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

Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

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

  • #16
    Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

    Originally posted by Tom White View Post
    I tried to put a humorous picture emoticon with the post, but my flash player wasn't working and I could not tell one of them from another. I'll try again
    Yes, it was supposed to be (true, but) funny.

    EDIT: I just tried viewing the emoticon again, and all I see are little boxes. No pictures. Even updated my flash.
    I'm not for certain, but I think Able is talking about the thread title, not your post. It's just a topic that has been run into the ground. In fact, it seems like it emerges in every thread regardless of the original topic.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

      Lance should start because Lance is the healthier player.

      Lance is also the better shot creator.

      In 2013 Lance is the better defender.

      In 2013 Lance is the better rebounder.

      Letting the starters and the bench get familiar is also important for the regular season and playoffs, switching players for the hell of it is just not the smart thing to do.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

        Advantages Granger:
        Most diverse scorer on the team
        When healthy he will be at worst the second best scorer on the team
        Can guard bigger SFs in the post
        Is much more respected by opposing teams defenses(see Dwight doubling him in the post)
        Good spot up shooter, spreads the defense

        Advantages Lance:
        Better handles and passing
        Can defend faster, quicker guards
        Great at pushing the fast break


        Simply put Danny is the better player(it is honestly laughable that some people actually think Lance is the better player right now when he has never done anything to suggest as much) and the better fit for the starters. Lance is flashier, but not really starter material. What he is good at can really be taken advantage of off the bench, as a change of pace player, and creating for the other back-ups. He is a "playmaker", but not really a shooter or a scorer in the half court. Although he shouldn't have any problem breaking down other teams back-ups and finding the open guy (Scola) for some easy baskets. I honestly don't think you can go wrong with either of them off the bench, but I think Granger's abilities mesh better with the starters as well someone like Lebron won't be able to cheat off of Granger like he did with Lance.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

          Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
          Advantages Granger:
          Most diverse scorer on the team
          When healthy he will be at worst the second best scorer on the team
          Can guard bigger SFs in the post
          Is much more respected by opposing teams defenses(see Dwight doubling him in the post)
          Good spot up shooter, spreads the defense

          Advantages Lance:
          Better handles and passing
          Can defend faster, quicker guards
          Great at pushing the fast break


          Simply put Danny is the better player(it is honestly laughable that some people actually think Lance is the better player right now when he has never done anything to suggest as much) and the better fit for the starters. Lance is flashier, but not really starter material. What he is good at can really be taken advantage of off the bench, as a change of pace player, and creating for the other back-ups. He is a "playmaker", but not really a shooter or a scorer in the half court. Although he shouldn't have any problem breaking down other teams back-ups and finding the open guy (Scola) for some easy baskets. I honestly don't think you can go wrong with either of them off the bench, but I think Granger's abilities mesh better with the starters as well someone like Lebron won't be able to cheat off of Granger like he did with Lance.
          It seems like a popular belief is that Lance didn't wow us the entire season because he was forced into being our fifth offensive option and our third or fourth ballhandler, thus preventing him from being a star. It seems much more likely to me that he was put into those positions because he wasn't good enough to demand more than that.

          With that said, he most definitely is starter material but we would be able to use more of his developing skills as a main ballhandler in the second unit. I think having another shooter in the starting unit is important. So I would be happy with Granger starting or even starting Orlando and playing him 8-10 minutes a night. With that third shooter, it's going to be hard to double anybody on our team.

          I really liked the combo of Stephenson and Granger from what I saw in the preseason though. So having a fifth "dummy" starter wouldn't necessarily be bad. Chicago did it with great success with Bogans a couple years ago.
          Time for a new sig.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

            Admins, just an fyi, the system is creating a bunch of double posts right now (see Eleazar above--and it's happened to me several times). When you click "Post quick reply" it returns to the same screen. When you click it again it posts twice.
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

              I like lance in the second unit because it allows him to be the primary playmaker, regardless of his talent level and every he brings to the table he's going to be the 5th option with the starters. I like the advantage that lance will have going against other teams benches. If lance and Scola can get a rhythm it may lead to a bigger impact than "starting"

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                Has anyone esle noticed the chemistry that the 1st unit built last year ?? With Lance suddenly going from somewhere on the bench to an important starting role ??

                And people really want to mess with that ?? Your starters are your starters. They don't sit out on the 2nd game of back-to-backs. You don't yank Lance around by starting him here, benching him there - all because Granger can't hack it. Keep the starting 5 intact, let Granger come off the bench and find his place on this team. If he can - GREAT. If not, his expiring is valuable come January or so.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                  Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                  Admins, just an fyi, the system is creating a bunch of double posts right now (see Eleazar above--and it's happened to me several times). When you click "Post quick reply" it returns to the same screen. When you click it again it posts twice.
                  Aren't you used with it by now? I mean I know it shows that error page or whatever but I also know my piece has already been posted.
                  Never forget

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                    Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                    Has anyone esle noticed the chemistry that the 1st unit built last year ?? With Lance suddenly going from somewhere on the bench to an important starting role ??

                    And people really want to mess with that ?? Your starters are your starters. They don't sit out on the 2nd game of back-to-backs. You don't yank Lance around by starting him here, benching him there - all because Granger can't hack it. Keep the starting 5 intact, let Granger come off the bench and find his place on this team. If he can - GREAT. If not, his expiring is valuable come January or so.
                    Has anybody noticed the chemistry that the 1st unit built before Granger was lost to injury?

                    And you want to mess with that while forcing a guy to lose his starting job because of injury? It can go both ways

                    Vogel has treated both guys like incumbent starters without a mention of which one has to fight to make the starting unit. And I fail to see where we would be yanking Lance around by making him go back to the bench. If he's on the bench, he's the 6th man who probably starts if Granger misses a game. And as for starters sitting out back to backs? You should tell Gregg Popovich or Doc Rivers that sitting starters for rest is just not something you do.
                    Time for a new sig.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                      A few notable exceptions aside--we all know the pros and cons of both players and what they bring to the table as a starter and as a 6th man. So as opposed to focusing on the pros and cons, I wanted to go a different route and focus on which role best utilizes each players strength's.

                      Lance is the 5th option offensively as a starter. His touches will continue to come from backdoor cuts (one of the tops in the league in points that were assisted last season), open court plays, and occasional spot ball handling duties within the half court. Although we only have pre-season as proof, this seems to be the way Vogel thinks is the best way to utilize Lance with the starters.

                      If Lance were to come off the bench, he's obviously the primary ball handler. He also will have more freedom to make plays or make mistakes (again from what we've seen in the preseason) The fact that he likes to play at a faster pace also suits the second unit a bit more IMO--but I see the argument of having that wild card in the starting line-up.

                      Whether Granger starts or not, we've seen during the preseason that his role will be close to the same in either case. As a starter he was clearly a secondary offensive option on the perimeter. He received a few set plays to get him the ball on the move which allowed him to either get to the basket, the FT line, an open mid range J, or a pass back out. He was also utilized as a floor spacer who benefited from open looks from 3 due to the attention our bigs and PG receive.

                      As a reserve we pretty much run the same sets that I mentioned before, just with different personnel. The one difference here is that Danny looked to score a little more with this unit whereas he would look to make an extra pass if available when playing with the starters.

                      I think it works either way for both players to be honest--though I do feel being able to unleash Lance off the bench is best.

                      FWIW if Granger ends up having minor injury issues during the season., I could see Vogel deciding to simply start Lance for continuity sake.
                      Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 10-21-2013, 05:56 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                        Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                        Has anyone esle noticed the chemistry that the 1st unit built last year ?? With Lance suddenly going from somewhere on the bench to an important starting role ??
                        Yes--it's similar to the same chemistry the same players had when Granger was a starter. The 4 main starters are so good and play so well together that it honestly doesn't matter what wing starts with them.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                          Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                          FWIW if Granger ends up having minor injury issues during the season., I could see Vogel deciding to simply start Lance for continuity sake.
                          We're already seeing it. Granger does not have the rust knocked off and isn't going to use meaningless preseason games to knock it off. So instead, he will have to knock it off as we attempt to win home court over the Heat and the other contenders. Our starting SF will be rusty for weeks at least...with continuity being lost from the outset.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                            We're already seeing it. Granger does not have the rust knocked off and isn't going to use meaningless preseason games to knock it off. So instead, he will have to knock it off as we attempt to win home court over the Heat and the other contenders. Our starting SF will be rusty for weeks at least...with continuity being lost from the outset.
                            I'm not sure how 3 preseason games would prevent "weeks of rust." Would you prefer he play through his injuries and risk aggravating them early or give him a week and a half off to heal? It's not like our entire team's been on fire this preseason and Danny's been messing it up. I'd take a healthy, rusty player over an injured player any day.
                            Time for a new sig.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                              Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                              Has anybody noticed the chemistry that the 1st unit built before Granger was lost to injury?
                              We might as well talk about the chemistry that Reggie Miller brought too then.

                              The Pacers have gone a loooooooooooong time without Granger. It's like that girlfriend you had (you folks HAVE had a girlfriend - right ??). Things are great, things are wonderful. Someone else comes along, you turn your attention away from one and towards the other. Months later, the old one comes back. You're just not that interested anymore. If you were, it would screw up your current situation. And then whenever you finally realize you are making a mistake - the new one is gone. Now, neither is a solution.

                              Stick with the new girlfriend.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                                Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                                Yes--it's similar to the same chemistry the same players had when Granger was a starter. The 4 main starters are so good and play so well together that it honestly doesn't matter what wing starts with them.
                                The Murphleavy group of few years ago had chemistry going too should the Pacers bring them back? of course not, the fact is that the Pacers starting 5 last year(with Lance as the starter) made it further than any starting 5 in the previous years(7 years?).
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X