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

Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

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

  • #46
    Re: Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

    Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
    While they are not Golden State, they do have Gary Neal who is a career 40% 3 pt shooter. Gerald Henderson, while not great is also a serviceable shooter as is Lance and Kemba Walker (shot 39% from 3, 84% from the line).

    Not sure they are as bad of a shooting team as your post would indicate.
    Well they were 25th in total 3 point shots made last year with 516. Guys who left their team this summer, mainly McRoberts, Tolliver, and CDR (who I suppose could still return as he hasn't been signed by anybody yet) made 293 of those. They added Lance, who is merely an average outside shooter. They signed Marvin Williams who should help with their spacing, but he hasn't ever been as good of an outside shooter as McRoberts and Tolliver were last season, so I can't imagine him really replacing them both. They drafted a project in Noah Vonleh, and PJ Hairston who I suppose could be a good shooter in the NBA if he figures it out, and doesn't end up in prison first.

    Gerald Henderson only made 40 threes all season at a .348 clip. He isn't an outside shooter, but at least he doesn't try to be. Kemba Walker hit 109 of them, but only shot .333 from back there, not 39%. He's a really below average outside shooter for a point guard. MKG who is their starting small forward, made 1 three last year. Seriously. He only made 1, and he started 62 games at a wing position for a playoff team. That's incredible. Of course he only attempted 9 of them, so at least he knew his limits. He also has the ugliest shot, possibly in the history of the NBA. Cody Zeller couldn't hit a shot anywhere on the floor, and certainly didn't show any reason to be optimistic he can spread the floor for them. Al Jefferson is actually a really good shooter from 15-20 feet.

    If you watched a lot of the Charlotte Bobcats last year, you watched a really bad shooting team. Now take away their 2 (possibly 3 depending on what happens with CDR) best outside shooters, and you have the Charlotte Hornets.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

      Nice post Mackey, regardless which side of the coin you fall on. You make a good argument.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

        Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
        Well they were 25th in total 3 point shots made last year with 516. Guys who left their team this summer, mainly McRoberts, Tolliver, and CDR (who I suppose could still return as he hasn't been signed by anybody yet) made 293 of those. They added Lance, who is merely an average outside shooter. They signed Marvin Williams who should help with their spacing, but he hasn't ever been as good of an outside shooter as McRoberts and Tolliver were last season, so I can't imagine him really replacing them both. They drafted a project in Noah Vonleh, and PJ Hairston who I suppose could be a good shooter in the NBA if he figures it out, and doesn't end up in prison first.

        Gerald Henderson only made 40 threes all season at a .348 clip. He isn't an outside shooter, but at least he doesn't try to be. Kemba Walker hit 109 of them, but only shot .333 from back there, not 39%. He's a really below average outside shooter for a point guard. MKG who is their starting small forward, made 1 three last year. Seriously. He only made 1, and he started 62 games at a wing position for a playoff team. That's incredible. Of course he only attempted 9 of them, so at least he knew his limits. He also has the ugliest shot, possibly in the history of the NBA. Cody Zeller couldn't hit a shot anywhere on the floor, and certainly didn't show any reason to be optimistic he can spread the floor for them. Al Jefferson is actually a really good shooter from 15-20 feet.

        If you watched a lot of the Charlotte Bobcats last year, you watched a really bad shooting team. Now take away their 2 (possibly 3 depending on what happens with CDR) best outside shooters, and you have the Charlotte Hornets.
        I am talking about this upcoming season, not last year. I get they were not great from 3 last season.

        Again, they are not a prolific team, but they have enough threats to keep the floor spaced and open up the paint for Al Jefferson and for Kemba/Lance to drive.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

          Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
          I am talking about this upcoming season, not last year. I get they were not great from 3 last season.

          Again, they are not a prolific team, but they have enough threats to keep the floor spaced and open up the paint for Al Jefferson and for Kemba/Lance to drive.
          So they were a terrible outside shooting team last year, but that's all going to change this coming season even though they didn't really add much outside shooting, and actually lost most of what they had?

          I don't follow that logic at all.

          The only returning player they have who really helps "open up the paint for Al Jefferson," is Al Jefferson.
          Last edited by Mackey_Rose; 08-06-2014, 09:51 AM.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

            Back to the OP:

            1) Miami is the best team of these 3. They should challenge Washington to be the 3rd best team in the conference. They obviously lost the best player on the planet, but Chalmers/Wade/Deng/McRoberts/Bosh is better than anything outside of Cleveland, Chicago, and Washington.

            2) Charlotte is a questionable a playoff team. I don't think they will be as good as they were last year.

            3) Indiana should blow it up. I just don't see any reason to try to fight and claw our way to an 8th seed and get blasted in 4 straight by Cleveland or Chicago. Start from scratch, and hope like hell Paul can come back and still play like a superstar by the start of the 2016-2017 season.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

              Charlotte - just think they are deeper than Miami
              Miami
              huge gap
              Pacers
              First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

              Comment


              • #52
                Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

                I disagree with most of you, I'm not high on Miami. Bosh will probably step up and Granger has the possibility to surprise some people but I think Wade's body is too broken and Miami will be the worst of the 3.

                Yes, PG is a beast, in all categories of the game really. But this Pacers team still has a ton of talent. They will be able to hold their own against 90% of teams they play. Hibbert, West, and Hill all have what it takes to step up and carry the team next year, knowing they'll be needed. Then you have deadly shooters in Miles and Copeland that can make a big difference if Vogel lets them play. I'm expecting someone to step up like Stuckey or Solo and make a difference as well.

                Charlotte
                Indy
                Miami

                EDIT: Just remembered they signed Luol Deng.. That makes a big difference.

                Now I'd have it like most of you

                Charlotte
                Miami
                Indy
                Last edited by Ownagedood; 08-06-2014, 01:18 PM.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

                  MIAMI
                  CHARLOTTE
                  INDIANA

                  I feel the Pacers can be closer than most give them. I wouldn't bet they couldn't be 2nd out of the three. It depends on how well Hibbert, DWest, and GH3 play. I don't see the Pacers as contending, but I can see them being a 41 win team if all the stars align themselves properly. I just hope I'm not being overly optimistic, and end up looking at 36 win seasons of the JOB era.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

                    Miami and Charlotte both have questions; health and durability for the Heat, fit and chemistry for the Hornets. Regardless, I think both of those teams finish higher than the Pacers. Which finishes higher is pretty irrelevant since neither will be coming out of the East. Perhaps they finish 4-5, but really, who cares. It's a two team race between Chicago and Cleveland and they've already overlapped the rest of the field in August.

                    As for the Pacers, our offense was already the worst in the league last season from February on. If you remove our two best play-makers from the equation, it gets even uglier. We'll have to resort to force-feeding Hibbert beyond its usefulness or running a Hill/West PnP or PnR to the ground. Unless you hang your hopes on a breakout season from the likes of CJ Miles or Rodney Stuckey, I think we're fighting for a playoff spot, and that's (hopefully) without any other injuries to another starter. To compound the disappointment of no longer being in the championship contender discussion, we don't exactly have young players to develop for the future, aside from Solo or LaVoy Allen. Would even the biggest sunshiners claim these guys have high ceilings to be key pieces? Franchise changers? To me, they're fringe starters/role players, at best.

                    In short, I have zero expectations for the Pacers this season. With a team that was built to win now, there's little youth waiting in the wings to look forward to. As grim as that sounds, I think we can still root for a team that will revert back to their Blue Collar days and scrap for every win. They might not win much, but hopefully we can still be proud of the product of the floor.
                    2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

                      1. Miami (around 45-48 wins)
                      2. Indiana (around 42-45 wins)
                      3.Charlotte (around 39-42 wins)

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

                        Charlotte is clearly better than last year. They finally have a PF who can make 3pt shots, thus clearing out the lane for Big Al Jefferson. That was a huge issue for them last year, because a lot of teams didn't respect McRoberts' jump shot. They also are benching their weakest starter, Gerald Henderson, in favor of Lance Stephenson. I'd say I'm shocked to see people predicting them to finish worse than last season, but I'm not. Clearly the posters making those predictions are holding a grudge against Lance.
                        <---- Hansbrough smiling in the training room after Gerald Henderson's cheap shot. UNC won the game, Tyler was happy so he took this picture. Roy Williams keeps it on his desk.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

                          1. Miami (45-50 wins)
                          2. Indiana (37-42 wins)
                          3. Charlotte (33-43 wins)

                          Charlotte could be better than the Pacers, or it could all totally implode, they're the absolute wild card in the East to me.

                          I just am not a fan of the Hornets line-up, especially with McRoberts gone. Kemba/Lance/MKG/Zeller/Jefferson is a very conflicting lineup. Common sense says to throw the ball into Jefferson, but Kemba and Lance are ball stoppers, Kemba more than Lance.
                          Last edited by Cactus Jax; 08-07-2014, 11:53 PM.
                          "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                          ----------------- Reggie Miller

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

                            LOL

                            Miami is still easily better than Charlotte. I think the Pacers without PG will be on a similar level with Charlotte, in the 5-7 seed territory.
                            "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                            - ilive4sports

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

                              Pacers- because I am a homer and think they can win it all next year. They always win next year. Its been proven time and time again.

                              Charlotte- I liked Lance and he is with them now. Since I can't stand Miami they are second.

                              Miami - Since I can't stand the Heat they are third.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Rank them: Charlotte, Indiana, Miami

                                Originally posted by Shabazz View Post
                                Charlotte is clearly better than last year. They finally have a PF who can make 3pt shots, thus clearing out the lane for Big Al Jefferson. That was a huge issue for them last year, because a lot of teams didn't respect McRoberts' jump shot. They also are benching their weakest starter, Gerald Henderson, in favor of Lance Stephenson. I'd say I'm shocked to see people predicting them to finish worse than last season, but I'm not. Clearly the posters making those predictions are holding a grudge against Lance.
                                By all metrics, McRoberts is a better three point shooter than Marvin Williams. Gerald Henderson was not their weakest starter. MKG was. But sure, it's us that are holding a grudge.
                                "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                                -Lance Stephenson

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X