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

The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

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

  • The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

    THE NBA'S MOST anomalous superstar is headed to lunch. It's a snow-flecked, hundred-yard saunter from Bankers Life Fieldhouse to Kilroy's Bar n' Grill in Indianapolis. Not long ago, Paul George swears, he could make this trek for a platter of Indy's finest stuffed breadsticks with nary a notice. But on this January day, no such anonymity. A Bud Light truck driver climbs out of his window to bellow "PG!" upon spotting the 23-year-old. In the restaurant, another man beseeches George for an autographed napkin; another requests a picture. By the time a lady thrusts a phone in George's face -- so her friend can hear him breathe, apparently -- the point is clear: This lunch is going to take time.


    Squeezing his frame into a booth at Kilroy's, George exhales. What were these walks like, say, a year ago, before he became the best player on the NBA's best team? "To be honest," he says, grinningly sheepishly, "when I walked around downtown, people thought I was a college student. They'd tell me, 'You must play for IU.'"

    ...



    "I want to be taken seriously," George says, finally, breadstick still in hand. "I want to be one of the most decorated players in this league. I want to win the MVP. Be the Defensive Player of the Year. I'd love to be the scoring champion. Be a real champion. Be a gold medalist."


    This sounds like a lot, he is told -- for any superstar. And as he looks up, nodding, what he does next feels like a warning to everyone he has ever deferred to, and idolized, and devoted himself to decapitating. "It is," he says, his gaze steady, his voice unwavering. "I want it all."
    http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/stor...-espn-magazine

  • #2
    Re: The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

    He'll have his gold medal in a couple years. The rest, we'll see.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

      If he wants all of those things, he needs to move in with Larry at the Eagle Ranch so he can enjoy some peace and quiet and complete privacy with pretty much no threat of outside distractions.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

        I wish I could eat breadsticks like it was nothing.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

          Another great article on a Pacer. SI had Hibbert last week, ESPN with PG this week. Roy won't be able to say "y'all mother ****ers don't watch us" this year haha.

          Also still crazy to think about that PG is only 23. So much more time for him to be even better, which I have no doubt he will be.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

            If Pippen's PER + Duncan's DWS + James' net rating = Paul George, then how many seasons until he becomes the NBA's best two-way player? (Trick question: He already is.)

            That is one of the single most bone tingling lines I've ever read about a Pacer.


            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

              Would have never guessed that Paul was averaged less TOs per 100 posessions than LBJ or KD. Damn this kid is good.


              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                If Pippen's PER + Duncan's DWS + James' net rating = Paul George, then how many seasons until he becomes the NBA's best two-way player? (Trick question: He already is.)

                That is one of the single most bone tingling lines I've ever read about a Pacer.
                No way man he's a Rudy Gay level chucker... #Paulhogallday

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

                  Originally posted by TinManJoshua View Post
                  No way man he's a Rudy Gay level chucker... #Paulhogallday
                  Fixed
                  "There is a time to play and a time to win. It is what you do during winning time that differentiates the average players from stars."

                  ~Ahmad Rashad~

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

                    Originally posted by Mr.Hinds View Post
                    Fixed
                    What was the green I used too dark?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

                      Sweet article. Might buy the magazine.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

                        PG is young, and he is already a top 5 arguably top 10 definitely player in the league. Kid has the potential to go places.
                        #LanceEffect

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

                          PG isn't consistent enough on the offensive end yet to be in the argument for best two-way player in the game.





                          Yet.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

                            Originally posted by Shade View Post
                            PG isn't consistent enough on the offensive end yet to be in the argument for best two-way player in the game.





                            Yet.
                            His defense is pretty much ALWAYS there. He just needs to continue growing consistency at the offensive end and he WILL be a top 3 player in the league.

                            I would say he is the best wing defender in the league. Then we have the best paint protector in the league too.
                            #LanceEffect

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The Grand Unified Theory of Paul George

                              http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/stor...-espn-magazine

                              THE NBA'S MOST anomalous superstar is headed to lunch. It's a snow-flecked, hundred-yard saunter from Bankers Life Fieldhouse to Kilroy's Bar n' Grill in Indianapolis. Not long ago, Paul George swears, he could make this trek for a platter of Indy's finest stuffed breadsticks with nary a notice. But on this January day, no such anonymity. A Bud Light truck driver climbs out of his window to bellow "PG!" upon spotting the 23-year-old. In the restaurant, a man beseeches George for an autographed napkin; another requests a picture. By the time a lady thrusts a phone in George's face -- so her friend can hear him breathe, apparently -- the point is clear: These breadsticks are going to take time.

                              Squeezing himself into a booth at Kilroy's, George exhales. What were these walks like, say, a year ago, before he became the best player on the NBA's best team? "To be honest," he says, grinningly sheepishly, "when I walked around downtown, people thought I was a college student. They'd tell me, 'You must play for IU.'"

                              Ignore, for a moment, that the campus of Indiana University resides an hour's drive from downtown Indianapolis -- or that Occam's razor suggests that a 6'9" man a block from the hometown arena might, in fact, play for the local NBA franchise. That a man now universally regarded as a leading candidate for league MVP could have been so anonymous a mere 12 months ago is enough to raise its own question: Has anyone in the NBA ever become better, faster than Paul George?

                              With an 83-inch wingspan on an 81-inch frame, he's the Platonic ideal of the modern swingman. His 22.2 points, 6.4 rebounds, 3.4 assists and 1.8 steals a game (through Feb. 12) scarcely hint at the astonishing depth of his all-around game. "I watch Paul George now," one Eastern Conference scout says, "and the physical tools, coordination and underlying biomechanics are all there, and there in abundance. In terms of talent, there's almost no limit to how good he could be." But what most separates George from the rest of the NBA elite is the anonymous nobody he used to be. Since the advent of the Internet and the glut of scouting databases that emerged to service the billion-dollar NCAA and NBA, every American superstar-to-be has been tagged and identified as such in puberty. Poll talent evaluators around the league and to a person they agree that George qualifies as the only domestically produced wunderkind to emerge from this much obscurity in at least a quarter of a century.

                              So ask yourself, and answer honestly: Did you really have any idea four years ago who the hell Paul George was? And then consider the really fun question: How the hell did this guy happen?

                              FOR THE ANSWER to that, we begin at the beginning; and in the beginning, there wasn't much to Paul George. A physical late bloomer, he ventured no further than the local playground for years. His game was literally forged by rejection, his shots swatted up and down his street in Palmdale, Calif., by his older sister Teiosha (a future Pepperdine starter). He didn't play organized hoops until he was a 6'1" freshman at Pete Knight High. "There wasn't a lot of meat on the bones," coach Tom Hegre says with a laugh. He didn't even know to join an AAU team until he was a rising senior. "At his first practice," George's mother, Paulette, says, "people were saying, 'I've never heard of you.'"

                              Nowhere close to a top-100 recruit, not even the best player in his AAU program -- that was current Pelican Jrue Holiday -- George surfaced at nearby Fresno State, a WAC school under probation for recruiting violations. With little to lose, Fresno could roll the dice on a reedy, high-flying project with two big asks: to play A) right away and B) on the perimeter. "Paul had a vision of himself that even his coaches and teammates didn't fully understand," former Bulldogs coach Steve Cleveland says.

                              By his second season at Fresno, George had grown in game and in stature (to 6'8"). But even though he repaid Coach Cleveland's faith in him with a 16.8/7.2/3.0/2.2 sophomore season, the red flags were scattered all over his bio. Fresno's 15-18 record, George's multisegmented jumper and his woeful 0.9 assist-to-turnover ratio meant few draft analysts projected him higher than a mid-first-round pick.

                              Still, not since Scottie Pippen, drafted out of Central Arkansas in 1987, had a U.S. prospect bloomed as dramatically, or as late. The 6'8" Pippen also had a delayed growth spurt, also had leveraged a wingspan around seven feet, also had made his bones as an oppressive perimeter defender. One man, at least, noted the resemblance. "There are a lot of similarities to Scottie," says Pacers president Larry Bird, who played alongside Pippen as an Olympian and against him as a Celtic. "He's got a good chance to do a lot of things that Scottie's done."

                              It was with that hope that Bird plucked George for the Pacers with the No. 10 pick in June 2010. Little did he know that George did not want to be as good as the great Scottie Pippen. He wanted to be better.


                              TWO YEARS AGO, in Brian Shaw's first spring coaching with the Pacers, the three-time NBA champion invited George and his father aboard a pontoon boat Shaw had bought on Craigslist. George, an avid angler, had been intrigued months earlier when Shaw had served fried, allegedly home-caught fillets to lockout-starved staffers. Now the three men floated out on Indy's Lake Clearwater, bonding over bluegills, crappies and a shark named Kobe Bryant.

                              As a storm descended, swaying the 16-foot vessel, George confided to Shaw that Bryant was, in fact, his ideal -- the one whose flourishes he'd impersonate while dribbling around the house, the one whose Lakers jersey he'd owned as a kid, the one who'd inspired him to stay out on the perimeter. Whenever anyone had asked little Paul whether he was good at his favorite sport, he had replied, with jarring self-assurance, "You ever see Kobe play?"

                              But Shaw, who'd watched the second-year player at work, knew idolatry was far from emulation. "If you want to be the best," he told George, "I've been around the best." For a decade, Shaw said, he'd seen Kobe play -- and stretch, and ice, and lift, and study opponents, and polish his footwork and generally start his day long before anyone else bothered. "I told real stories," Shaw says, "and Paul was like a wide-eyed puppy, soaking it all in."

                              From then on, if George ever threatened to cut corners, Shaw would intone Kobe's name, dangling superstardom in front of his pupil "like a carrot." George, at the time an unreliable fourth option behind Danny Granger, David West and Roy Hibbert, got the message: There's a canyon of difference between being your team's hardest worker and being Kobe Bryant.

                              George, Shaw says, began doin' work, Kobe-style. He booked office hours with Pacers color analyst Quinn Buckner, a known confidant of Michael Jordan, to learn a killer's regimen: what MJ ate, how he prepared, how he watched film. When he sought out Bird for criticism, the three-time NBA champ hooked him on the exhaustion of full-court one-on-one.

                              "It all shaped how I prepare for games now," George says. "Before, I'd come in and I'd shoot when it was my shooting time. But now, let's say we're playing at 7 p.m. I'll come into the arena at 3:30, get a nice lift in, upper body and lower body. Then I'll go to the practice court and shoot 250 jump shots. Then, after that, I'll get a massage because I'm so worked up to that point. Then it's game time. I learned that you really get into a mindset: I've been ready since 3:30. And I'm going to rip your head off."

                              By the end of that 2011-12 season, which ended for the Pacers with eventual champion Miami crushing them in the final three games of the second round, George resolved to make up for his late matriculation into basketball. He adopted a mantra. Over and over, in the weeks after that defeat, he began silently repeating the same phrase: This is going to take time.

                              "I'm a person who gets better if I'm actually learning," he says. And to do that, he needed to start ripping off heads in the offseason.
                              Sittin on top of the world!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X