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

Let Lance give it a whirl just once

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

  • #16
    Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

    All I'd really like to see different with Lance from a coaching standpoint is to put him back at the backup 1 instead of the backup 2. I know it's like with Tyler where they're taking both out of their comfort zones to try to grow their games in new ways (Tyler's passing, Lance playing off ball), but right now I'd like to see Lance back doing what he knows how to do because we do need a boost right now.

    The problem is I don't think that's going to happen until George Hill returns because he was our backup 2. Actually with both it was kind of switching back and forth almost play by play; sometimes Hill would handle the ball, sometimes Lance would handle it.

    But since AJ had to come back, he's obviously a 1, so now he's almost always handling the ball, leaving Lance almost exclusively off ball.

    I think in the future Lance will be okay off ball, but I think we all agree that he'll always be his strongest with the ball in his hands, so I can understand where McKey is coming from here.

    I just think putting him in the starting lineup is too radical of a step to take; Lance, even at the 1, is still pretty rough (particularly anything that isn't a pass), and defenses could exploit his shoddy shooting/scoring until he figures that out.

    Sure, you could be patient and let him figure it out game by game, but that's, to me, something you do when you're a .500 team or a losing team, not a team that's competing for the 3rd seed in the conference. We just need these guys to pull their heads back out of their asses, and when they do that the wins will come again. I don't think we'll continue to be this bad defensively, and I think Roy will give us more of what we need more often than not.

    The only thing bothering me lately, and last night you could see why I feel this way, is that we don't use David West's offensive abilities enough. He's trying so hard to keep the ball moving, which is very admirable, that he's not giving us enough with regards to his own scoring ability. He's a new, big weapon for this team in that regard, and we ought to wield that more often than we do. He could easily average in the low 20's per game if we made a concentrated effort to get him the ball more often (in areas where it's not pass-first, score second); the dude's pretty damned good at it.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

      What we need is George Hill to be healthy. We haven't had a consistent stretch of Hill healthy and Danny shooting well.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        Sure, you could be patient and let him figure it out game by game, but that's, to me, something you do when you're a .500 team or a losing team, not a team that's competing for the 3rd seed in the conference.
        Good post.

        Regarding the part above, I might counter (not sure if I'm right or not) that if we were .500 I would be less likely to take the risk. Playoffs would be at stake. However, it looks like we're simply dealing with seeding right now, and it clearly looks to me that we will have difficulty getting out of the first round without a new acquisition before the deadline. So if that doesn't happen, why not take a flyer on Lance?

        If my 20 percent theory is true, it just might be the extra lift we need to advance in the playoffs.
        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

          Yeah, I say you try to develop when winning. It's not affecting us negatively when we're winking, which is a win win.

          I tell you what else...it looks like it's starting to work with Tyler. He's starting to make passes I haven't seen since his rookie season.

          There's probably more to it than we're seeing. They may be teaching Lance how to earn his minutes, knowing that he'll break out.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

            Originally posted by Hicks View Post


            The problem is I don't think that's going to happen until George Hill returns because he was our backup 2. Actually with both it was kind of switching back and forth almost play by play; sometimes Hill would handle the ball, sometimes Lance would handle it.
            Thanks for noticing. Hard to understand why some people are still standing firm to their stance that Lance hasn't played PG this year.

            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            Good post.

            Regarding the part above, I might counter (not sure if I'm right or not) that if we were .500 I would be less likely to take the risk. Playoffs would be at stake. However, it looks like we're simply dealing with seeding right now, and it clearly looks to me that we will have difficulty getting out of the first round without a new acquisition before the deadline. So if that doesn't happen, why not take a flyer on Lance?

            If my 20 percent theory is true, it just might be the extra lift we need to advance in the playoffs.
            If this is the team on the floor for the rest of the year I think it's worth the gamble. What do we have to lose a championship? Even if it wasn't pretty at first it'd speed up his development so that next year he'll be more prepared.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

              I'd like to see Lance sub for Collison.... or if AJ comes in for Collison then let Lance sit longer and Lance come in for AJ. Have Lance coming in when some of the starters return to the game.

              I like the idea of Lance having a starter or two around him when he comes in...

              I think if Lance is to be a future 1 then he should get his time at the 1 with some threats around him. Then let him drive and dish and see what he's got.
              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


              • #22
                Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                Man, you know were really in bad shape if were worrying about Lance. I think Hicks is right that Lance isnt ready, but so are the others when they say Lance needs some time. Bottom line is were regressing as a team. WE had a nice run when were went 4-0 with the win in Dallas, but since then we haven't looked as good. We bearly beat Utah, and looked bad in loses to Boston, Orlando, Atlanta, and Memphis

                DC just is not getting it done. His "good game" is when he hits a high percentage of his shots, and limits his turnovers. I still dont know why he averaged so many assits in NO, then he struggles here.

                Back to Lance, He would do well with the starters because he would have more weapons, and be able to play with the ball in his hands. Problem is, I can't see any way Vogel would do this, it just wont happen. Lance would have good moments and bad moments, but at times on the court everything moves too fast for him. His talents right now are more towards that open floor, up and down game where he would dominate inferior compettion. He needs to get game minutews to get better, but it cant be at the expense of the team.

                What I would like to see is a starting 5 of DC, Dhanty Jones. Granger, West, and Roy. Then off the bench have PG come in for DJ, Lance come in for DC, Ty come in for West, and Foster/Lou come in for Roy. I would leave Danny in with the bench , for a few minutes to stabilize the bench play , then bring DJ back in for him and slade PG to the 3.

                Another thing is when G Hill comes back he will need time to get up to NBA speed , and when he does his minutes will take away from either Lance or Dhanty.

                Lance has skills that are from athletic talent and playing the game of competitive basketball most of his life. He controlled the ball and was a high playmaker and scorer up until the NBA. What he hsan't figured out yet is how to translate his basketball IQ on a consistent basis into NBA basketball IQ. He has raw insticts on the court , as you can see by his passing and playmaking at times. Thats what gets us all excited. When he can figure out the timing of when to make certain plays, within the flow of the game he can be much more effective. I think what makes Jeremy Lin successful besides his physical talents is , he is a very smart player and man in general. The fact he is a Harvard grad would generally make you think he must be a pretty smart guy. So when you combine his talents and smarts , you see the sucess. Can only imagine if Lance had the smarts of Lin to go with his talent. Not saying Lance is not smart but I don'th think its a stretch to say Lin's proabably a smater smarter guy
                Sittin on top of the world!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  Lance isn't ready. He needs to establish himself as a consistent bench player before anything else.
                  Yeh, but I like the concept here. It would be worth giving him the reigns to the second unit, while the player ahead of him in the rotation is injured. Give him Hill's minutes and responsibilities for a game, play the game to Lance's strengths, and it might work. Is that not similar to what we said about Paul George during the JO'bie days? And now he's our incredibly talented starting shooting guard. Maybe Lance can eventually backup George Hill at the starting 2, while Paul starts at the 3.
                  witters: @imbtyler, @postgameonline

                  Originally posted by Day-V
                  In conclusion, Paul George is awesome.
                  Originally posted by Slick Pinkham
                  Our arena, their arena, Rucker park, it just doesn't matter. We're bigger, longer, younger, faster, and hungrier.


                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                    I wanna see what Lance can do with time with the starters. I don't necessarily want him to start, but just see what it's like. I could envision Lance going into the lane and instead of dishing a nice pass to Lou he dishes it to Roy or D-West for a nice finish... maybe a few oops to PG too...

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                      When I see the Linsanity going on I get jealous. I think Lance has a similar game and if giving a chance he will show his talent. The talent that most have recognized behind the scenes.

                      Remember T. Evans at the beginning of the season wasn't putting up good numbers and looked ordinary. New coach comes in and lets him play his style and he shows again why he was considered a future star.

                      I'm on board with it. Defense has been this teams strength and that's where the chemistry has shown the most. I doubt that the offensive chemistry of the second unit we be ruined if Lance has the ball in his hands.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                        Originally posted by MaHa3000 View Post
                        When I see the Linsanity going on I get jealous. I think Lance has a similar game and if giving a chance he will show his talent. The talent that most have recognized behind the scenes.

                        Remember T. Evans at the beginning of the season wasn't putting up good numbers and looked ordinary. New coach comes in and lets him play his style and he shows again why he was considered a future star.

                        I'm on board with it. Defense has been this teams strength and that's where the chemistry has shown the most. I doubt that the offensive chemistry of the second unit we be ruined if Lance has the ball in his hands.
                        Jeremy Lin has above-average basketball IQ that makes up for below-average athleticism. Lance Stephenson has below-average basketball IQ that makes up for above-average athleticism.

                        I'm not sure that's a fair comparison.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                          Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                          Jeremy Lin has above-average basketball IQ that makes up for below-average athleticism. Lance Stephenson has below-average basketball IQ that makes up for above-average athleticism.

                          I'm not sure that's a fair comparison.
                          I'm not convinced Lance has a low BBall IQ. It may be high.

                          What he has is bad training. And an immature, emotional personality.
                          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                            Originally posted by rexnom View Post
                            Jeremy Lin has above-average basketball IQ that makes up for below-average athleticism. Lance Stephenson has below-average basketball IQ that makes up for above-average athleticism.

                            I'm not sure that's a fair comparison.
                            I think thats a little harsh. Some of the passes, drives to the lane and deffensive plays Lance makes at times seems to me , at least, he has a pretty good basketball IQ for being 20 and a handfull of minutes in the NBA
                            Sittin on top of the world!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                              I think I'm just going to start ignoring any topic with Lance in it.

                              This place is getting silly about it. When people are getting called delusional for thinking Collison can improve by the same person promoting Lance as the savior of our bench .... yikes. Pot calling the kettle black. This same person claims Lance does nothing but stand in the corner, but somehow while standing in the corner he leads the team in turnovers per minute by a pretty wide margin, in fact he's one of the league leaders. Imagine if he actually didn't just stand in the corner most of his time on the floor because right now he's 21st in turnovers per 48, and half of those ahead of him have played 10 or less games.

                              Yes, lets release the reigns on a turnover machine. We'll win games that way.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Let Lance give it a whirl just once

                                Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                                I think I'm just going to start ignoring any topic with Lance in it.

                                This place is getting silly about it. When people are getting called delusional for thinking Collison can improve by the same person promoting Lance as the savior of our bench .... yikes. Pot calling the kettle black. This same person claims Lance does nothing but stand in the corner, but somehow while standing in the corner he leads the team in turnovers per minute by a pretty wide margin, in fact he's one of the league leaders. Imagine if he actually didn't just stand in the corner most of his time on the floor because right now he's 21st in turnovers per 48, and half of those ahead of him have played 10 or less games.

                                Yes, lets release the reigns on a turnover machine. We'll win games that way.

                                Why are you trashing our players? OMG ...........
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X