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

Granger traded to Philly

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

  • Re: Granger traded to Philly

    I just wonder if Danny's done. If the knee is still bothering him. The man has now made 60 million in his career. He's got a good head on his shoulders and could probably easily do something the rest of his career. I would much rather listen to Danny call a game than Reggie for example. Danny has always been the better speaker. His shot just didn't have lift which makes me think the knee never really came back.


    Comment


    • Re: Granger traded to Philly

      Originally posted by Eindar View Post
      I'm not buying the statement that the Pacers organization "found ways to keep their longest tenured and most repected players", or at least, moreso than other franchises. These are examples only from my tenure as a Pacers fan, which began around 1985. We traded Chuck Person when he was Option 1B to Reggie Miller. We traded Herb Williams, who had played 8 years here (and only here) for Detlef, then traded Detlef for Derrick McKey. We traded Antonio Davis for a draft pick. We traded Dale Davis for JO. We traded JO for a draft pick. We traded Jalen Rose when he was option 1B for young players in a teardown move. If you think we haven't traded integral, long-term Pacers veterans for purely basketball reasons, you're viewing this team with rose-colored glasses.

      The other issue with your statement is that Tim Duncan is the best Power Forward who has ever lived and won 4 titles. And Tony Parker is probably going into the Hall of Fame at some point. It makes it a lot easier to keep those guys around when they're that good for that long. Oh, it also helps when those guys are still putting you within a putback of another NBA title. Danny isn't those guys in any recognizable way.

      I think Danny isn't done in the league, and I think he'll be better next year than he was this year, but we're all in THIS year.
      Yeah, in our NBA era, the only big names I can think of who started their careers from start to finish as Pacers were Miller and Smits. Miller was obviously a legend who put the franchise on the map and was able to go out on whatever terms he wanted. Smits played 12 years here, which is quite a bit, and was forced into retirement because of foot trouble. So who knows if we would have ultimately cut bait with him too had he tried to keep playing.

      Mark Jackson is another one. Didn't start his career here, but was traded once and then we let him walk after 2000.

      Danny was good, but he was never an "OMG, this guy has to retire as a Pacer no matter what" type of player.

      Comment


      • Re: Granger traded to Philly

        Why does there have to be anyone to "blame"?

        Danny didn't die. We didn't rescind his contract. We literally weren't even going to trade him until Philly offered us two guys that are 5 years younger than him for basically nothing.

        There is no blame here. It took a perfect conspiracy of events for it to even happen. If the Sixers don't call us at 2:30PM and offer us two 25 year old contributors, one of which still has the potential to be a real big time player in this league, for basically an 8 PPG bench scorer and a second round pick, this wouldn't have even happened.

        Danny shouldn't be blamed. Larry shouldn't be blamed. The rest of the Pacers shouldn't be blamed. Business happened. That is what took place. Sometimes it sucks, but the reality is that I think this deal would have been made regardless of how Danny was playing the more I think about it. Even if Turner only gives us 10 PPG the rest of the season on decent shooting % and gives us some good rebounding and ball handling, he's still TWENTY FIVE. That I think is the real key here. Larry got significantly younger.

        Let's say that Danny had been playing alright 10 ppg 4 rpg on 45% shooting (being pretty generous here). We knew all along that if Lance bounced Danny was our backup plan, but then Philly calls and says hey you can have this backup plan to Lance that is 5 years younger than your current backup plan AND He's a much closer Lance replica than not just Danny than just about anyone in the NBA. I mean seriously, look at Turner's cons in Philly, doesn't shoot well of the dribble, over dribbles into bad decisions, streaky 3 point shooter, and then look at this pros, great ball handler, very good in the open court, finishes extremely well at the rim, did I not just basically describe Lance Stephenson? I really think Turner's age combined with the possibility of having to be the Lance backup plan this would have been a deal that got made regardless of how Danny was playing unless he was averaging like 18 per game, but he just wasn't and I think even the most positive Danny people, which I think actually includes me, would say that it is unlikely we ever see that sort of production from Danny again.

        We pretty much traded Granger for a guy who does a lot of things like Lance and was putting up numbers comparable to what Paul did last year minus 3 point shooting, who is 5 years younger than DG, I mean that is such a home run it is almost mind boggling, and we picked up another bench guy in Lavoy Allen who is NINE years younger than Scola and IMO will definitely replace him next year. Like I said earlier in the thread, damn Larry don't hurt 'em.


        Comment


        • Re: Granger traded to Philly

          Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
          I just wonder if Danny's done. If the knee is still bothering him. The man has now made 60 million in his career. He's got a good head on his shoulders and could probably easily do something the rest of his career. I would much rather listen to Danny call a game than Reggie for example. Danny has always been the better speaker. His shot just didn't have lift which makes me think the knee never really came back.
          It seems that the knee has come back at least enough to allow him to play relatively pain free, but the injury obviously robbed him of quite a bit of explosiveness. He can't shoot, nor can he take it to the rack with any sort of jolt. He was never the fastest player, but he's obviously lost a lot. Losing just a little bit of physical explosiveness in this league can ruin a career.

          Comment


          • Re: Granger traded to Philly

            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
            I just wonder if Danny's done. If the knee is still bothering him. The man has now made 60 million in his career. He's got a good head on his shoulders and could probably easily do something the rest of his career. I would much rather listen to Danny call a game than Reggie for example. Danny has always been the better speaker. His shot just didn't have lift which makes me think the knee never really came back.
            I don't think Danny is done, it usually takes a season before they are back completely healthy and in basketball rhythm. Look at David west when he came back his first season off his injury. He was a lot better movement and health wise in season 2 after the injury. If Danny played a Dwayne wade style of game I'd say he's done, but he doesn't. His game is a below the rim style where shooting and posting up is where he can take advantage.

            Comment


            • Re: Granger traded to Philly

              Originally posted by clownskull View Post
              i try to look at it this way:
              if we remove the emotional aspect of this situation and look at it from the business point of view, what do we see here?
              imagine for a moment that this wasn't granger but some injured 1-time all-star vet we picked over the summer on a 1 year deal. he hasn't been playing for quite a while but we got him to see what he could do for our bench. turned out it wasn't much. that guy we had coming off the bench couldn't even manage 36% shooting, had no explosiveness at all, couldn't attack the rim and finish either. and this guy was pulling down 14 million this season too.
              if you remove the emotional aspect of this situation, this trade looks pretty good and gives us a better shot at a title than if we stood by and stuck with him. i also doubt few if any would have any problem moving in another direction and would be more likely to agree the guy wasn't working out as hoped.
              i was bummed as well as a bit shocked when i learned about it but, we hired larry to do everything he could to put this team in the best position possible to win a title. and as we found out, that might even involve trading a popular and well-liked guy like danny.

              With holding judgment about a player who's had a little over 2mons of playing time, after sitting out nearly a season in a half, is a position I would give any player not just Danny.

              I don't know why that concept is really that questionable.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
                This whole thing really made me respect the Spurs so much more, even though I respected them a whole lot already. You've gotta believe teams approached Pop with trade scenarios for Manu, TD or TP over the years, possibly hoping to add more veteran experience to a young locker room, yet Pop and the Spurs managed to keep those guys all these years. Instead of sacrificing them for younger talent to hasten the rebuild, they've found ways to build the pieces around them to stay competitive, even as those guys have aged considerably and even battled injuries and missed more than a few games. And it's not like they've found hidden stars. We're talking about Patty Mills and Marco Belinelli here. So, tip of my hat to Pop and Spurs for their continued success and loyalty to their core players.
                That's why they are one of the classiest franchises. If Danny gets bought out then I really wish that he'd land there.
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                  Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                  That's why they are one of the classiest franchises. If Danny gets bought out then I really wish that he'd land there.
                  They are an outstanding franchise in every measurable way, no doubt about that, but I don't think it takes "class" to keep a core together that long. It's just the smart thing to do. They win a ton of games every year, go on playoff runs, and were a hair away from a championship last year. They've kept this core together not because of charity, but because it's continued to win. They are kind of like the Brady/Belichick Pats. It's been a while since they last won it all, but they continue to win a lot every year and always at least give themselves a chance.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                    I just wonder if Danny's done. If the knee is still bothering him. The man has now made 60 million in his career. He's got a good head on his shoulders and could probably easily do something the rest of his career. I would much rather listen to Danny call a game than Reggie for example. Danny has always been the better speaker. His shot just didn't have lift which makes me think the knee never really came back.
                    Danny isn't done. He shot 40+% from 3 when he had 1 day of rest. He was just horrid when he had 0 days of rest. Considering that almost 1/3rd of his games played came on the second night of a back-to-back it quickly becomes obvious why his 3pt shooting was below average, and it isn't because he is done. If he gets bought out and goes to a contender he is going to cause trouble in the playoffs for his opponents as there are no back-to-backs.

                    His inability to score consistently around the basket is more concerning, but it is still too early to make a final statement. At the very least I expect by next year Danny will be an elite spot up 3pt shooter.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                      Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
                      His 36% shooting and below average defense didn't hurt us at all? News to me.
                      I'm not sure where you get the below average defense from? Danny played pretty good defense over these past 30 games if you ask me, and even made a good effort on the boards. Again What the heck are you judging him on when more times than in not over the past month this team started out way in the hole before Danny Granger even took the court.

                      Sure poor shooting hurts, but I contend that a guy who shoots 8 times a game at 36% has much less negative impact than guys who was average similar poor shooting percentages taking 15-20 shots per game, while completely healthy and not hampered by conditioning.

                      You people keep point to his shooting percentage, but dont look at the situation. He has horrible in back to back games. That a coaching issue.
                      You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                        Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                        That's why they are one of the classiest franchises. If Danny gets bought out then I really wish that he'd land there.
                        Just a devil's advocate, but if a buyout happens, I would like to see him in a Miami Heat uniform. Removing the hate glasses aside, they're one of the top organizations in the league with Pat Riley running the show there, and with the small-ball basketball they're playing, he can replace the role of Battier as a backup SF/PF. And at least the Pacers fans have a valid reason to hate him lol

                        Well, it's a long shot since I think he'll probably go West Coast when there's an opportunity. But you never know.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                          I hate everything about this trade except the fact that LB would have been a total fool to turn it down. The 76ers are the reason for this trade, IMO. Put yourself in Bird's position for a moment. You are out of the office, not really looking for a trade(if you believe LB) when you get a phone call offering you not one but two needed pieces for your team. Scola, who's obliviously hurting, needed a young, cheap backup to let him heal. Danny still needs more time to return to his peak, whatever that will now be, and we need a backup and possible replacement for Lance in case he gets injured. One phone call, 30 minutes to decide, both problems taken care of. What would you do if you were Bird? Had he not taken this deal, what would you do if you were Herb Simon. Granger fanboy, which I am, I would have said yes. I just hope Larry and Danny got to discuss this before it hit the news cycle.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                            Did Danny do anything wrong, or was it literally just everyone else's fault?
                            Sure, he didn't shoot it well. But how much fault are you going to assign a guy who is coming off a 1.5 year long rehab? The trade was made because the entire team was faltering.
                            You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                              I stand by it. I think we could have been on a winning streak and Danny could have been shooting in the 40s and I think Bird still pulls this trigger. The age is just such a big deal. As was getting a Scola replacement for free. I think lavoy will be a nice cheap siging this offseason to retain him for a couple years


                              Comment


                              • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                                Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                                While I understand your point(I hate seeing Granger go too), I have a question.

                                Would you rather keep Granger or win a Championship? If you had to chose one or the other, which do you pick?
                                Why not both? Does keeping Granger hinder us from winning one?

                                Of course, the chances have risen on paper because by the current numbers, it's obvious that Turner wins, and plus age and health, it puts Danny in a disadvantage. But we still have yet to see how Turner can help this team win a championship this year. That will have to wait until we see him play the rest of the season and the playoffs.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X