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

Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

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

  • Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

    http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wir...ose_out_games/

    Not sure how to bring articles in so I just copy and pasted link. But anyway I thought this was interesting, especially since the young guys very rarely if ever finish games.

  • #2
    Re: Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

    The Pacers held a 16-point lead over the Trail Blazers on Saturday night, but lost 97-92 at the Rose Garden.

    On their current road trip, the Pacers have had double-digits leads in all three games but don't have a win to show for it.

    "I just don't think we have the experience, honestly," Danny Granger said. "Closing out games, it's not something that just happens. You have to be in a lot of those situations and you have to learn how to do it."

    Indiana has led in the fourth quarter or overtime in 11 of their 24 losses this season.

    "I don't know if I can say I've been on a team like this, but it's a sign of an immature, young team that can't hold the lead," Jeff Foster said. "We can't execute under pressure. We have to figure out a way to improve on that in the last 40 or so games we have remaining."

    Read more: http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wir...#ixzz1BshbKHl8


    Could it be possible that Granger is actually lobbying for the young guys to close out games? Not quite sure what Foster is babbling about, considering we LOST the lead with the vets (Posey, Foster, Dunleavy) in the game in the 4th quarter.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

      They both need to take a long look in the mirror.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

        Win those games, and we're 27-13 right now. Just to put things into perspective.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

          I'll be happy when we get a coach that uses Hansbrough to close out games. The kid was a monster in those situation at North Carolina b/c no one wants it more than him. Everyone didn't hate him b/c he was a choke artist. Last night he was a +13... and couldn't see the floor in crunch time?

          I would like to see Paul George in late in games too. Kid just has a swagger/confidence about him

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

            Not sure Jeff and Danny are in agreement here. I hear Danny saying that the young guys haven't gotten the opportunity to learn how to close out games, while Jeff is saying it's the fault of the youth. I kind of disagree with Jeff because they were a young and far more immature team during the JO years. The difference is that Isaiah and Rick put it in their hands to sink or swim.
            Protect the Promise!!!!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

              I don't think it was the veterans who cost them the game. It was JOB NOT making the adjustment at the right time when it mattered most.

              The Blazers went with a taller lineup to start the 2nd-half AND they went to a 3-2 Zone defense. The only way to break a zone defense is dribble penetration and shot creation in isolation or off creating mismatches. The Pacers didn't do anything to counter both these moves.

              They stayed with their small-ball lineup for most of the 2nd-half. That was a mistake!

              Instead, what JOB should have done, IMO, was go with a traditional lineup that included length and quickness. Had he had access to Jmac, he could have gone to a front court that consisted of Jmac and Hans down the stretch. Unfortunately, Jmac was in street clothes. His other althernative should have been pulling Foster and BRush, and rotating Posey and Hans on the floor w/Granger, Dunleavy and Collison. I'd have placed Hans at Center and used Posey as a Stretch-Foward/3-pt specialist which he became eventually, but it was much too late. The Blazer had put up a 5-pt lead with mere seconds remaining to the game, but had JOB recognized what coach McMillan had done and countered his bigger, faster, 3-pt specialist, zone defense lineup sooner - as soon as the Pacers' lead was cut in half - the Pacers could have regrouped faster and won that game.

              Foster wasn't fast enough to close out on Aldridge and BRush couldn't break through the Blazer's zone to be effective, nor could he cover or close out on Batum. But had JOB been able to rotate Hans, Jmac and George on the floor, they would have countered both of them.

              The players who should have been in street clothes last night were Stephenson, TJ Ford and Solo. Everyone else should have been active and promptly utilized to the best of their collective abilities.

              I blame this one on JOB...again.
              Last edited by NuffSaid; 01-23-2011, 01:08 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

                pretty sure jeff and danny were talking about darren collison. the pacers have gone to the collison-foster + 3 shooters offense big time. collison took 18 shots and made 14 points. that is volume shooting. allen iverson results without allen iverson skills. darren had 7 assists but 5 turnovers. darren has been handed the keys to the car, but he needs to do a much better job of driving. and don't even get me started on his defense. darren spent most of the game playing follow the leader with his man on the defensive end. a starting PG needs to give more resistance than that.

                the others would be tyler hansbrough. neither tyler [or roy for that matter] could defend aldridge at all. and tyler let przybilla offensive rebound with little resistance. tyler needs to defend his man, right now, guys just shoot over him. roy gets a little bit of a pass, because he was defending out of position. but on the nights that jeff foster has foul trouble, the pacers have zero interior defensive presence.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

                  Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                  pretty sure jeff and danny were talking about darren collison. the pacers have gone to the collison-foster + 3 shooters offense big time. collison took 18 shots and made 14 points. that is volume shooting. allen iverson results without allen iverson skills. darren had 7 assists but 5 turnovers. darren has been handed the keys to the car, but he needs to do a much better job of driving. and don't even get me started on his defense. darren spent most of the game playing follow the leader with his man on the defensive end. a starting PG needs to give more resistance than that.

                  the others would be tyler hansbrough. neither tyler [or roy for that matter] could defend aldridge at all. and tyler let przybilla offensive rebound with little resistance. tyler needs to defend his man, right now, guys just shoot over him. roy gets a little bit of a pass, because he was defending out of position. but on the nights that jeff foster has foul trouble, the pacers have zero interior defensive presence.
                  I usually agree with almost everything you say, but I disagree with everything here.

                  Firstly, Darren has played ridiculously well since being handed the "keys".. And that has tremendously helped Danny's offense. Nate threw a curve-ball too and put Rudy on him and Rudy could shoot right over him.

                  Tyler defended Aldridge very well. A lot better than Foster did anyway.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

                    that's interesting. that we would disagree completely on this.

                    i really thought darren had a horrible game. he dominated the ball [like he is supposed to in the NO style offense], but made terrible decisions. bad shots. turnover after turnover. and horrible defense. not just on rudy, but on mills and matthews [i think]. his defense really regressed.

                    and hansbrough was horrible against aldridge. when they could, the pacers doubled to help tyler, but that was only early in the game. IIRC. after that, pacers seemed to try to avoid having tyler defend aldridge at all. tyler did have a nice +/- though. so he must have played better than i thought. idk??

                    Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                    I usually agree with almost everything you say, but I disagree with everything here.

                    Firstly, Darren has played ridiculously well since being handed the "keys".. And that has tremendously helped Danny's offense. Nate threw a curve-ball too and put Rudy on him and Rudy could shoot right over him.

                    Tyler defended Aldridge very well. A lot better than Foster did anyway.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

                      Yeah this has to be the first time we have ever disagreed with eachother

                      I do think that Darren turned the ball over a lot, but he was one of the only guys in attack mode yesterday. If he wasn't in attack mode, we'd be in a lot more trouble.

                      Tyler had a bad game offensively, and on team defense, but I just saw him on-ball defense and especially rebounding to be very good.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

                        Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                        Yeah this has to be the first time we have ever disagreed with eachother

                        I do think that Darren turned the ball over a lot, but he was one of the only guys in attack mode yesterday. If he wasn't in attack mode, we'd be in a lot more trouble.

                        Tyler had a bad game offensively, and on team defense, but I just saw him on-ball defense and especially rebounding to be very good.
                        i have a hard time telling if tyler has trouble with the team defense. don't always know who is supposed to rotate where. tyler has a tendency to wander on defense instead of making quick precise rotations.

                        i do love his rebounding and scoring. i think it gives him a chance to just play instead of think about what he is supposed to be doing. i try to be patient with tyler and paul about being where they are supposed to be. i know they are fist year players and still trying to remember everything and play basketball at the same time. it is hard. especially for bigs. but the sooner they get that figured out the better it will be for all of us.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

                          Another thing is I'd prefer Hansbrough to drive the ball, even though I think his mid range love has a lot to do with Jim.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

                            Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                            Another thing is I'd prefer Hansbrough to drive the ball, even though I think his mid range love has a lot to do with Jim.
                            yeah, me too. he is short by PF stds, and gets lots of layups blocked. that might have something to do with his reluctance to go to the basket. he is such a good FT shooter, he needs to draw more fouls somehow.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Interesting quotes from DG and Foster....

                              I'd rather have Tyler in crunch time than Posey.

                              I think this team has just lost confidence.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X