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

Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

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

  • #16
    Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

    Originally posted by Bball View Post
    Soooooo did that shot go south for Foster or did he just quit looking for it??

    -Bball
    Tinsley took them.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

      Originally posted by Ownagedood View Post
      Personally I think it should go something like this:

      Normal lineup:
      Diogu
      O'Neal
      Granger
      Dunleavy
      Tinsley

      Small Ball:
      O'Neal
      Granger
      Dunleavy
      Rush
      Tinsley
      I'm with you on the "Normal" lineup, but the only way that works is IF Ike can finally come around and begin to be a force underneath the basket, as well as, a decent interior defender. He just comes across to me as being too indecisive and timid underneath. I'd rather see JO/Foster than JO/Ike at this point.

      Maybe all this practise time will help him get back to where he left off before his injury.

      As to the absence of Foster's 6-10' shot, yeah...Tinsley took 'em!

      Seriously, I think he just stopped taking them and went back to doing what he does best. Personally, I'd like to see him impose his will out there and try to score more from the field rather than just settle from gimme-putbacks. He has a nice shot and he's got a strong, quick first step to basket. If he'd only use it more he'd be pretty darn good!
      Last edited by NuffSaid; 01-15-2008, 04:36 PM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

        We've started off games better with this line up. Foster needs to be the back up centre, not Murphy, Murphy has been playing like crap lately. Rebounding won't be a problem if we'd take it to the hole a few times per game
        R.I.P. Bernic Mac & Isaac Hayes

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

          Doesn't matter how fast or slow/big or small our line up is if we don't take care of the rock and play defense.
          Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

            Originally posted by Bball View Post
            To start the season Foster had an 6-10' shot he was hitting. Then I missed some games, especially during Dec, and now I've yet to see anything but scores at the basket for Foster.

            Soooooo did that shot go south for Foster or did he just quit looking for it?? ...Or did defenses actually scout that and put a stop to it?

            -Bball
            He's hit it consistently throughout the year. He's also been finishing better at the rim. I've been really impressed with his offensive game this year.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

              The Pacers need to go large.

              Put Shawne, Dunleavy or Troy at point. It's the point guard that needs to be changed on our team.
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                The Pacers need to go large.

                Put Shawne, Dunleavy or Troy at point. It's the point guard that needs to be changed on our team.
                You laugh but I would have zero problem with using Dunleavy as the ball handler and initiator of offense.


                Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

                  We don't have the shooters to run "small ball", you rebounds a dramitically decreased with this type of basketball. You need great shooters to run this type of basketball. At this point though, why not?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

                    I don't know why I am choosing this thread to put this in or for that matter why I am even saying this at all.

                    But I am beginning to feel like Naptown Seth here.

                    You know how he is always claiming that he is not a Stephen Jackson fan but feels the need to defend Jax from the unfairness of the Pacers fold?

                    Well I now sympathize with him because I feel the same way about Troy Murphy.

                    I am not realy a fan of Troy's, in fact I am very dissapointed in his play here as I always thought he was more of a physical player than he ended up being.

                    But frankly the absolute hate that he gets on this board is just amazing to me.

                    Guy goes out about a week ago and grabs 15 rebounds, most of which were actual rebounds not just picking a loose ball up off of the floor and yet everyone longs for Jeff "The Stilt" Foster.

                    Guy has single handidly offensively taken over a game for us and was more responsible for a win against a very good team this season than any other player that night (Dallas) and yet we long for Foster. Can the words Jeff Foster and took over the game offensively even be uttered in the same sentance without some part of the cosmos dying? I've probably killed countless molicules just in typing that.

                    Look, I have nothing against Foster. He is a good basketball player, but nothing more.

                    Troy Murphy is a good basketball player but nothing more.

                    Both are equal as rebounders in my eye and Troy and Jeff are polar opposites of each other on the offensive and defensive ends.

                    Yes, Jeff is a hustler who does a lot of little things that don't show up on stats. Guess what? If you can take off your "I hate Troy Murphy" glasses for a min. you will see Troy does a lot of little things as well.

                    He is the best pick setter on the team. Someone asked me in another thread if that wasn't setting the bar to low? My answer is hell no!!!! Setting Picks and good screens is a huge huge huge part of an overall offensive scheme. It's like the offensive lineman in football. He doesn't get the glory of the QB or RB but without his blocking very littel will get done.

                    Jeff after 8 years in the league still cannot set a screen on the wings without moving and getting a foul called on him.

                    I like both player equally.

                    That is why I disagree with the small ball lineup per say.

                    What I would like to have O'Brien do is use the entire bench. I'm not kidding I mean go 10-12 deep every single game. Nobody should play more than 35 min. a game and the two people who should be at 35 are of the last name Dunleavy and Granger.

                    We supposedly have depth, well if you are going to have a running game you should use it.

                    Don't be predictable. Use Foster every night, not just on nights when we have to guard Shaq.

                    Anyway that is getting away from my Murphy talk.

                    Look Troy has problem, no doubt. But the fact that some of you think that Troy Murphy is the biggest problem on this team is just mind boggling to me.


                    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

                      ^^^^Why can't we just pair Foster with Murphy in the 2nd unit and have a Tinsley/Rush/Dunleavy/Granger/JONeal Starting lineup?

                      I know that it's not small-ball.....but Murphy can do the same thing that Shawne, Granger or Dunleavy are basically doing.....shoot the mid-range or perimeter jumper and just have Foster man the paint.
                      Last edited by CableKC; 01-15-2008, 10:52 PM.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

                        Originally posted by Peck View Post
                        Look Troy has problem, no doubt. But the fact that some of you think that Troy Murphy is the biggest problem on this team is just mind boggling to me.
                        Maybe not the biggest, but he's definitely up there.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                          ^^^^Why can't we just pair Foster with Murphy in the 2nd unit and have a Tinsley/Rush/Dunleavy/Granger/JONeal Starting lineup?

                          I know that it's not small-ball.....but Murphy can do the same thing that Shawne, Granger or Dunleavy are basically doing.....shoot the mid-range or perimeter jumper and just have Foster man the paint.
                          Many posters have advocated this, and I think it's a good idea. Foster may not give the Pacers much offense, but you won't easily get inside and score on him. He'll certainly put the brakes on most dribble penetration. Still, I think JOB tried to counter w/Murphy as the other Big just to provide minutes for Williams and keep shooters on the floor. The more I think about this pairing, the more I actually like it because when you think about it you've still got lots of speed on the floor:

                          Starters
                          C-JO
                          PF-Dunleavy
                          PG-Tinsley
                          SF-Granger
                          SG-Rush

                          2nd Unit
                          C-Foster
                          PF-Murphy
                          PG-Deiner
                          SF-Williams
                          SG-Quis
                          Last edited by NuffSaid; 01-15-2008, 11:31 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

                            Originally posted by Peck View Post
                            Look Troy has problem, no doubt. But the fact that some of you think that Troy Murphy is the biggest problem on this team is just mind boggling to me.
                            How 'bout we compromise and start Foster and Murphy and sit JO?

                            -Bball
                            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


                            • #29
                              Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

                              Originally posted by johnnybegood View Post
                              With the volume of jumpshots we put up on a nightly basis, it makes sense to me to have Foster in there. The other 4 guys could jack up shots to their heart's content, and Jeff could rebound his a off.
                              It's certainly why the Bulls put Rodman with MJ and Pippen and let them jack 3's to their hearts content. Mike was never a very good deep shooter but it never stopped him from taking them. The Worm made this a non-issue.


                              My problem with small ball isn't the concept, it's the fact that even small ball hasn't ended the penetration issues they have on defense. Keep this all you want, but at some point the defense at PG, SG and SF just has to be improved.


                              Peck, Troy's biggest issue is his defense. If you iso on him a bit you quickly see him getting beat or falling behind plays like crazy which ends up leaning on other players to pick up the slack. When JO picks up that 4th foul you can bet that he got there partially from players like Troy lagging behind. Add to this the enormous foul problem the team has and it amplifies the impact that a guy can have at that end.

                              Everyone loves to look at offense or DIRECT defense, but when you watch rotations and spacing there are lots of problems there too, very big problems. That leaves opponents with all these easy looks and forces the Pacers to work much harder all game. I think this is a factor in their losing leads issue.
                              Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 01-16-2008, 12:17 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Small lineup for Quickness Article - Indystar

                                I might be alone, but I don't like any of the lineups that have been mentioned. I like small ball if we're the Suns or Warriors, but we're not. You can't run a mule in the Kentucky Derby. We need some horses.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X