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

Can we win a Title?

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

  • #76
    Re: Can we win a Title?

    I think a title is a stretch for our roster UNLESS,

    George Hill can dish out like 8 assists per, Roy, Paul and Danny all average around 20 points per and Vogel allows Lance Stephenson to UNLEASH! (I'm a big First Take fan!)

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Can we win a Title?

      I think people are confusing 'can we' with 'should we expect to'.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Can we win a Title?

        I think Pacers have as good a chance as any team does. At this point it's all about chemistry, health and hitting your shots.
        Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Can we win a Title?

          Needs more green.

          LOTS more green.

          Originally posted by AugustinGrangerHill View Post
          We have signed D.J. Augustin and Gerald Green and traded for Ian Mahinmi who IMO have all strengthened our bench from last year.
          1. George Hill/DJ Augustin
          2. Paul George/Lance Stephenson
          3. Danny Granger/Gerald Green
          4. David West/Tyler Hansbrough
          5. Roy Hibbert/Ian Mahinmi

          In your opinion can this line up win a title?

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Can we win a Title?

            Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
            If you are a team that relies only on 2 or 3 guys you need that, but we aren't playing by that model.
            I'm fine with the team concept but we still need someone that can get us baskets when we need them... or get inside with confidence and purpose and get to the line.

            Maybe one of our guys can grow into that but that is yet to be seen.
            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


            • #81
              Re: Can we win a Title?

              Are the Pacers the favorite? . . . no

              Can they win? . . . yes

              Just like last year, the thing that will determine the success of the Pacers is the Young Guys. Danny will be Danny. DWest will be DWest. Those guys are good players that will be who they are. Some tweaks to their games, subtle improvements, but basically they are a finished product. a pretty good product.

              The guys that matter are Paul George, Lance Stephenson, George Hill and Roy Hibbert. They are the guys with room to improve. For the Pacers to be a championship team, they are the guys that have to become the better players the Pacers need.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Can we win a Title?

                If the Pacers were to somehow win the championship it would be surprising but not insane. Pacers don't have a star player and they'll never win one without a star. The best bet is for Paul George to become a star.

                Also I think some teams got better but no Eastern Conference teams who weren't better than the Pacers are better than the Pacers now.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Can we win a Title?

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  No, but this is the best approach

                  The biggest problem wasn't and isn't that our bench isn't good enough, but it is that our best players 1 through 3 are not good enough.

                  But our bench needed an upgrade and that is much easier to do than to acquire players better than West, Roy and Granger. Only way IMO we could have acquired a player better than our best three is to take a huge chance on a player hoping they might turn out to be a better player than any of those three guys. Williams or Howard weren't coming here and neither was Nash. So we would have had to gamble, trade one of our best players for a potential player.

                  That is usually a bad strategy. I think this is the correct approach, improve where we can, grow as a team, hope that Paul George becomes our best player and that chemistry and stability pull us through.

                  This is not unlike the Pacers from 1994 - 2000. The team from 2002 - 2005 tried the other approach, gamble on some questionable guys and most of you didn't appreciate that approach.

                  But overall no, we won't beat the Heat in 2013 if both teams are as they are now. But I'd love to see us in the ECF with the Heat next late May to have that chance.

                  Pacers need to take the Dallas Mavs approach. Be as good as you can for as long as you can. Tinker each year and we might come up with just the right mixture and win it all like the Mavs did in 2011. But being as good as you can be every year is huge, if the Pacers are good every year 50-58 wins it is much easier to acquire a player who just might push us over-the-top like Tyson Chandler did for the Mavs
                  Many, many years ago I would have agreed with you - put yourself in position to be a very good team and wait for some breaks. But after watching and realizing how the best players dominate in the NBA, I no longer believe it is a realistic avenue for a title if you don't have a top 10 player. That is were I think your Dallas Mavericks comparison fails. Dirk is a much better player than any the NBA Pacers have ever had - including Reggie. And especially better than anything on the current roster. Until the Pacers rectify that, they are not true contenders IMO. That is why I now believe in the tank. IMO it is nearly the only chance to acquire that top level talent for a small market, non destination NBA city.
                  Last edited by rm1369; 07-13-2012, 06:43 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Can we win a Title?

                    Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
                    Also I think some teams got better but no Eastern Conference teams who weren't better than the Pacers are better than the Pacers now.
                    Brooklyn. Easily.

                    (I'm assuming you already thought Boston was better.)
                    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                    -Lance Stephenson

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Can we win a Title?

                      Originally posted by WhoLovesYaBaby? View Post
                      I can tell you this:

                      With every loss next year, half of this board will be calling for blowing up the team.
                      How many will be calling for Vogel's head??

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Can we win a Title?

                        With a lot of luck. A LOT of luck. Who knows what happens over the next few years though.
                        "man, PG has been really good."

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Can we win a Title?

                          Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                          Brooklyn. Easily.

                          (I'm assuming you already thought Boston was better.)
                          They had Brook Lopez and had Deron Williams. Joe Johnson never helped Atlanta win jack. They might not get back Humphries. No Dwight. I don't see where they improved that much, frankly. A new logo and a new arena don't mean wins.

                          Boston lost Ray Allen. KG and PP are another year older. The logical replacement for RA was Avery Bradley and he may be out to January. Brandon Bass may be gone, right? Green returns with a bad heart. Two rookies will play like rookies. Jason Terry may help though. I like him in an uptempo setting, which Boston doesn't play. I don't think Boston passed us either.

                          Does Chicago without Rose scare anybody? They are also losing some key bench players.

                          The Pacers are only looking up at the Heat in the East.
                          Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 07-13-2012, 05:08 PM.
                          The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Can we win a Title?

                            Hahaha Brooklyn really?

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Can we win a Title?

                              Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                              They had Brook Lopez and had Deron Williams. Joe Johnson never helped Atlanta win jack. They might not get back Humphries. No Dwight. I don't see where they improved that much, frankly.
                              Brook Lopez was hurt all year last year. Joe Johnson is better than anybody on our roster. They've got Gerald Wallace who is no slouch. Deron Williams is one of the 2 best point guards in the NBA. I've got to think Kris Humphries accepts the offer they gave him but it really doesn't matter. They are better than the Pacers. By a considerable margin.

                              Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                              lost Ray Allen. KG and PP are another year older. The logical replacement for RA was Avery Bradley and he may be out to January. Brandon Bass may be gone, right? Green returns with a bad heart. Two rookies will play like rookies. Jason Terry may help though. I like him in an uptempo setting, which Boston doesn't play. I don't think Boston passed us either.
                              Boston doesn't have to pass us. They were already better than us. And they will be better this year than they were last year. Saying Jason Terry may help is an understatement. At this stage of their careers, he's a better player than Ray Allen.

                              Originally posted by mattie View Post
                              Hahaha Brooklyn really?
                              Without question.
                              "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                              -Lance Stephenson

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Can we win a Title?

                                Brooklyn has arguably the best back court in the NBA. good luck to anyone that tries to guard both Williams and Johnson. Plus they have an above average SF and an above average C arguably top 5-7. With a nice PF in Hump they really dont have a weakness on the starting lineup and will be really hard to guard. Plus the bench isnt terrible Reggie Evans Marshon Brooks and the guy they gave the MMLE(I am guessing he can play never watched him)

                                they are really solid from 1-9 (possibly more I like Tyshawn Taylor and Shengelia but they are young and I wont include them)

                                and have 2 or 3 guys who can take over a game and they have defenders and that wins in the playoffs.


                                Saying they aren't better than us is really a head scratcher IMO

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X