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

    Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
    Doesn't have to be David West Strong to defend David West. In a ISO match up in the post Danny Granger is a great defender, he has shut down the likes of Blake Griffin, Dirk, and Chris Bosh in his prime. I dont' think David West would man handle Danny.
    And none of those three play the style that West does.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • Re: Granger traded to Philly

      Originally posted by croz24 View Post
      Except I can actually defend my comments with fact, which I've done for the better part of 7 years. It seems Indy fans are the only one's who view Granger in such a positive light. Was the "most overrated Pacer in history" comment a bit hyperbole? Sure. But you could very much make the case. I'd put Granger right there with Rose, Croshere, and JO as most overrated in this team's history. As for the rest of my post, tell me how this isn't the case. NBA history is littered with examples of players who put up huge numbers on poor teams. And then when the games mean something, their shooting drastically falls off. Which has been the case through Granger's career. Anybody who wishes to disagree with that need only to look at the facts.
      What was it Mr. Rogers used to say?



      Comment


      • Re: Granger traded to Philly

        Anybody else listen to Peter Dinwiddie on JMV a few days ago? He heaped plenty of praise on Danny and talked about how he'd be an asset in the playoffs. Shows how quickly things can change in the NBA I guess.

        Comment


        • Re: Granger traded to Philly

          Danny Granger is a notoriously slow starter. I really was beginning to think with time that his shot would have started falling. His post defense was actually above average. My best memory of him this year was him defending and shutting down Blake Griffin that game D West was ejected. Can anyone with more knowledge of Evan Turner tell me anything about his post defense? Is he a viable off the bench defender for LeBron James in spot minutes?

          And am I wrong if I say Evan Turner (although I admit my exposure to him playing is a bit low) reminds me of a slightly more versatile version of Courtney Lee?

          Comment


          • Re: Granger traded to Philly

            Originally posted by idioteque View Post
            Do you think there is any possibility Granger will be bought out and then signed by Miami?

            Sounds to me like he and Big Baby Davis could end up in LA with the Clippers.

            Comment


            • Re: Granger traded to Philly

              Ever think this is a ploy by Bird and Granger to get bought out by Philly, sign with Miami and destroy them from the inside...

              Comment


              • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                Actually the more I watch highlights, the more I'm convinced my comparison to Courtney Lee is spot on. Hopefully someone can prove me wrong and completely change that perspective, cause I was never a fan of his game. I'd like to know more about his defensive abilities, other than the fact he's a somewhat below average three point shooter, and an inefficient first option on a bad team.

                Comment


                • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                  I think Bird needs to give this trade alittle more lip service for the fans sake. Certainly needs to express some more gratitude for Danny Granger. You don't just trade away a 9 year veteran, all-star, face of the franchise and only release a brief thank you statement.
                  Last edited by graphic-er; 02-21-2014, 01:56 PM.
                  You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                    Apologize if this has been posted. Trade come up 30 minutes before the deadline

                    http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/pacer...n-move-granger


                    Pacers Make Tough Decision to Move Granger

                    by Mark Montieth | askmontieth@gmail.com

                    February 20, 2014 | Updated 11:54 PM


                    In strict basketball terms, it was a good trade for the Pacers.

                    In emotional human terms, it was a horrible trade for Danny Granger.

                    Professional sports is a tough business, a bottom-line business, with the primary bottom line being winning. Larry Bird is a sensitive man who cares about people and their feelings, but he's paid to care mostly about winning. Thus, Granger was traded to Philadelphia on Thursday, while Evan Turner and Lavoy Allen won the lottery and joined a contender.

                    Bird also had to release one of his sentimental favorites, backup guard Orlando Johnson, to stay at the 15-man roster limit. Bird had drafted Johnson in the second round two summers ago, and awarded him a two-year guaranteed contract. Johnson showed promise the second half of last season, but his jump shot went awry and he had fallen out of the playing rotation.

                    In short, the Pacers gave up an aging but still viable player (and a 2015 second-round draft pick) for two young ones with fresher legs and potential for improvement. Just where that potential will be realized – or not – remains to be seen, but for now it seems a favorable exchange for the Pacers, who also received a trade exception in the deal.

                    The trade came together less than half an hour before Thursday's 3 p.m. deadline when Philadelphia backed off its stated demand for a first-round pick and accepted a second-rounder instead. The tip-off for the last-minute nature of the trade was that Granger played 18 minutes in the Pacers' loss at Minnesota on Wednesday. Normally, players on the verge of being traded are left on the bench to avoid an injury that could cancel the deal.

                    Turner, the centerpiece of the swap, is productive, intriguing and provides flexibility for the Pacers on the court, and perhaps off. He's averaging a team-best 17.4 points, with the caveat of the 76ers' woeful 15-win record and their fast pace of play. He was the consensus national college player of the year at Ohio State in 2010, and the second pick in the draft that year but had not panned out well enough in first-year general manager Sam Hinkie's eyes to be offered an extension to his rookie contract at the Oct. 31 deadline.

                    He becomes a free agent this summer, but the Pacers can keep him for another season with a qualifying offer of $8.7 million. That means he could become an option if the Pacers are unable to sign free agent Lance Stephenson. Turner also could be re-signed and traded, or simply allowed to sign with another team. Regardless, the deal was made with the rest of this season in mind.

                    The trade received mostly favorable acceptance from NBA media when it was sprung on the public after Thursday's deadline, but you still have to feel for Granger. His timing turned out to be terrible, leaving him the lucrative but unfulfilling task of being the face of the franchise during its lean years. He arrived in 2005, a steal for the 17th pick in the draft, and was a rookie on a team still regarded as a title contender with veterans such as Jermaine O'Neal, Ron Artest, Stephen Jackson, Austin Croshere and Jeff Foster. Artest's in-season trade demand, however, began a breakup and rebuilding process that persisted until last season – which Granger missed except for five games with knee injuries and a surgery.

                    During that time, Granger averaged at least 18.7 points over five consecutive seasons, peaking at 25.8 in 2008-09, when he made his only All-Star appearance and was voted the team's Most Improved Player. He was the team's leading scorer all five of those seasons, and also became the first player in NBA history to lift his scoring average at least five points in three consecutive seasons.

                    Entering this season, Granger was regarded as a likely starter if he could regain his athleticism of previous seasons. He wasn't able to play until Dec. 31, however, by which time Lance Stephenson's play and the Pacers' record made it illogical to make a drastic lineup change.

                    It was then hoped that Granger would become the primary scorer off the Pacers' bench. He moved well and played without pain, but had yet to recover his jump shot. After making his delayed debut, he scored in double figures in eight of his first 10 games, but managed to do so in just two of his previous 10. He averaged 8.3 points in 29 appearances overall, shooting 36 percent from the field, 33 percent from three-point range and 96 percent from the foul line.

                    Turner shoots better from the field (43 percent) than Granger, but worse from three-point range (29 percent). He's an inch shorter (6-7), but a more flexible athlete who can score in a wider variety of ways, and at five years younger has fewer miles on his legs. He's also regarded as superior in pick-and-roll situations.

                    Allen, a 6-9 power forward, was averaging 5.2 points for the 76ers, hitting 44 percent of his shots. He was a second-round pick of the 76ers in 2011, and a rotational player throughout most of his three seasons there. He started 37 games last season, when he averaged 5.8 points. He's regarded primarily for his defense, but appears unlikely to fit into the Pacers' rotation unless an injury creates an opening.

                    Granger's future with the 76ers is unclear. He could be released, so that he can sign as a free agent with a playoff team. Or, he'll play out the season and hope to sign a free agent contract this summer. It was a harsh ending to his career in Indianapolis, but ultimately just another reminder of the nature of the business of basketball.

                    Winning trumps sentiment almost every time. Especially when you're trying to win a championship.
                    Last edited by Unclebuck; 02-21-2014, 01:55 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                      Ken Berger is one of my favorites

                      http://www.cbssports.com/nba/writer/ken-berger/24450062/with-smart-but-painful-granger-trade-pacers-win-the-day

                      Comment


                      • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                        Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                        I think Bird needs to give this trade alittle more lip service for the fans sake. Certainly needs to express some more gratitude for Danny Granger. You don't just trade away a 9 year veteran, all-star, face of the franchise and only release a brief thank you statement.
                        Read Candace Buckner's tweets... He already has.

                        or this story:


                        Last edited by tadscout; 02-21-2014, 02:02 PM.
                        "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

                        Comment


                        • Re: Granger traded to Philly


                          "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

                          Comment


                          • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                            I just thought of something, didn't Evan Turner say something about how the Pacers/Roy get away iwth more fouls than any other team after we beat them earlier in the year?

                            I thought I remembered him being pissed about something and saying something to the media or on twitter after the game?


                            Comment


                            • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                              I didn't say it earlier but was thinking it, but in a way I'm kind of relieved we did this trade because along with Danny struggling, and along with Lance et al making it tougher than it had to be to get him going (IMO), I also felt he was playing without fire and sometimes just plain lazy (or if not lazy, careless) on defense (like falling asleep on Korver the other night), and while I have faith in his ability to regain much of his offensive potency in the right circumstances... he does look slower than he used to, and that's rough on anyone expected to guard a wing in this league.

                              I think his future is at PF now.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                                Originally posted by tadscout View Post





                                LaVoy and Turner haven't tweeted since the trade.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X