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

Postgame vs Lakers

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

  • #46
    Re: Postgame vs Lakers

    Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post
    I think a lot of this is on the coaches. There is plenty of time to get into a play and it just doesn't seem like one is even getting called from the bench.

    I had my share of issues with the late 90's teams and their shortcomings with defense & rebounding but man it was sure nice to know those guys were going to get a good shot in those situations almost everytime. They were great with out of bounds plays after timeouts too.

    Lack of execution in these situations will really hurt if (when) the Pacers get into a lot of one & two possesion games in the playoffs. I almost feel this group will better off jacking up any shot they can with 5-seconds left on clock and then just going after it for a put back.

    I agree, I think we had something like 17 seconds on that iso at the end of the first half. Everyone just sat there while PG dribbled a bunch of seconds off the clock and then jacked up a missed shot. It's just too predictable at this point. I agree, this could sting us in the playoffs. PG deserves to get plenty of those shots, no doubt about it, but the coaches need to reign it in just a little bit and design some other plays in those situations.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Postgame vs Lakers

      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
      PG deserves to get plenty of those shots, no doubt about it,
      DESERVES ?? B.S.

      I'd love to see some stats about his shots at the end of quarters. I would say it's 25% at best. He's done nothing to show that he deserves to waste the last seconds of a quarter trying to hit a low percentage shot. It's a wasted possession each time it happens.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Postgame vs Lakers

        At 6:12 of the 4th quarter, Vogel subbed out the second string and put the third string in with a 31 point lead at 109-78. At that point of the game, the Pacers had outscored the Lakers 52-24 in the second half. What a beat down.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Postgame vs Lakers

          Originally posted by Miller_time04 View Post
          Really? It's one game. He still has to learn the defensive schemes.
          That IS the defensive scheme. Press you're man, force him to Roy.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Postgame vs Lakers

            Nice start for Evan. Danny forever, but his legs never came back, he couldn't jump stop or change direction. So no Danny drives or shots off curls. Camping the corner for spacing was his remaining trick. Not much.

            Ian was the best sub last night. G2 moved the needle the most, but this is Ian's best run in Pacers gear. If Bynum does nothing other than lighting a fire under Ian's arse, he was a good signing.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Postgame vs Lakers

              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
              Defensively, I guess I didn't see the flaws that some were seeing; he looked active and engaged to me. Sometimes I think when he's getting 'burned' he's a victim of the same thing as George Hill: Pressing up on people / chasing them over screens to funnel them to Roy and Ian, on purpose, and leaving some fans thinking they suck on D when they don't. But that's just me. I'm not saying he was great defensively, but I certainly wasn't cringing, either.
              I disagree. If it looked like he was just trying to funnel his guy, then that is more of a compliment to how well Ian and Roy rotate than Turner picking up on our defensive scheme. He was just getting beat, and not really putting up much of a fight. We still want our wing defenders to try and prevent the drive, and he wasn't doing that. He is just lucky Roy and Ian are good at what they do.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Postgame vs Lakers

                A few thoughts from me...

                1. Too early to be too high/low on Turner in any area. He'll have better defensive nights than that; he'll have worse offensive nights than that. What I do like, though, is that quite a few of the shots he was making...Granger couldn't make, or wasn't taking anymore. It's a new look. If he's efficient with it, I like it. If nothing else, it's going to make opponents go back to the tape a little bit on the second unit.

                2. Ian has had 5 or 6 pretty damn good games now, although I thought his first half was pretty bad on both ends. Consistency is the name of the game for Ian. I say it all the time: he has the skill set, he doesn't have the consistency. If he can develop the latter, the former should shine and elevate him to "good bench player" status.

                3. Scola's jump shot is just dead. RIP. Months now. I was intrigued by his play near the rim, though, which a lot of folks have argued should be his focus all along. He was crafty around the rim last night. One, he's trying really hard there because he knows he's not helping from midrange. Two, that is perhaps his more natural contribution anyway. Be interested to see if he can re-develop himself on this team a bit in that area. If not, Vogel HAS to go to Copeland. But I'm willing to give Scola a little more time if he can figure things out at the rim.

                4. Why can't CJ Watson play like that every night? That's a HUGE difference off the bench...

                5. Pacers did that killswitch thing again last night. It almost always happens on defense. Team plays lackluster, uninspired, passive defense for most of the game...and then decides to get pissed off and get their hands in there. Paul George led the charge there. Best hounding defense I've seen him play in quite some time, and you could tell he was doing it because he was pissed off. Don't get why this is the exception to the rule (for everyone) more often than not lately. This team should always be playing with an edge on defense. I get that an 82-game season wears on you, and you won't bring it every night. But this is the first time I remember them turning on the defensive jets in...a month? Months? Love to see it, but it's frustrating to know they're fully capable of doing this (and really, built to do this) and still play so far south of their capabilities here of late.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Postgame vs Lakers

                  Hard to really judge this game except to say the lakers are awful. Coached awful, play awful, everything is just awful.

                  I thought the pacers for 2 and a half quarters were not much better, they were sleep walking through the game, and then played a good 6 minutes to put the game away. Wow the Lakers are bad. no defense, terrible offense, no structure to their offense.


                  I like Gasol's comments.

                  http://www.latimes.com/sports/basket...#axzz2uR2q6bOq

                  Gasol wasn't buying the Lakers-initially-played-well story line.
                  "Better teams take it easy in the first half and then when they see the game is kind of close or they're fooling around with the game, they step it up in the third," he said. "I've been on the other side of it and I've done it many times."


                  Last edited by Unclebuck; 02-26-2014, 08:59 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Postgame vs Lakers

                    Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
                    4. Why can't CJ Watson play like that every night? That's a HUGE difference off the bench...
                    There's a reason he's a bench player.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Postgame vs Lakers

                      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                      I disagree. If it looked like he was just trying to funnel his guy, then that is more of a compliment to how well Ian and Roy rotate than Turner picking up on our defensive scheme. He was just getting beat, and not really putting up much of a fight. We still want our wing defenders to try and prevent the drive, and he wasn't doing that. He is just lucky Roy and Ian are good at what they do.
                      I'm just not sure of that.


                      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Postgame vs Lakers

                        Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                        There's a reason he's a bench player.
                        I know, I know, but the ask is so simple: play solid defense, hit open shots. He's not being asked to create, to carry the scoring load, to make insane passes. He's just asked to be solid. He should be able to do that more often.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Postgame vs Lakers

                          The most exciting thing about Turner's debut, was he came in and immediately tried to do exactly what we brought him in to do. When he first got in the game and was playing with the other four starters, he took a mostly deferential role and tried to help facilitate. When he was in with more bench players, he tried to take over. That's exactly what we had to be hoping for. Even if his shot hadn't been falling, just knowing that he was able and willing to play that role, is extremely encouraging. It's a major upgrade for this team considering what we had to give up.

                          Can't ask for much more out of a guy who has been with the team for 5 days.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Postgame vs Lakers

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            Ehhh...about as expected. Not very good. The effort was there, but his tendency to ball watch bit him once on a three. He's got a pretty slow first step which isn't ideal against quicker defenders. He wasn't dreadful by any means, but I don't really think he has the tools to be a great wing defender.
                            He was, however, better than Danny IMO. He had a nice steal, and a couple nice instinctual double teams or drop downs on guys in traffic that created rushed shots or bad passes. There were a couple times he got beat, but overall I was pretty happy with it. I think by the end of the season he'll be a +defender. He's got good length, he's noticeably taller than Lance when they stand next to each other and he's got very long arms and hands, he will fit the system. I was honestly pretty pleased with what I saw on D. He has obviously not had extensive coaching on that side of the ball, but we have House Vogel to teach him the House words "Strength in Length"


                            EDIT: As a couple others have mentioned, he got caught over pursuing a few times on the perimeter. This is mostly a coaching/scheme issue, Philly sells out for steal chances all the time. Evan will have to learn to trust in Roy and his teammates, if he does that I actually really liked what I saw. He's got a good sense of when to play help D, and as reported he's pretty damn good around screens and fighting through traffic on D. He's no Paul, but he's actually better at this specific part of defense than Lance is. If he stops biting hard for passes and learns to just stay home, I think he will be very good. I also think he's got the ability to both Wade in the post when he tries to go for those turnaround jumpers.

                            Somebody pointed it out on twitter last night, but at one point Lance had a moment where he made the wrong switch on D, and Evan was the one who corrected him. Lance actually took the correction well, and they seemed to have a good on court vibe going with each other. Was really, really impressed with that pairing honestly. A couple sequences I loved from them, one was in the fourth when ET went one on one with his guy around half court, he made some nice moves, threw down a spin and a couple behind the leg moves and then tossed it to Lance. Lance then went one on one and did some nice dribbling moves before popping the J and hitting it. It was fun to see two guys with that kind of skill and creativity on the court together. Not many teams (if any) that have a pair of wings with the ball handling abilities of Evan and Lance.

                            I also liked the play where Evan tried to throw the oop to Lance, it didn't connect, but if it had my head might have exploded. That is the kind of free flowing basketball we need from those two, it's not always going to work perfectly, but I think the more they get on the same page the more fun they are going to have playing together.


                            Don't hurt 'em Larry.
                            Last edited by Trader Joe; 02-26-2014, 09:53 AM.


                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Postgame vs Lakers

                              Originally posted by travmil View Post
                              That IS the defensive scheme. Press you're man, force him to Roy.
                              Ya I don't think our defensive scheme is complicated at all and where Turner got burned was on some spot up 3s where he was sagging off before the ball got to his man which is exactly what you are suppose to do in our system.

                              Plus the lakers players are strong one on one dribble drive guys. Their stupid chuckers but they can still fill it up just like Nick Young did against Lebron a few weeks back.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Postgame vs Lakers

                                Also, Evan's end of 3rd pass to CJ for the THREE J was a perfect encapsulation of how I think his game will change now that he's here. In Philly, Evan is absolutely taking that mid range jumper, but as we saw he has the skills and vision to make the very nice over the top jump pass there and I absolutely loved the way he confidently turned and started walking back towards the Pacers bench before CJ even took the shot. I know some would say they'd like to see him crash the boards there, but I thought showing that sort of confidence in your teammate (and knowing that a corner 3 is his strength) was pretty impressive. That was maybe my favorite ET play of the night and he had several I was really happy with.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X