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's discuss Lance

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

  • Re: Let's discuss Lance

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    Yes and his name is Josh Mcroberts
    Good one....
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • Re: Let's discuss Lance

      I'm expecting Lance to destroy Toronto tonight
      Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

      Comment


      • Re: Let's discuss Lance

        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
        Lance has 2 fundamental things going for him right now.

        1) His work on shooting has him as the primary/only solid 3pt threat on a team that desperately needs more than one.

        2) His playground style and desire to make things up on the fly are conducive to solving the other major issue the Pacers have which is no flow between players, and from that virtually no passing.
        Agreed. However, you make it sound like this is some sudden problem. We've had problem with movement, passing, penetration, and creativity for several years. Lance could possibly solve a longtime problem, not just something that popped up by Granger's absence.



        HOWEVER - I also thought Price was a great passer and for all the chest pounding in this thread I think only Sookie, myself and maybe 3 other posters thought Price was worth anything, and he just showed up and dropped double digit assists on the Pacers and nearly led his weak team to a road victory.
        For the record, I was always an AJ Price fan. I liked him better than Collison in terms of helping the entire offense. Unfortunately, he just couldn't hit a very high percentage. He rarely shot for us like he did for the Wiz the other night.



        So maybe let's cool the jets on the "we all showed you" angle. It's pretty 6 games vs meh teams and some god awful basketball early to make any calls.
        I didn't write the OP with "we all showed you" in mind. In drifted into that (not started by me) but I don't want that to be the main tenor of the thread. I think we can both agree that the most important thing is what helps the Pacers the most. You have a number of places you can say "I told you so," particularly the Tyler predictions, yet I never saw you wanting anything but to be shown wrong about Tyler in order to help the Pacers. Similarly, I am an admitted Lance fan, first and foremost because I am dying for the Pacers to finally come a across a legitimate creator/distributor to move us to the next level.



        Paul shows more overall skill by far
        Man, I just totally disagree.


        and clearly Green is a superior athlete. So for all this "he's the most talented player" talk, it's just nuts.
        Talent is not that related to athleticism. Think Larry Bird. I say Lance is more talented than Paul, far more talented than Green, and not as athletic as either.



        In fact I think Lance is in a dangerous position right now. He's having some success, but due to his style and attitude he runs the risk of letting it go to his head and reverting into "bad Tinsley". He still gets way too cute with the ball when he starts feeling it, throws pointless moves into plays that go nowhere (ie, shake and bake, crossover, head fake, head fake, pull up 20 foot jumper for iron), and teeters on getting distracted with yapping about plays.
        Generally agree with you here. I don't think his moves are pointless, I think they are generally effective, but I do have a similar fear that he resorts to playground ball and attitudes. The few games of this season have been very encouraging that this won't be a huge temptation for him.



        Those 2 areas of strength I mentioned are VERY VALUABLE to this team, and the shooting especially is a credit to his work. But all the people saying they saw that in him are full of it because he wasn't a great outside shooter previously and had no history of it. Everyone has always loved his pointless hot sauce flair moves. That and his size.
        Not me. From the first summer league, I saw a scorer. I saw a scorer that could shoot. Beyond that, my premise has always been that you don't hold the all time scoring record for New York without being able to shoot from the outside. The proof now seems to be in the pudding.



        But the hot sauce at least isn't what's coming to fruition and making him better right now. It's the boring old shooting work and his willingness to take a shot.
        This is what separates him from Paul George. Lance is more like West and Granger than he is Paul.



        But he's not filling, let alone killing the "best guy on the team" role. . . but he'll have to up the contributions quite a bit before he's making good on the standard imagery put out by some of the fanboys.
        I agree, but I think he needs to be given the opportunity to fill it. Sooner than later.
        Last edited by McKeyFan; 11-13-2012, 11:09 AM.
        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

        Comment


        • Re: Let's discuss Lance

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          Lance has 2 fundamental things going for him right now.

          1) His work on shooting has him as the primary/only solid 3pt threat on a team that desperately needs more than one.

          2) His playground style and desire to make things up on the fly are conducive to solving the other major issue the Pacers have which is no flow between players, and from that virtually no passing.


          Also I think Lance/Tyler show the best relationship on the team. Lance knows were Tyler is going to be and gets him the ball in a way we wish Hill or Paul were getting the ball to West or Roy.


          HOWEVER - I also thought Price was a great passer and for all the chest pounding in this thread I think only Sookie, myself and maybe 3 other posters thought Price was worth anything, and he just showed up and dropped double digit assists on the Pacers and nearly led his weak team to a road victory. So maybe let's cool the jets on the "we all showed you" angle. It's pretty 6 games vs meh teams and some god awful basketball early to make any calls.


          Paul shows more overall skill by far and clearly Green is a superior athlete. So for all this "he's the most talented player" talk, it's just nuts.


          In fact I think Lance is in a dangerous position right now. He's having some success, but due to his style and attitude he runs the risk of letting it go to his head and reverting into "bad Tinsley". He still gets way too cute with the ball when he starts feeling it, throws pointless moves into plays that go nowhere (ie, shake and bake, crossover, head fake, head fake, pull up 20 foot jumper for iron), and teeters on getting distracted with yapping about plays.



          Those 2 areas of strength I mentioned are VERY VALUABLE to this team, and the shooting especially is a credit to his work. But all the people saying they saw that in him are full of it because he wasn't a great outside shooter previously and had no history of it. Everyone has always loved his pointless hot sauce flair moves. That and his size.

          But the hot sauce at least isn't what's coming to fruition and making him better right now. It's the boring old shooting work and his willingness to take a shot.

          Lance is NOT DRAWING FOULS for all his perceived aggressiveness and ability to create his own shot (5 FTAs total, 1.1 per 36 ranks 10th on the team).

          His Assists per 36 is 4th and at 2.9 he's way behind the "non PG" Hill (6.4) and the pretty awful so far DJ (5.2). Paul George also leads him (3.2).

          So right now you have a good shooting backup guard that gets steals at the same rate as Hill, Paul or even DJ and turns it over at the same rate as Roy Hibbert has been.

          What Lance is right now is a good backup guard, he's killing that role I'd say. But he's not filling, let alone killing the "best guy on the team" role.

          This is just a case of expectations and looking better compared to the options. And at a rate of about 1 3PM per game, it's not like his scoring is changing the world. It's very helpful, very needed, but he'll have to up the contributions quite a bit before he's making good on the standard imagery put out by some of the fanboys.



          Frankly it should just be enough to say that a kid that used to flake out has finally put in enough serious work to make himself a useful weapon. To me that's enough compliment on it's own given his history, one that mirrors Gerald Green. That's where I'm hanging my "hope hat" right now. That and BAMF's post game.
          I was a Price supporter. Couldn't understand why they would let him go in favor of Augustin. Price would have been cheaper and more versatile.

          'Throw Baby Mama Down the Stairs' Lance is having a good year so far. Great for him since he is playing for next years contract.


          Still don't like the fool.

          Comment


          • Re: Let's discuss Lance

            I never understood the Price v Lance arguments. I always felt that Price wasn't playing over Lance, and Price was a point guard and Lance wasn't. (And I think I'm still right there.) With AJ's game here, I was just happy to see he clearly has/had a good reputation (to say the least) with the Pacers organization. (Particularly Tyler, Hill, and Frank.). The way the organization likes their point guards to play is pretty much like a combo guard. (And I think that stems back to Larry..) And AJ was probably better off on a team that prefers a more traditional PG approach. For those wondering, Jim O'brien's system still hasn't been fully exorcised from AJ's game..it's mostly gone, but there's usually about a two minute span per game where Jimmy shows up again. :P

            Lance, I'm happy to see that not only does he appear to have grown up (most important) but his game is clearly improving. I think his talent level is exaggerated because of his flashiness. (No, I don't think he's close to being the most talented Pacer.) Then again, I think we likely all have different definitions of talent anyway.

            The reason though, as Naptown pointed out, he's having as much success as he is, is because of his improved shooting. Which was never (from 3) in his game before the NBA or in his past two seasons. He also has calmed down his playground approach, and learned to make more simple plays (although not as much as he should.) which helps a lot as well. I'm not saying this to "beat up" on him. I'm just saying calm down guys. He's been our best bench player. He does have talent, and if he stays consistent and improves in the areas he needs to improve in he could be a very good 3rd guard. (Which he's shown he's willing to do.) I'm happy to eat crow about his maturity and transition from playground to NBA. (Which, kudos to the Pacers for taking the time to do that. Knuckleheads work out for NBA teams like .1% of the time. The Pacers obviously did a fantastic job in helping him grow on and off the court. ) But it's only been a year and a half since he's done something stupid. And it's only been about 5 games of playing well. So hold on to the "I told you so" thing.
            Last edited by Sookie; 11-13-2012, 04:31 PM.

            Comment


            • Re: Let's discuss Lance

              Lance to me I always viewed as the most talented offensive player for his position until we signed West(west with his footwork and ball handling in his prime is elite for a PF offensively). I said a few days after the draft he could be better than George offensively.The reason being was his frame combined with his ablity to keep his dribble alive(critical skill to be an elite scorer IMO). That is why guys like Manu and Harden are impossible to stop they always keep there dribble. The shooting didn't really bother me I am in the camp of you can fix shooting(if they work hard and break it all down and start from scratch. Guys like Rondo played from day 1 and didnt have the chance like Lance to work on that skill all day). I loved how cocky in played in college and not many have that cocky style. It will hurt him at times but watching him at Cinncy I got the feel he loved the game of basketball and that is something that is a must. Buckner says he is a gym rat and that doesn't surprise me watching him at the pro am you can tell the kid really loves what he does. I also though when we drafted him he would be a great post player one day he has the skills if he spends a summer developing them.

              However I hated his decision making and he is actually fixing that. I figured he could be like a Jordan Crawford like scorer but hurt his team some nights. But if he keeps up his imprisonments I will be really wrong on that.

              I also hated his defense even when he trys he is limited just because he is so big. He moves poor laterally so he has limitations and will always have them. Harden has this same problem. But when you can score like Harden can you will live with it. I felt the same with Lance he will always be average on defense overall but I will live with it especially considering how much he tries. Now when he takes plays off that is when I get mad.


              I just find it funny Lance has respect from the refs now that he didnt as a rookie. The play he made the other night as a rookie the refs would of called carry on. But thats part of the NBA as you play you get more respect Phil Jackson atest to that in his book. As he gets more PT this season I expect the TOs to slowy go down game XP is valuable and cant me duplicated in practice so be patient he should still struggle a lot.

              My favorite thing about Lance watching him at Lincoln and at Cincy was that kid wants to take the last shot. Now a days that is getting harder to find. He has a mentality that with his tool set could make him a dominate 6th man for years to come.(if I was a coach that would be my role for him I just like that fit for my team best. he is a OW and off the bench that is so nice to have)

              Comment


              • Re: Let's discuss Lance

                Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                But if he keeps up his imprisonments I will be really wrong on that.
                Freudian slip for sure.




                Great post.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • Re: Let's discuss Lance

                  Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                  Freudian slip for sure.




                  Great post.
                  *improvment I wish I remembered what thread that was in. I know I was responding to Cdash who ask if anyone thought Lance could be better than PG. I donk remember what specific thread it was.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X