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

Odd thoughts about beating the Blazers.....

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

  • #61
    Re: Odd thoughts about beating the Blazers.....

    Originally posted by CableKC
    The current offense seems to be the "Best fit" for the current makeup and lineup of the team.

    Once everyone is back.......what would be the "Best fit" offense for that lineup?

    IMHO....it pretty much comes down to:

    Do we change the offense to fit the players?

    or

    Do we change the players to fit the offense?


    and based off of Carlisle's coaching history....even dating back to his Pistons' days......which does he tend to do?

    I think we can use last year as a template for this year (Past preformance is an indicator of future....). JO/JT return, we return to what we were doing, just like last year.
    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Odd thoughts about beating the Blazers.....

      I'm one of the biggest Carlisle fans on here, but if he scraps the revamped offense for a walk-it-up and pass in to Jermaine and let him do something offense, then we seriously need to consider a coaching change.

      i don't think that will happen.
      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Odd thoughts about beating the Blazers.....

        I get both sides of the Jermaine argument. He's awesome, but I don't want him screwing (or Carlisle screwing) up what we've got now with the post up offense. I think he would fit fine in the offense we have now, he would just have to take a smaller roll. He'd probably put up as good stats as he does now, and we would win, which is what he cares about anyway.

        Now I don't understand the Tinsley is useful argument. I get that he would be better than any of our pgs in this offense. But the operative word there is would. He's never going to stay healthy. There is no way that he makes it through an entire season. I love his game but I don't want him messing chemistry up like he does every season with his continuous coming and going.
        Play Mafia!
        Twitter

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Odd thoughts about beating the Blazers.....

          Originally posted by Peck
          As to Jamaal? Sorry, injury prone or not he just is not available enough for me to care anymore. I know he is almost impossible to move right now but over the summer it is time to do something else & no Saras is not the answer.

          Now before everybody has a seizure with me complaining about things after a three game win streak understand this. I know we are on a hot streak right now & as soon as teams get us scouted this may change again, who knows.
          I'm not the biggest Sarunas fan in the world but how can you say he isn't the answer after just half a season of adjusting to an NBA game and a brand new NBA system? I agree with everything else in your post but this..Maybe 2 years down the road from now, I might agree..But I think Sarunas is playing great right now. I think he's a much better fast break PG then AJ but AJ is a much better half court player. There is no doubt in my mind Sarunas could easily be a starting PG a year from now on a run and gun team out west.

          And the play of Jamal Tinsley will be our key to a championship this year. AJ has been great every now and then but he's as streaky as Jackson is in terms of how he runs the offense..One game he can be great and then the very next he can completely blow a lead in a matter of 5 minutes.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Odd thoughts about beating the Blazers.....

            I think the funniest thing about this whole thread is that some of us are in denial. We all said last year that when O'Neal comes back we can't stop this "share the ball game." And that is exactly what we did.

            Every game this year with O'neal has basically been the same thing. I'm hopeful we will change, but why would Rick turn over a new leaf when we see what would appear to be obvious?

            And what I think it boils down to is control. Rick likes the dump it in offense b/c he feels he can expolit his best chess piece, Jermaine O'neal, against the other team. And more often than not he is going to have an advantage. He views this as "safe."

            If you listened to his news confererence he kept talking about the pros and cons of a looser offense. More fun to watch, more opportunities on offense, but it also brings with it the tendency to get a little too loosey goosey out there. Those weren't his exact words , but he was worried that if the open offense is undisciplined it has some opportunities to burn you if you don't get back on the defensive end.

            Rick is conservative. He goes with vets. He goes with defense. And when he can, he always has and probably will continue to dump it into the post. I've not seen anything that would make me think differently.
            “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
            motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
            Reggie Miller

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Odd thoughts about beating the Blazers.....

              Okay....let's broaden our minds.....is it possible to run a dynamic offense like this ( Old Vs. New )....based purely off of matchups against the opposing team?

              For example, wouldn't it be better to use the "low-post....dump it to JONeal" type offense against teams that have a very small frontlne and very bad low-post defenders ( like NJ or GSW ).....then use a different type of offense ( like the current one that includes a lesser used low-post threat with JONeal playing Foster's role ) against teams that has a bigger and more troublesome Frontline ( like against the Spurs, Pistons or even the Clippers )?

              Realistically...I see benefits to both type of offenses. If JONeal is being guarded by Troy Murphy in a game ( a very poor low-post defender ) and JONeal is abusing him.....I would want to get him the ball as much as possible. But if JONeal is being defended by Duncan....I may not want to get the ball to him as often.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Odd thoughts about beating the Blazers.....

                Originally posted by brichard
                Rick is conservative. He goes with vets. He goes with defense. And when he can, he always has and probably will continue to dump it into the post. I've not seen anything that would make me think differently.
                It was totally out of character then for him to insert Granger and Harrison into the lineup for the last 3-4 minutes against Detroit. I would have thought he'd play it safe and go with Jeff and/or Scot.

                That gives me hope that he can change his thinking if solid facts (like great play and wins) are staring him in the face.
                The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Odd thoughts about beating the Blazers.....

                  Originally posted by CableKC
                  Okay....let's broaden our minds.....is it possible to run a dynamic offense like this ( Old Vs. New )....based purely off of matchups against the opposing team?

                  For example, wouldn't it be better to use the "low-post....dump it to JONeal" type offense against teams that have a very small frontlne and very bad low-post defenders ( like NJ or GSW ).....then use a different type of offense ( like the current one that includes a lesser used low-post threat with JONeal playing Foster's role ) against teams that has a bigger and more troublesome Frontline ( like against the Spurs, Pistons or even the Clippers )?

                  Realistically...I see benefits to both type of offenses. If JONeal is being guarded by Troy Murphy in a game ( a very poor low-post defender ) and JONeal is abusing him.....I would want to get him the ball as much as possible. But if JONeal is being defended by Duncan....I may not want to get the ball to him as often.
                  OK. Now I've had it. Your using logic and logic simply has no place on this board..


                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Odd thoughts about beating the Blazers.....

                    Originally posted by hoopsforlife
                    OK. Now I've had it. Your using logic and logic simply has no place on this board..
                    It just dawned on me after I read birchard's post. It maybe possible.....but I don't know if its a good idea to switch up the type of offense ON PURPOSE ( as opposed to being forced to switch up the offense due to injuries ) on a regular basis.

                    I would think that some semblance of consistency....which none of the starting lineup / bench has experienced in the last 3 seasons....would be a benefit. But you guys know more about basketball fundamentals then I do...I simply don't know if its a good idea to do that from a coaching / lineup perspecitive.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Odd thoughts about beating the Blazers.....

                      Originally posted by CableKC
                      It just dawned on me after I read birchard's post. It maybe possible.....but I don't know if its a good idea to switch up the type of offense ON PURPOSE ( as opposed to being forced to switch up the offense due to injuries ) on a regular basis.

                      I would think that some semblance of consistency....which none of the starting lineup / bench has experienced in the last 3 seasons....would be a benefit. But you guys know more about basketball fundamentals then I do...I simply don't know if its a good idea to do that from a coaching / lineup perspecitive.
                      I personally would like to see Rick go with what is working. I like the way the Pacers have been playing the last few games. I still believe Ron would have been very valuable in this type of offense we run now. But Carlisle seemed to like the Tins to JO set more and just wouldn't open it up until he was forced into it by injuries to both JO and JT. At least now we know what this team is capable of and what to expect out of it in the future. The addition of Peja has been a good thing because of his shooting ability. Teams simply cannot sag inside like before because he will burn them. Peja is not too proud to pass the ball if he sees someone with a better shot.

                      This could turn out to be good year yet if JO and JT can become more team oriented. IF its Ricks fault that they go back to the old style of Dump Shoot Miss or Drive Turnover then Rick should be replaced. I like Carlisle as a coach but enough is enough already.

                      PS: There is still time to make a trade yet and I would be in favor of a two for one somewhere with filler. I still don't see how Austin is going to fit into this scheme now. We have too many good players and not enough minutes for them all. I honestly don't know who I would replace with who or what position to fill. We, when healthy are DEEP. Too deep but thats not a bad thing. I could see trading some top tier talent for picks in the draft at this point.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Odd thoughts about beating the Blazers.....

                        Regarding Tinsley, there is no further legit defense for him. Either you can stay healthy enough to play in the NBA or not. In his case, the answer seems to obviously be NOT.

                        When Tins plays, he does good things. But he does not play enough. And I 100% support those who feel that he should be forced to earn back his starting spot. I almost wonder at times if he isn't dogging it a bit in the regular season b/c in the postseason, he inevitably comes back at a certain point and plays through the pain.

                        Very torn in the issue of Jermaine and I have many thoughts which for the time being, I'll keep to myself and release once I've had a proper chance to see how things play out. But I do not hold a negative opinion of JO.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X