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

Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

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

  • #76
    Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

    Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
    QB blamed Bynum for Ian's butter fingers during the game so maybe not.../green
    I heard him say that too and thought it was total baloney. Ian fumbles at least one pass every game. My nickname for him is Iron Paws.

    I've been ready for an upgrade for Ian since the Heat series in the ECF last year. I think that Larry Bird feels the same way. Really think about it for a minute. Larry Bird said when he returned this past Summer that the biggest needs was to sign PG to an extent ii and upgrade the bench. He got rid of almost everyone on the bench except for Mahinmi. That was the one position he was unable to upgrade during the offseason. Mahinmi has been woefully inconsistent and foul prone all season. I'm sure Larry has noticed that as well and when he had an opportunity to sign a former All-Star who once scored 42 point in a game and pulled down 30 rebounds in another for a mere 1 million dollars he jumped on it with both feet.

    I'm glad this team is so close. I love the fact that they support each other. However, during the Westcoast trip, a major weakness has been exposed. If Roy Hibbert get in foul trouble, the defense decreases rapidly. Another potential problem is that if both Roy and Ian are in foul trouble, they don't have enough size to continue to defend the rim with the Scola and West tandem. Signing Bynum makes a lot of sense. If he's healthy he's the backup for 15-18 minutes and Ian is the 3rd center.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
      That, or agents.
      Or he asked Kobe. I think i heard George had Kobes number.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

        All these NBA players know each other. I have to think it's really, really easy to get someone's number if they want it. Between teammates that might have played AAU, college (obviously not in Bynum's case), or with him in the NBA, I'm sure someone has it. Charity events or off the court stuff they do together is possible. Their agents absolutely know each other so I'm sure that avenue is available.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

          Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
          I heard him say that too and thought it was total baloney. Ian fumbles at least one pass every game. My nickname for him is Iron Paws.

          I've been ready for an upgrade for Ian since the Heat series in the ECF last year. I think that Larry Bird feels the same way. Really think about it for a minute. Larry Bird said when he returned this past Summer that the biggest needs was to sign PG to an extent ii and upgrade the bench. He got rid of almost everyone on the bench except for Mahinmi. That was the one position he was unable to upgrade during the offseason. Mahinmi has been woefully inconsistent and foul prone all season. I'm sure Larry has noticed that as well and when he had an opportunity to sign a former All-Star who once scored 42 point in a game and pulled down 30 rebounds in another for a mere 1 million dollars he jumped on it with both feet.

          I'm glad this team is so close. I love the fact that they support each other. However, during the Westcoast trip, a major weakness has been exposed. If Roy Hibbert get in foul trouble, the defense decreases rapidly. Another potential problem is that if both Roy and Ian are in foul trouble, they don't have enough size to continue to defend the rim with the Scola and West tandem. Signing Bynum makes a lot of sense. If he's healthy he's the backup for 15-18 minutes and Ian is the 3rd center.
          Iron Paws...LOL. Reminds me of Rik Smits nickname in his first few years, Brick Mitts.

          But seriously, you're exactly, exactly right. Most teams carry 3 bigs, and Ian, although a physical specimen and athletically gifted, reminds me of a guy who got goaded into playing basketball when he was 18 years old because he was big and tall (though I'm sure it was earlier)...whereas Bynum got drafted at around 18 years old. Thus he has a low BB IQ...never seems to know where the flow of the play is, where to be, never anticipates passes, and as a consequence, isn't ready for them when they come. It's not that he's bad, it's just that it's clear the nuances of basketball aren't second nature to him.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

            If I have to see Paul George not fighting through one more pick or getting smoked on one more spin or crossover I'm going to puke. This is why I'm so annoyed by "Hill is letting us down" talk.

            Going directly at Paul Joe Johnson scored easily in the 1st quarter. When Paul switched to Livingston we saw a rebirth of the pre-injury Livingston. This was the same Paul I saw struggle with Chandler and Thorton.

            Paul's defense is on suck mode about 75% of the game right now which to me is by far the biggest reason the team defense is down. In one sense this is a compliment because I think his defense is that important, but of course it's a knock because he's playing it so poorly right now.

            He looks a bit lazy on most middle of the game defensive trips. He can get motivated and make plays but a lot of his game has "coasting" written all over it.

            This is not to say he's not a great star and a key Pacer for years to come, just that for whatever reason his DEF play the last 2 weeks just isn't that good.



            Scola - good lord this slump. He is all out of sorts and looks confused half the time. A lot of guys are not reading the floor well, but he's the most lost on offense of the group.


            West - his slump is over and he was dialed in last night. Several tough defensive plays and so many awesome passes. BAMF city last night.


            You hate to knock a win but they beat a team that isn't playing the quality of ball their W-L record recently suggests. Nets are getting more hype than their play actually deserves. There is no confusing their quality with the Suns quality, for example. The Nets are closer to the Lakers than the Suns.

            This culminated last night with the brilliant play to get Paul, not Joe, the final corner 3. And then when Trader Joe and I said "just throw the ball at a Nets foot" when they got possession with .4 left, Kidd either had Paul face the court or failed to tell Paul to face Scola to avoid having happen exactly what any sane NBA fan saw coming the entire way,

            I got a laugh out of just how slow Pierce reacted to the ball hitting his butt. It was like he hadn't even considered the possibility and it just wouldn't compute. Pathetic basketball.



            Don't let Livingston/JJ do anything they want against Paul and all the clunky offense and dropped passes to Ian couldn't keep you from beating the Nets by 20. They are not good and they were on a 2nd night when you weren't. It was about the lowest quality win you could get.




            And if you don't think Bynum is a distraction just read this NETS POST-GAME THREAD. It's happening right here. Instead of evaluating how the team played people are talking about players talking about Bynum.

            Even Hicks is doing it, the guy that thinks Bynum won't distract the locker room. Of course Hicks is no David West.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

              Originally posted by Pingu View Post
              Ironically, Scola's purposeful turnover sealed the deal for the Pacers.
              Luis Scola--Savvy Veteran or Bad Passer?
              The Indiana Pacers won a close one over the Brooklyn Nets Saturday night 97-96. Along the way there were several solid plays made by the entire team, but the best might have come at the end of the game by veteran forward Luis Scola.



              http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RZiFEjxbcQ...1600/scola.gif




              It appears that he screwed up and nailed Paul Pierce in the back with the inbound pass, but if you watch closely you can tell he did it on purpose. Why Pierce had his back turned is a mystery, but it was the perfect time for Scola to lob a soft pass at his back and than watch the ball--and the remaining seconds of the game--bounce away.

              No chance for the Nets to steal the inbound pass. No chance for the Nets to throw up a last second shot. Pacers win.

              http://www.fatmanwriting.com/2014/02...b#.Uu6uQrS1tOA
              12/27/2005 at Spurs - SamBear - 3

              1/2/2008 vs Memphis - SamBear - 19


              4/9/2014 - Luis Scola also recorded a season high with 24 points and Evan Turner added 23 for Indiana.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

                I don't agree with you on the Nyets, Seth. In January, they beat the Thunder, the Hawks twice, the Warriors, the Heat, the Knicks and the Mavs; losing to just the Thunder and the Raptors twice. Are they a great team? ****, no, they won't make it out of the first round of the playoffs in the East. But they've switched up their lineups, Kidd has gotten more comfortable, and their slow, old guys have looked less slow and less old. I think you're going overboard suggesting that Luis' savvy play is indicative of Brooklyn's issues. It was a bad game, but still a good win.
                You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  It really was a crime the way we didn't abuse the West/Pierce matchup on offense. I hate when big teams let small teams off the hook for that.
                  I just didn't understand that at all. This happens a lot, they get a great matchup and just have no way to go at it or feed the ball to that guy.

                  I mean Plumlee lingered with 5 fouls for a long time with no action going right at him. He can't make a strong defensive play for fear of fouling out and you don't even challenge him? I don't get it.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    I just didn't understand that at all. This happens a lot, they get a great matchup and just have no way to go at it or feed the ball to that guy.

                    I mean Plumlee lingered with 5 fouls for a long time with no action going right at him. He can't make a strong defensive play for fear of fouling out and you don't even challenge him? I don't get it.
                    Between this and our overall offense, I have to wonder if the dirty little secret just might be that this encompasses Vogel's weaknesses?

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

                      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                      Between this and our overall offense, I have to wonder if the dirty little secret just might be that this encompasses Vogel's weaknesses?
                      Do you mean just not coaching? I'm seeing more of that then I would like.
                      Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

                        Originally posted by kellogg View Post
                        Iron Paws...LOL. Reminds me of Rik Smits nickname in his first few years, Brick Mitts.
                        Ha that is hilarious, never heard that.

                        Originally posted by SamBear View Post
                        It appears that he screwed up and nailed Paul Pierce in the back with the inbound pass, but if you watch closely you can tell he did it on purpose. Why Pierce had his back turned is a mystery, but it was the perfect time for Scola to lob a soft pass at his back and than watch the ball--and the remaining seconds of the game--bounce away.

                        No chance for the Nets to steal the inbound pass. No chance for the Nets to throw up a last second shot. Pacers win.
                        Did any one seriously think this was an accident? If they think this was a bad pass, they're high.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

                          It was odd. I really never thought we were going to lose the game, which is extremely unusual for me, especially when we lose a lead. Either I'm learning how this team works or I just need to go to a beer festival before every home game...
                          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


                          • #88
                            Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

                            D-West is averaging 18 a game on 49% shooting over the last 5. If we can keep that cooking as the team's D gets back we are in great shape.


                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

                              Originally posted by BillS View Post
                              It was odd. I really never thought we were going to lose the game, which is extremely unusual for me, especially when we lose a lead. Either I'm learning how this team works or I just need to go to a beer festival before every home game...
                              It was the beer festival, and you still owe me a beer from the PG dunk being number 1


                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Post-Game Thread: Pacers beat Brooklyn

                                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                                D-West is averaging 18 a game on 49% shooting over the last 5. If we can keep that cooking as the team's D gets back we are in great shape.
                                You can take it all the way back 7 games to GS. He's averaged 17 PPG over the last 7 games. He's looked very spry since that west coast road trip started. Reminds me of last year's West. The jumpers are falling and his post moves are dialed in. It definitely bodes well for us as we head down the final stretch of the season and into the playoffs.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X