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

NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

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

  • NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

    [/B]http://www.basketballinsiders.com/nb...-be-a-problem/

    During last month’s draft, between the Boston Celtics desperately trying to unload their third overall pick and experts trying to predict where Skal Labissiere would fall, somehow, we overlooked the Indiana Pacers dramatically upgrading their point guard position by turning George Hill into Jeff Teague.

    Somehow, we missed the Pacers turning the 20th pick in the draft into the versatile Thaddeus Young and, due to the Kevin Durant sweepstakes, overlooked the signing of Al Jefferson. Jefferson, who will turn 32 years old in January, has probably seen better days, but even still, when healthy, he is still a tremendous low post presence.

    With newly installed head coach Nate McMillan calling the shots for the Pacers, there are a bevy of unknowns in Indianapolis.

    But even still, it’s difficult to imagine them not reemerging as a power in the Eastern Conference.

    Seeing an opportunity to make a defensive play in an utterly meaningless game, with his sights set on James Harden, Paul George measured his steps and rose into the air. By the time gravity would take its course, on August 1, 2014, everything changed.

    The Pacers were coming off of back-to-back appearances in the Eastern Conference Finals and seemed to be the only team that could rightfully call itself a peer of the LeBron James-led Miami HEAT. With a defensive-first attitude and career-best production from Lance Stephenson and Roy Hibbert, Paul George rose up from being simply a player with a funny haircut to one of the best all-around players.

    Today, we have no concept of history. It’s all about what someone has done for you lately and about what they showed you last week. But if you go back and watch the tape and listen to the commentary on and praise of Paul George, you will quickly be reminded that there was no player in the entire league that had his combination of size, length, on-ball defensive instincts, shooting ability and athleticism.

    As he laid on his back during the pre-FIBA World Cup Team USA Exhibition in the Thomas & Mack Center in Las Vegas, George and his parents wondered whether his career was over while the basketball-viewing public knew it was.

    Miraculously, despite being ruled out for the entire 2014-15 season, George beat the odds by beginning to practice with his team in February of 2015. This was a miracle considering the compound fracture he suffered in his lower right leg. George ended up playing the final six games of a 2014-15 season that saw the Pacers miss the playoffs for the first time since he entered the league.

    By the time the 2015-16 season began, George had long been cleared to resume basketball activities without any restrictions. By the time he did so, most of his running mates—Lance Stephenson, Roy Hibbert and David West among them—were gone. He was surrounded by new faces and suddenly saw his Pacers in the lower echelon of an Eastern Conference that had suddenly become more competitive.

    George responded to that how any truly great player would: he excelled.

    During the 2015-16 season, George appeared in 81 games. The lone game he missed was the final game of the regular season and it was because head coach Frank Vogel opted to rest four of his starters since the Pacers were locked into the conference’s seventh seed.

    The Pacers would last all of seven games before succumbing to the second-seed Toronto Raptors, but in their first round playoff series, George was magnificent. He dominated the series on both ends of the floor and was clearly the best and most consistent player over its duration. During the series, his per-game averages of 27.3 points, 7.6 rebounds 4.3 assists and two steals easily tell the story of what he contributed.

    In the end, he simply didn’t have enough help.

    During the regular season, George essentially picked back up right where he left off. As compared with his output during the 2013-14 season, George was superior in a number of areas, including scoring a career-high 23.1 points per game, and accomplishing it while playing the least minutes he averaged since his sophomore year. His shooting percentages were consistent with his career output. He scored 35 points or more on seven occasions and 45 or more twice.

    In short, after a one-year hiatus, Paul George had reverted to Paul George. And that’s something that the entire Eastern Conference needs to take note of.

    It’s October 28, 2015. George stands at center court of the Air Canada Center and greets Kyle Lowry and DeMar DeRozan. They exchange pleasantries as a great many of the Raptors players welcome George back and wish him the best of luck.

    With George Hill, C.J. Miles, Monta Ellis and Ian Mahinmi flanking him, George struggles a bit. In the end, after suffering a 106-99 loss at the hands of the Raptors, George recognizes that his 12 rebounds and eight assists were good output, but his 4-for-17 shooting from the field simply wouldn’t get it done.

    As the season wore on, George became stronger, but the same couldn’t be said of his supporting cast.

    Now, as the 2016-17 commences, the 30-year-old Hill has been replaced by the 28-year-old Jeff Teague while Mahinmi’s place in the rotation will be taken by new additions Al Jefferson and Thaddeus Young. The sophomore Myles Turner truly hit the ground running during his rookie year and will eventually be a starter in the NBA for many years to come.

    With McMillan replacing Frank Vogel on the bench, his responsibility will be to find a way to put the pieces together. But judging by the way McMillan handled the revolving door of players he coached with the Portland Trail Blazers, the head coach should have little difficulty with finding a way to put these pieces together.

    In Teague, McMillan has a point guard who has played an integral role in his team’s reaching the playoffs in each year of his seven-year career, while Young has long been one of the more underrated two-way, combo forwards in the league. With Young and George in the lineup, the Pacers perimeter defense will be top-notch.

    In Ellis, the Pacers will have a proven score and a player who doesn’t get the credit he deserves for seeing the floor as well as he does, and in Jefferson, the team will have an interior presence who has made a living for himself by attracting double teams and attention in the low post.

    With Myles Turner, C.J. Miles, Rodney Stuckey and Lavoy Allen, it’s difficult seeing how this experiment in Indianapolis will fail. It’s especially difficult considering that Paul George just recently celebrated his 26th birthday and is nowhere near his physical prime. History tells us that George will improve upon his 2015-16 season, and with the pieces that have been put around him, again, that’s something the entire conference should recognize; and perhaps shudder at.

    As the offseason continues, even as we enter and pass mid-July, there are still a number of impact free agents on the market. As of July 17, the Pacers have $12 million available under the cap and could have the $2.8 million room exception as their disposal. Next summer, depending on whether Rodney Stuckey and C.J. Miles opt out of their contracts (they will, in all likelihood), the Pacers could have as much as $50 million available under the cap.

    With sensible contracts on their books, a fairly young nucleus augmented by productive veterans and the progressing Paul George, a bright season and a bright, bright future may lie ahead for the Pacers.

    Indeed, since Paul George laid on his back in Las Vegas’ Thomas & Mack Center just about two years ago, things have change dramatically.

    The Indiana Pacers will prove in short order, though—change is sometimes for the best.
    Last edited by 90'sNBARocked; 07-17-2016, 01:51 PM.
    Sittin on top of the world!

  • #2
    Re: NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

    Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
    dramatically upgrading their point guard position by turning George Hill into Jeff Teague.
    Hmmm. Them's pretty strong words. Jeff Teague is not a dramatic upgrade over George Hill.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

      Good read. I already know Pacers going to the ECF. They need to take the next step and go to the finals

      Sent from my Nexus 5X

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

        I think Teague is only a slight upgrade on Hill, but a much better upgrade in terms of "fit". People have been pining for a true point guard around here since forever.

        I really think the acquisition of Thad Young was the sneaky great move of the off season. He's always been underrated (played on bad teams almost his whole career) and he's been handed the absolute perfect role here to succeed.
        "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

        - ilive4sports

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
          Hmmm. Them's pretty strong words. Jeff Teague is not a dramatic upgrade over George Hill.
          Fine. We went from a below average starting PG to an above average starting PG.
          Lifelong pacers fan

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
            Hmmm. Them's pretty strong words. Jeff Teague is not a dramatic upgrade over George Hill.
            Lol Hill sucked. You guys overrated this guy so much!
            Impossible Is Nothing

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

              Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
              I think Teague is only a slight upgrade on Hill, but a much better upgrade in terms of "fit". People have been pining for a true point guard around here since forever.

              I really think the acquisition of Thad Young was the sneaky great move of the off season. He's always been underrated (played on bad teams almost his whole career) and he's been handed the absolute perfect role here to succeed.
              Hes alot better than HILL
              Impossible Is Nothing

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

                Teague will give our offense an entire new dimension that GHill couldn't provide.
                //

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

                  Originally posted by Romsey31 View Post
                  Lol Hill sucked. You guys overrated this guy so much!
                  Here is what I love about this board. I am the resident George Hill critic to many people here. Yet I overrate him. Someone please tell cdash and Ace.

                  Someone also said Teague isn't that much better, but he's a much better fit. I would argue next to Monta that Hill may well be a better fit. He can defend real SG's. Monta cannot do that and people are going to be pretty surprised by the difference.

                  But sure, Teague is the better PG. He actually is a real PG. Hill isn't.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

                    Thad Young was a great addition. He can be a 12/7 guy easily. Very flexible on defense as well.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

                      Yea, I'm going to assume the people who overvalue Hill haven't watched too much of Atlanta. Jeff Teague is a huge upgrade over George Hill. If you don't believe it, Atlanta would not do / would not have done the deal without getting a lottery pick in return. George Hill for Jeff Teague is not a fair deal....that's why we need to be thanking Utah.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

                        Originally posted by Romsey31 View Post
                        Lol Hill sucked. You guys overrated this guy so much!
                        George Hill had way too many games where you didn't even realize he was out there. Too many games he was not effective. You're going to know Teague is out there every single game...just like you know PG is.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

                          Originally posted by I Love P View Post
                          Yea, I'm going to assume the people who overvalue Hill haven't watched too much of Atlanta. Jeff Teague is a huge upgrade over George Hill. If you don't believe it, Atlanta would not do / would not have done the deal without getting a lottery pick in return. George Hill for Jeff Teague is not a fair deal....that's why we need to be thanking Utah.
                          I been so bored with lack of NBA/Pacers so I have been watching a lot of Teague highlights (I get its highlights, aka good stuff)

                          To me the biggest difference with Teague is he puts sooo much more pressure on opposing defense's than Hill. not too many guards in the league can put stop Teague from getting into the paint
                          Sittin on top of the world!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

                            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                            Hmmm. Them's pretty strong words. Jeff Teague is not a dramatic upgrade over George Hill.
                            Maybe a bit strong, but I have a feeling that most non-biased NBA observers with no dog in the fight would consider Teague to be the better player. The Hill-Teague debate is far closer on this forum than anywhere else because biases creep in.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: NBA Sunday: The Pacers Might Be A Problem

                              Teague was an All Star on the best team in East just a season ago. He average 16 and 7 in their Eastern Confrence Finals playoff run.

                              From a pure proof of production standpoint, Teague is a dramatic upgrade over George Hill.
                              Last edited by freddielewis14; 07-17-2016, 07:48 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X