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

Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

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

  • #76
    Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

    Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
    .

    That is a set play we have ran all season just basic PnR at first that was a option but the main option. Is to set Granger up for the shot he got. With an option to drive if he felt he could. But DC didnt leave him enoght time for that option. I think the Bulls knew it was coming.(he didnt get good sepration which is why he didnt get the best look)


    It is simlar to the baseline end bound play. Where we give it to Hibbert by the 3pt line and Danny just runs around him and gets a open look from the Hibbert pick.
    Yeah, that does seem to be one of the two plays we run. The other is the Granger iso play--the one that beat the Knicks and the one that he tried to use a second time against the Knicks which Melo blocked.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

      you know i was hoping for those trick set plays we make with alley oops to the basket from the inbound pass....have danny curl through a screen set by McRoberts and then have McRoberts go for the oop from the inbound passas Bulls were looking hard to double team Danny when he gets the ball...

      there was a play called but the players just chocked on the execution of it...their spacing was awful thanks to the D that the Bulls came up with and they just weren't able to adjust to it in time...

      this is all lack of experience more than anything...we will continue to get burned till we can learn to read the defenses better and react after they take away our option instead of trying to force our main/2nd option.

      it felt like DC was told no matter what Granger is going to take the last shot - not sure if thats the case but that is exactly how he played it out....

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

        Originally posted by cdash View Post
        What was that garbage at the end of the game then?
        p4ever asnwered your queston directly.

        I think maybe some of us have different definition of what an iso is. if we dribble the ball up and the pt guard passed to danny, everyone clears out and DG goes one-on-one that is an iso.

        If we move the ball up, run one pick and roll, run danny off a double scren and get Danny the ball at the top o the key - that is not an iso, especially because usually then danny runs of a screen in order to get into his sweet spot.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

          Originally posted by cdash View Post
          Yeah, that does seem to be one of the two plays we run. The other is the Granger iso play--the one that beat the Knicks and the one that he tried to use a second time against the Knicks which Melo blocked.

          I dont consider those iso plays

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            I dont consider those iso plays
            Going one on one againts SW is not an Iso?
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

              Dumb thread alert!!!

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                Frustrating loss.

                As for Vogel, I think he's done an amazing job with his overall game plan and getting the players ready to play. His only flaw has been off set pieces. We had a couple at the end of this last game and both ended up being contested crappy missed shots.

                As for our point guards, I've been for months that we should draft a point guard in the draft with size to back up DC and let Price go. I like Price, but he's just not good enough.

                I think this series has also really exposed our problems inside, especially with Hibbert. Offensively he should be a huge asset with Noah guarding him, and he just can't hit the close shots. I'm not calling for Hibberts head as I think he puts in the effort needed to progress and he has a great attitude. I'd like to see how he progresses over the offseason for next year as I think it will be a continued improvement, but I am now worried it's a position we'll have address.
                Danger Zone

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                  I like Vogel a lot and I hope he's back next year

                  That being said, it's ok if everybody and there mom knows you're give it to your best player....if you're best player can get their own shot. That's not grangers game. The pacers strength is their depth, so they need to use it right down to their final possession. I would have been fine with any player on the court taking the final shot rather than grangers off balance 3. He needs to have something more creative following a time out.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                    Originally posted by SMosley21 View Post
                    Dumb thread alert!!!
                    Come on. Grow up buddy. If you don't like it, don't post in it, but lets not act like a child.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                      Originally posted by Foul on Smits View Post
                      Aj price has killed any momentum this team has had.
                      And you think TJ Ford would not have killed any momentum this team had? How quickly we forget why the guy got benched every year including this one. TJ would have killed the momentum just as quickly as AJ.

                      I think a lot of fans just had way to high of expectations for this team. I am thrilled we just kept it close, Paul George is having an amazing series defensively, and our young guys are gaining valuable experience.

                      Vogel has done a tremendous job turning this team around and getting us to the playoffs. He has done a very good job in the playoffs go up against the best team in the league given what he has to work with.

                      We get some rebounding help at PF in the offseason, Paul George works on his offense, and we will be a much higher seed then 8th next season.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                        I strongly disagree with your theory of playing TJ over Price. TJ is a turnover machine. We traded big to get him and he's our 3rd option for a reason. Veteran or not, he is not better than Price.

                        I agree Vogel made some mistakes.

                        1.) HAVING JONES GUARD ROSE AT THE END OF THE GAME!!! Paul George should of been on Rose, he has guarded him the best any defender in the league could and to allow Jones to do so was a vital mistake.

                        2.) Keeping Collison and Granger under 35mins. I mean these kids are 23 and 28 they can play significant minutes. Especially Collison, he is far superior to TJ and Price and should of been on the court 41 minutes.


                        Is Vogel a good coach. Yes! I don't think we should keep our options closed though.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                          6 of 24 shots
                          12 combined rebounds

                          but its our backup point guard's fault that we lost.

                          THIS is why I stick up for DC and AJ. Have they had their absolutely terrible stretches. Yes. Yes they have. Tonight was one of them.

                          But the other young guys always seem to get a pass. All of us knowing that they'll develop and they've got potential. To me, this extends to the point guards. Particularly when they are learning the most important position on the floor, and the hardest position on the floor..and neither have had the easiest circumstances to learn them in from the start of their careers.
                          I don't suppose that you are advocating for a change in big men? That would make us most unlikely allies....

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                            Originally posted by BoomBaby31 View Post
                            I strongly disagree with your theory of playing TJ over Price. TJ is a turnover machine. We traded big to get him and he's our 3rd option for a reason. Veteran or not, he is not better than Price.

                            I agree Vogel made some mistakes.

                            1.) HAVING JONES GUARD ROSE AT THE END OF THE GAME!!! Paul George should of been on Rose, he has guarded him the best any defender in the league could and to allow Jones to do so was a vital mistake.

                            2.) Keeping Collison and Granger under 35mins. I mean these kids are 23 and 28 they can play significant minutes. Especially Collison, he is far superior to TJ and Price and should of been on the court 41 minutes.


                            Is Vogel a good coach. Yes! I don't think we should keep our options closed though.
                            Price or Ford... I don't think it makes much difference. However, Price had not been playing very well, so I probably would have given more time to Ford.

                            I agree, I would have had George on Ford. George had played Ford very well throughout parts of the game and seemed to be "all in" for the challenge.

                            As far as minutes go, couldn't disagree more. We were down 2-0, so screw the minutes. You play whoever you have to for as many minutes as you have to in order to get the job done. Basically, there is NO tomorrow.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                              Originally posted by d_c View Post

                              It's not as if Tom Thibodeau drew up some creative, unpredictable play for his team's game winning possession. He gave the ball to Rose and told everyone else to get out of the way.

                              This is very true, and it makes Granger look even worse. Granger had some nice baskets in the 4th qtr, but who didn't realize Granger would take the last shot whether it was an open shot or a forced one? The sun comes up in east and sets in the west everyday, and it was predictable Granger would take the last shot. He's not Wade, LeBron, or Rose. Apparently, Granger feels he is the "MAN", when in reality he is just one of the other many boys when it comes to being clutch and the closer.

                              I realize Granger is the best player the Pacers have, but there are other players on the floor. IT IS A TEAM GAME. Quit allowing Granger to feel he has to take the last shot, especially when it is a forced shot that isn't even a good shot. 2 words that aren't synonymous with each other are "clutch and Granger." Never have been nor will they ever be.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                                Wow. I disagree with so much of the sentiment in this thread. AJ did make a few turnovers, agreed, but he wasn't nearly as bad or as accountable for our loss as any other player.

                                I want to look at Granger. He took some really bad shots, early in the shot clock with nobody in position to rebound. That pass he threw cross court that sailed over the head of AJ was HORRID. He took that quick jumper off the offensive rebound completely off balance and in no way was that a smart play. He has been trying to bail himself out at the top of the key when he gets out of control by handing the ball off to a BIG on the three point line. They can't do ANYTHING with that. WTF are you thinking? The last shot, I don't mind him taking, but he was being guarded by three people. There were two people open. Our best player is making dumb plays. He was making shots last night. Great, but he needs to do more. Of course, he doesn't have any more playoff experience than everybody else on this team.

                                Hibbert missed some close ones, but the touch he had on those shots was nice. They just rolled off the rim. Joakim Noah is one of the best defensive centers in the entire league. To expect Hibbert to put up 20+ points and outrebound Boozer and Noah by himself is ridiculous. He does need to do a better job of rebounding I agree.

                                Hansborough was awesome last night with his hustle and toughness, but man his decision making was bad. He couldn't make up his mind whether he wanted to shoot or drive all night. There was no confidence stepping up into that 15-20 footer. Hansborough and Hibbert both need to box out more, but their PG, SG, and SF are all better rebounders than what we have. At least that is what they have been showing. Keith Bogans coming up with several key rebounds this series? Where are you Granger? Sitting outside the three point line watching? Cause that is all I have seen from you on that side of the ball.

                                As for Darren Collison. There is absolutely, positively, uncontestably no reason why, he should be guarding Korver. I have seen almost every single big three Korver has hit this series has been when Collison has been on him. I was saying last night that he should not have even been in the game. We should have just played without a PG if we are going to put George on Rose. Go big, get more rebounds, CONTEST JUMP SHOTS OF THE GUY WHO HASN'T MISSED A THREE NEARLY ALL SERIES AND WE HAVE OUR SHORTEST PLAYER GUARDING HIM?!?!?!

                                Coronary almost over.

                                Our pick and rolls have been ugly. Collison has been leaving way too soon so our bigs aren't even in position to set a pick. Collison has hit some big shots in the lane don't get me wrong, but when you are only doing one thing well, it becomes easy to defend. The Granger play last night he left early and took a bad angle on the pick. He started the play poorly and it just got worse. How did Granger not realize he had three people on him? Pass the ball if that is the case. Everybody on the court is an NBA player.

                                I hate that Rush hasn't gotten enough minutes, but I understand why. We are trying to figure out a way to guard Rose. Brandon is a half step too slow for Rose, so Jones makes more sense. George makes the most sense, I agree. Dunleavy has been solid offensively. I would have him guarding Korver being as long as he is. Korver isn't going to drive around anybody, even if it is Mike. Korver needs to be contested and that is what Mike does best, recover from getting burned by using his length and vision to make up for it later. I would have Mike playing Point Forward for us honestly. Keep him on Korver or Bogans defensively. If we were playing the Heat or Celtics, we would see Brandon getting more minutes.

                                McRoberts has been awesome this series. So has Foster. Love that Foster hit Rose hard. They want to elbow and punch our players, well we need to take it out on him. I am disappointed that we haven't fouled Rose harder. We have beat him up pretty good but it should be worse, considering that we are having fouls called on us for breathing on the guy. Make him pay for the officiating at least.

                                OK. I'm done. Sorry so long. It's been inside for too long.

                                PS - I think Vogel has done a good job. We are just a really inexperienced team who falters in the last two minutes of the game. It SHOULD be expected that these games have played out this way.
                                "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X