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

Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

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

  • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
    I don't know if anyone saw Danny's quotes after practice yesterday, but basically he sounds pretty upbeat all things considered and I think it was maybe Cornrows who made the point that typically if Danny is down about the injury or wants to dodge it he gets his butt out of there before the media is in.

    Granger said he was really happy with how his knee has held up through training camp.

    The big thing about this is two fold, as someone who has had both knee injuries, calf injuries and ankle injuries from playing basketball I can tell you first hand that when they rehab you they treat the whole leg. That old song about the hip bone connected to the leg bone connected to the ankle bone, well it's a simple way to look at it but it's all very true in how they treat the leg. You have to treat the whole thing. Right now I am rehabbing from a grade 2 sprain I got a few weeks ago playing in a bball league and they treat my calf and my knee just as much as my ankle. I think this is probably a large part of the concern with Danny. I am sure they don't want him over compensating for the strain and end up aggravating his knee.

    The good news is this, if they were worried about the knee at all I think they would have shut Danny completely down, but he said himself he's been doing ball handling drills and shooting drills. I am sure ball handling drills require some level of cutting and explosion. The fact that he's not allowed to run with the calf makes sense to me because they don't want that level of exertion put on the calf right now.

    Basically, if I hear that Danny's blowing out of practice without talking to the media or something like that, I'll get concern, but until then this just seems like a case of better safe than sorry.
    I agree, and I'll add to this by pointing out that in between the initial calf injury (vs. Dallas) and the time he re-aggravated the calf (second half @ Chicago), while he was out there playing versus the Bulls he looked as healthy and as comfortable as I have seen him since before the knee injury. He looked to me like he was ready to be the starter that night, IMO.

    Add it all up, and I think this is just a small thing.

    Comment


    • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
      But what is Derrick Rose if he's not faster/more athletic than everyone but Lebron James? Probably not that great of a player..

      If that's the case, then he's going to be pretty useless once he hits age 30. I don't buy that he couldn't still be a good player if less than 100%, but it's his body and only he knows how he felt.

      Comment


      • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
        If that's the case, then he's going to be pretty useless once he hits age 30. I don't buy that he couldn't still be a good player if less than 100%, but it's his body and only he knows how he felt.
        He would still be a very good player. He just wouldn't be Derrick Rose if he wasn't 100%.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
          He would still be a very good player. He just wouldn't be Derrick Rose if he wasn't 100%.
          But a player who isn't "Derrick Rose" could have still been very valuable to the Bulls last season.

          Like I said, only he knows his body. But I don't buy that he or any other player is worthless if they aren't 100%. An 85% Derrick Rose should still be better than the majority of players. If he isn't any good without physical explosiveness, then he won't be worth much once he hits age 30.

          Comment


          • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

            Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
            If that's the case, then he's going to be pretty useless once he hits age 30. I don't buy that he couldn't still be a good player if less than 100%, but it's his body and only he knows how he felt.
            Unless he improves his shot, I expect he won't be. He's not that great of a shooter, he's not that smart of a player. He is an efficient distributer, but he's a scoring point guard so... This is a guy whose entire game is centered around exploding to the basket. If he can't do that, I don't think he's one of the best players in the game. (now, he'd still be pretty good..but superstar level? Nope..)

            Comment


            • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              Not enough basketballs on the floor for him to do it with the starters. GHill doesn't do much other than inititiate the play, so it's not really like you're swapping their roles. In order to put the ball in Lances hands, with the starters, it takes the ball out of PG's hands and DWest's hands, as they're the 1st and 2nd options. I like Lance, but I don't think he's good enough to pull the ball away from them.
              No, it would not be a role swap. It's not about putting the ball in Lance's hands. It's about Lance putting the ball in DWest and Hibbert's hands...in the right spot. Or dishing out to Paul George or George Hill.

              Our guards, except Lance, are very average seeing the floor and passing. Until this team gets better in that area...or Paul George becomes Kobe Bryant, it's not advancing out of the East.

              Comment


              • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                All of this is irrelevant now; just start Lance.

                Comment


                • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                  Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                  No, it would not be a role swap. It's not about putting the ball in Lance's hands. It's about Lance putting the ball in DWest and Hibbert's hands...in the right spot. Or dishing out to Paul George or George Hill.

                  Our guards, except Lance, are very average seeing the floor and passing. Until this team gets better in that area...or Paul George becomes Kobe Bryant, it's not advancing out of the East.
                  It's amazing you think Lance will be able to facilitiate the ball, without actually having the ball in his hands. Get Lance a pair of glasses and a lightning bolt scar, and maybe he can become the NBA's version of Harry Potter. If he's facilitating to everyone else, he's going to have the ball in his hands, and have the PG role, which is Hill's. Sorry, but you can't describe him havign a different role, and then try to say he won't have a different role.
                  Last edited by Since86; 10-28-2013, 10:32 AM.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                    Originally posted by ECKrueger View Post
                    All of this is irrelevant now; just start Lance.
                    It's irrelevant until Danny is playing.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      It's amazing you think Lance will be able to facilitiate the ball, without actually having the ball in his hands. Get Lance a pair of glasses and a lightning bolt scar, and maybe he can become the NBA's version of Harry Potter. If he's facilitating to everyone else, he's going to have the ball in his hands, and have the PG role, which is Hill's. Sorry, but you can't describe him havign a different role, and then try to say he won't have a different role.
                      Yeah, I just don't see how the third-most-used ball-handler in a starting five dedicated to feeding two different players in the post is going to somehow be the kind of facilitator people are talking about with Lance. Granger's game is just a better fit, and I think to most people that would be obvious, but I guess not. You want that third guy ready to catch and shoot/score.

                      I think it may just boil down to people letting the highlight plays burn into their memory while the rest (IE every other play, and the bad plays) fade away versus really looking at what these guys do individually, together, and specifically in this offense. There are people who know a lot more about all three of those concepts than I do, but I know enough to feel pretty confident I'm right about this.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                        I think it should be pretty obvious to all by now that Lance should start while Granger make's sure the rehab equipment is working.
                        Danger Zone

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                          Yeah, I just don't see how the third-most-used ball-handler in a starting five dedicated to feeding two different players in the post is going to somehow be the kind of facilitator people are talking about with Lance. Granger's game is just a better fit, and I think to most people that would be obvious, but I guess not. You want that third guy ready to catch and shoot/score.

                          I think it may just boil down to people letting the highlight plays burn into their memory while the rest (IE every other play, and the bad plays) fade away versus really looking at what these guys do individually, together, and specifically in this offense. There are people who know a lot more about all three of those concepts than I do, but I know enough to feel pretty confident I'm right about this.
                          I think the starting unit needs shooting, but if it had a guy more capable of breaking down a defense with a nice entry pass or drive and dish or perhaps a superior defender who allows Paul to play his natural position, I think those things are more important. The fact i doubt Granger fully recovers is a factor. The fact i think he's gone after this season is also a factor. The fact i expect Lance to improve a little more is yet another reason.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                            I think the starting unit needs shooting, but if it had a guy more capable of breaking down a defense with a nice entry pass or drive and dish or perhaps a superior defender .
                            All things Danny has shown he can do as recently as this preseason. Is Danny as flashy as Lance with his dribbling and passing no, but Danny also is more than capable of "breaking down" a SF and passing to the open man. He just doesn't break ankles, and make no look passes. Effectiveness is more important than style, and while Lance has Danny beat on style easily, Danny is capable of being just as effective doing the same thing as the "5th option". What would be even more effective though, is have George and Hill do that while Danny drains open 3's while still being a threat to score in the post, off the dribble, or from mid-range. The reason Lance is so much more effective offensively with the ball in his hands is because he doesn't have the offensive arsenal that Danny has. Danny has the ability to be anything from the number one option that does the most scoring to the number 5 option who just waits for the ball in the corner. Lance on the other hand is most effective as the first or second option, so that when he gets down to being the 5th option all he really brings is he isn't going to make a stupid mistake. Lots of players are capable of that. So why limit a good chunk of his minutes starting him, when you have another player who is more capable of filling that role, and put Lance into a role that lets him help the team more than he would starting. It doesn't make basketball sense. You want Lance to be your 6th man because it puts him in the best position to take advantage of his skills, while putting Danny in with the starters fills a gap that is needed.

                            It isn't like Lance was constantly breaking down defenders last year, and he won't be this year with the starters either. If you want Lance in a position to help the team the most you want him coming off the bench and Granger starting.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                              It's irrelevant until Danny is playing.
                              I'd like Danny to start ideally but it will be ~8-10 games before he's back and then how many more until he's back in game shape? Another 10 more? All in all I'd think it's 15-20 games into he's back to old form barrng any set backs.

                              I guess ~3/4 of the season is plenty to get a groove but I'm just worried he will be in and out of the line up.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official "Danny or Lance should start" Thread: Pros and Cons and Indiana's Offensive Options

                                Originally posted by ECKrueger View Post
                                I'd like Danny to start ideally but it will be ~8-10 games before he's back and then how many more until he's back in game shape? Another 10 more? All in all I'd think it's 15-20 games into he's back to old form barrng any set backs.

                                I guess ~3/4 of the season is plenty to get a groove but I'm just worried he will be in and out of the line up.
                                Let's see, the earliest he's expected back is three weeks, so that means the earliest he'd be back is November 20th @NYK. That would be the 11th game of the year. I don't know that he needs 10 games to be in game shape. I imagine it will take some time to be whatever his 100% looks like these days, but 10 sounds too long to me. I would think he'd come off the bench for 1 to a few games, but if he's looking good in that stretch I don't think it will be very long before he's starting (assuming, of course, this is it for him in terms of significant injuries).

                                As soon as he looks like he did during the @CHI preseason game again, he'll start, I think. If the calf hadn't been an issue after the vs DAL game, he'd already be the starter.

                                I'd guess he's starting by December 1st if not sooner, if we assume he's healthy in 3 weeks and stays healthy.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X