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

Andrew Bynum 13-14 General Discussion

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

  • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

    Some points:

    1) Risk Analysis: One of the factors when doing risk analysis is to combine the DAMAGE a risk coming true would bring with the PROBABILITY of each level of damage. In this case, the worst case scenario (that Bynum comes in and completely disrupts the team) is unlikely because of the very cheapness and short length of his contract - first sign of trouble and the Pacers FO demonstrates their support for the existing locker room by booting Bynum to the baseboard. Were we investing some huge amount of money or needing to arrange a fancy trade to get him out of here, that risk becomes more likely.

    2) Why push Bynum so quickly? Because, as was said, this answers the people who might think the Pacers aren't going for it all this year. Bynum is a recognizable name who was brought in for a final push - that's a significant step this franchise is not known for taking. Does it sell tickets? Well, the STH renewal period isn't too far off - but, marketing cynicism aside, it's also a legitimate move to make when going for it all.

    3) What would PD have thought if he'd gone to the Heat? I think anyone reading the copious posts during speculation would have to come away with the idea that those who thought he would disrupt their locker room were very definitely balanced out by those who thought it would about guarantee them the championship. I would even venture to say MORE people were concerned about him helping the Heat than were certain he'd drag them down, while it seems like we are raising a lot more concerns about dragging US down than ever were pointed out for the Heat. Maybe it is because we feel our success is due much more to chemistry than talent, which I think has been mentioned, but ultimately it goes against the idea that Bynum is being overvalued because he is wearing Blue & Gold.
    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: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

      When can we expect Bynum to play?
      https://twitter.com/DrogsNavan

      Change is neither good or bad, it simply is.

      Comment


      • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

        Originally posted by IrishPacer View Post
        When can we expect Bynum to play?
        Probably towards the end of February. Maybe sooner.

        Comment


        • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          Bynum has not been in basketball shape for two seasons now, I doubt he is going to get into shape over the next few weeks.

          At best he is a better backup than Ian and can provide some low post scoring off the bench playing 10-15 minutes per game. And sure there is some value in that, I don't see this as a game changer.
          He averaged 20 minutes a game with Cleveland and put up better numbers than Mahinmi. I think part of his problem was that he was paid starter money ($12 million) but only giving backup production. Not sure if that was due to conditioning or attitude or what. His numbers would have been considered very good for a backup. So I'm hoping he continues to give that same level of production to the Pacers now that he is paid like a backup. And I hope he raises his field goal percentage now that he's part of a more mature team. He should get less double teams and if he is doubled, his assist numbers show he should be able to get the ball to an open player.

          Comment


          • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

            I hope being with a good team, in more ways than wins and losses, gets the most out AB. With Lance there to throw him passes I am very interested in watching that play out. Ian just cannot catch the ball. He is a good defender but that is about it. I am very tired of watching our team make so many interior passes to another player 3 feet away, that turn into turnovers. Just shoot the ball please.
            {o,o}
            |)__)
            -"-"-

            Comment


            • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

              Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
              Danny should definitely be getting 25 minutes every game, while either Lance of Paul playing over 36 minutes should be more of an exception than a common occurrence.

              I'm not sure I am ready to make Danny the main focus of the bench offense. They force fed him some against the Nets, and it didn't working out very well. I do think his role does need to increase though.




              Moving Danny for a guard who can back up Lance makes sense to cut down on his 36 mpg. Copeland would slide in to back up PG. Unless Vogel is willing to move Danny down to backup 2, and Copeland to back up 3.

              Comment


              • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                Moving Danny for a guard who can back up Lance makes sense to cut down on his 36 mpg. Copeland would slide in to back up PG. Unless Vogel is willing to move Danny down to backup 2, and Copeland to back up 3.
                I'm more concerned about Paul's minutes than I am about Lances. When Lance starts to show a huge drop off in his game, then maybe we can take it in to consideration. Otherwise, I think 35 minutes a night minimum is fine for him.
                There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

                Comment


                • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                  Originally posted by Strummer View Post
                  He averaged 20 minutes a game with Cleveland and put up better numbers than Mahinmi. I think part of his problem was that he was paid starter money ($12 million) but only giving backup production. Not sure if that was due to conditioning or attitude or what. His numbers would have been considered very good for a backup. So I'm hoping he continues to give that same level of production to the Pacers now that he is paid like a backup. And I hope he raises his field goal percentage now that he's part of a more mature team. He should get less double teams and if he is doubled, his assist numbers show he should be able to get the ball to an open player.
                  Except for the part where his team was 10.1 points better with him on the bench than they were with him on the court. If Cleveland was a winning team it wouldn't be a big deal, but Cleveland currently is tied for the 6th worst record in the league.

                  Comment


                  • Re: So what was Andrew's Bynum's conduct detrimental to the team??

                    Why are we only focusing on what happened in Cleveland. He was a little bit of a problem in LA and he didn't show much desire to get into shape and play for the Sixers either.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                      Except for the part where his team was 10.1 points better with him on the bench than they were with him on the court.
                      But why was that? What does it mean? Is it a reflection on him or the way the other players tried to play with him? Were his teammates getting open so he could pass the ball back out when he got doubled? Was he having to force shots because he didn't have any better options? I don't know. I do know that his rebound and assist numbers were better than Mahinmi's. More blocks and less fouls. Looks promising to me.

                      ........MPG ..FG% .FT% RPG APG SPG BPG TO .PF .PPG
                      Bynum.. 20.0 .419 .762 5.3 1.1 .30 1.2 1.3 1.2 8.4
                      Mahinmi 16.0 .424 .622 3.1 0.3 .60 0.9 0.8 2.7 3.0


                      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                      If Cleveland was a winning team it wouldn't be a big deal, but Cleveland currently is tied for the 6th worst record in the league.
                      Even without the suspension, I suspect that they would have traded him or cut him anyway because he wasn't living up to the contract. But that's why they signed him to a contract with only a $6 million guarantee. He was a low risk, high reward signing for them. But they didn't get the reward they hoped for.

                      Coming off the bench for the Pacers he should be facing other backups. There's no reason not to think he can continue to give 20 minutes a game. And if his production matches what he did in Cleveland we'll be thrilled.
                      Last edited by Strummer; 02-03-2014, 12:41 PM. Reason: better phrasing, maybe.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                        Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                        Moving Danny for a guard who can back up Lance makes sense to cut down on his 36 mpg. Copeland would slide in to back up PG. Unless Vogel is willing to move Danny down to backup 2, and Copeland to back up 3.
                        Just stop. Your constant need to trade someone is beyond annoying.

                        Anyways Butler is more likely to get the back-up SF minutes than Copeland.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                          Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                          Moving Danny for a guard who can back up Lance makes sense to cut down on his 36 mpg. Copeland would slide in to back up PG. Unless Vogel is willing to move Danny down to backup 2, and Copeland to back up 3.
                          How have you not gotten that trading Granger means losing Lance

                          Comment


                          • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                            Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                            Except for the part where his team was 10.1 points better with him on the bench than they were with him on the court. If Cleveland was a winning team it wouldn't be a big deal, but Cleveland currently is tied for the 6th worst record in the league.
                            Gerald Green was a suction of Dyson-ic proportions for the Pacers last year, and this year is a starter for a vastly improved Suns team. It all comes down to the situation.
                            Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 02-03-2014, 01:02 PM.
                            There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                              Originally posted by Mad-Mad-Mario View Post
                              How have you not gotten that trading Granger means losing Lance
                              Not necessarily. He could be traded for another player with an expiring contract.

                              Still this thread is supposed to be about Bynum. I sure hope that everyone, including the Pacers players, gives him the benefit of the doubt. Both times he's had a problem, Mike Brown has been the coach. He was really good under Phil Jackson. The combo of Larry Bird, Frank Vogel, and Nate McMillan will have no problems getting him to "buy in".

                              With the way some people talk about Bynum you'd think the Pacers just signed Dennis Rodman. The only complaints I've read about him are that he's an aloof loaner who sometimes likes to jack up 3-pointers in practice. Maybe it's because his teammates were jerks in LA (nobody really likes Kobe off the court) and Cleveland. We never heard any of those complaints from Philly and Doug Collins. As far as shooting 3-pointers in practice is concerned, he'll fit in fine here as that's what all the Pacers players do after practice for fun and the coaching staff is fine with the players having a little fun during practice and during the games. He'll fit in fine off the court. Whether he'll fit in fine on the court is the biggest question mark.
                              Last edited by naptownmenace; 02-03-2014, 01:02 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 02/01/14 Update: Andrew Bynum is a Pacer

                                I think those of us saying that this move likely won't hurt us are saying exactly that. It's not that we don't recognize that Bynum could be an issue. But those of you saying, "He killed the Sixers and Cavs; therefore he's going to kill us" aren't taking context into context (haha, I just made that up). It's all been said before in this thread; he's being paid way less (peanuts, actually); he's being expected to do way less; we have a great team and lockerroom full of strong character guys who won't put up with his ****; and if despite all that he still manages to be a pain --- we cut his ***. I believe our guys will have no problem moving on just fine.

                                Therefore, in our opinion, this isn't a very risky move. It would be a a risky move for Cleveland, because they suck as a team, have no leadership, were paying him a truckload, and were expecting him to be their team's backbone, and he's known to lose focus when the situation isn't great.

                                And like I said earlier, there's actually something to be said on Bynum's part that he was willing to come here for peanuts and play a limited role. I think it's a sign he's been humbled and possibly matured. Of course, I could be way wrong about that, and if I am and he comes here and tries to bed CJ Watson's mom, then you know... Bird cuts his butt.
                                Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 02-03-2014, 01:00 PM.
                                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X