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

Warriors Pre-Game thread Sunday 1/13 - Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

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

  • Warriors Pre-Game thread Sunday 1/13 - Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

    In preperation for one of the few Pacers games that I get to see up-close ( this year, I get to go to the Arco on Saturday to see the Pacers play the Kings and then go to the Arena in Oakland to see the Pacers play the Warriors ), I thought I would post this analysis from a Warriors Blog that I found on ClubLakers after they beat the Warriors last month.

    It's an interesting read and something that I hope the Coaching Staff is paying attention to ( I highlighted the good parts in Blue ).

    http://www.mercextra.com/blogs/warri...13-lakers-123/

    An Unnecessary Sequel (Warriors 113, Lakers 123)
    By Adam Lauridsen

    Sunday, December 9th, 2007 at 11:25 pm in Game Summary, Baron Davis, Mickael Pietrus, Monta Ellis, Kelenna Azubuike, Stephen Jackson, Troy Hudson, DJ Mbenga.

    Don Nelson kicked off the season by asking us to wait 20 games before judging his team. At 11-9 — and 10-3 with Stephen Jackson in the line-up — there are endless reasons to be excited about our prospects. Still, the more things change, the more three nagging things stay the same: the San Antonio Spurs, the Utah Jazz, and, as Sunday night made clear, the Los Angeles Lakers. The City of Angeles continued to bedevil the Warriors. In what could have been a rerun of last year’s losses, the team struggled to contain LA’s big men, got burned by Phil Jackson’s systematic offense, and coughed the ball up far too often to stay in the game. If this team is better than last year’s squad (and I still think they are), they need to start winning games that were losses in 06-07.

    Following Friday’s comeback against the Heat, Don Nelson was highly critical of his “8:30 players,” not showing up to play until the second half. Sunday night, with a 6:30 tip, it seemed like most of the roster failed to show up at all. After a series of games during which guys tripped over themselves to play the hero, no one stepped up to bail out the Ws against Kobe and the 14 other guys he doesn’t feel are worthy of playing with him. But while Friday night’s struggles seemed to be a matter of effort, the Lakers had a clear plan for shutting down the Ws’ potent offense:

    Keep Baron from being a playmaker. Kobe spent most of the night draped over Baron no matter where he got the ball. Davis worked a hot hand during the first quarter to drop in a fair number of points, but Kobe’s defense owned him for the final three quarters. The Warriors can still win when Baron misses shots. they have serious trouble, however, when he can’t get others involved. Kobe’s size kept Baron from seeing the court and his speed kept Davis, for the most part, out of the lane. The result was a very stagnant offense. When Hudson and Ellis took turns at the point, things didn’t get much better. The rest of the Warriors did try to move the ball during spurts, but all the passing was around the perimeter. The inside-outside game on which the team thrives was largely non-existent. It showed in our shooting percentage.

    Refuse to abandon the block. Unlike Miami, which tried to run with the Warriors rather than park O’Neal down low, the Lakers sent Bynum, Turiaf, and Ariza into the paint. Bynum, in particular, ate us alive, forcing Nelson to use Mbenga instead of Andris or Al. DJ gave the team a great stretch defensively, but his inability to be a cog in the motion offense kept us from building momentum for a typical Warriors run. We got stops, but we couldn’t always turn them into points at the other end. When Nelson went away from Mbenga looking for more points, the Lakers once again feasted around the basket. Quick big men are still kryptonite to the Warriors’ special powers. We can’t drive past them on offense or keep them away from the rim on defense. Nelson probably will spend all of Tuesday night against the Spurs (and a likely-to-play Duncan) trying to solve the same problem. It’s mid-December. Let’s hope he sorts it out by April.

    Dare the Warriors to beat you from behind the arc. Phil Jackson played the numbers Sunday night. It’s usually a safe bet. The Warriors are viewed by most as three-point crazy team. That’s only half the story. The Warriors use the three pointer to open up the lane by drawing out the defense. They then use their quicker players to get a lot of high percentage looks. The two parts of the game feed off one another. Most teams hate to give up 6, 9, or 12 point runs to the Warriors when they get hot from behind the arc, so they pull their defense out. The Lakers, however, weren’t buying it. The Warriors hit some early threes but the Lakers kept packing the lane. Jackson, Davis, Harrington and Pietrus had open looks all night long but couldn’t convert. The game came down to the Lakers’ high-percentage post and mid-range offense (excluding Kobe’s shots from near the Mexico border) versus the Warriors’ low-percentage barrage from behind the arc. The results were exactly as you would have expected. The Warriors made runs - and crept ahead a few times - but simply didn’t have the consistency to pull it off over 48 minutes. Once again, we’ve seen this playbook before. The Jazz wrote it last season. Nelson has yet to come up with a persuasive rebuttal.
    The key seems to be limiting what Baron can do. My hope is that Granger, Rush and Marquis are able the ones assigned to guarding and hasseling him.

    BTW....anyone else going to the game in Oakland on Sunday?
    Last edited by CableKC; 01-11-2008, 07:14 PM.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

  • #2
    Re: Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

    This has very little to do with this thread, but I wish Andris Biedrins was a Pacer.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

      I have a feeling that this could either turn out to be a very exciting game ( much like the Suns/Pacers game ) or a game similiar to the first Post-Trade game in Indy. I still don't think that we will win.....but if Dunleavy and Granger show up on the offensive end....we should be competitive and at least keep pace with them much like the Suns/Pacers game and not embarress ourselves like in the Jazz/Pacers game.

      I'm more concerned that Dunleavy may disappear from the offensive end. I really think that there is a mental aspect and level of confidence to the game that Dunleavy has to overcome to play like the way that we want him to play. I just have a sinking feeling that it's going to be hard to return to Oakland for the first time where the fans continually booed and pretty much ran him out of town.

      Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
      This has very little to do with this thread, but I wish Andris Biedrins was a Pacer.
      I could probably say something in regards to this....but I won't.
      Last edited by CableKC; 01-11-2008, 07:23 PM.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Warriors Pre-Game thread Sunday 1/13 - Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

        What Lauridsen wrote is pretty much how you beat the Warriors.

        As he mentioned, half the reason they're shooting the three is because they're trying to open up the lane for drives to the hoop.

        If I'm an opposing team playing vs. the Warriors, I'd do any of the following:

        - Be as physical with Baron and Jackson as the officials will let you. Try to frustrate them and get the out of rythym, as they're both stubborn guys. Dallas should have tried using Greg Buckner more to simply try to annoy Baron and get in his head.

        -Take the ball to the basket on them and draw fouls. It slows the game down and prevents fast breaks.

        -Take care of the ball and limit turnovers to cut down on fast breaks. Often easier said than done, of course and you want to limit turnovers against anyone, but the Warriors really feed off forcing them.

        -Let them shoot the 3 if they're inclined. Make them prove they can shoot it at a high clip before you start running at them.
        Last edited by d_c; 01-11-2008, 09:06 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

          Originally posted by CableKC View Post

          I'm more concerned that Dunleavy may disappear from the offensive end. I really think that there is a mental aspect and level of confidence to the game that Dunleavy has to overcome to play like the way that we want him to play. I just have a sinking feeling that it's going to be hard to return to Oakland for the first time where the fans continually booed and pretty much ran him out of town.
          Dunleavy got booed, jeered, mocked, harassed, and made fun of most of the time he was in Oakland.

          If he has any ounce of competitive pride in him (and I mean any), he'll show up and compete and try to stick it to the crowd. If he just shrivels up and hides and plays passively, then that'll pretty much justify why the fans wanted him gone.

          This game should go a long way into telling you what kind of competitor Dunleavy really is.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Warriors Pre-Game thread Sunday 1/13 - Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

            I agree with that assessment, except I would not dare Jackson to shoot the 3. Not when he is likely to be focused.

            One thing about Jack is, when he wants to play well he can do it. Not saying he helps your team develop during the season, but when motivated (which is not all the time) he can play a good *individual* game and light you up if he's on.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

              Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
              This has very little to do with this thread, but I wish Andris Biedrins was a Pacer.
              I would say Biedrins is a very good, though not great, young prospect. The Warriors aren't shopping him, but if the right deal ever came along, they'd deal him.

              Did you know that Biedrins actually broke one of Shaq's records last week?

              Shaq had a record of something like 26 straight games of making at least 50% of his FG attempts. Biedrins broke it last week and I think he's at 28 or 29 games. Of course the guy doesn't shoot much never shoots outside 5 feet. Now there's a guy who knows his limits.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Warriors Pre-Game thread Sunday 1/13 - Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

                That last point should go well for us if we do our job. Our defense is based around letting teams try to shoot over us and not allowing them to drive to the lane at will. Now that we're going small-ball we should be even better at playing a team like Golden State.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

                  Originally posted by d_c View Post
                  Dunleavy got booed, jeered, mocked, harassed, and made fun of most of the time he was in Oakland.

                  If he has any ounce of competitive pride in him (and I mean any), he'll show up and compete and try to stick it to the crowd. If he just shrivels up and hides and plays passively, then that'll pretty much justify why the fans wanted him gone.

                  This game should go a long way into telling you what kind of competitor Dunleavy really is.
                  I REALLY REALLY WANT him to come out and play like the way that he has been playing with us as of late.....become aggressive on the offensive end....where he drives to the hoop...pulling down boards and doing those little things that help us win. I really want him to be able to show the Warriors fans what their missing out on.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Warriors Pre-Game thread Sunday 1/13 - Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

                    Anyone here going to the Warriors and/or Kings game?
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Warriors Pre-Game thread Sunday 1/13 - Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

                      I wish... I'd like to experience being part of a Warriors game. Must be crazy.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Warriors Pre-Game thread Sunday 1/13 - Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

                        Sounds to me like Mike is damned if he does damned if he doesn't. If he does the right thing and plays his normal game, playing his normal role on the team, he's a coward or he isn't a competitor. If he tries to torch Golden State, to do so he has to play differently than he normally does, most likely outside of the team's gameplan, and become a selfish player.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Warriors Pre-Game thread Sunday 1/13 - Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

                          Originally posted by Mal View Post
                          Sounds to me like Mike is damned if he does damned if he doesn't. If he does the right thing and plays his normal game, playing his normal role on the team, he's a coward or he isn't a competitor. If he tries to torch Golden State, to do so he has to play differently than he normally does, most likely outside of the team's gameplan, and become a selfish player.
                          At times, I can only hope that Dunleavy can be a selfish player. When he's aggressive on the offensive end......he seems to be far more effective.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Warriors Pre-Game thread Sunday 1/13 - Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

                            I may be going to the game, haven't completely decided yet. It's hovering in the "likely" area.
                            Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Warriors Pre-Game thread Sunday 1/13 - Interesting analysis about how to beat the Warriors

                              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                              Anyone here going to the Warriors and/or Kings game?
                              I'll be at the Warrior game and my Warrior fan friend is already gearing up to boo Dunleavy the entire night.

                              I'm in the camp that fully expects a 3-11 with 9 points night from Dunleavy.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X