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

Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

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

  • Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

    I know at least five or six people who were NBA fans throughout the nineties, but have since stopped watching or caring about pro hoops. Among the reasons I've heard for this: The NBA has become boring, there's too much one-on-one play, too little team-oriented play and too many prima donnas. But what I hear most of all is that NBA players don't seem to care about winning.

    To if not confirm this theory, at least strongly support it, John Amaechi says (among other things) in his new book that NBA players don't love the game nearly as much as fans would like to believe. Here's an excerpt from a recent article about it on Slate.com:

    Amaechi says he finds common cause with other players on at least one matter: seeing sports as a means to an end. He writes that the pros play the game for a lot of reasons -- money, fame, groupies, self-esteem -- but that very few NBA players love basketball. "The fan sitting at home ? wants us to love the game like he does," he writes. "If he knew why we really play the game, for the most part, he might not love the game. He might not even watch it."

    Link: http://www.slate.com/id/2159931/

    Do you think that's true? If so, has it affected how frequently you watch or how much you enjoy the NBA?

  • #2
    Re: Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

    Good question and yes I do think that statement is true. The simple answer is I get burnt out doing my own job so why wouldn't the players feel the same way. I'm not saying there is no passion, but at the end of the day these guys have played ball probably since grade school and at some point there is no joy in mudville.

    In the answer to your question. No it has not affected the way I watch the game. I still think high school ball is the purest sense of the game.
    You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

      I've long thought the season was too long which makes each individual game a little less important.

      Then, I've thought salaries got way out of hand with reality. Even if TV contracts and ticket sales seemingly justify it, that is only because the ticket prices had to be raised enough that it limited a certain segment of the fanbase from easily atttending the games. And attending religiously. That is not good for the long term health of any individual team nor is it good for the league.

      Of course if the players accepted less money (yeah right) then the owners would need to reciprocate with lower ticket prices all the way around (yeah right again). So could 3 greedy parties actually pull this off (the league, the players, the owners)?

      But I think when the players are grossly overpaid, and with guaranteed contracts to boot, it has to foster too much of a sense of complacency. And the players who might be hungry because they don't have the mega contracts are going to be (mostly) glued to the bench in favor of the star player (who management can't risk offending and the fans want to see (thanks to the PR machine).

      And I think the Pacers have historically been some of the worst offenders in this overpaying and overhyping of players. For a time it was pretty easy to be comfortable being a Pacer. We fostered a culture of entitlement.... IMHO...

      If there was one change I could make to the NBA it is that guaranteed contracts would be gone tomorrow. I'd consider some form of severance pay/buyout percentage... and/or I'd consider only the first year be guaranteed and some other caveats BUT for the most part, owners need a way to keep a player accountable when they sign the dotted line.

      -Bball
      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

      ------

      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

        Originally posted by flakcatcher View Post
        I know at least five or six people who were NBA fans throughout the nineties, but have since stopped watching or caring about pro hoops. Among the reasons I've heard for this: The NBA has become boring, there's too much one-on-one play, too little team-oriented play and too many prima donnas. But what I hear most of all is that NBA players don't seem to care about winnning.

        To if not confirm this theory, at least strongly support it, John Amaechi says (among other things) in his new book that NBA players don't love the game nearly as much as fans would like to believe. Here's an excerpt from a recent article about it on Slate.com:

        Amaechi says he finds common cause with other players on at least one matter: seeing sports as a means to an end. He writes that the pros play the game for a lot of reasons—money, fame, groupies, self-esteem—but that very few NBA players love basketball. "The fan sitting at home … wants us to love the game like he does," he writes. "If he knew why we really play the game, for the most part, he might not love the game. He might not even watch it."

        Link: http://www.slate.com/id/2159931/

        Do you think that's true? If so, has it affected how frequently you watch or how much you enjoy the NBA?
        Yes it's true, you can see it on the court every night. WHen they turn it "on" in the 4th quarter. And the fact that it shows now is a big part of why their tv and attendence numbers are going down.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

          Being somewhat young this is the only NBA that I know. I was a kid in the later Jordan years, but I would love to be able to watch the game when it meant something to the people playing it. It seems like when I watch old games on classic or something they had so much passion for every basket. Every win.
          "I'm not looking for the best players, I'm looking for the right ones."

          -Herb Brooks

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

            I don't think apathetic to winning is the right way to word it. First of all, these guys have spent the better part of their lives training, eating and sleeping basketball. Most of them I think very much want to win, in the same way that everybody wants to win, just the natural human drive to compete (and there's a lot more money for those who win games as opposed to those who lose them). So they aren't apathetic to winning, they're apathetic to the work that goes along with winning.

            Do I think a lot of players are just doing it for the paycheck? Of course, same reason I go to my job. And these are some pretty fat paychecks in the NBA. And yeah, the groupies and the fame, all that is definitely a part of it, no doubt. But can't we say the same thing about musicians? Did the Beatles really love music or did they just want the money and the girls? If they were just in it for the cash does that make them any less great?

            But I really do think there are a lot of people playing in the NBA who enjoy the game and love playing it. Just watch Gilbert or Kobe or Duncan. They love basketball the same way that Peyton loves football. You don't work your *** off everyday your entire life if you don't love the game, especailly when you're fifteen years old.

            I read an article on Yao in the New Yorker a couple years ago and what really struck me was the nature of basetball in China. You're forced to play basketball if you're tall. You go to an academy, you do drills all day then go to your dorm room and sleep. It's not exactly the type of environment that breeds a love for the game, but it seemed like the reason Yao is so good (besides being 20 feet tall) is that he has an appreciation for basketball that a lot of people being forced to play don't. He actually has fun and he enjoys the game itself, totally separate from the millions of other things that go along with it. And that's why Yao will be one of the greatest someday, and it's why Magic was so good, and Michael was so good and Larry was so good. They liked playing basketball and that fueled their desire to get better.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

              Chauncey Billups was irate over the attitude of his teammates last night.

              I think it's around 50/50.

              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

                I think we all know what half Jamaal Tinsley is in.

                Nobody cares more about winning than Tinsley, hence why he's in the gym 12 hours a day perfecting his shooting touch and his Adonis physique.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

                  Seeing Amechi speaking on Real Time the other night I will say that I was impressed with his apparent candidness and thoughtful viewpoints. He doesn't come across as a guy being flippant or looking for book sales. He sounds like a very philosophical guy who was taking in all the details of his NBA experience, much of which bugged him or struck him as odd.

                  For example he called the NBA locker room one of the "gayest" places he'd ever seen, simply because of the narcisism, the pruning and primping, etc. A Queer Eye for the Straight Guy core audience you might say.

                  That stuff comes across as very observational with an eye for detail, as though perhaps he was always interested in documenting his experiences.


                  Anyway, point is that if he says it then it probably carries a ton of truth behind it. That is a bit depressing. But OTOH there is a lot of money to be lost by playing poorly. I think a player driven by financial success is going to play with a passion similar to someone who just loves the game, both want to make a point in the end and to be successful.

                  I'd guess that guys content with going through the motions would be the same way without the money. That's probably their personality as much as anything. If you aren't Kobe or Wade and aren't trying to reach their level of fame and wealth, then you just aren't all that driven period. Because the extra fame and money is out there for the taking for players like Tinsley (for example) if only they could improve their output.

                  It's the same at every job. Not every doctor is out to save the world, plenty just want the money. Same with pilots, waiters, teachers, policemen, and so on. We idealize ALL of those roles, assume that all of them have a passion for what they do when it involves us, but often we are just another day of work to them.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

                    I think you can tell which guys care about winning. They usually bust their behinds for however long they're on the court any given night. They play through minor injuries. You hear anecdotal evidence of their humility; I.E. your friend met him once out of the blue and asked for an autograph, and he obliged.

                    They put in the extra work after team practices and in the offseason, to get better.

                    To be fair, a lot of these guys learn to love the game as they see their prime years approaching. But the ones who love the game from the get-go are the special players.

                    Dwyane Wade comes to mind as a prime example. Never once have I heard him complain about having to do just about everything on that team, from winning games with his shooting to playing great defense to having to be essentially the only playmaker on the team, all the while having his teammate, the highest paid player in the NBA, constantly injured and/or underperforming.

                    He may be annoying to watch at times because of all the fouls the refs call for him, but I don't think anyone can question his desire and effort to win.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

                      If only they all had the competitive spirit of Dick Bavetta........
                      PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

                        Originally posted by PacersFan83 View Post
                        I think we all know what half Jamaal Tinsley is in.

                        Nobody cares more about winning than Tinsley, hence why he's in the gym 12 hours a day perfecting his shooting touch and his Adonis physique.
                        I don't see anybody in the LEAGUE with better handles than Tins.
                        Guess that's just "natural" right??

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

                          Nope, I don't think they're apathetic towards winning. I think they're apathetic towards losing. Like Bball said, any single loss doesn't really mean much in an 82-game season.

                          Interestingly, Kstat, Chauncey Billups is one of the players in whom this is most obvious.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

                            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                            Nope, I don't think they're apathetic towards winning. I think they're apathetic towards losing. Like Bball said, any single loss doesn't really mean much in an 82-game season.

                            Interestingly, Kstat, Chauncey Billups is one of the players in whom this is most obvious.
                            Um, the dude ripped his teammates after losing a meaningless all-star game...

                            http://freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artic.../1051/SPORTS03

                            The reason I don't play in charity games is because I want to play for real," said Billups, who scored eight points and had six assists in 16 minutes. "I want to play to win. I understand guys don't want to get hurt, but I just wish they would somehow put some rule that these cats have to play."

                            Because Billups doesn't show his emotions often doesn't mean he's somehow apathetic towards losing.

                            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Are most NBA athletes apathetic toward winning?

                              I agree with the poster who wanted guaranteed contracts eliminated. Too many players with long-term contracts do just enough to maintain their playing status. Some don't even do that.

                              How many times have you seen a player with an injury wait until the season starts to have surgery? It happens time and time again...Shaq is a prime example of that. Even our Smits was good at putting off elective surgery until the season started. McKey was another one who would wait until it was time to play and then decide to have surgery. How many times has it seemed that some player was milking an injury? There's no way to ascertain for sure whether a play is injured or not but there's times it seems they are malingering.

                              Miagranes, sinus ailments, flu, etc. seems to hit some players harder and more often then others. Are some players prone to more illnesses or are they simply packing it in? It's strange how some sickly players suddenly get well for an entire season when their contract is about to expire.

                              The season is a long haul and it's natural for a player not to give it his best game in and game out. However, there seems to be some players who mail it in more than others.

                              I would have to say the vast majority of players are somewhat apathetic towards winning at some time during the season. There are players who just hate to lose and seem to give it their all most of the time....KG, Kidd, Nash, Foster, Granger to name a few. Then there are gym rats like Mully who couldn't get enough basketball and practically lived in a gym.

                              Things are stepped up during the playoffs and then most players give it their all. How many times have you heard someone say that a particular game has a playoff fervor? Meaning that a game is being played with extra fervor and tenancity.

                              As a whole, I think we fans care more than most players do about winning. I couldn't say that about players before the era of long term contracts.
                              .

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X