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

Larry Bird on Granger: He doesn't work hard enough(in the offseason)"

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

  • #46
    Re: Larry Bird on Granger: He doesn't work hard enough(in the offseason)"

    I think there's room for a factual statement here without saying that Danny doesn't have a good work ethic. When you look at guys like Hibbert and George, they not only add something basketball-related to their game (Hibbert's low post moves, Paul's shooting and dribbling), they are also killing themselves to improve strength and conditioning. If Danny spends all summer every summer working on becoming a better shooter, that would be reflected in his shooting stats, which historically, it has been. If, simultaneous to that, Danny isn't working on dribbling, posting up, and becoming a stronger, better conditioned, more explosive player, then defensively, he's not going to improve. He's not going to draw more fouls from the post and on drives, and he's not going to be in game shape when the season starts, because he's spent that time just focusing on shooting.

    Also, there's also the part where we don't hear about George and Hibbert building a bat cave or vacationing with a spouse in the off-season. That's not a slight on Danny, but it is indicative of the type of player each of these three guys wants to be.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Larry Bird on Granger: He doesn't work hard enough(in the offseason)"

      Originally posted by Eindar View Post
      Also, there's also the part where we don't hear about George and Hibbert building a bat cave or vacationing with a spouse in the off-season. That's not a slight on Danny, but it is indicative of the type of player each of these three guys wants to be.
      I am pretty sure just about all of them vacation in the offseason, and it isn't like building a bat cave really takes up that much time. We also did here from Hibbert that he takes the first month easy before he starts to work on things.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Larry Bird on Granger: He doesn't work hard enough(in the offseason)"

        Originally posted by Eindar View Post
        When you look at guys like Hibbert and George, they not only add something basketball-related to their game (Hibbert's low post moves, Paul's shooting and dribbling.
        In his last healthy offseason, Danny spent the summer adding a post game. It took about a month to really work it into the offense, but by the New Year it was really strong.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Larry Bird on Granger: He doesn't work hard enough(in the offseason)"

          Well, it impresses the heck out of me how DG could get MIP by sucking worse every successive year. I'm also impressed that in spite of the revelation that OK players on bad teams never get picked by coaches for the All-Star Game that Danny convinced coaches to pick him for the ASG when he was only a mediocre player who looked good on a bad team. He may suck as an NBA player but he has a great future as a con man scam artist.

          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


          • #50
            Re: Larry Bird on Granger: He doesn't work hard enough(in the offseason)"

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            In his last healthy offseason, Danny spent the summer adding a post game. It took about a month to really work it into the offense, but by the New Year it was really strong.
            I recall him coming back with that post game, but he rarely used it. I remember that because I wanted him to do it more. So, while an improvement we didn't realize too much value out of it.

            Really, Danny made huge strides the first several years in the league. But about 80% of his improvement was related to scoring or shooting. His second area of improvement was dribbling. He can now dribble all the way for a layup. One thing I've really been surprised by is that he's not better rebounding the ball. I would think with his body and length he'd be all over the boards. Instead, he has rather average rebound numbers for a big wing. Even so, he's still qualifies as a great NBA player IMO. He does most everything pretty well and shoots better than most wings.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Larry Bird on Granger: He doesn't work hard enough(in the offseason)"

              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              Well, it impresses the heck out of me how DG could get MIP by sucking worse every successive year. I'm also impressed that in spite of the revelation that OK players on bad teams never get picked by coaches for the All-Star Game that Danny convinced coaches to pick him for the ASG when he was only a mediocre player who looked good on a bad team. He may suck as an NBA player but he has a great future as a con man scam artist.

              Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk
              OK players get picked by coaches all the time not sure why you are acting like that never happens, the year DG was selected Jameer Nelson, Mo Williams, Devin Harris and Rashard Lewis were selected to be in the game too, Rashard was picked twice and people around here think the guy was garbage.

              I mean even some OK players were selected at least one time to the all star game, Josh Howard, Caron Butler, Okur, Ilgauskas, Jamaal Magloire?(lol), Theo Ratliff?, I can keep going but you get the point, just because somebody was picked by the coaches doesn't mean that player was not an OK player.

              .Note that I don't think DG was an OK player but I don't think he was one of the greatest ever either, he is in the same list with Josh Howard, Rashard Lewis and Caron Butler IMO.
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Larry Bird on Granger: He doesn't work hard enough(in the offseason)"

                IMO, these comments are blunt, clear, and straight to the point. I find it hard to see any ambiguity or sarcasm in them, IMHO.

                I don't think that many here think that Bird was implying that DG sits on a beach all summer and doesn't do squat. Clearly the guy does what is expected of him and practices in the summer with teammates to improve. But keep in mind that Larry Bird has been around the NBA since 1979 as a player, coach, and executive. He is one of the greatest players in NBA history and has had great successes as a coach and executive. It's pretty much impossible to find another person who has as much experience at all three levels of NBA basketball. Thus, I think it's pretty safe to say that Larry is familiar with every type of work ethic that a player can have. Most NBA players work pretty hard, but there are obviously going to be those guys who go the extra mile killing themselves in the summer to get better. I'm pretty sure that Larry knows who these guys are after spending most of his life around the NBA game.

                When I read Bird's comments, it's clear to me that he's saying that DG isn't one of the guys who completely kills himself in the off-season. This isn't meant to say that Danny is just some lazy bum who doesn't do anything. Clearly he practices like virtually every NBA player. And he obviously improved every year from age 22-26 because those are the ages where players naturally get better. I don't think Bird is saying that Danny doesn't put effort in. He's just saying that he doesn't go the extra mile, and I'm pretty sure that Bird knows what the extra mile is.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Larry Bird on Granger: He doesn't work hard enough(in the offseason)"

                  As you find in all professions, even the most competitive, some people do indeed work harder than other people. I don't believe Bird would have said that if it were not the truth. At the same time, there is no doubt that Granger improved dramatically the first 3 or 4 seasons in the NBA. As it is with most of these debates, there is truth on both sides. Yet Bird said what he did and I would take it at face value. You have to really want to disbelieve this quote from the link in the OP:

                  "He doesn't work hard enough (in the offseason)," Bird said. "He's not a guy who'll push himself to the brink like a lot of our guys do. He works hard but he doesn't push himself. That's why he starts slow every year and he just works his way back. Now this year, he's been hurt, so it's a different deal."
                  Last edited by BlueNGold; 12-25-2013, 11:07 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Larry Bird on Granger: He doesn't work hard enough(in the offseason)"

                    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                    IMO, these comments are blunt, clear, and straight to the point. I find it hard to see any ambiguity or sarcasm in them, IMHO.
                    I agree with all of that. Bird's clearly the man, so if he says something plainly it should be taken as more-or-less gospel.

                    But while what he said was straightforward, I'm trying to understand. Danny's been in the league for a decade... did he fail to work hard enough every year? Surely the first few years he was killing it on the offseason, and in the last couple of years he's been rehabbing. In 2011, Paul George said Danny was working hard, instead of taking an easy summer like normal. So if I had to guess, I'd say Danny didn't work hard in 2009 (after averaging over 25ppg the previous year) and possibly in 2010 (played FIBA, but rested otherwise). That would make sense of Bird's comments, Paul's comments, and the external evidence.

                    Is there another explanation?
                    This space for rent.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Larry Bird on Granger: He doesn't work hard enough(in the offseason)"

                      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                      I haven't looked at his numbers on a month-by-month basis before this evening, but since you put it out there, I went and checked BBREF. Eyeball test only; if you want to do advanced metrics you're more than welcome.

                      Let's take 2013-2014 and 2012-2013 out of the discussion, because rehab is for quitters.
                      Here's 2011: <LINK>. Danny's first-month scoring was pretty solid. First 5 games: 16, 21, 22, 11, 15.
                      Here's 2010: <LINK>. Bad game against Philly, but other than that he had good numbers: 26, 33, 22, 7, 19.
                      Here's 2009: <LINK>. Same thing. 31, 22, 18, 21, 22.

                      I'll grant that I only took a quick glance, but I'm not seeing what you're seeing. I've also subscribed to the "Granger always starts cold" myth as well, but I'm just not seeing it in the numbers. Can you pull some spreadsheets together and show us your thinking?

                      http://www.basketball-reference.com/...ngda01/splits/

                      You can see his monthly splits from his career here.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Larry Bird on Granger: He doesn't work hard enough(in the offseason)"

                        I notice that he shoots higher in Oct/Nov than he does in Dec/Jan.... And those numbers are kind of surprising. He shoots a lower fg% during those months, but his 3pt% barely moves for Dec, and then jumps for Jan. I would have thought it would have followed the fg% trend, and would have been the driving force behind it since he relies on it so much.
                        Last edited by Since86; 12-26-2013, 10:29 AM.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X