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

Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

    Forgive me if this has already been posted. I haven't seen it posted yet.

    http://dimemag.com/2013/02/whos-bett...paul-george/2/

    There are two different arguments posted. This is the pro Paul George argument.


    Paul George doesn’t have the years of experience, the dozens of clutch shots or the world championship under his belt.

    He’s only got everything else.

    He’s a young player whose role has grown from complimentary player to NBA star in about 10 weeks, after all. But for as legendary as Pierce has been — and as resurgent he’s played since Rondo’s season-ending injury — only one other player in the NBA this season is averaging at least 17.5 points, 7.5 rebounds and 4.0 assists per game. And that player is LeBron James, whose greatness has already been discussed. In fact, since Pierce was a rookie, only 11 people have averaged those kind of statistics George has for a season, a group that’s never included Pierce. Those are numbers befitting one of the rare players who can translate his gifts of athleticism and timing into every phase of the game. This is, as a reminder, just George’s third season. If I’m taking George vs. Pierce in a winner-take-all matchup in this moment, George is an easy choice because his impact covers more than just one end of the court.

    Both have shown they can score, of course. While Pierce has done it for more than a decade in a steady run of excellence even for the storied Green and White, George is showing he can answer the call in a moment’s notice. Say, for example, an injury that knocked leading scorer Danny Granger out of the lineup for all but two weeks of the season. George’s scoring jumped from 14.3 points per game in November to 18.8 in December, 19.4 in January, and 19.1 this month. Three consecutive months of not only scoring but leadership from George to hold Indiana together despite Granger’s absence and Roy Hibbert’s virtual invisibility in the paint. It matches the kind of put a team on my back role Pierce has always held. Is that too general a description of his influence for you? The Pacers’ offense is anemic without him on the floor, scoring eight fewer points, according to NBA.com statistics, while shooting seven percentage points worse from three and four points worse overall.

    The difference is defense. Put George on a team like Indiana and it can be hard to differentiate his effect from the rest of the squad’s league-leading defense. However, it’s also hard to separate Pierce’s poor defense on account of his age — not to blame him much, because everyone loses a step — from the rest of his team’s worsening defense. While the Celtics are ranked in the top 10 of defensive rating this season, it’s the team’s third-worst rating since the beginning of the Big Three era in 2007, nearly four points per 100 possessions worse than last year’s 2011-12 team. What George brings that is different is the quickness to shadow players from point guard to a stretch four, often checking a team’s best player. In a Feb. 4 game against division-best Chicago, George hounded Luol Deng, one of the game’s top-five best two-way players, in a fitting compliment. On the game’s first possession, George stuck with Deng over a screen from Carlos Boozer, kept Deng on his left hip and drove him toward the corner instead of letting him turn toward the rim, then blocked a poor shot attempt. In the same game’s fourth quarter with Indiana protecting an 11-point lead, George swatted Deng from behind at the rim off an offensive board. In games against James this season where he’s almost exclusively guarded the game’s most unguardable player, he’s blocked his shot in a ridiculously impressive show of athleticism, then slid underneath him for a block to seal a Feb. 1 victory at home.

    Pierce can create many plays still, but he can’t make those. And right now, I’ll take George in this guard matchup because plays just like them.
    — ANDREW GREIF
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

    He's not quite there yet to Paul pierce in his prime. But he has the chance to surpass that definitely. If any GM in the league had to pick now they would take George every time. And it's not that far of a gap right now either. Paul will be on another level than Pierce when all is said and done.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

      Pierce is the better player right now (by a little) and I doubt George will ever be as good as prime pierce was
      Originally posted by Piston Prince
      Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
      "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

        Right now, today, Paul George, Pierce has gotten slow on defense. If there was a vote on this one and people chose Paul Pierce I would automatically assume all people watch for is who scores the most points. These guys play the same position and PG grabs more boards, and plays much better defense on the ball and off the ball right now. While Pierce averages one more point and half an assist. The ball is in Pierce's hands a lot more with Rondo gone, and it was about equal to PG when Rondo was there. Now, if the question is Pierce in his prime then it is a different story.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

          Truth is still better because he is battle tested in the playoffs. When a playoff game is on the line, you can still count on Truth to make a play. PG still has to prove that he can be that kind of player. Truth won't be better for too much longer though, because sooner or later he's going to decline. It hasn't happened yet though. I have nothing but respect for Paul Pierce. I knew he was a bad** after this:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ehUsyxZIjc

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

            Good point about Pierce being the vet Sollozzo, but I think right now PG is making more plays to impact the game, but yeah with the the game on the line I'd put the ball in Pierce's hands, but I'd probably take PG for the other 47 minutes at the moment.


            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

              I think Paul Pierce is the most underrated superstar of his era. I'd easily choose him over PG in crunch time until PG proves otherwise.

              All in all I honestly feel they're about equal right now; even though they're literally on complete opposite ends of the spectrum.

              Pierce getting by on guile, veteran know how, and pride, whereas George is getting by on talent and athleticism.

              This isn't a knock on Paul, he is obviously able to do more (defense, rebounding, 3pt shooting, etc) than Pierce is at this point. But in basketball, it always seems like the vets manage to get things done year in and year out.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

                Originally posted by Miller_time04 View Post
                He's not quite there yet to Paul pierce in his prime. But he has the chance to surpass that definitely. If any GM in the league had to pick now they would take George every time. And it's not that far of a gap right now either. Paul will be on another level than Pierce when all is said and done.
                Not quite? He's pretty far off imo.

                Paul Pierce is a HOF'er and PG has a long long way to go before you can say "he'll be on another level than Pierce"

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

                  Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                  Good point about Pierce being the vet Sollozzo, but I think right now PG is making more plays to impact the game, but yeah with the the game on the line I'd put the ball in Pierce's hands, but I'd probably take PG for the other 47 minutes at the moment.
                  I agree that PG has been the better overall player this season. But yeah, Truth will kick it up a notch in the playoffs like he always does. Will PG be able to turn it up a notch in the playoffs? I have no doubt that he will eventually be able to, but will it be this season? It will be fascinating to watch.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

                    I like that they were both the #10 pick.
                    "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

                      [QUOTE=Sollozzo;1589475]Truth is still better because he is battle tested in the playoffs. When a playoff game is on the line, you can still count on Truth to make a play. PG still has to prove that he can be that kind of player. Truth won't be better for too much longer though, because sooner or later he's going to decline. It hasn't happened yet though. I have nothing but respect for Paul Pierce. I knew he was a bad** after this:=QUOTE]

                      I agree at the end of the game I would rather the ball be in Pierce's hands than PGs, but there is more to basketball than being clutch. And right now George is the more complete players I think.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

                        I'd say PG is right now.

                        Scoring just a bit less, shooting a better percentage, rebounds more, gets more steals, plays better defense.

                        Pierce had a really nice run...after Ray Allen and Garnett showed up. And Rondo.

                        If he was as good as he thinks, they'd have been able to win without a helping hand from buddy McHale.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

                          PG
                          Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

                            I really dislike these kind of comparisons. "Who is better" really only comes down to one important question as far as I am concerned. And that is, ignoring age and salary, which player would be better in the Indiana Pacers starting lineup at this time? Which player would be better for the PACERS?

                            And that is really what I think folks overlook when they start looking at players like Irving when they say I sure wish we had player x rather than George, or that they would be willing to trade a Pacer player for a player from another team.

                            Everyone has their favorite players and would like to see them more often, so they would like to see them in a Pacers uniform to help accommodate that. Or, they get wide-eyed over the statistics produced by a player on an opposing team and picture the Pacers with that player producing the same for the Pacers.

                            But to answer the question using my own framework, replacing Paul George with Paul Pierce would prove two things. That Paul Pierce is still a good player. And that Paul George is far more important to this team, from this time forward, than Paul Pierce ever could be.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Who's better Paul Pierce or Paul George?

                              I love Paul George, but Pierce is better. George may be better at some things, but Pierce is one of the greats. I meant to post the same in another post that said George at his best is better than Kobe at his best. He's not, not yet. He is growing leaps and bounds, and he is going to be nasty eventually. But Kobe and Pierce are both in HOF discussions, with 'best ever' arguments in Kobe's direction. They've both put championship teams on their backs. Right now, Paul has yet to be our go to guy down the stretch. I believe it's coming, but right now he's not better IMHO. Love me some Paul George though.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X