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

Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

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

  • #31
    Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

    Just as good as he used to be....
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

      Originally posted by pumpk35 View Post
      Agreed. If anyone on our roster is most injury prone, it would be George.

      George Hill games played:

      08-09: 77
      09-10: 78
      10-11: 76
      11-12: 50 (out of 66)
      12-13: 76

      Not sure how he's injury prone. Only once in his career has an injury caused him to miss a significant amount of time, which was the ankle injury a couple of years ago.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

        Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
        He has been more than that in the preseason so far, but a good margin.

        Granger shot 31.8% from the field in the pre-season. Granted it's just pre-season, and sure he was no doubt going to look rusty after being away from the game for so long, but he's not even come close to looking like someone who should be the second or third option in the offense.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

          Originally posted by Speed View Post
          He's been more than a 12 point a game scorer, good outside shooter, in 24 minutes a game, while playing good D off the bench.... in the preseason so far..... by a good margin??????
          I'm not worried about the exact stats, it is only preseason, and he has barely played in over a year. How he has played, though, he has looked like much more than just an outside shooter who can only play 24 minutes a game. He has moved well, created for others, and generally looked more or less like Danny, just missing the shots instead of making them.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

            Originally posted by J7F View Post
            I honestly worry more about G. Hill having multiple minor injuries...
            I sure hope most people aren't sitting around worrying about George Hill when he's very likely to be healthy. What people should be worried about is whether Danny Granger is available in the playoffs in 2014. I really hope he takes it slow and perhaps comes off the bench starting in January. No hurry people. Let the man heal.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
              I sure hope most people aren't sitting around worrying about George Hill when he's very likely to be healthy. What people should be worried about is whether Danny Granger is available in the playoffs in 2014. I really hope he takes it slow and perhaps comes off the bench starting in January. No hurry people. Let the man heal.
              Hill has been healthy enough to play, but I remember both last year and the year before he had some nagging injuries. I think a hip injury was one of them both seasons, but don't quote me on that part.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

                Candace Buckner ‏@CandaceDBuckner 11m

                #Pacers F Danny Granger, in full warm ups, is participating in the layup line before the game but again, he's not expected to play
                Details
                "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

                  Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
                  Candace Buckner ‏@CandaceDBuckner 11m

                  #Pacers F Danny Granger, in full warm ups, is participating in the layup line before the game but again, he's not expected to play
                  Details
                  That screams of him probably being able to play, but they are being extremely cautious.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

                    Local news channel covered this story a day or so back. Showed some practice coverage and Granger seems to be moving around pretty well. Saw a little jumping but nothing extreme. So, I'm going to think they are playing it careful. And, why not? They can see what the new guys can do. If there is any time to be careful, it is the beginning of the season.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

                      Scott Agness ‏@ScottAgness 15m
                      Vogel declares Danny Granger (calf strain) out for the first two games of the season.
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

                        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                        George Hill games played:

                        08-09: 77
                        09-10: 78
                        10-11: 76
                        11-12: 50 (out of 66)
                        12-13: 76

                        Not sure how he's injury prone. Only once in his career has an injury caused him to miss a significant amount of time, which was the ankle injury a couple of years ago.
                        With Hill it's not about games played, it's about effectiveness. The past two years he has had nagging injuries that he played through, but they limited his mobility. Remember when most everyone complained that Hill wasn't fighting through screens last year? He had hip and groin issues all season. It's admirable that he plays through this stuff (maybe...actually perhaps a little more time off would prevent the chain of little maladies), but when he isn't 100% it does have an impact on the game. This is especially true with our defensive system, which relies heavily on the talents of George and Hibbert. When Hill can't consistently keep his man in front of him that leaves the other two more vulnerable to fouls.

                        Hill's tendency to be plagued by nagging injuries is probably not in the top 5 or even 10 of Pacer concerns. But I wouldn't dismiss the idea that he is injury prone based solely on games played/missed. Last year he sat out the whole preseason with a thumb injury, then during the season he had the hip-pointer, a right thigh contusion, a left shoulder contusion, a left groin strain, a concussion...and he aggravated many of those injuries several times. There was even an article on Pacers.com (I think...could have been The Star) about how Hill led the team in injuries.
                        "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

                        "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

                        "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

                          Originally posted by gummy View Post
                          With Hill it's not about games played, it's about effectiveness. The past two years he has had nagging injuries that he played through, but they limited his mobility. Remember when most everyone complained that Hill wasn't fighting through screens last year? He had hip and groin issues all season. It's admirable that he plays through this stuff (maybe...actually perhaps a little more time off would prevent the chain of little maladies), but when he isn't 100% it does have an impact on the game. This is especially true with our defensive system, which relies heavily on the talents of George and Hibbert. When Hill can't consistently keep his man in front of him that leaves the other two more vulnerable to fouls.

                          Hill's tendency to be plagued by nagging injuries is probably not in the top 5 or even 10 of Pacer concerns. But I wouldn't dismiss the idea that he is injury prone based solely on games played/missed. Last year he sat out the whole preseason with a thumb injury, then during the season he had the hip-pointer, a right thigh contusion, a left shoulder contusion, a left groin strain, a concussion...and he aggravated many of those injuries several times. There was even an article on Pacers.com (I think...could have been The Star) about how Hill led the team in injuries.
                          A good point. I wonder if it had anything to do with the dearth of options behind him? If we'd had CJ/Sloan backing him up, would the coaching staff have been more open to shutting him down for a couple of games?

                          If it would mean he's healthy late in the year, it's an option I'd want to consider.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

                            Might as well be careful with Granger to avoid a potential setback. It's part of the reason why we brought in Copeland and drafted Solomon Hill.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              Scott Agness ‏@ScottAgness 15m
                              Vogel declares Danny Granger (calf strain) out for the first two games of the season.
                              Here we go...
                              "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Danny Granger unlikely to play when Pacers open regular season

                                I feel like the circumstance with Granger has been clear, for a very long time.

                                He is getting older, he has a chronic knee injury, and he's not played NBA-level basketball for over 1.5 years now. These are facts that are indisputable. To expect that he's going to be the player that he was in his prime with us is unrealistic. To see him at even 75% of his peak performance in the next 2-3 months is also likely quite unrealistic.

                                He has a 14 million dollar expiring contract. Most of that cap space has already been spoken for in PG's new deal. The front office has also been fairly clear that they intend to try hard to resign Lance next offseason. This gives the team very, very little flexibility to trade Granger's contract this year. Doing so would put them over the luxury tax next year, something that it's clear they don't want to do.

                                This leaves us in the current circumstance: hoping that he'll deliver something resembling a quality 20-30min/game, with solid perimeter offensive and average defense, and highly, highly unlikely to be traded. We will have to wait and see what his new "steady state" is and be thankful for any sort of consistent contribution.

                                Why are folks on this board still wringing their hands about him at this point? You all certainly can't be surprised? I think the goal at this point is to have a solid lineup contributor by the playoffs, which is more or less a coin toss at this point.

                                Just my $0.02.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X