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

Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

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

  • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

    Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
    and whataya say we stop whining about media coverage

    Let me see what the TV version is doing first. I don't know why people keep thinking ESPN web site proves anything - a lot of people won't see that because they go straight to the "HEAT Check" section.

    That said, PJ spent a lot of time talking about PG yesterday, and it was practically the only non-NFL coverage except for Kobe, so it may be thawing.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk
    BillS

    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

      Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
      well from all the Eric Gordon posts I assumed LN.. but then I misspoke bc Gordon went to NC. I get those two mixed up all the time.

      my bad.
      I haven't lived in Indy for 15 years, but random people in town can refer to my high school by initials and everybody knows who they're talking about. I love Indiana.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

        Originally posted by cdash View Post
        I watched the whole thing and I would hardly call the ending "bizarre". I mean, I guess it was a little weird that down 7 with like 22 seconds remaining the game the Heat just kind of gave up like it was over and let Hill throw the ball to a wide open Lance under the basket for a dunk, but it didn't matter and wasn't a big deal.
        No, he meant the "fastbreak-ref-goaltend-tip" sequence. It was pretty weird.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

          Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
          and whataya say we stop whining about media coverage


          Maybe ESPN needs to take their talents to Indiana Beach!

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

            Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
            and whataya say we stop whining about media coverage

            So if you go to the Sportscenter website, the Pacers-Heat have the top video.

            http://espn.go.com/video/sportscenter

            That's a shockingly bad recap. Just awful. I haven't watched Sportscenter in ages, and crap like that demonstrates why.

            EDIT: for comparison, look how much better the NBA.com recap is.
            Last edited by Anthem; 12-11-2013, 08:40 AM.
            This space for rent.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

              I'm pretty sure that our best home record is when we went 36-5 in the first year of the Fieldhouse (99-00 when we wen to the Finals).

              We're 10-0 now. I'm beginning to think that we can give that 36-5 record a serious run for its money. We'll probably lose a couple at home to good (West) teams, and will probably have a "WTF loss" to a garbage team that comes in here and catches us on a bad night where our guard is down, but I just don't see us losing more than 5 games at home this year. We're just becoming near impossible to beat at home.

              It's beautiful to see a great home court advantage again. That crowd seemed so loud and intense last night. The Pacers are once again a "cool" thing to do again.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

                If I never hear the phrase, "Statement game" again it will be too soon. I personally think that phrase is 100% meaningless. Why so much of the discussion is about a meaningless phrase is beyond me. Sad thing is there are so many interesting actual basketball things to discuss about the heat vs pacers matchup.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

                  After a night to sleep on it, I still think we sucked last night. We can't play like that and expect to win too many. 21 turnovers? You kidding me? The Georges gave us a combined 16 minutes of good basketball. I'm hoping it was just fatigue from the long road trip.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

                    I am going to post several links to articles about the game last night.

                    good article about what PG did after losing game 7 in Miami last year
                    http://sports.yahoo.com/news/first-s...070857702.html

                    Nice general article about the game last night.
                    http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=400489184

                    "I thought we brought it tonight," James said. "We know they're a very good defensive team. I thought they hit some tough shots and they attacked the rim real well but even though they had us down by 10 rebounds, I thought we rebounded well and we battled."

                    "Anytime you get into this kind of a slugfest with them, where you're down six to eight points, it feels like it's a 20-point lead," Bosh said. "We know they're a good team. We know what their goals are, we know what our goals are, we want to keep building to be a complete team for the spring."

                    http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/p...-renew-rivalry

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13


                      http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/page/dime-131210/heat-pacers-renew-rivalry


                      Promising Start For A Season Of Heated RivalsBy Brian Windhorst | ESPN.com

                      INDIANAPOLIS -- Regardless of how they may try to insulate themselves from letdown or criticism by debating the terms of the word "rivalry," there's only one thing you need to know about how the Miami Heat and Indiana Pacers view each other.

                      In the waning seconds of the Pacers' 90-84 win Tuesday night, as the players waited for the clock to run out they used the time to start barking at each other. The basic message, cleaned up, was this: " We'll see you next week."

                      If there's a way to determine what games matter to players, it's when they know the date of the next game without having to look at their pocket schedule.

                      "Everybody was talking," Pacers forward David West said. "We circle them on our calendar and they circle us. We'll see them in Miami next week."

                      This was a quality win for the Pacers, who have focused their entire regular season on finishing ahead of the Heat to assure home-court advantage for the playoffs. But there was no yellow rope rolled out to remind the Heat of their season's mortality. Or, as Chris Bosh said before the game: "It's hard to play like there's no tomorrow when, you know, there is."

                      Instead, it was a mostly entertaining stage-setter. As the rest of the East embarrassingly languishes below .500, the Pacers and Heat just had the first round of what could be an 11-game bout between now and June. It took until the 10th meeting between the two teams last season to settle matters.

                      The challenge has only intensified, and the failure of many of their peers has made this a premier matchup in the league. Tuesday showed just how much promise it has for drama and how much uncertainty there is in the outcome.

                      Both teams are just so different in their identities. The Pacers are traditional with their anchor defensive center with focuses on rebounding, dumping the ball to the big man and letting the star wing player create his own shot. They talk loudly and strongly about their goals and sometimes come off as brash in their expectations.

                      The Heat are so modern with their multi-position, centerless attack that values creating turnovers more than rebounds and efficient shots more than even wide-open inefficient ones. They seem to ignore all their opponents, even when they're successful. They stick to the boring script when it comes to their true motivations, wanting their actions to settle things.

                      The Heat's style has beaten the Pacers twice in contested playoff series and it seemed destined for a third. Yet neither, as we see often in rivalries, has yet budged on its philosophy to better deal with its top competition. They've both just tried to get better at playing and winning at their games.

                      That tug-of-war is what will probably eventually decide who wins their battle this season. Or as Heat coach Erik Spoelstra put it simply: "Who can get to whom."

                      Tuesday the Heat were so interested in setting a tone and perhaps answering the Pacers targeting them so publicly recently that they exploded with energy in the early going. They were nearly as aggressive defensively on Paul George as they were two years ago when Linsanity rolled into Miami and they went so ferociously at Jeremy Lin that it might've done psychological damage in the first quarter of that blowout. Lin, frankly, has never looked the same.

                      On the game's first possession, George came off a screen and saw LeBron James guarding him chest-to-chest, hardly the type of ease-into-the-game style that is commonplace even in big regular-season games. George was stunned and he was also scoreless in the first quarter.

                      At first it looked like James was trying to send the younger George, who edged him out for Player of the Month in November and looks like his first serious Most Valuable Player challenger in the East in the past few years, a message. But it did not last.

                      "I knew it was the kind of night it was going to be then," George said. "At that point I knew I just had to run him. I couldn't allow him to load up on me."

                      George did run him and James didn't give in, but he did get tired. Spoelstra had to call timeout to get James off the floor with a minute left in the first quarter he was so gassed. In the second half, when the Heat were relying on James to carry them offensively, they couldn't afford to have him on George. So Dwyane Wade and Ray Allen were getting the assignment and George reeled off 15 points as the Pacers took over the game.

                      "It's rare to see LeBron tired," George said. "It was a challenge to me to rise to that level. I had to be a mature player."

                      James, who seemed to have zapped himself with that first-half burst, was a rare non-factor in that second half as he was largely outplayed and out-defended by George.
                      James had just seven points in the second half plus several crucial turnovers.

                      Consider that one of the points of emphasis when the teams play the Pacers again next week. You can count on James not wasting his reserves by trying to smother George in the first quarter. There will be lessons the Heat take and apply, the next phase of what promises to be an enjoyable back-and-forth all season.

                      Roy Hibbert got the Heat out of their preferred game as they mostly ditched their spread offense and eventually moved Bosh to power forward and put Chris Andersen at center to try to handle the Pacers center. His 24 points and defensive aggression ended up defining this matchup.

                      Bending to deal with Hibbert caused the Heat to be slower and play fewer shooters, which explains why they scored just 37 points in the second half, shot just 4-of-21 from 3-point range and weren't able to punish the Pacers for turning the ball over 21 times. Normally you turn the ball over 21 times against Miami and it's a Wade-James dunk show and a loss.


                      Instead the Heat were complaining about officials letting Hibbert get away with his defensive collisions in the lane. Hibbert may not have won Defensive Player of the Year last season, but he's started regularly getting star calls at that end from officials. He has established himself as a rock and when he goes up the whistles often get swallowed. He didn't even get a foul until midway through the fourth quarter.

                      If James getting whistled for an offensive foul and then a technical for complaining after a midair meeting with Hibbert in a vital moment in the conference finals last season wasn't a message of how it is going to be, this night was a refresher.

                      The idea is the Heat's shooters will punish Hibbert for staying home, but Shane Battier has struggled so much as a shooter recently that he's been losing minutes. The Heat have stopped playing Udonis Haslem, who had several big games against Hibbert in the playoffs last season. And Allen seems to hate Bankers Life Fieldhouse. He didn't even score in two regular-season games there last season and Tuesday he was 1-of-5 shooting.

                      "When they go big-big instead of small-big with Bosh and the Duke guy -- what's his name? oh, Shane Battier -- it allowed me to roam free a little bit," Hibbert said. "We always stay big and we make teams adjust to us." When they're not even remembering your name, it sort of sums it up.

                      This script will be flipped and flipped again before this is over. The Heat will surely have their moments when their strategies make the Pacers look foolish. There will be countermeasures aplenty, the Heat having Greg Oden somewhere in their future to deal with Hibbert in some fashion and the Pacers waiting to roll out Danny Granger.

                      The only thing that seems assured is that nothing is assured. The Heat's ultimate success against the Pacers the last two seasons has only emboldened them and made them a huge threat to a fourth consecutive Finals.

                      "The respect runs deep between these teams," Spoelstra said. "There are going to be some ups and downs."
                      Last edited by Unclebuck; 12-11-2013, 09:00 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

                        Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post



                        he's not exactly wrong
                        Or, it may just be that Roy has more verticality than anyone else.

                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

                          Smits was so tall. He gave problems to everybody he played against. Even Shak had trouble shooting over him.
                          He was also (off the top of my head) the best 7' all mid range shooter I've ever seen... until Dirk (tho I suspect Dirk is 6 10 1/2 ish).

                          That being said, Roy surpassed Rik's overall game influence - at least since the time of last years playoffs. Not since Mutumbo (or that thick monster in D town... that I'm too drunk to name) has anyone so discouraged activity in the paint. It is a beautiful thing! Ewing and ZO Had similar defensive prowess. And that was in a fine age of balanced physical ball.

                          Roy is a monster.
                          And we still have not seen his peak.
                          Last edited by solid; 12-11-2013, 09:22 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

                            Originally posted by SamBear View Post
                            Ref Obstructs Indiana's George Hill on a Fast Break
                            Throughout the baseball season we heard too many reports about umpires admitting they messed up the next day. It's happened too many times during the current NFL season too. How about the NBA season? Can it escape the gaffes that the other major sports have had?

                            Indiana's George Hill would say no after Wednesday night's game against the Miami Heat:

                            Ref Obstructs Indiana's George Hill on a Fast Break
                            It was Lance, not George Hill.
                            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

                              I'm pretty sure that Roy would have lots more blocks if guy's still had the 'nads to "bring it" into his vicinity.

                              Smothered Chicken baby!

                              It's all good. Take that weak stuff back outside.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Heat Postgame Thread 12/10/13

                                Somebody explain what this paragraph from Windhorst on ESPN means:

                                The Heat are so modern with their multi-position, centerless attack that values creating turnovers more than rebounds and efficient shots more than even wide-open inefficient ones. They seem to ignore all their opponents, even when they're successful. They stick to the boring script when it comes to their true motivations, wanting their actions to settle things.
                                Literally, none of the three sentences make sense.

                                Bosh has a good quote though:

                                Or, as Chris Bosh said before the game: "It's hard to play like there's no tomorrow when, you know, there is."
                                http://espn.go.com/nba/dailydime/_/p...-renew-rivalry

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X