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

All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

    Originally posted by BillS View Post
    And had we kept Kawhi we probably never would have seen what Lance could do because he'd never have seen the floor.

    The Spurs decided the year prior to Hill's contract expiring that they would not be able to keep him and therefore moved him. After the 2012-2013 season, exactly what would we have gotten for Lance (and what reason was there for anyone to believe he'd be a $10M per year player)? Those decisions are much easier to make with guys nearing the end of their second contract than with guys who only break out in the last year of their rookie contract.

    I'm not saying you're wrong - the ability to manage their payroll is huge for the Spurs - but I'm saying there isn't a good one-to-one comparison here.

    Well you brought them up....

    I agree, the Spurs are always a dangerous comparison. You're talking about the greatest PF in history, a PF - coach duo that just won a title 15 years after first doing so, and a three man Duncan/Parker/Ginobili core that just won a title 11 years after first doing so. What they've done is virtually impossible to copy.

    I'm not too bent over Kawhi because I doubt we would have been able to keep him anyway. It sucks to see a traded draft pick become a Finals MVP, but that was a great trade at the time because the Pacers needed Hill's veteran leadership after that Chicago series.

    Comment


    • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

      Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
      Watching the Hornets game really made me question why Bird is committed to average players like George Hill and Roy Hibbert. If we truly couldn't pay lance any more money because of how much those two players are making, is just plain horrible roster management. Lance is a true difference maker on the court.
      Hibbert when he's playing well is worth the contract. Unfortunately he became a one-man wrecking ball last year, dragging this team down with him. Hill's contract seemed about 2-3 million a year of an overpay at the time, and after watching Hill play the last couple years, it feels like a 2-3 mil overpay still. Problem is he's not good enough to be a starting PG on a good team. A good back-up and possibly more suited to SG, but we play him as a ball-dominant PG.
      Danger Zone

      Comment


      • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

        Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
        But this wouldn't happen without the environment they've built in SA. Mutual accountability, shared responsibility. Everyone's opinion is respected. No one player is bigger than the team, and so on with the Pop-isms. One thing Pop said in that NBATV Spurs special (which was great, btw) stuck with me: At what point does quality of life trump those extra millions per year? He went on to highlight how so many players seek a certain contract number for peer validation, but then they're miserable on losing teams. Duncan, Manu and TP wouldn't have re-signed for what they did without that culture in SA; that's the biggest thing they have going for them, IMO. And aside from the luxury of drafting Duncan -- many teams draft number one picks and don't build what SA built -- that culture gets built through continuity and consistency, and it starts at the top.
        Other teams do this though. The Pacers are a team that does it, even with the speed bumps in chemistry. The difference between SA and the others, is SA actually walks the walk when the most important thing comes to the fore front, money.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
          Well you brought them up....
          I brought them up, though, to mention their tactical advantage when they were the ones scouting Europlayers, not to mention specific player movements. I definitely agree with your post, though.
          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


          • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

            Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
            Watching the Hornets game really made me question why Bird is committed to average players like George Hill and Roy Hibbert. If we truly couldn't pay lance any more money because of how much those two players are making, is just plain horrible roster management. Lance is a true difference maker on the court.
            Second half was different, but the first half of that game he was pretty bad. I watched a couple possessions where Lance was pouting on offense when he wasn't getting the ball, just standing around annoyed. Long season though and maybe Lance will learn to deal with that stuff better, but that's the type of thing I won't be missing.

            Comment


            • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

              When PG's like Rubio and Walker are getting $12 mil/yr and Isaiah Thomas is getting $7 Mil - Hill at 8 is hardly a 2-3 Mil overpay.

              Hill played up to his contract during the 12-13 season. He will be used in more of a featured role this year, and will exceed the worth of his contract this year.

              Comment


              • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                Other teams do this though. The Pacers are a team that does it, even with the speed bumps in chemistry. The difference between SA and the others, is SA actually walks the walk when the most important thing comes to the fore front, money.
                Do they? I love Frank, but Frank is no Pop. I watched Lance and PG take ridiculous shot after ridiculous shot last year, both of them not sharing the ball. And what did Frank do? Did he pull them aside and bench them? Did he get in their face and be honest with them that they were hurting the team (in particular Roy)? No, he rode it out until the wheels came off. If the Spurs walk the walk, they do it when it comes to discipline and selflessness. A lot of coaches try to discipline, but they do it through gimmicks. A lot of teams preach selflessness, but then they meet success and selflessness takes a back seat to hero-ball and highlight reels.
                2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                Comment


                • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  Other teams do this though. The Pacers are a team that does it, even with the speed bumps in chemistry. The difference between SA and the others, is SA actually walks the walk when the most important thing comes to the fore front, money.
                  They also are very lucky to have had their marquee players from the start of this era (Robinson and then Duncan) be players whose personal aggrandizement was never important to them. It's what makes Duncan willing to take appropriate pay to allow the rest of the team to function (setting an example for the other top-tier guys) vs. other stars going where the lights are brightest and the pay is highest.

                  Yes, Pop's culture is key, but I don't think he'd get LeBron or Kobe to take a pay cut in their contracts just by demanding it. You have to have the right fit of players and culture.
                  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


                  • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                    When PG's like Rubio and Walker are getting $12 mil/yr and Isaiah Thomas is getting $7 Mil - Hill at 8 is hardly a 2-3 Mil overpay.

                    Hill played up to his contract during the 12-13 season. He will be used in more of a featured role this year, and will exceed the worth of his contract this year.
                    I agree, I've softened on Hill's contract after seeing some of the insane contracts that other players have gotten. Hill has been a really good player here and his impact on Paul George's development cannot be measured by any basketball statistic.

                    Comment


                    • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                      Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
                      If the Spurs walk the walk, they do it when it comes to discipline and selflessness. A lot of coaches try to discipline, but they do it through gimmicks. A lot of teams preach selflessness, but then they meet success and selflessness takes a back seat to hero-ball and highlight reels.
                      Do you have an example of star players who tried to show each other up on the Spurs and were then benched for it? I think we miss the fact that the star players in San Antonio were all very complementary, meaning they were in a position to "get theirs" without having to directly compete with one another.
                      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


                      • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                        Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                        ...cannot be measured by any basketball statistic.


                        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


                        • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          I agree, I've softened on Hill's contract after seeing some of the insane contracts that other players have gotten. Hill has been a really good player here and his impact on Paul George's development cannot be measured by any basketball statistic.
                          He took over for Darren Collison, who took over for TJ Ford, who took over for "I Drink vodka during practice" Jamaal Tinsley. Lol life is good.

                          Comment


                          • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                            The best thing the Spurs have done is keep their key players, and make moves around them. Duncan, Parker, Ginobili and Pop are their core. They signed each player to contracts that were probably below market value (although Duncan signed a huge contract prior to his current one), and then built a team around those guys that complimented them.

                            Lance may or my not become a perennial all-star type of player. But no matter how good Lance may or may not become, there was some question as to whether or not he fit in around PG and to a much greater extent Roy. We tried to sign him, an didn't succeed. As long as we surround our core (Vogel, PG, Roy) with players that compliments them - then we shouldn't miss a beat in the future. It sucks to lose a player for nothing, but teams do it all the time. It's been a long time since we've lost a starter in FA that we didn't want to lose. That makes the sting a bit worse.
                            Good post. In my opinion, if fitting around Roy was a problem, then I would have found a way to "restrategize" the strategy, and make a lethal perimeter option of PG and Lance the longterm plan. Maybe they tried that by attempting to trade Roy and failing. I don't know. But I don't have a high enough view of Roy anymore to build our future around him, nor to lose a prospect like Lance because of him.
                            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                            Comment


                            • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                              Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
                              Do they? I love Frank, but Frank is no Pop. I watched Lance and PG take ridiculous shot after ridiculous shot last year, both of them not sharing the ball. And what did Frank do? Did he pull them aside and bench them? Did he get in their face and be honest with them that they were hurting the team (in particular Roy)? No, he rode it out until the wheels came off. If the Spurs walk the walk, they do it when it comes to discipline and selflessness. A lot of coaches try to discipline, but they do it through gimmicks. A lot of teams preach selflessness, but then they meet success and selflessness takes a back seat to hero-ball and highlight reels.
                              Indiana was just one example. The Heat. They had great chemistry, and everyone on the team sacrificed in order for the team to succeed, from LeBron down to James Jones. Why did it break apart? Money. You'll see who really is dedicated and who isn't, when money starts being discussed.

                              The Spurs are the Spurs, not only because they have players who are willing to make the extra pass, but are also willing to take a pay cut to get a better teammate to pass to.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                                Good post. In my opinion, if fitting around Roy was a problem, then I would have found a way to "restrategize" the strategy, and make a lethal perimeter option of PG and Lance the longterm plan. Maybe they tried that by attempting to trade Roy and failing. I don't know. But I don't have a high enough view of Roy anymore to build our future around him, nor to lose a prospect like Lance because of him.
                                This is definitely a valid argument following Roy's disappointing end to last season. You would think with their skill-set's, Paul and Lance could have been an extremely poor man's version of Lebron and Wade, but they weren't. They lacked on court chemistry and seemed to get in eachother's way as much as they complimented one another. (Too much holding the ball, too much "hero ball, too much "my turn, your turn")

                                With that said, the combination of Lance and Paul not really being a perfect compliment to one another on the court, plus the fact that Roy has shown to be a big part of our playoff pushes in the past (especially during the entire 2013 playoffs) made it at least a question as to who should the team build around. At the end of the day, Bird tried to build around all 3, and ultimately failed. My original post was to show that we should move forward with players that compliment our current core.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X