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

Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

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

  • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

    Originally posted by Ichi View Post
    I guess nobody else saw Thad doing as well as anyone switching onto LeBron during the playoffs, and shooting extremely well before the injury? I am so tired of how much he gets dragged around here, I thought he was our 2nd or 3rd best player when healthy.
    Thad shot well above his norm but was trending back toward his mean as the season progressed. Once his wrist was injured, his shooting went to hell.

    He's a fine role player and does some nice things. But he's not a long term or even a short term answer. Especially on a team that is going to be mediocre at best.

    Hes been a starter on losing teams for most of his career, so I guess it wouldn't be any different from his POV. But I'd imagine he would rather be a 6th man on a winning team at this point in his career (role best served for him IMO).

    Make no mistake about it, he does some nice things and brings very good versatility. But the fact that he was one of our better players last year shows how disappointing we were as a whole imo
    Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 07-08-2017, 10:37 AM.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
      Thad shot well above his norm but was trending back toward his mean as the season progressed. Once his wrist was injured, his shooting went to hell.

      He's a fine role player and does some nice things. But he's not a long term or even a short term answer. Especially on a team that is going to be mediocre at best.

      Hes been a starter on losing teams for most of his career, so I guess it wouldn't be any different from his POV. But I'd imagine he would rather be a 6th man on a winning team at this point in his career (role best served for him IMO).

      Make no mistake about it, he does some nice things and brings very good versatility. But the fact that he was one of our better players last year shows how disappointing we were as a whole imo
      Disagree, and that reads like straight up hating tbh. It's lazy to assume that because he put up good numbers on a bad team that him playing well on a good team (then falling off after injury) means that he's the typical "good guy on bad team, bench player on decent team" player.

      The man put in work on his 3 pt shot. If you think it was mere luck then you didn't watch the games. His form was much improved. His defense was better than advertised. He played very unselfishly. By all accounts he should be a PD favorite, but instead he was a whipping boy for some reason. He should have taken more time to heal his hand injury, but he toughed it out and gave whatever (little) he had for the team. That's the kind of TOUGHNESS you see delusional posters here pretend that Danny Granger showed. It's the kind of toughness people say they want from players.

      You saying his stats falling off was mere regression to mean and NOT a direct result of injury, again, just proves that you either didn't watch the games or you're straight up lying. Dude couldn't use his left hand at all in some games, not even for wide open layups or dribbling. He was shooting airballs because of lack of flex/strength. This was 100% obvious, not even debatable. Thad was our swiss army knife, he's a good player who stepped up knowing he was on what should have been a good team. The Pacers probably won't keep him, but not for lack of production or professionalism.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

        Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
        sional posters here pretend that Danny Granger showed. It's the kind of toughness people say they want from players.

        You saying his stats falling off was mere regression to mean and NOT a direct result of injury, again, just proves that you either didn't watch the games or you're straight up lying. Dude couldn't use his left hand at all in some games, not even for wide open layups or dribbling. He was shooting airballs because of lack of flex/strength. This was 100% obvious, not even debatable. Thad was our swiss army knife, he's a good player who stepped up knowing he was on what should have been a good team. The Pacers probably won't keep him, but not for lack of production or professionalism.
        Thaddeus Young is a career 32% shooter from the three point line. Over the first two months of the season, he was well over 40% IIRC. There were people talking at the time that Thad couldn't sustain it, and that he was going to regress back to the mean at least somewhat. He was heading that way and then the wrist injury happened and obviously it was a huge factor. He essentially stopped shooting threes after the wrist injury.

        On the plus side of the statistical outliers, Thad shot 53% from the free throw line. I believe it was hovering around 60% before the wrist injury, but man after he hurt his wrist he really, really struggled at the line. He's a career 67% FT shooter, but for whatever reason that has been trending down the past five seasons or so.

        My biggest complaints with Thad is that he's a bad fit next to Myles, because they are both pretty soft, and push comes to shove, I'm picking Myles over Thad. My biggest complaint about this board's opinion of Thad is that he is a good shooter. He's not a bad shooter, but he's not a stretch guy or someone who will punish teams that leave him open. He's a crafty, efficient scorer though.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

          What teams are clearly worse than the pacers right now, and why?
          Lifelong pacers fan

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

            Originally posted by pacers_heath View Post
            What teams are clearly worse than the pacers right now, and why?
            Brooklyn, Phoenix, Lakers, Atlanta, New York, because they suck. Arguments can be made for a few others imo.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

              Originally posted by pacers_heath View Post
              What teams are clearly worse than the pacers right now, and why?
              Orlando, why?



              This guy
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                Brooklyn, Phoenix, Lakers, Atlanta, New York, because they suck. Arguments can be made for a few others imo.
                Man, thats only 5 teams
                Lifelong pacers fan

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

                  Originally posted by pacers_heath View Post
                  Man, thats only 5 teams
                  Forgot about Orlando. They're a wreck.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    Orlando, why?



                    This guy
                    How vnzla decides who he roots for: Do other people like this person? If so, crusade against them.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

                      I feel like the lakers might be better.
                      Lifelong pacers fan

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

                        Originally posted by cdash View Post
                        How vnzla decides who he roots for: Do other people like this person? If so, crusade against them.
                        Hey he didn't prove me wrong last year did he?
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

                          Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                          I actually spent the time to look it up and one thing is for sure and that's neither of these guys are in late in games very much but when they are CJ is by far the worse shooter. Like 22% bad with 5 minutes left and the score is close. This could anothe reason why CJ is seen as inconsistent.
                          How'd you come up with like 22%? NBA.com has these clutch stats, which I believe are defined as- during the 4th quarter or overtime, with less than five minutes remaining, and neither team ahead by more than five points.

                          C.J.'s clutch stats
                          28 GP
                          84 MIN
                          7/21 (33.3%) FG
                          1/2 (50%) 2P
                          6/19 (31.6%) 3P

                          Bojan's clutch stats
                          36 GP
                          87 MIN
                          15/34 (44.1%) FG
                          6/10 (60%) 2P
                          9/24 (37.5%) 3P

                          I agree that C.J. comes up short in pressure situations including the playoffs, but frankly I don't really care that much. He shouldn't be in the game in crunch time to begin with, and we shouldn't be that concerned about the playoffs right now anyway!
                          Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                          Now looking at the shot chart what is apparent is that Bojan took more above the break 3's than CJ and less corner 3's. So essentially Bojan took something like 35ish less corner 3's and 20 more lower percentage 3's above the break.
                          Even though Bojan's overall percentage was slightly hurt by taking more above the break 3's and less corner 3's, C.J. still outperformed him regardless, shooting better percentages from both areas. According to NBA.com, C.J. shot 66/130 50.8% from the corners and 99/274 36.1% above the break, compared to 41/95 43.2% and 102/296 34.5% for Bojan.
                          Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                          My bet is that when he started for BKN that he was left to create more on offense and not just camp on the corner for spacing for the Wizards.
                          As far as catch and shoot vs. creating, C.J. yet again outperformed Bojan. C.J. shot 42.6% on catch and shot 3's and 32.6% on non catch and shot 3's, compared to Bojan at 39.0% and 30.5%.
                          Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                          Oladipo is a bad shooter off the dribble, but I actually think he's like a top 15 or 20 guy in catch and shoot situations last year. People are gonna be surprised by Vic if we don't make him shoot his 3's off the bounce.
                          Oladipo shot 37.1% on catch and shoot 3's last year, not even close to top 15-20.
                          Did you know Antonio and Dale aren’t actually brothers?

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            Hey he didn't prove me wrong last year did he?
                            In his defense, he had a roster that made no sense positionally from the get-go. Too many big men. Not enough guards.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

                              Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                              In his defense, he had a roster that made no sense positionally from the get-go. Too many big men. Not enough guards.
                              True but he also started DJ Augustin a lot and nobody is going to win many games starting that guy.


                              Now to Vogel's credit (like Spo) he threw away the **** coaching book he had and decided to play his guys how they were supposed to be playing since the beginning (small ball up tempo) and they looked better, now lets see if he sticks to that or goes back to "smashmouth this is the only **** I can coach basketball".
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers Sign Bojan Bogdanovic 2 Years $21 million

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                Hey he didn't prove me wrong last year did he?
                                No. He just proved you wrong the 5 and a half seasons he was our head coach. Over and over again. He proved you wrong every time you underestimated our ECF teams. He proved you wrong every time you underestimated the importance of chemistry. Heck, he even proved your love of Monta wrong. Or was Monta himself that did that?
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X