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

Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

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

  • #31
    Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

    Originally posted by Peck View Post
    • I’ve saved the worst for last. We were trying to win that game. What I mean by that was that Frank treated that far more like a regular season game than a pre-season game. Just look at our rotations and the amount of min. our starters played. I’m not sure the Bulls did. Their bench players and even a couple of what I assume will be deep bench players all throughout the game while we didn’t until the very end. In other words our starters and regular rotation players could not overcome the Bulls team minus Noah & a limited Rose. Again, go to the very fist paragraph I wrote so I already know what people are going to say, I’m going to say it as well but to me it was worth noting this.
    The Bulls were trying to win this game as well. Jimmy Butler played 30 minutes and Taj Gibson (without Noah he's practically a starter for them) played 31 minutes.
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
      Preseason game, no one pays attattention

      Bulls are good, not based on this game, but they are good.
      Bulls are just a bad matchup for the Pacers. They also have two big wings that can defend. Normally the B&G can count on a size advantage somewhere and the Bulls just really don't give that.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

        I just looked at draft express out of curiosity, Danny is in fact 1.5 inches taller than Solomon Hill. Danny's arms are stupid long too, so I'm sure that makes it appear like he's much taller than he is..

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

          I was watching Lance during warmups, and his stroke is so much smoother. Didn't get to see it much during the game, but you can tell he has been putting in work on his shooting.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

            You all shouldn't put too much thought into the effort or outcome of this game. I'm sure most of our guys had alot on their minds, having to leave for the Philippines about an hour after the game. Plus its the first game of the preseason, you main goal is just don't get injured, so thats why you didn't see our guys chasing down rebounds.

            These next 2 against Houston won't matter much either. I don't think you see the team really dialed in until 4th pre-season game against Dallas.
            You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

              Peck -

              Lois Scola. Unintentional or implied/hidden meaning?

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                Our rotations played heavy minutes because we don't play until Wednesday. They will be on a plane for 18 hours. They played heavy minutes not to win, but for conditioning.
                Yeah, but playing the Starters more minutes than one would expect in a Pre-Season game while going into what appeared to be a loss in Pre-Season halfway through the 4th QTR? I agree with Peck, I get the sense that Vogel was approaching this as a "Statement" game.....since it was the Bulls and it was the 1st game that DRose played in.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                  Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                  Yeah, but playing the Starters more minutes than one would expect in a Pre-Season game while going into what appeared to be a loss in Pre-Season halfway through the 4th QTR? I agree with Peck, I get the sense that Vogel was approaching this as a "Statement" game.....since it was the Bulls and it was the 1st game that DRose played in.
                  Even if it was, and the players now feel down about it....I think you have to ask so what? We've got a whole preseason and an 82 game season to bounce back. Nobody wins all the tough ones or even all of the easy ones. No big deal either way.
                  Time for a new sig.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                    Originally posted by Miller_time04 View Post
                    Weird how Solo played so much more than Cope.
                    It's not that weird, imo. Solo played as the back-up SG while Cope played as the 3rd PF.
                    Originally posted by IrishPacer
                    Empty vessels make the most noise.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                      Why do you think the rebounding was so bad? We were at or near the top of the league last year.
                      We were at the top of the league last year. I don't believe that anything is going to change in this season. We will still be one of the top rebounding teams.

                      The rebounding was bad today due to those following reasons, imo:

                      1) Lack of chemistry in our second unit due to this being their first game together. This lack of chemistry led to defensive miscommunications that led to guys being in the wrong spot and thus losing the rebounds.

                      2) We got outhustled by Chicago. Simply put, they wanted this win more. We did hustle at points but we didn't match their intensity throughout the game.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        Copeland is what I expected, a longer version of Gerald Green the guy shoots open or not, he doesn't give a damn about passing the ball and taking a better shot.
                        I think that Copeland had a clear instruction from Vogel to "get in the game and try to bring us back".

                        It's important to note that Cope was the only player in that unit that had experience in bringing a team back in a pro game.

                        The first play that was drawn out when he got in was a side pick and pop with Cope as the receiver that got him an open 3 (that he missed) and in the next offensive possessions our players were setting screens for Cope to get open. That seemed like a clear instruction to me.
                        Originally posted by IrishPacer
                        Empty vessels make the most noise.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                          Yeah, but playing the Starters more minutes than one would expect in a Pre-Season game while going into what appeared to be a loss in Pre-Season halfway through the 4th QTR? I agree with Peck, I get the sense that Vogel was approaching this as a "Statement" game.....since it was the Bulls and it was the 1st game that DRose played in.
                          The starter that played the most in this game played for the Bulls (Jimmy Butler with 30 minutes). The player that played the most minutes (Taj Gibson with 31 minutes) was also a Bull and is the de jure starter when Noah is out (since he always plays more than Nazr). On top of that, the Bulls hustled a lot more than us which indicates that they wanted the game more.

                          The only reason that Frank played the starters late in the 4th was because he didn't play them at the start of the 4th like Thibs did with his own starters.

                          Also, let's add up the minutes that both teams starters played (and let's add Nazr as a starter even though he isn't really a starter and played less than Taj):

                          Bulls: 25 + 25 + 21 + 20 + 30 = 121 minutes

                          Pacers: 27 + 27 + 28 + 25 + 18 = 125 minutes

                          The difference in minutes played is really minimal. I don't think that either coach instructed their team that they have to win this game. Chicago's players seemed to want it a bit more individually but that's it.
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                            Regarding that Hibbert's foul on Rose that everyone was chippy about it. I want you to clear it up for me. From what I saw, Hibbert was vertical but he also dropped his hands down trying to block Rose. Now, did he get the ball or Rose's hands? Couldn't see that well cause the image was a bit grainy.
                            Never forget

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                              Originally posted by Peck View Post
                              • I wanted the Pacers to let Lance guard Rose for a play or two just to see how it would work. I think he can do it for spurts and his lack of respect for anyone would drive Rose up the wall. Perfect from the line, good shot selection and he made a real effort on the boards. I think he is going to have to look for his own shot a little more but overall a good game.
                              I love how far Lance has come as a player and young man whereby this can be stated and taken in a totally positive light. I would love to see that too.
                              "I mean, you'd walk into our dressing room and run into Mel Daniels holding a .45 -- it makes you wonder."

                              Bob Netolicky

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Observations from the first pre-season game vs. the Bulls for 13/14 season.

                                All I could take from this game is that Lance only knows how to play one speed which is kind of awesome, but also terrifies me that he's going to hurt himself in a meaningless game. I thought perhaps Vogel was trying to win the game, but I honestly am not sure the starters cared. There were a lot of times we lost rebounds simply because we didn't chase hard engouh. I thought the starters played one stretch where they were trying to win, from the start of the 3rd quarter til Paul picked up his 5th foul, whcih was about a 7 minute stretch and in that stretch we blitzed the hell out of the Bulls. We outscored them 21-8 to take a 44-41 half time deficit to a 62-52 lead. Paul during this time period was other worldly. He's added a step in, step back jumper expansion pack to his patented 3 point curl that he hit 3 times, that move is pretty much unguardable for someone of his height. Basically for those who couldn't or didn't watch, Paul runs his baseline curl to the elbow of the 3 that we've seen him run hundreds of times, he receive the ball from Lance or Hill and if he's open he pops the 3, but now if the man guarding him is able to fight through, he's added a move where he takes the guy inside the 3 point line, does a little hesitation move and then nails a step back mid range J, it is a move that no NBA Pacer has ever had.

                                Also during that stretch, I think we had at least 2 steals and pretty much dominated the boards.

                                West is so much better than Boozer it is comical.
                                Last edited by Trader Joe; 10-07-2013, 09:47 AM.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X