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 13-14 Discussion

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

  • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

    Also, are people really squabbling/complaining now? I'm just noticing different opinions on his health and his role, but I think everyone is thrilled with the team right now, yes?

    Comment


    • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

      Originally posted by Bball View Post
      Let's remember, it's not just Granger that would be affected by his return. You could always have a situation where a hobbled Granger taking minutes away from a player or two might cause issues with those players that causes issues to grow from that with the lockerroom taking sides. He wouldn't necessarily even have to be hobbled for that to occur...
      Come on Bball, let's get real. Do you really think the TPTB or even the top 6-7 players themselves are concerned one bit with how Danny's return and soaking up extra minutes might affect Copeland or SHill? If there are scrubs on your bench that actually DO have a problem with Vogel playing Granger in an attempt to evaluate how much of Danny is still there, there is a very simple solution. You dump the scrubs and go with Granger and the other remaining bench players. I'm sure OJ will have no problem with that at all.

      A team doesn't give two craps about how the return of a former star player affects the psyche of two of it's scrub players. Instead, they are more concerned about determining whether the former star player is currently still a star player.
      Last edited by beast23; 11-29-2013, 12:22 PM.

      Comment


      • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

        Originally posted by beast23 View Post
        Come on Bball, let's get real. Do you really think the TPTB or even the top 6-7 players themselves are concerned one bit with how Danny's return and soaking up extra minutes might affect Copeland or SHill? If there are scrubs on your bench that actually DO have a problem with Vogel playing Granger in an attempt to evaluate how much of Danny is still there, there is a very simple solution. You dump the scrubs and go with Granger and the other remaining bench players. I'm sure OJ will have no problem with that at all.

        A team doesn't give two craps about how the return of a former star player affects the psyche of two of it's scrub players. Instead, they are more concerned about determining whether the former star player is currently still a star player.
        It depends on whether he'd return ready to go quickly shaking the rust off or returns a shell of himself, in and out of the lineup, on and off availability, attitude, etc....
        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

        ------

        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

        -John Wooden

        Comment


        • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

          I think you also have to figure that a returned Granger is always going to be on the radar for finishing the game instead of Lance. What's that do for Lance's confidence? Could work either way.
          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

          Comment


          • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            I think you also have to figure that a returned Granger is always going to be on the radar for finishing the game instead of Lance. What's that do for Lance's confidence? Could work either way.
            Good point. I was assuming at this point it wouldn't go that direction but that assumption wasn't based on much.
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

            -John Wooden

            Comment


            • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
              They said "3 more weeks" after he had already missed three weeks. He was expected to start practicing this past week.

              And for others in the thread, Danny, Vogel, and CBuckner have all said it's not the knee.
              They didn't actually say "3 more weeks" in the article I pasted. They said "Indiana Pacers small forward Danny Granger will be out about three weeks as the NBA regular season commences with a strained left calf, the team announced Monday morning."

              Really, that reads like he should've been out a total of about 3 weeks. Your paraphrasing and adding 'more' to the sentence is a change that wasn't really there. Of course my overall point remains, we need to start the clock on the injury when it occurred and not when the Pacers talked about so it still into the 7th week of healing/rehab with the return still not really on the radar.

              It's discouraging that it's taken this long. We can move the goalposts and interject speculation about what was said versus what was meant regarding the rehab time, but we are locked into the start date on the injury and it's now into 7 weeks since it happened. There's really no way to sugarcoat it, it's taking longer than expected.
              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

              ------

              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

              -John Wooden

              Comment


              • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                No offense, but why are we even concerned with "a clock". It seems to me that a clock only implies some level of blame or accountability. What then, do we take the "guilty" party out back and beat the hell out of them?

                Granger will be back when the appropriate people believe him to be completely healed. No sooner, no later. We've waited this long, I don't think it's going to cause any deaths to wait just a while longer, however longer a while" happens to be.

                The only thing we do know is that it is on the horizon and will eventually happen, despite how long it may take.

                Comment


                • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                  The idea of a clock is to interject some perspective into the discussion. The bad news is that Granger's injury is exceeding the expected recovery time. The good news is this team has had plenty of time to develop without Danny as part of the picture and is able to win without him.

                  Secondarily, it also shows that concerns that some have about Danny's health moving forward aren't just made up out of nothing. There is a basis for them. It's not a position that should be ridiculed for example.... IMHO....

                  I agree with you, Granger will be back when he's back. How effective he'll be and whether that return is long term or in skips and jumps is still in question and will be until he proves he can return, be effective, and stay consistent in his role (whatever that may be).

                  Fortunately, it doesn't really seem to matter on the court right now.
                  Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                  ------

                  "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                  -John Wooden

                  Comment


                  • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                    I think you also have to figure that a returned Granger is always going to be on the radar for finishing the game instead of Lance. What's that do for Lance's confidence? Could work either way.
                    If Lance can't deal with Granger coming back you have to question if you even want Lance on the team next year.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                      Right. But my point is that he will be 31 by the time the most important games of the season are played.
                      Which has nothing to do with his current age. You only put that in there the way you did to make him seem older than he really is. He is 30 right now, and his injury is right now. Him being 31 by the end of the season has nothing to do with anything. That is what really grinds my gears. Misrepresentation of reality. When it comes to the "anti-Danny" crowd half of what is said is a misrepresentation of the truth. If your points were valid there would be no reason to try and make him appear older than he is, or try to make him seem like a worse player than he actually was.
                      Last edited by Eleazar; 11-29-2013, 05:13 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                        Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                        Which has nothing to do with his current age. You only put that in there the way you did to make him seem older than he really is. He is 30 right now, and his injury is right now. Him being 31 by the end of the season has nothing to do with anything. That is what really grinds my gears. Misrepresentation of reality. When it comes to the "anti-Danny" crowd half of what is said is a misrepresentation of the truth. If your points were valid there would be no reason to try and make him appear older than he is, or try to make him seem like a worse player than he actually was.

                        Saying that he will be 31 by the end of the season is not a misrepresentation of reality. It's a factual statement.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                          Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                          If Lance can't deal with Granger coming back you have to question if you even want Lance on the team next year.
                          If the concern that McKeyFan has is that Lance could lose some of his confidence because Vogel chooses to have Granger finish the game ( over him ), then my concern would be that Lance is mentally mature enough to handle such a move.

                          But this scenario is IMHO unlikely.....I doubt that Vogel would ever finish a game without Lance in the closing lineup if the game is close....we all know that the best lienup that we have includes Lance at the SG spot. The only scenario that I can see Granger in a Closing lineup ( which would include Lance and take out West at the PF spot ) is if we needed to go small ball while needing a 3pt shot to tie the game.

                          I have no problem with having Gramger start ( for various reasons ), but i do recognize that just because he starts...doesn't mean that he finishes the game.
                          Last edited by CableKC; 11-29-2013, 05:32 PM.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                            Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                            Which has nothing to do with his current age. You only put that in there the way you did to make him seem older than he really is. He is 30 right now, and his injury is right now. Him being 31 by the end of the season has nothing to do with anything. That is what really grinds my gears. Misrepresentation of reality. When it comes to the "anti-Danny" crowd half of what is said is a misrepresentation of the truth. If your points were valid there would be no reason to try and make him appear older than he is, or try to make him seem like a worse player than he actually was.
                            I think it's beginning to sink in. Granger will never be the same player. At one time he was clearly better than George Hill. That will never again be the case...not as a Pacer. At one time, he was better than Lance is right now, simply because he was such a good shooter. Again, that will never again be the case as a Pacer.

                            His shooting may still be there, but he will never again be able to defend or get open quite as well. He's also not going to be as physically strong. It's not that Granger is ancient. It's that he's coming off a knee injury that had him out of the league for a year and a half AND he's not a young player. He just won't have the same lift and speed. By the time he's 32, he joins all vets on their way down hill. That drop off is coming soon. He might possibly have one more excellent year but it's not going to be this year...and most important he won't be doing that in Indy. Let's just hope he comes back and gets to 80% for the playoffs. That's not going to be good enough to close out games. But it will help the bench significantly. Next year is Granger's last chance to play at a very high level and unfortunately it will not be as a Pacer.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                              I think it's beginning to sink in. Granger will never be the same player. At one time he was clearly better than George Hill. That will never again be the case...not as a Pacer. At one time, he was better than Lance is right now, simply because he was such a good shooter. Again, that will never again be the case as a Pacer.

                              His shooting may still be there, but he will never again be able to defend or get open quite as well. He's also not going to be as physically strong. It's not that Granger is ancient. It's that he's coming off a knee injury that had him out of the league for a year and a half AND he's not a young player. He just won't have the same lift and speed. By the time he's 32, he joins all vets on their way down hill. That drop off is coming soon. He might possibly have one more excellent year but it's not going to be this year...and most important he won't be doing that in Indy. Let's just hope he comes back and gets to 80% for the playoffs. That's not going to be good enough to close out games. But it will help the bench significantly. Next year is Granger's last chance to play at a very high level and unfortunately it will not be as a Pacer.
                              You got any lottery numbers for us?

                              Comment


                              • Re: Granger To Resume Practice

                                Originally posted by kent beckley View Post
                                You got any lottery numbers for us?
                                Yes. #10. That was the time we picked Paul George who has replaced Granger as our franchise player.

                                The fact is, you have a better chance winning the lottery than seeing Granger in a Pacer jersey a year from now. He's not playing now and he will not be playing for the Pacers a year from now. At best, he's a 6 month rental coming off the bench to pour in a few points a game.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X