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:
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

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

11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves



    Game Time Start: 7:00 PM EST
    Where: The Fieldhouse, Indianapolis, IN
    Officials: Ron Garretson, David Jones, Gediminas Petraitis

    Media Notes: Indiana Notes, Minnesota Notes
    Television: FOX Sports Indiana / FOX Sports North
    Radio: WFNI 1070 AM, 107.5 FM / WCCO 830 AM
    NBA Feeds:

    REMINDER: Per PD policy, please do not share a link to, describe how to search for, request a link to, or request a PM about streaming video of a NBA game that is not coming directly through the NBA. Not even in a "wink-wink, nudge-nudge, know-what-I-mean" round-about sort of way. Thank you

    Home: 2-2
    West: 0-2
    Away: 4-0
    East: 2-2
    Nov 16
    Nov 18
    Nov 21
    Nov 24


    Rodney Stuckey - ankle (out)
    Myles Turner - thumb (out)

    Nikola Pekovic - right Achilles tendon (out)
    Ricky Rubio - left hamstring strain (probable)
    Andrew Wiggins - right knee soreness (probable)

    Paul George is singlehandedly keeping the Pacers relevant
    Paul Flannery

    The All-Star is returning to his elite form after a devastating injury and allowing his team
    to navigate a difficult style change properly.

    For three-and-a-half quarters Wednesday, the Pacers and Celtics were locked in one of those
    weird NBA games that was close without being compelling. Neither team shot well from
    behind the arc, turnovers were a problem for both squads and as the misses and errant
    passes piled up, the game lacked a cohesive element that would easily define it in the next
    day's postmortems.

    There was, however, Paul George, and he was clearly the best player on the floor. George
    put up 22 shots, a dozen more than any of his Pacer teammates and well more than anyone
    on the other side. He was every bit the star that the Pacers will rely on to bring them back to
    playoff contention and exactly the kind of player the Celtics lack in their large ensemble mix.

    That much was readily apparent, yet George didn't dominate the action as much as artfully
    pick his spots. There was a brief outburst early in the third quarter when he erased a small
    Boston lead with a pair of threes, but it was down the stretch when he truly took over and
    carried the Pacers home with a win. Indy ran actions to get its star into mismatches and he
    took advantage by shooting over Marcus Smart, a tenacious on-ball defender who lacks the
    size to defend a player like George once he gets into his spot.

    "It's my job to go out there and perform," George said after scoring 26 points to go with 10
    rebounds. "I take a lot of pride in being our leader. I take pride in the outcome of games.
    I'm going to bring it, night in and night out. I'm going to be the guy that's always going to
    bring it."

    This is what stars do and this is what George was coming to terms with before he suffered
    that gruesome leg injury during a Team USA exhibition game in the summer of 2014. Before
    the injury, PG was a vital part, but by no means the whole show for a Pacers' team that won
    primarily with defense and a bruising frontcourt. Now he is the undisputed centerpiece of a
    fairly dramatic overhaul.

    In the offseason, the Pacers cut ties with Roy Hibbert and David West, the latter of whom
    took a significant paycut to chase a title with the Spurs. They added Monta Ellis and worked
    on installing a spread offense that would represent a complete stylistic change from the past
    few years. It would also conclude the transition that began over the past few years as George
    grew from a player with tantalizing potential into one of the premier perimeter threats in the

    "We believe we're putting him in position to have the best season of his career," Indiana coach
    Frank Vogel said. "Playing with a little more space, a little more tempo, we think offensively is
    going to help him explode onto the scene and take his game to an even higher level, while still
    having the flexibility to play with bigger lineups when we need to."

    After a slow start George has been fantastic over the past week. It started with a win over
    Boston in Indy when he also went for 26 and 10 and continued through huge performances
    against Miami, Cleveland and Orlando. After dropping their first three games, the Pacers have
    won five of six even with several key players missing time with injuries.

    As they move on from the low post bullyball ethos that defined their recent success, a middling
    start could have spiraled into disastrous territory, but George has kept them afloat. He's
    averaging 23.8 points, 8.8 rebounds and 4.7 assists, which would be career highs if he kept up
    this pace. All of that is to say that PG looks like he's back, although he'll be the first to tell you
    he's not back back just yet.

    "My skillset, everything on the court has been there," he said. "I feel like with a year away from
    the game I was able to rehab and really focus on myself. I'm still trying to gain that little bit
    back physically. I'm not all the way there. Leg endurance, the foot speed, the explosiveness.
    That's the little bit that has to come back."

    These are tiny, encouraging signs... CONTINUE READING ON SBNATION

    The Wolves and the Youth Movement: What Do We Mean By "Development?"

    Some early season thoughts on youth and development.

    Let me start with a caveat, because that's always a fantastic way to draw in readers: The
    Wolves have only played four games so far this season, and it's far too early to make any
    hard and fast judgments.

    Now that's out of the way.

    One of the givens about the Wolves last season and this has been that "development" is
    more important than winning. This idea seems to be central to both the organization and
    coaching staff as well as most of the remaining serious fans of the team.

    And it might be the right idea. The Wolves, for better or worse, have a roster full of
    inexperienced players. Nine of the 15 players on the roster are in their first, second, or
    third years in the league. Of the six remaining, one is out injured and seems a dubious
    proposition to ever play a significant role again (Nikola Pekovic), three are here for hybrid
    playing "mentoring" reasons (Kevin Garnett, Tayshaun Prince, and Andre Miller) and are
    clearly on their last legs as players, one seems as likely as not to be gone by the trade
    deadline (Kevin Martin), and one is their best player, Ricky Rubio.

    So yes, the Wolves have a lot of guys to develop.

    Which raises the question: What is the best way to go about doing that?

    One of the advantages to an organization saying they are focused on development is that
    it creates much hazier bases on which to judge their performance. When the goal is to win,
    to put the best team on the floor, well, that's easy. What's your record? What's your point
    differential? What are your offensive and defensive ratings? We have numerous, generally
    accurate, ways to determine how well a team is playing.

    Development is a much thornier issue. Development means mistakes. Development
    means playing certain players more or less than optimal if your goal is to win, but how
    much more or less?

    Development raises questions. Is playing time necessary? Always? Some of the time?

    Is all playing time created equal? Is development affected by who you share the court
    with? By how well or badly the team plays while you're out there? By the style of basketball
    that you and your teammates play?

    Does quality development happen when you are clearly over-matched and getting blown
    out every night, as we saw regularly last season?

    Most importantly, how do the people in charge view the development process?

    This stuff has been going around in my head for a while, but I was spurred to start writing
    by this exchange of tweets, so let's start here:

    So let's see if we can trace the development of Zach LaVine. LaVine was thrust into the
    point guard role last year far earlier than was intended when Ricky Rubio got hurt in the
    fifth game of the season. He wound up playing 1900 minutes, almost all of which was at
    point guard, for the worst team in the league. He was awful, yes, but in theory he was
    getting valuable experience. But how valuable was this experience?

    The Wolves last season were a train wreck on both sides of the ball. They gave up easy
    shots and points in bunches, took terrible shots themselves, took the fewest percentage of
    threes in the league and one of the highest percentages of long two point attempts. Much
    of this was "orchestrated" by Zach LaVine. I'm not blaming LaVine; he did the best he could,
    but it clearly wasn't very good.

    The question is whether it helped him prepare for this season and future seasons, indeed a
    difficult question to answer... CONTINUE READING ON CANIS HOOPUS

    Candace Buckner @CandaceDBuckner
    Nate Taylor @ByNateTaylor
    Jared Wade @8pts9secs
    Tim Donahue @TimDonahue8p9s
    Tom Lewis @indycornrows
    Whitney @its_whitney

    Jerry Zgoda @JerryZgoda
    Zach Harper @talkhoops
    Steve McPherson @steventurous
    Howlin' T Wolf @howlintwolf
    A Wolf Among Wolves @A_W_A_W
    William Bohl @BreakTheHuddle

    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves

    I don't understand the thread title.

    This is gonna be a good test. Minny won @Chi and @Atl and was competitive against Golden State last night, no small feat.


    • #3
      Re: 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves

      Minnesota's 4th game in 5 to take advantage...really not sure if I feel right watching basketball tonight, but I guess it can be calming.
      "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

      ----------------- Reggie Miller


      • #4
        Re: 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves

        I know I am a bad, awful person for this, but I hope we put Garnett on hi butt at least once tonight.


        • #5
          Re: 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves

          I might as well get this out of the way guys, but I don't think it would be appropriate unless we mention what's going on in Paris. Thoughts go out to those who have suffered there.

          Change is neither good or bad, it simply is.


          • #6
            Re: 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves

            PG vs. Wiggins is a great matchup.


            • #7
              Re: 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves

              This should be fun


              • #8
                Re: 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves



                • #9
                  Re: 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves

                  God these crowds suck...


                  • #10
                    Re: 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves

                    Originally posted by 31Since1990 View Post
                    God these crowds suck...
                    There you are! IU's opener is tonight in Bloomington. Might have a small effect.


                    • #11
                      Re: 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves

                      KG cannot stay in front of CJ Miles.


                      • #12
                        Re: 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves

                        Originally posted by cdash View Post
                        KG cannot stay in front of CJ Miles.
                        Wish he'd have made that layup, but yeah, we need to exploit this.


                        • #13
                          Re: 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves

                          Zach Levine looks like a young Gerald Green. He isn't a bad player, but I am not sure he is a core piece either.


                          • #14
                            Re: 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            There you are! IU's opener is tonight in Bloomington. Might have a small effect.
                            IU?! Pacer looking crowds to freakin IU? lmao


                            • #15
                              Re: 11/13/15 Game Thread #10: Pacers vs. Timberwolves

                              Man...Towns/Wiggins is one hell of a core to build around.