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

Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

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

  • #76
    Re: Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

    Originally posted by Ralph Snart View Post
    Phoenix is punching above their weight. Right now, they're not even in the playoffs.
    1) Punching above your weight is supposed to be a GOOD thing, meaning you are playing well enough to win games your talent says you shouldn't.

    2) Someone must be doing something to win those games


    So what you guys are doing is complementing Green more, not less. You are saying Green has played so well that he's carried a team that has no business being in the playoffs or being over .500 into both spots (potentially, West is tough). Please, stop beating him up like that. smh


    I love when people just abandon not only the numbers but even the BS sayings. "Oh, okay they are a good team....but they shouldn't be so they still count as a bad team which proves he's not a good player cause he's got a bad team looking like a good team"


    Yes, f*** logic indeed.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

      Originally posted by Ralph Snart View Post
      He is flourishing, and I agree it's due to the system, but I also think it has to do with their coaching and low expectations. Swap out Jeff Hornacek with half the coaches in the league and they are likely a lottery team. Hornacek is doing a brilliant job coaching to that team's strengths, and the team is playing with house money, everyone was certain they would stink this year.
      Um, so this is saying that Green has made Hornacek look like he's much better than Vogel. So doesn't that make PD idiots for thinking Vogel is a good coach?

      I mean either Green's success is on him or his failure in Indy is on Vogel for not being as capable of coaching to strengths as Hornacek. I just want people to pick a side and stay on it once the debates get going.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
        Um, so this is saying that Green has made Hornacek look like he's much better than Vogel. So doesn't that make PD idiots for thinking Vogel is a good coach?

        I mean either Green's success is on him or his failure in Indy is on Vogel for not being as capable of coaching to strengths as Hornacek. I just want people to pick a side and stay on it once the debates get going.
        I'll get kicked off PD for saying but I don't think Vogel is that great of a coach. There are rarely adjustments to his game, he is almost as stubborn as dare I say JOB.
        Vogel needs a great offensive minded coach next to him that he trust. JMO
        I'm not perfect and neither are you.

        Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the esteem of Elohim,
        Ephisians 4: 32 And be kind towards one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as Elohim also forgave you in Messiah.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

          Gerald Green is having a great year and I enjoy watching him play but unless you give him the green light (no pun intended) do whatever he wants to out on the floor, he's a useless player. He doesn't know how to operate in a controlled offense because he has no feel for the game. What I mean by that is he doesn't know how to operate the pick and roll, move without the ball to get open, find the open man if he's double-teamed or trapped, or make a basic entry pass to a post player. He's what I call a 50/50 player because half of the time he's amazing and the other half he makes terrible decisions.

          With all that said, he's the perfect pick-up-game player. If you just tell him to go out there and get buckets, he'll do that. He's a good shooter off the dribble and with the Pacers he was used more as a catch-and-shoot player. The only time he was allowed to play his freewheeling game when he was with the Pacers was the 2 games against Cleveland and the last regular season game against Philly where he scored 32 points. If you're willing to live with the bad defense, bad shots early in the shotclock, and bad passes, he'll have a lot of games where he puts up points in great numbers. Vogel wasn't willing to do that last year but maybe he should've given GG a little more leeway considering how bad the bench offense was last year. Either way, that doesn't change the fact that GG is the ultimate example of a player that only plays well in an uptempo offensive system.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

            Originally posted by sportfireman View Post
            I'll get kicked off PD for saying but I don't think Vogel is that great of a coach. There are rarely adjustments to his game, he is almost as stubborn as dare I say JOB.
            Vogel needs a great offensive minded coach next to him that he trust. JMO
            I have been critical of this to a point lately. I was really hoping the turnover problem would be improved coming into this season, and when it wasn't, that's when I became skeptical. I may have been most impressed with him Saturday night in Detroit, but they players deserve quite a bit of credit for that too. I guess will see what he's made of in May.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
              Um, so this is saying that Green has made Hornacek look like he's much better than Vogel. So doesn't that make PD idiots for thinking Vogel is a good coach?

              I mean either Green's success is on him or his failure in Indy is on Vogel for not being as capable of coaching to strengths as Hornacek. I just want people to pick a side and stay on it once the debates get going.
              Middle ground perhaps? Does it have to be black or white? Vogel might be partially blamed but unless you think he should have built the offense around Green's strengths, I don't see how you can put the blame entirely on Vogel. I understand the ongoing frustration with our offense and Vogel definitely plays a part in that but Green seems to flourish in specific situations. I am happy for him but let's admit that he was clueless in our offense, his decision making was very bad and we were never going to build our offense around a then fringe starter/bench player being paid 3mil. He was supposed to help, not be the focal point you build around on offense. Unfortunately, it did not work out, it happens. If anything, I'd blame the TPTB for signing him, not that I will though. It was a gamble that did not work. The talent was there (undeniable now), the fit wasn't. Every time he scores a lot, I immediately remember his defensive rotations. Has everyone forgot that he was by far our worst defender (ok, second worst with Augustin )? Not hitting shots is not necessarily a reason with Vogel to send someone to the bench; failing to stay in front of your man and missing every second rotation are. I mean people blame Scola for his bad defense and rightfully so to an extent, but Green just happened to be worse somehow. He found the perfect environment to flourish in, good for him but let's not act like the blame falls entirely on Vogel. Or Green for that matter. Share that between all the parties and that's a little closer to the truth.
              uno, due, trezegol!

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                Um, so this is saying that Green has made Hornacek look like he's much better than Vogel. So doesn't that make PD idiots for thinking Vogel is a good coach?

                I mean either Green's success is on him or his failure in Indy is on Vogel for not being as capable of coaching to strengths as Hornacek. I just want people to pick a side and stay on it once the debates get going.
                Green has incredible talent, but it became abundantly clear in his time here, that he was also a really, really stupid basketball player, and he made some really, really stupid basketball plays. Vogel is probably way too lax of a coach for a guy like that. I don't think Vogel was willing or able to rein him in, so it made sense to move on.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

                  Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                  Green has incredible talent, but it became abundantly clear in his time here, that he was also a really, really stupid basketball player, and he made some really, really stupid basketball plays. Vogel is probably way too lax of a coach for a guy like that. I don't think Vogel was willing or able to rein him in, so it made sense to move on.
                  This is probably the easiest way to boil it down when it comes to Green and his time with the Pacers.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

                    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                    This is probably the easiest way to boil it down when it comes to Green and his time with the Pacers.
                    I agree and I also wonder the same thing when it comes to Lance. I'm not saying Lance the same player as Green but I see a need for direction that he doesn't seem to get from Vogel when he gets out of control. The stupid behind the back pass against Detroit is just one of hundreds of examples. Lance has evolved under Vogel but I think he'd do better under a coach that knows when to real him in. He should have been given a seat immediately after that pass, talked to and then allowed back out only after he'd agree to play the way the coach wanted him to.
                    Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

                      Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                      I agree and I also wonder the same thing when it comes to Lance. I'm not saying Lance the same player as Green but I see a need for direction that he doesn't seem to get from Vogel when he gets out of control. The stupid behind the back pass against Detroit is just one of hundreds of examples. Lance has evolved under Vogel but I think he'd do better under a coach that knows when to real him in. He should have been given a seat immediately after that pass, talked to and then allowed back out only after he'd agree to play the way the coach wanted him to.
                      It sort of goes both ways with Lance though. Lance's out-of-control, incredibly erratic play style, is also a major part of what makes him so effective. That wasn't the case with Green.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

                        Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                        I agree and I also wonder the same thing when it comes to Lance. I'm not saying Lance the same player as Green but I see a need for direction that he doesn't seem to get from Vogel when he gets out of control. The stupid behind the back pass against Detroit is just one of hundreds of examples. Lance has evolved under Vogel but I think he'd do better under a coach that knows when to real him in. He should have been given a seat immediately after that pass, talked to and then allowed back out only after he'd agree to play the way the coach wanted him to.
                        Unfortunately Lance may be one of those guys that you HAVE to let make a bone headed play every now and then. I think Frank is afraid he'll completely lose Lance if he comes down on him too hard. What makes it unfortunate is that you have a player on the bench who can produce when Lance has his one of many "wtf are you thinking" plays.

                        I do agree though, there needs to be some type of accountability when it comes to these types of plays. If not, they will just continue (as we have seen)

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

                          I thought about this, and decided that I'm not to worried about it. Plumlee we made fun of, but also thought he could develop, and good for him. Green and Augustin were awful here. It's nice to see Green doing better, and to be honest, his main problem here was he couldn't hit wide open threes. It was amazing how many he missed, but for some reason he's shooting them much better in Phoenix, other than that his stats are about the same across the board. DJ... First off, Thibido (no idea how to spell his name) is IMO the best coach in the game right now. He is getting more out of DJ than should be gotten. However, I think he'll be a huge weakness for them in the playoffs when teams start to focus on exposing his D game after game. Still, I like seeing ex-Pacers do well, so here's wishing they do a good job and we win a title!
                          Danger Zone

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            44% shooting is weighed down by the increased 3PA. His eFG% (adjusted for the bonus point of a 3PM) is .524. His assists p36 are at 5.0 this season. Of the Pacers regulars there are TWO guys with a better eFG% - Lance at .541 and Hill at .532. ONLY LANCE can match McBob's assists p36 at 5.0 himself. So what I'm saying is Josh is putting up Lance numbers for Charlotte. It's coming from the PF spot which makes it odd and perhaps not a good fit everywhere, but it's smart change for him considering how good his handles are.

                            Lance is outrebounding Josh, though we also know some of Lance's boards are "stolen" or system based (West or Roy block out to let guard get ball clean). But Josh is also playing more perimeter so that's a negative by-product. Josh has MORE steals p36 than Lance, obviously more blocks (.7 to .1) but also less than HALF THE TURNOVERS. Josh is getting the same amount of assists for only 1.2 TOs vs 2.7. Josh is shooting the three BETTER THAN LANCE (36% to 34%).

                            Lance is shooting the 2 better and is taking more 2PA vs 3PA than Josh (Lance 8 to 3, Josh 4 to 4). Neither draw many FTAs but Josh is shooting FT a fraction better (ie, equally non-important).


                            Josh is 26, Lance is 23. Lance is playing 35 mpg, Josh is playing 30 mpg.



                            Frankly I'm glad Josh was thrown under the bus because I was undervaluing his impact this year, those are some darn good, if non-traditional numbers.
                            Lance and Josh make for an interesting statistical comparison. Their production levels are remarkably similar. With Josh likely opting out after this season, they'll also both be in line for new contracts this summer.

                            I wouldn't be surprised if Charlotte makes a play for both of them.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Ex-Pacers Making Us All Look Like Idiots

                              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                              . . . I do agree though, there needs to be some type of accountability when it comes to these types of plays. If not, they will just continue (as we have seen)
                              I disagree. Although there have been some bad Lance moments, they are fewer and farther between. Vogel is holding him accountable, but not embarrassing him by yanking him when he messes up. It appears that issues are being addressed in private instead of during the game in public. Lance has toned his game down, made an effort not to force things. Think of the times he gets the rebound and drives down court and pulls up now, when he would have driven head long to the basket early in the season. There is still room for improvement, but improvement is being made.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X