assume that Danny is suddenly going to be a worthless player, because he has proven otherwise and it wouldn't be fair to him.

                              We don't know how good someone is going to be, just how good they have been recently. Again, see David West as an example.
                              Granger is a wing and will no longer have the same foot speed. He will not only have to move to get open shots, he will have to move to defend athletic SF's. David West's game doesn't suffer from that. He can guard the post while standing straight up...not even moving. We'll see how this turns out. I think Granger will have taken a solid step backward and Lance will be the more effective player. This does, of course, depend on Lance making some degree of improvement but it's not going to take much. With this team...George, West, Hibbert and Hill...Danny will not be scoring anything close to the amount he scored in the past....and Lance, at just 22...the year Danny was still in college...his numbers will go up.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Indy Cornrows: Granger an "Easy Choice" over Stephenson

                                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                                Granger is a wing and will no longer have the same foot speed. He will not only have to move to get open shots, he will have to move to defend athletic SF's. David West's game doesn't suffer from that. He can guard the post while standing straight up...not even moving. We'll see how this turns out. I think Granger will have taken a solid step backward and Lance will be the more effective player. This does, of course, depend on Lance making some degree of improvement but it's not going to take much. With this team...George, West, Hibbert and Hill...Danny will not be scoring anything close to the amount he scored in the past....and Lance, at just 22...the year Danny was still in college...his numbers will go up.
                                Even assuming lost speed, Danny should still be our 4th best post scorer and either 2nd or 3rd best perimeter scorer. If you have 1 play you're going to run and Danny's healthy, I'm still going his way for the shot over Paul George. And that includes either an iso from the wing or a three point shot created by Hill, George, or West. Until the playoffs, Paul George was devastatingly bad in high pressure situations. At one point he was shooting like 10% with the chance to tie or go for the lead in the last 30 seconds.

                                So unless Paul George is suddenly a polished offensive player next season, there are actually situations in which Granger should be given precedence over Paul. How many arguments can you make for Lance over Paul? Lance's strengths are, for the most part, also Paul George's strengths. Though Paul as a whole does everything better than Lance but finish at the rim (and he's improving at that).

                                Offensively, with our inside three-headed monster of Hibbert, West, and Scola, we are not a running team. We run when it's conducive to getting easy baskets but if it's not there we run our offense and play slow inside-out ball. Offensively, what's more useful to that form of offense--a 6'8" sweet shooting forward or an (admittedly big) guard who seeks to push the tempo and in the offense waits around for wide open 3 pointers or backdoor cuts while his man helps off of him a ton? The change-of-pace role for Lance would be dynamic with him coming off the bench. A scoring option or two would be gone and the team would be better designed for running/playing aggressive defense.

                                Offensively Granger has a pretty clear advantage. Defensively, Lance probably gets it. As far as chemistry, there's no real difference IMO because they've both been on the same team core for 3 years. Now all of this assumes Granger is healthy; you can't have a conversation about them without it.
                                Last edited by aamcguy; 09-12-2013, 08:10 AM.
                                Time for a new sig.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X