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

Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

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

  • #61
    Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

    Originally posted by Bball View Post
    Let's discuss why Danny Granger's game seems to have changed. But let's not discuss or even mention the gorilla sitting on the couch with its gray sideburns.

    Again I say- Coaching matters.

    While the gorilla sends mixed verbal messages the gorilla sends perfectly clear messages thru its action. Granger is the player that a p-$$ poor coach has molded and created...
    OK, I'll rise to the bait.

    Exactly what in Danny's actions were caused by JOB brainwashing him somehow?

    I know, you're going to say that his love for the 3 last year was all due to Jim, and that him staying in love with it in Team USA was all due to Jim and that him not sticking to the 3 point shot only last night was due to him ignoring Jim.
    Last edited by BillS; 10-14-2010, 11:58 AM. Reason: Summer League? Where did THAT come from?
    BillS

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

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

      Originally posted by BillS View Post
      OK, I'll rise to the bait.

      Exactly what in Danny's actions were caused by JOB brainwashing him somehow?

      I know, you're going to say that his love for the 3 last year was all due to Jim, and that him staying in love with it in Team USA was all due to Jim and that him not sticking to the 3 point shot only last night was due to him ignoring Jim.
      I don't really want to derail Andy's thread and make this about O'Brien. My point is that it's hard to talk about the player Granger has become without talking about the game that the coach is wanting from him as well as what is possible from the player when the coach emphasizes certain things.

      I'm sure injury has affected certain games. But I'm just as sure that heading into the 4th year of O'Brien's system that it is plenty of time for Granger to have a certain pace ingrained in his head as far as how he will attack the game to play the way that he believes O'Brien wants. I'm sure plenty of bad habits are ingrained as well. Especially shot selection since everyone knows O'Brien is 3 happy and wants quick offense. And especially after 3 years of a coach who isn't exactly going to have his picture in the encyclopedia when the topic of fundamental basketball is talked about. If Granger would've spent these last 3 years with a coach that emphasizes a slower pace, smarter shot selection, and defense I think we'd see a different player game in and game out as well as when playing away from the coach. Of course that player might get less natl recognition due to a lower ppg total. Or maybe that player becomes a more efficient scorer and still keeps his ppg up with more ability to pace himself for defense too.

      Call it brainwashing if you want but you're going to play the way that practice has reinforced you to play. O'Brien has demanded Granger become a 3 point scorer and play at a fast pace. He's probably hoped he could still get some defense out of him but O'Brien has shown over and over again that he will sacrifice defense for offense every time.

      So five years ago Granger's basketball upbringing might've had us believing he'd become a certain kind of player. But was that really the type of player O'Brien would want him to be? O'Brien's actions through the years all but etch it into stone what he demands Danny be... and what he will accept Danny sacrifice in his game to be that player.

      That's why O'Brien is the gorilla in the room when it comes to discussing a topic as wide ranging as why Granger (a major part of the team) is the player he is today.

      Coaching matters....
      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


      • #63
        Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

        Originally posted by Bball View Post
        So five years ago Granger's basketball upbringing might've had us believing he'd become a certain kind of player. But was that really the type of player O'Brien would want him to be? O'Brien's actions through the years all but etch it into stone what he demands Danny be... and what he will accept Danny sacrifice in his game to be that player.

        That's why O'Brien is the gorilla in the room when it comes to discussing a topic as wide ranging as why Granger (a major part of the team) is the player he is today.

        Coaching matters....
        I see what you're saying and can't really disagree. Still, Danny has been selected for an All-Star team, won the MIP award, and was selected to this summer's Team USA squad. I'm certain that O'Brien giving him the green-light offensively had a lot to do with those accolades too.

        Out of all the players that might have struggled or suffered in development playing for this coach, I think that Danny is at the very bottom of the list (slightly below) Troy Murphy.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?



          where are all of you danny granger supporters?
          "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

            Terrible game by granger but his my favourite player in the league n I'm sticking by that. Pacer fan through thick n thin!!

            AUSTRALIA'S NO.1 PACER FAN

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

              there's nothing wrong with him being your favorite player in the league. 3 years ago he was one of mine as well. In 1995 my favorite player was a nearly cripple three time traded Chuck Person. And I'm still a pacer fan 15 years later.
              "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

                Originally posted by Kaufman View Post
                there's nothing wrong with him being your favorite player in the league. 3 years ago he was one of mine as well. In 1995 my favorite player was a nearly cripple three time traded Chuck Person. And I'm still a pacer fan 15 years later.
                Yeh I wasn't questioning if your a fan or not. We all are and get very disappointed with games like this. For an Aussie like me who spent 7,000 dollars to travel to Indy n c them play Utah like they did wasn't the best feeling in the world. But hey, all I am looking for is the future. Love watching hansbrough.

                AUSTRALIA'S NO.1 PACER FAN

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

                  Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                  Just like we were/all disappointed, I think Danny is just as, if not more, disappointed in our teams these past years. He's had alot of injuries that have messed him up last season. However, three weeks or so after he recovered from his injury he played quite phenomenal and I hope that is the player he will be all this year.

                  I'd rather take "Antoine Walker" that will stay here no matter how tough things have been rather than Carmello Anthony or Lebron James who have had everything given to them every single year and they still have no loyalty and they don't care.
                  I still feel this way. I'm amazed that Danny hasn't demanded a trade. If I were in his shoes I would have handled myself significantly worse over the past couple of years.

                  EDIT: It's funny how good Kevin Love has become.
                  Last edited by BringJackBack; 03-09-2011, 11:10 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

                    Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                    I still feel this way. I'm amazed that Danny hasn't demanded a trade. If I were in his shoes I would have handled myself significantly worse over the past couple of years.

                    EDIT: It's funny how good Kevin Love has become.
                    why would he demand a trade? no where else does he have a nice supporting cast, and no where else could he play unchecked by anyone else. i guarantee you Kevin Garnett, Kobe Bryant, Derrick Rose, Dirk Nowitzki, Tim Duncan, none of those folks would tolerate his crappola. Those would be the teams he would want to go to. And he wouldn't want to play for them bc he would lose his spotlight. Which is why he wouldn't play for the Knicks, Thunder, or Heat at this point.

                    I now get why he went to New Mexico.
                    "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

                      I'm afraid that Danny either never had the skill or was influenced too much by Jim O'Brien's offensive style. Fact is, Danny doesn't have (or doesn't use) a number of important tools in his toolbox to be a great player.

                      He can shoot better than Iggy, but seriously, does he do anything else better? Clearly, Coach K had his preference. There's a reason he rode pine on the USA team...and it's because his game is limited.

                      Fact is, his limitations are being exposed because his strength is getting up and down the court ala Golden State ball...and launching. He can really do well in that system...which of course is JOb Ball. But when he needs to operate in the half court he's nowhere near as effective. Can't pass or handle the ball that well. Doesn't defend at a high level...which is more important when you're not in the playground.

                      One thing I will say about Vogel arriving. He may have helped guys like Lance, Hans and yes Hibbert...but his arrival probably hurt Danny and DC. All those dudes want to do is run and shoot. ...and Vogel's system requires playing with force in the half court...something Danny does not know how to do because of nearly 4 years of JOb teaching him...

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

                        Originally posted by Kaufman View Post
                        why would he demand a trade? no where else does he have a nice supporting cast, and no where else could he play unchecked by anyone else. i guarantee you Kevin Garnett, Kobe Bryant, Derrick Rose, Dirk Nowitzki, Tim Duncan, none of those folks would tolerate his crappola. Those would be the teams he would want to go to. And he wouldn't want to play for them bc he would lose his spotlight. Which is why he wouldn't play for the Knicks, Thunder, or Heat at this point.

                        I now get why he went to New Mexico.
                        The argument is that the reason that Danny doesn't play defense, just plays an all-around lazy game is that he is tired of losing and doesn't want to bring it every night. Ron Artest pushed him very hard and because of that Danny became very good so stop acting like Danny is some spoiled brat who can only succeed on a crap team without many ego's.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

                          BlueNGold, you hit the nail on the head.

                          Originally posted by Kaufman View Post
                          I now get why he went to New Mexico.
                          I may have part of this wrong, but I believe he started at a different school and was going for a degree in engineering, then when his NBA hopes actually became serious he switched to Gen Ed so he could develop his game more and transferred to New Mexico. In that case, I think going to New Mexico was more about transferring to a school that would work a 2nd year player into it's program. I can't imagine a top-tier program being too excited about giving a guy minutes who's going to be there for an abbreviated period of time.


                          Is it just me, or has he never fully came back from the plantar fasciitis? I remember his game when he came back being pretty average. Then at the beginning of the season he looked okay, although if I recall his shot wasn't falling like it used to, and now he just seems like a ghost out there. Maybe I'm just trying to pin it on something, but he looked like a legitimate star prior to that injury and ever since then (and especially now) he has looked average.

                          Edit: And count me as one of the Danny supporters. Outside of Jarrett Jack busting his tail every night, the only positive memory I really have of the 08-09 season was Danny being a lights out scorer and playing like a true All-Star. For that, I think I'll always hold him in pretty high regard even if he has taken a step or two back.
                          Last edited by smj887; 03-09-2011, 11:37 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

                            :confusing:

                            if danny needed ronnie to push him then i would say lazy and spoiled would be fair adjectives to use

                            danny is getting paid to win and to bring it, not to slough off bc he's tired of losing.
                            "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

                              Originally posted by smj887 View Post
                              BlueNGold, you hit the nail on the head.

                              In that case, I think going to New Mexico was more about transferring to a school that would work a 2nd year player into it's program. I can't imagine a top-tier program being too excited about giving a guy minutes who's going to be there for an abbreviated period of time.

                              Edit: And count me as one of the Danny supporters. Outside of Jarrett Jack busting his tail every night, the only positive memory I really have of the 08-09 season was Danny being a lights out scorer and playing like a true All-Star. For that, I think I'll always hold him in pretty high regard even if he has taken a step or two back.
                              Memphis - Derrick Rose 1 year. Kentucky - John Wall, D. Cousins 1 year. Syracuse - Melo 1 year.

                              I do appreciate your reasonable and rational defense of Danny though. cheers to that.
                              "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Danny Granger --- Disappointing?

                                Danny was playing the best ball he has played in 2 seasons... prior to 5 games ago. I mean everyone is acting as if he has started playing bad as soon as Vogel took over. This is not true. He was easily playing the best ball of the season in 17 games: 23ppg, 50% fg, 42% 3pt...

                                I don't know why he is playing so bad right now, but it's not because he belongs in JOB's system.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X