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

Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

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

  • #46
    Re: Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

    Originally posted by PR07 View Post
    So Paul has consistently led team that have won? He should've led opposing teams that lost instead?
    Like I said at the beginning of this exchange, Reggie Miller started with less talent around him. Paul had years where he had a very good team. He's complaining because he doesn't have a team good enough to contend. But he had one for several years that was contending. Fact. At the age of 26, Miller's teams were no where close to that.

    What we have here is a situation that he doesn't have patience, something typical for his "right here, right now" age group.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      Like I said at the beginning of this exchange, Reggie Miller started with less talent around him. Paul had years where he had a very good team. He's complaining because he doesn't have a team good enough to contend. But he had one for several years that was contending. Fact. At the age of 26, Miller's teams were no where close to that.

      What we have here is a situation that he doesn't have patience, something typical for his "right here, right now" age group.

      Reggie also played in an era, where most stars stayed on their original teams. It was only when Shaq joined Kobe that we started seeing 'super teams form' later in his career. That's no longer the case. It's hard to win now because you have two dream teams and everyone else is a clear level below.

      In your argument, Paul George loses either way. He can't help whether his team has more talent, and the fact that he's won with talent means he's a failure? Yes, he's complaining that he doesn't have enough because no one does unless you're the Cavs or Warriors.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

        Originally posted by PR07 View Post
        It's amazing how quickly some people will turn on a player when he's playing on a team that's currently starting Lavoy Allen and Kevin Seraphin at PF, has essentially 3 good players around him in Teague, Turner, and Thad Young, and then a bunch of spare parts--including two high paid ball dominant guards (Ellis, Stuckey) who can't shoot in a league that now requires it.

        Paul George isn't playing well, but on the Pacers list of problems, he's not anywhere near the top of the list.
        I'm not turning on him, because of his performance and team record. I'm turning on him, because of his damn attitude. No one wants to keep hearing how "bad" the team is from their "leader", and how good the previous teams were. Especially considering how many poor games he had himself.

        If he demonstrated leadership qualities on the court instead crying to the refs for fouls, then I would give him a past on his comments. If I was his teammate, I would have been blew up on him. His statements makes you want to revisit the "selfish dudes" comments from Hibbert.

        Ask for a damn trade, and stop blowing bs in our faces.


        Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

          Originally posted by BillS View Post
          Or we'll trade him for a roleplayer and draft picks that don't turn out to be superstars, because Bird is a moron.
          Or we'll trade him for a decent player but PG will blow up and fulfill his superstardom, because Bird is a moron.
          Or we'll re-sign him and he'll play pretty well but not be a Westbrook or LeBron, because Bird is a moron.

          I suspect this is an "all lose" proposition, because the chances of getting something better than Paul for Paul are pretty damn slim.
          I think this is just such a terrible mentality to have. People are way too hung up on the fact that we won't find a better player than Paul George.

          This is certainly possible. But I think a top 3 draft pick this year absolutely could be as good of a player as Paul George....or maybe not, either way all that is irrelevant.

          Why is it irrelevant? Because while the chances of us getting a player better than Paul George might be pretty slim, they are much, much higher than the odds of us winning a Championship with Paul George.

          Its not Paul George's fault. Its Larry Bird's. But this is a team that is absolutely no where near being a competitive team. We aren't a team that can get out of the first round right now, how the hell do you expect us to become contenders? Nearly every single one of our players are either already in their prime, exiting their prime, or past their prime. Our entire teams hopes literally rest solely on Myles Turner becoming a DOMINANT player next season...and while that may make us better next season, we still won't be remotely close to competing for a Championship.

          So, we can sit here all day long and talk about not finding a player better than Paul George. But who the **** cares how good Paul George is when we have 0% chance to win. 0. Literally, we aren't winning. It doesn't matter how good he is when we have a losing situation around him. Even worse, because we keep trading our first round picks or not resigning them, we have no value outside of Turner to even bring in the help Paul George would need.

          Teams are not built overnight. They take time. We are probably 3 GOOD players away from being a contender, yet, we have no way to acquire those players. We are in a situation where it is impossible to make this team a contender within the next 3 seasons and even then we would need A LOT of luck. Is Paul George going to wait that long and hope for best case scenario with a President that shares a different vision than him? I highly doubt it. He has had one foot out the door all season, you can hear it in his comments and see it on the floor. The dude is leaving. I mean, in these situations you have to pay attention to the warning signs, and they are all there. And again, on the off chance he doesn't leave, we still aren't winning with him.

          The worst part of all of this, is when PG does leave in FA, all of a sudden we will be putting Turner in a **** situation, because, we are going to have a bunch of 30 year olds who aren't great, and Myles Turner with absolutely no youth to grow up with him. If we put all of our eggs in this broken Paul George basket, we are just going to waste Turner's prime as well.

          Again, I don't think any of this is Paul George's fault. But its just the situation we have now.
          Last edited by Dr. Awesome; 02-17-2017, 10:51 PM.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

            Originally posted by TinManJoshua View Post


            In case ya'll needed to know what a 200 million dollar player doesn't look like.
            You can watch that same video to see what a first round exit looks like.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
              Who doesn't want to play for a winner? If I were him, I wouldn't sign an extension and put the pressure on Bird to build a winner.
              But he can't.

              We have no assets to trade outside of Turner.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

                Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                But he can't.

                We have no assets to trade outside of Turner.
                True. We don't have assets and it will take a number of sharp moves to turn it around. Bird isn't delivering and putting more pressure on him isn't going to change that. Paul knows that and will be walking soon.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

                  Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                  True. We don't have assets and it will take a number of sharp moves to turn it around. Bird isn't delivering and putting more pressure on him isn't going to change that. Paul knows that and will be walking soon.
                  Its not that it would even take sharp moves. It literally cannot happen. Turner is the only valuable player we have. Teague has value too, but what would we trade him for? We aren't getting a better player.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

                    Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                    But he can't.

                    We have no assets to trade outside of Turner.
                    They are really banking on our first round pick being better than a B asset.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

                      FWIW I think the Vogel era teams that challenged the Cavs were probably less talented than the current team, or at least the talent level is arguable.

                      What we had going for us was synergy and fit, and sadly those things seem to be lacking on the Pacers right now.

                      Can we get lucky again and catch another wave? Perhaps. But IMO we need changes, a lot of changes, since the current iteration doesn't seem to be working at all.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

                        The part about that has a chance to win a championship kind of scares me because ownership is not going to go into the LT to get us over the top with another star. If you look at the last how ever many championship teams most of them have had a much higher payroll than the Pacers are ever ready to entertain. Durant saw that the Thunder were unwilling to go to that next level so he left had they kept Hardin and gone into the LT to keep all three of those guys they would absolutely been contenders but they were unwilling to spend the money and thats the case here too.

                        Heck I cant believe I did not figure this out when they let Brad Miller go over not getting into the LT. They had one of if not the best passing big man in all of basketball who could bother the most dominant center of his day to the point of him taking a swing at Brad and we tossed it aside for a broken down Scott Pollard to save 1 million dollars. I just do not see in the modern NBA making it to a title without a higher payroll, teams are willing to spend to have three big stars.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

                          Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
                          The part about that has a chance to win a championship kind of scares me because ownership is not going to go into the LT to get us over the top with another star. If you look at the last how ever many championship teams most of them have had a much higher payroll than the Pacers are ever ready to entertain. Durant saw that the Thunder were unwilling to go to that next level so he left had they kept Hardin and gone into the LT to keep all three of those guys they would absolutely been contenders but they were unwilling to spend the money and thats the case here too.

                          Heck I cant believe I did not figure this out when they let Brad Miller go over not getting into the LT. They had one of if not the best passing big man in all of basketball who could bother the most dominant center of his day to the point of him taking a swing at Brad and we tossed it aside for a broken down Scott Pollard to save 1 million dollars. I just do not see in the modern NBA making it to a title without a higher payroll, teams are willing to spend to have three big stars.

                          I have no problem with calling teague, PG and Turner our big 3. Problem is outside of that what do we have? The team is missing 3 important players that would put us into contention. We need a 3 and D SG for the starting line-up. A rebounding PF for the starting line-up and a rebounding C for the second unit. These guys don't have to be superstars, just good at what they do.

                          Still would have been nice if Ellis was the one dealt for Teague.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

                            I'm sorry is it PGs fault that we lost three of our four best defenders last year? Is it his fault that Frank was fired for a new voice that happened to be a voice on the team for two years? Is it Paul's fault that we loaded up on combo guards that can't shoot, can't defend, and can't stay healthy? I'm surprised he hasn't said more. It's easy for us to say," shut your mouth and play basketball". But Paul worked his tail off to get back. And now he is stuck with this.

                            All I ask is for Herb, Bird, Nate, and Pritchard to get this team back to where we don't have to hear neutered comments from our superstar.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

                              Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                              I'm sorry is it PGs fault that we lost three of our four best defenders last year? Is it his fault that Frank was fired for a new voice that happened to be a voice on the team for two years? Is it Paul's fault that we loaded up on combo guards that can't shoot, can't defend, and can't stay healthy? I'm surprised he hasn't said more. It's easy for us to say," shut your mouth and play basketball". But Paul worked his tail off to get back. And now he is stuck with this.

                              All I ask is for Herb, Bird, Nate, and Pritchard to get this team back to where we don't have to hear neutered comments from our superstar.
                              Where my mindset is at is that Paul is not THAT good as someone stated earlier. He's talented, but I don't believe he gives 100% all the time to the point where he can/should be calling out management or his teammates.

                              I forgot what game it was, but I was extremely upset when he gave up on the play when the ball was tipped from behind as he was about to start a fastbreak. That was an EFFORT play that he could have salvaged, but didn't even attempt to.


                              Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Paul George on extension: 'I want to play on a winning team' (Indystar)

                                None of this is the least bit surprising to me. While he hasn't said much to the press on this topic, his body language and performance on the court speaks it almost every game. He's simply not all in like you need a leader to be. I still have hope that he figures it out (what leadership truly is), but it's obviously discouraging to read this.

                                What he continues to not realize is that getting the best out of his teammates and encouraging good players to consider Indy is at least partly on his shoulders. You didn't see Oladipo crying when he got traded to OKC, right? That's because they have a dedicated leader there who is doing his all to will his team to win.

                                Wake up Paul. It's right there in front of you. Get out of your own way.

                                In a strange irony, I actually believe that Turner understands this better than Paul does. Wonder what's going through his mind reading what PG has to say?


                                Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
                                Last edited by docpaul; 02-18-2017, 10:26 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X