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

Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

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

  • Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

    Nothing but the obvious stated here.

    There are times when I watch Gerald Green play that I am shocked at how terrible a basketball player he really is. He has no clue how to play. Sure he is a great athlete and a pretty good shooter, but everything else he is horrible. I have trouble watching him

    http://www.indystar.com/article/20121213/SPORTS4/212130334/Kravitz-Pacers-offseason-upgrades-bench-were-no-upgrades

    The NBA trading deadline is months away, but already, it’s time for Indiana Pacers bosses Donnie Walsh and Kevin Pritchard to work on bringing in reinforcements.
    The reason is simple: With this bench, the Pacers aren’t going to get out of the first round of the playoffs — assuming they even reach the playoffs.

    After Wednesday night’s 96-81 victory over the Cleveland Cavaliers, the Pacers’ bench has now been outscored in 16 of 22 games — it was 35-21 Cavs subs at Bankers Life Fieldhouse — and has shown no signs it is going to get out of this funk.

    Coming into the game, the Pacers ranked 28th in the league in plus-minus ratings, and 24th in bench scoring at 26.9 points per game.

    It’s gotten so bad, coach Frank Vogel already has made one change — Ben Hansbrough replacing the startlingly inept D.J. Augustin at backup point guard — and he’s ready to make more moves if the bench doesn’t start to produce.

    And you’d better believe that Vogel is already in Walsh’s and Pritchard’s ear about making some moves down the line. He sees what we all see. This team lacks depth, and that’s a bad thing, especially when your starting center, Roy Hibbert, is having a gruesome year offensively. It’s also forcing him to use his starters for more minutes in an effort to hide the bench.

    The early returns on Walsh’s and Pritchard’s initial moves have not been good.
    And that’s surprising, because on paper, the additions of Augustin and Gerald Green looked like they were going to make the Pacers’ bench more formidable.
    Augustin started for Charlotte and averaged 11.1 points and 6.4 assists per game.

    Green, who has been around the world and around the league, had a coming-out party last year, averaging 12.9 points in 25 minutes per game for the New Jersey Nets.

    But Augustin has been a giant mystery of Loch Ness-ian proportions. Even the coaches can’t figure out what happened to a guy who looked like a starter for most teams. He has been miserable defensively, and offensively, he can’t shoot (27 percent from the field) and rarely penetrates the paint to create shots for others.

    Darren Collison, anybody?

    The Pacers traded Collison in large measure because they feared he would go into the tank as a backup to George Hill. They had every reason to believe Augustin would be a suitable replacement, if not a minor upgrade. Instead, he has been a disaster.

    Green? He has been so-so, and was particularly awful Wednesday night, making 1-of-8 shots and committing three turnovers. He shows occasional flashes, but for the most part, he’s a great athlete who doesn’t quite know how to play basketball.

    The Pacers fell in love with his athleticism, but his hoops IQ is limited. After a nice season in Jersey, he’s averaging just 7.1 points per game in 21 minutes and shooting just 38 percent from the field.

    Leandro Barbosa, anybody?

    I was confused why they let Barbosa walk. Sure, he was unproductive in the Miami series, but so were a lot of people. During the regular season, though, he was one of the few Pacers bench players who could create his own shot. Now look at this bench and tell me: Who can do the same thing?

    Nobody.

    At least Ian Mahinmi has been a nice upgrade over Lou Amundson. No complaints about him. Except maybe that most of his tweets are in French. And I don’t speak French.

    And then there’s Tyler Hansbrough, whose minutes are going to get cut if he doesn’t start showing a bit more offensive flair.

    “We’ve got to start looking for minutes for Jeff (Pendergraph),’’ Vogel said. “And our rookies (Miles Plumlee and Orlando Johnson) are starting to come along.’’

    Hansbrough simply hasn’t improved since his second year. He still plays hard, still gets rebounds and defends, but he has no low-post moves and isn’t hitting that 15-foot jumper he was making with such alacrity his second season in the league. He came into the Cleveland game averaging 5.9 points and shooting 38 percent from the field.

    “We knew changing our bench didn’t necessarily mean improvement,’’ Vogel said. “Obviously, we hoped for it, but remember, last year’s bench wasn’t succeeding at a high level, either, which was why we made all those changes. I’ve just got to keep challenging them to be better, and I’ve got to find a way to use them better.’’

    Eventually (we think), Danny Granger will return, which will not only empower the starting unit, but allow Lance Stephenson to return to the second unit. Stephenson has had a nice year and will be a good addition at the two-guard. Just don’t look for him to play the point.

    By then, they either need Ben Hansbrough to turn into Jeremy Lin, or they need Augustin to rediscover his game.

    Or they need to make a deal.

    Preferably, and necessarily, the latter.



    Bob Kravitz is a columnist for The Indianapolis Star. Call him at (317) 444-6643 or email bob.kravitz@indystar.com. You can also follow Bob on Twitter at @bkravitz.
    Last edited by BillS; 12-13-2012, 09:53 AM. Reason: cleanup

  • #2
    Re: Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

    I never take Bob Kravits opinion too seriously, especially when its about the Pacers. Hes constantly stating the obvious, and his opinion flip flops from week to week. He should stick to talking Colts.
    I Bleed Blue

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

      One wonders whether has a post count he uses to tell him when to write a column based on what he reads here, or whether he just skims the forum when he is out of ideas. Then again, have we ever seen vnzla81 and Kravitz photographed together? Hmm...
      BillS

      A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
      Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

        Originally posted by CreekShow View Post
        I never take Bob Kravits opinion too seriously, especially when its about the Pacers. Hes constantly stating the obvious, and his opinion flip flops from week to week. He should stick to talking Colts.
        Newspapers don't publish stories for people on this site. As a close follower of the Pacers, of course what he says is stating the obvious to you. To the vast, vast majority of people who read this, none of it is obvious.
        "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

        -Lance Stephenson

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

          Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
          Newspapers don't publish stories for people on this site. As a close follower of the Pacers, of course what he says is stating the obvious to you. To the vast, vast majority of people who read this, none of it is obvious.
          Its not just the obvious Pacer stuff either. I was speaking for myself as to why I dont take him seriously. Never said anything about the vast majority or anyone else.

          And while we are @ it, yes I do think if you watch ANY Pacers Basketball, that this article is clearly stating the obvious.
          Last edited by CreekShow; 12-13-2012, 09:31 AM.
          I Bleed Blue

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

            Originally posted by CreekShow View Post
            Its not just the obvious Pacer stuff either. I was speaking for myself as to why I dont take him seriously. Never said anything about the vast majority or anyone else.

            And while we are @ it, yes I do think if you watch ANY Pacers Basketball, that this article is clearly stating the obvious.
            A very large portion of the people that read Bob, don't watch any Pacers basketball, so again, it isn't meant for you.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

              Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
              A very large portion of the people that read Bob, don't watch any Pacers basketball, so again, it isn't meant for you.
              Redundant post is redundant. Write an article over a subject for an audience who doesnt watch nor care about said subject. Your logic is flawed
              Last edited by CreekShow; 12-13-2012, 09:55 AM.
              I Bleed Blue

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

                Originally posted by CreekShow View Post
                Redundant post is redundant. Write an article about a subject for an audience who dont watch nor care about said subject. Your logic is flawed
                There is a very real difference between not watching it, and not caring about it. They're still the hometown team, and hence Kravitz and the Star has a very real obligation to cover them. Look at the numbers that FSI gets for their game broadcasts. Look at how many people are in the stands. As a fan that closely follows this team, actually watches the games, and is up to date with what is going on, you are the extreme minority.

                He is writing for his audience, which is the majority of Indianapolis that may not watch, but still wants to know what's going on. You're taking offense because he isn't writing his columns for you as a small minority member of his readership? That doesn't make sense.

                All this thread has shown is that he's better at his job as a writer, than you are as a writing critic.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

                  The Kravitz fan club showing out strong this morning. I find it funny how you came to the conclusion I was offended. Your reading conprehension must be lacking bc I clearly stated my own opinion, and why I formed that opinion. I am still allowed an opinion right? If you read my post I also said its not just the Pacers stuff he writes about either.

                  Seems like I offended you with my assesment of old Bob. Sorry bro I didnt mean it. Bob is the GOAT
                  Last edited by CreekShow; 12-13-2012, 10:20 AM.
                  I Bleed Blue

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    There are times when I watch Gerald Green play that I am shocked at how terrible a basketball player he really is. He has no clue how to play. Sure he is a great athlete and a pretty good shooter, but everything else he is horrible. I have trouble watching him.
                    Agreed.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

                      Nothing new here, I disagree with Kravitz about Ian I still think he is not that good and to pay that much money for a player that doesn't bring an speciality is a waste of money.

                      The best off season ever for the Pacers came up as probably one of the worse ever, at least when they brought Diener, Kareem and the rest of the scrubs they didn't give them big long term contracts.

                      And also Kravitz is asking to fix the bench, how? the Pacers don't have the pieces, cap space or good picks to make anything happen, if they couldn't do anything with cap space and pieces what makes Kravitz think that they can do it now?
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

                        I'd take Ian over Lou, and Sam Young's way better than I expected. So that's positive.

                        At the backup wing spots, I prefer Stephenson/Young to Barbosa/Inferno. I recognize Green's shortcomings, but I also expect him to get better under our more disciplined coaching.

                        Augustin's the only really big miss from the offseason, and I don't really understand that one or blame our front office for it. Nobody in the world expected him to be this bad, including Kravitz or anybody on this board. As far as I'm concerned, this is all on DJ himself.

                        If Granger's playing 30+ minutes a night, then everything about the bench except the backup PG spot looks pretty good.
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

                          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                          And also Kravitz is asking to fix the bench, how? the Pacers don't have the pieces, cap space or good picks to make anything happen, if they couldn't do anything with cap space and pieces what makes Kravitz think that they can do it now?
                          Getting Granger back and pushing Stephenson to the bench at the 2 gets the bench mostly fixed. The backup PG spot is still a problem unless Lance was able to play there, and I'd try that before trading for someone else.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

                            I guess Bob didn't get the memo about the Star and their faux outrage at the Bloomington South Girls Basketball coach.
                            "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                            "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Kravitz: offseason upgrades to bench were no upgrades

                              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                              Getting Granger back and pushing Stephenson to the bench at the 2 gets the bench mostly fixed. The backup PG spot is still a problem unless Lance was able to play there, and I'd try that before trading for someone else.
                              Even with Granger back, unless he spends a lot of time at power forward, Hansbrough's minutes are still a major issue.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X