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 from the home opener...

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

  • #16
    Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

    Danny's taken 17 shots in the first two games, 8.5 FGA per game. If he can hit 4 shots a game (47%), including 1 three and get to the line 4 times a game, and hit 3, that would work out to 12 points per game, about what I expected. And thats in only 30.5 minutes per game. If he keeps up the same rate over 35 minutes per game, we're looking more around 14 per game, which coincidentally, is what Tayshaun Prince averaged last season.

    The key is to stop shooting 29% from the floor, 25% from downtown, and 63% from the line.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

      Originally posted by PacersFan83 View Post
      Granger has a long way to prove himself as a top-3 scoring option. Why rush him into it? If he suceeds in his current role and the team feels his offensive game can be taken to the next level, I'm sure they'll make it happen. Right now we need Danny to be focusing on defense, rebounding, and doing some of the dirty work.
      Since you seem to think he doesn't have that ability, there's no need to rush him into it. I happen to think he does. If you think his top end is to be a solid role player than it shouldn't bother you that the Pacers have Jackson, O'Neal and Harrington signed through the next 4 seasons.

      Or are you saying you think the best way to develop a top-25 player in the NBA is for him to spend his first 5 seasons as a 4th option, then suddenly explode on the scene as a primary scoring option at age 27?
      The poster formerly known as Rimfire

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

        Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
        Since you seem to think he doesn't have that ability, there's no need to rush him into it. I happen to think he does. If you think his top end is to be a solid role player than it shouldn't bother you that the Pacers have Jackson, O'Neal and Harrington signed through the next 4 seasons.

        Or are you saying you think the best way to develop a top-25 player in the NBA is for him to spend his first 5 seasons as a 4th option, then suddenly explode on the scene as a primary scoring option at age 27?
        No I do not. But I don't think it's neccesary to rush a sophomore into things either. I'd prefer they do it gradually. Let him be the 4th option to start, and if he handles it, start getting him a few more shots a game.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

          We can talk about the first teams offensive problems all we want, (and yes there are some problems there - many of us were afraid of those) but the biggest problem with the starters is their lack of effort, energy, and intensity. If that doesn't get corrected, then I don't really care about the offensive problems.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

            We looked really, really bad.

            As I was watching the game, I just couldn't help but wonder why Tins and Jax are STILL on the team. I mean, what the hell? Jax was decent, but Quisy is soon going to be outplaying him. And Tins, they don't even have to guard Tins. How is he going to run an offense when no one is within ten feet of him because they know he can't make a shot to save his life?

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

              There are a few things I don't quite understand:

              JO had 25 pts, on 11-19 shooting, 5 blocks, and "only" 6 rebounds and went 3-3 from the stripe, so he gets hammered here, needs to come of the bench to see what "big" Al can do, who accidentally had 7 rebounds, 4 pts on 1-9 shooting and 2-2 from the stripe and to give room to the hardworking SJax, who had 5 rebounds and 14 pts on 5 - 13 shooting and 2-2 from the stripe, and Danny, who had 3 rebonds, 10 pts on 3 - 7 shooting and 2-4 from the stripe.
              Next to that you want Sara to start who had 2 Ast and 5 pt on 1-8 shooting over Tinsley who had 2 Ast and 12 pts on 5-11 shooting.

              To top it all off we complete ignore that this is not the 40th game of the season, but the 2nd after anything but a "good" camp.
              (where the 2nd unit had favourable minutes because we had to decide who to drop).
              I do seriously wonder when people will be a bit more patient and will recognise that in JO we have one of the absolute premier players in this league and with Tins we have a serious chance of having one of the best PG's in the league adn Sara is not just one step behind on the depthchart, but two whole charts, in fact so far that Rick already promoted Darrel Armstrong to 2nd PG, which in itself says more then enough.

              Nobody harps on Al's production, nobody biatches about David playing 3 minutes in a game where he could've been used to contain Chandler even if only with his size and force, nobody harps on Sara's shooting, or Jax, those are all teething problems?

              Jax is the same Jax as last year, to many shots, to many threes and most bad selection.

              The coach considers the number of 3pt shots "good" when in their teens (i.e. 14 15 16 ) let me help you out here; we took 26 and 14 of those (with 11 misses) came from Jax and Sara, meaning the rest of the team took 12 3's and made 4 of them.

              I will go a long way saying Harrison should have played a hell of a lot more minutes, and Foster, well I will leave him out of the equasion as I like UB to much.(sorry, good game? 14 minutes 3 rebounds? that's about JO's avg over the game and he gets burned for it)


              Patience, a virtue, let's see if we can excercise it.
              So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

              If you've done 6 impossible things today?
              Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

                I agree. I love watching Tinsley play, I love his playmaking and passing, but the guys just too flawed. He still can't shoot, can't defend very well, and is turnover prone. Those three huge negatives pretty much nullify the positives he brings to the table.

                I wouldn't mind seeing Quis starting at PG, but then I question the starters ball handling ability not to mention we'd have 3 backup point guards and no backup shooting guard. I wish we could move either Saras or Jamaal for a solid backup SG.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

                  able if you want some complaining about Al's game, it is all over almost every other thread today. I gave him a D- for his performance last night.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

                    I know UB, was only ribbin you

                    I just don't get the gliding scale thing and the way ppl pick up on it, you can and should no measure with different sticks for different people.

                    Give this team a few weeks and JO will do as I predicted, i.e. 25 & 12 avg with 2-3 blocks per game and Tins will be averaging 8 or 9 Ast and 14 pts.
                    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

                      I can see the 25ppg, and the 2-3 blocks, but not the 12 boards. JO doesn't have that in him IMO.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

                        Depends on his minutes really. If he plays 36-37 minutes a game, 22/10/2.5 sounds about right. I know his rebounding has slipped a little over the past two seasons (partially due to lowered minutes and injury) but I'd be shocked if he didn't end up averaging 10 boards a game provided he plays 36 minutes.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

                          Originally posted by PacersFan83 View Post
                          No I do not. But I don't think it's neccesary to rush a sophomore into things either. I'd prefer they do it gradually. Let him be the 4th option to start, and if he handles it, start getting him a few more shots a game.
                          And your reasons for thinking that Jackson and Harrington will begin to defer to Granger are ....?
                          The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

                            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                            What does it say about the franchise player when the idea of BENCHING HIM comes up to IMPROVE the opening offense, and it's not responded to with only lots of laughter and "that should never happen!"?

                            I don't think this is O'Neal's fault, but I do think he doesn't fit in that well anymore. The more I think about finding the best 2-guard (or hell even a 1) we can find for him, the more I like it.
                            I wanna know what JO has done wrong offensively? Outside of a first half mired in foul trouble against Charlotte JO has been fantastic. He has not been a black hole by any stretch and on top of that he has his mid ranger jumper going and that is something that will benefit us in the long run.

                            I find it hilarious that the idea of benching a 5 time all star is even thought to be a somewhat good idea in favor of a second year player thats offensive game looks sketchy right now, a player in Al that doesn't look like he has any idea thats going on right now, and a one dimensional player that offers us little to no offense. Yeah we should definetely bench a 20 and 10 player in the favor of them that would certainly solve all our problems.


                            That or get us a one way ticket to lottery land...


                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

                              Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                              I'm firmly convinced Granger will be a McKey-type player and have been ever since you got Al which IMO was a huge mistake this offseason.

                              We know (or are pretty sure) that Granger won't look too hard for his shots and is willing to defer to the rest of the team. We also know that Al, JO & Jax DO look for their shots and won't defer to teammates.

                              Danny Granger just became the 4th option on the Pacers and he'll do what 4th options do - rarely look for his shot and only take one where he's wide open or the shot clock is running down.

                              IMO Granger has the potential to be a better offensive player than either Jackson or Harrington and one of the goals of the coaching staff had to be that by the end of this season he was your number one perimeter option.

                              With the Harrington - fan-pacification trade, Walsh & co turned Danny Granger from a possible all-star within 2 years to a role player.

                              Of course the other option is to trade Jackson which will give Danny more touches. Since I believe Granger has the potential to be a better player down the road I think that's a good move but management seems to feel differently.
                              Danny is still only what 23? Al is signed for only 4 years so even when his contract is up Danny will only be 27 and should still have some good years left in him. On top of that Danny is only in his second year and has already earned a starting job and has plenty of time to fix his deficiencies. I don't buy this whole getting Al ruined Danny's progression concept. If a player is going to be an all star they are still going to be an all star regardless of who they have to go through to get there.


                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Odd thoughts from the home opener...

                                I don't think people are saying bench him as much as the pieces aren't fitting yet.

                                Let me say this, I'm all for bringing DG off the bench, which I wasn't in the summer, but this concerns me. I'm a fan, I don't really get to make decisions. Carlise seems to be making this change pretty quick. If it works fine, but it's concerning to me that you change after 2 games. I'm for it, because I think it gives you a more traditional look, but is Carlise going to stop trying to run if that doesn't work if they lose to NY tonite? I think back to the Larry Brown days, when it was this line up and here is your subs, even when they struggled early in the season, guys started to understand their roles. Granted it was easy with that team cuz guys fit in neat little niches, but if Carlise really thought Granger was better off the bench then why not do it from the get go. Was the TPTB saying that AO, AL , and DG will be a formidible front line putting pressure on Carlise to go that way? Again, I think now, it's the right way to go, heck I picked DG to win 6th man of the year award, but it's just interesting to think 2 games is enough to change your mindset.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X