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

Is the NBA rigged???

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

  • #31
    Re: Is the NBA rigged???

    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
    Of course not.

    You're accusing the nba of having a rigged system, as evidenced by too few teams (one of them chicago) having too many titles, and you have no idea the pacers gave away a chance to draft Michael Jordan.
    If you misconstrue my words one more time you are going on ignore. The words I used were "little background," not "no idea" as you think I said. I am 100% aware of the fact the Pacers gave away a chance at drafting Jordan. And the evidence I was using had nothing to do with Chicago, it had everything to do with Boston and LA. Please take my words for what I am saying, not for what you want me to have said.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Is the NBA rigged???

      As a league, no, the NBA is not rigged.

      Certain games, on the other hand, I think have been rigged (Game 6 WCF 2002 for example).
      "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

      "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Is the NBA rigged???

        Originally posted by Kstat View Post
        Of course not.

        You're accusing the nba of having a rigged system, as evidenced by too few teams (one of them chicago) having too many titles, and you have no idea the pacers gave away a chance to draft Michael Jordan.

        ...or do you think the pacers couldn't have won a championship with Michael Jordan?

        I prefer to assume they would have done the same as Portland and drafted Bowie over Jordan. Hey, we took another Kentucky center right before Bird was drafted (yes, I know the whole story) so why not repeat that great strategy?!?
        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by HickeyS2000 View Post
          If you misconstrue my words one more time you are going on ignore. The words I used were "little background," not "no idea" as you think I said. I am 100% aware of the fact the Pacers gave away a chance at drafting Jordan. And the evidence I was using had nothing to do with Chicago, it had everything to do with Boston and LA. Please take my words for what I am saying, not for what you want me to have said.
          Oh, only Boston and LA?


          ...so you're saying if the pacers had 6 nba championships, you'd have the same complaint about the lakers and celtics having too many?

          By the way, bird, hondo, and Russell accounted for 16 of Boston's 17 titles. Magic and Kobe accounted for 10 of LA's 11.

          That's five players accounting for 26 championships. Do you really think it matters what team they played for?

          And technically, LA and Boston have combined for 28 titles. The nba has been around for 65 years. The only way you get above 50% would be to include the 5 titles the lakers won in the mega media market that is Minneapolis (all with George Mikan).
          Last edited by Kstat; 04-05-2013, 03:01 PM.

          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Is the NBA rigged???

            Originally posted by Kstat View Post
            Oh, only Boston and LA?


            ...so you're saying if the pacers had 6 nba championships, you'd have the same complaint?
            Not once did I insinuate that, but yes, I would. The evidence is there. It's just some accept it as part of the game and others accept it as human error. I accept is as part of the game (aka raise the entertainment value to cash in), and because of that, I only watch Pacers games. Why is it so hard to believe that I only support the NBA because of the Pacers? If it wasn't for me being a little kid in awe of Reggie Miller, there is no way I would watch the NBA today. It's really as simple as that.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Is the NBA rigged???

              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
              That's five players accounting for 26 championships. Do you really think it matters what team they played for?
              .
              I think these teams have greater resources for acquiring the players for these great teams, and I believe it's best for the NBA when the large market teams are winning. I'm just adding the numbers, I'm not writing the equation.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Is the NBA rigged???

                I just wish the NBA would conduct an officials review after each game that was opened to the public. I think that would go a long way toward putting to rest any thought of an organized NBA League Office bias and would help fans understand the issues involved in officiating a game.
                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


                • #38
                  Re: Is the NBA rigged???

                  Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                  Of course Cuban thinks the nba is rigged. That's why he owns a team and pours hundreds of millions of dollars into it. Cuban is well known for throwing his money into futile investments.
                  Cuban is a rich dude that loves basketball. Of course he owns an NBA team. Wouldn't we all if we could, even if we believed it was rigged?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Is the NBA rigged???

                    Originally posted by HickeyS2000 View Post
                    In what world is "manipulating" a game not the same as "rigging" a game? Are we really splitting hairs on the "strength" of a word?
                    No, I think the words actually have different meanings to some.

                    "Rigged" = The outcome is predetermined before the game even starts. You'd need a vast conspiracy between players, coaches, officials etc. for this to happen, with no one ever leaking the secret, ever. Not very likely.

                    "Manipulated" = Officials might not be trying to alter the actual outcome of a game but might, for example, call the game more loosely when one team is going on a big run, or when a star is having a big game, etc. Occasionally the "manipulation" in a close game might end up determining the winner, either intentionally or unintentionally.

                    I'm not saying whether or not this happens, just saying that there is a distinction between those two things.

                    Originally posted by HickeyS2000 View Post
                    But when 2 teams win over 50% of the total championships, something has to be up.
                    No, actually, it doesn't. Most sports leagues have eras of dynasties. The NFL had a two-decade span where one conference won almost all of the SuperBowls. The NHL has had periods where teams dominated, such as the Canadiens in the 50s/60s/70s. Baseball has had dynasties with the Yankees etc.

                    As for the two teams you're talking about, they were crazy-dominant due to the personnel they had. No need for a conspiracy, just look at the level of talent.

                    Of the list of the NBA's "50 Greatest Players" made in 1997, 21 of those played for the Lakers or Celtics, most of them during their prime.

                    CELTICS

                    Bill Russell (11 rings)
                    Larry Bird
                    Nate Archibald (later in career)
                    Dave Bing (final season)
                    Bob Cousy
                    Dave Cowens
                    John Havlicek
                    Sam Jones
                    Kevin McHale
                    Robert Parish
                    Bill Sharman
                    Bill Walton (end of career)


                    LAKERS

                    George Mikan (most dominant player of his era, 7 rings)
                    Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (6 rings, 6 MVP awards)
                    Elgin Baylor
                    Wilt Chamberlain (final 6 seasons)
                    Magic Johnson (5 rings)
                    Karl Malone (final season)
                    Shaquille O'Neal
                    Jerry West
                    James Worthy

                    Since 1997 you could add Kobe Bryant (5 rings) to that list safely, and probably Kevin Garnett as well. How could you NOT win a ton of championships with these guys? Heck Bill Russell alone was on 11 championship teams!

                    Also keep in mind that the NBA had 9 teams by 1966, 18 by 1974, and 22 by 1976. So a ton of those early championships by the Celtics and Lakers were during an era where the talent was concentrated on a small number of teams.

                    Since 1988-9 the Lakers and Celtics have 'only' won 6 out of 25 championships, less than 25 percent. And that included the Shaq/Kobe 3-peat.

                    ---------------

                    If you're looking for a 'vast conspiracy,' look at how much talent is concentrated on so few teams. I can think of a few games (2001 Lakers/Kings series etc) where there were biased calls toward star teams but there are many, many more head-scratching instances in history where you wonder "how in the heck did that team get those players?"

                    EDIT: to be clear, I do not believe there is a conspiracy in how the great teams got their players. I'm saying that great players are the reasons those teams won so many championships, not anything to do with officiating


                    Last edited by rabid; 04-05-2013, 04:24 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by HickeyS2000 View Post
                      I think these teams have greater resources for acquiring the players for these great teams, and I believe it's best for the NBA when the large market teams are winning. I'm just adding the numbers, I'm not writing the equation.
                      Greater resources?

                      Russell- draft pick
                      Hondo- draft pick
                      Bird- draft pick

                      Magic- draft pick
                      Kobe- draft pick (trade)

                      Did the pacer lack resources when they traded a potential Jordan draft pick?

                      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Is the NBA rigged???

                        If things are rigged than why does the best team always win the championship. I cannot remember when the best team hasn't won. I mean does the NBA always want the best team to win, even when it is the Spurs?

                        And how come we have never had a Kobe vs Lebron NBA Finals - a lot of people would love to see that. The NBA if they do rig the thing they really aren't very good at it.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Is the NBA rigged???

                          -Officials calling a foul.... and two players of the same team are close to the foul. The foul goes to the lesser known "name."

                          - Lebron James can go 5 games or so without committing a foul.

                          - Kobe,Lebron, etc can go years without fouling out of a game

                          - Make up calls

                          - When teams are up, they stop getting calls

                          Just a few of the things that bother me about NBA officiating. I think NBA officiating has changed the last 5 or 6 years. You see a lot less of the "Allen Iverson" type calls where all the star has to do is drive, get minimal contact, and is put on the line. Players can actually stand straight up on defense and not get called for a foul. I wonder if this change had something to do with the increased scrutiny after the Donahgy scandal and Donahgy's own allegations of officiating. The fact that NBA fans are so aware of who the officials are is an interesting factor. There are celebrity officials in the NBA: Crawford, Bavetta, etc. In no other sport do you see this.

                          ed hochuli in the NFL but that's only because of his huge magnified blow call a few years ago.
                          "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Is the NBA rigged???

                            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                            If things are rigged than why does the best team always win the championship. I cannot remember when the best team hasn't won. I mean does the NBA always want the best team to win, even when it is the Spurs?

                            And how come we have never had a Kobe vs Lebron NBA Finals - a lot of people would love to see that. The NBA if they do rig the thing they really aren't very good at it.
                            Well I don't think people are arguing that it's scripted. Just that teams are given an advantage.
                            "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Is the NBA rigged???

                              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                              Greater resources?

                              Russell- draft pick
                              Hondo- draft pick
                              Bird- draft pick

                              Magic- draft pick
                              Kobe- draft pick (trade)

                              Did the pacer lack resources when they traded a potential Jordan draft pick?
                              You used the one example where the pacers do have the same resource, the draft. You forgot to mention things such as local media revenue, taking on salary in lopsided trades, going over luxury tax, and things that are important to free agents, such as the hollywood lifestyle, living on a coast, warm weather and income tax free states.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Is the NBA rigged???

                                Originally posted by HickeyS2000 View Post
                                Cuban is a rich dude that loves basketball. Of course he owns an NBA team. Wouldn't we all if we could, even if we believed it was rigged?
                                It was interesting to note that after the Mavericks were eliminated from the finals in 2006, Cuban went up to stern and yelled at him for his league being rigged (reportedly and he was fined). Wade shot a lot of free throws that series and the Mavs were hit with some debilitating suspensions if I remember correctly. The next time his team was in the finals was 2011 and if you remember Cuban was very quiet (much was made about this in the media) and his team won.

                                Not saying they're all related, just interesting factoids.
                                "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X