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

Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

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

  • #31
    Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

    Originally posted by Dat Dude View Post
    That was before I saw that the doctors let Jermaine play.
    That explains it.

    That was the last thing I read before I left for the game, and I found it surprising you would say such a thing since I had already read that JO would play.
    PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

      I thought he was playing against the Bulls, then they said no. I wasnt gonna get my hopes up again.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

        Originally posted by bnd45 View Post


        If some of the people on this board can get past all of the petty bull**** that they let bother them, then they can be REAL solid.
        FIXED!

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

          I really liked the combo of Sarunas (PG), Granger (SG), Shawne (SF), Maceo (PF), and Foster (C) they used at one stretch in the 4th quarter... long, lean, and good ball movement. It was fun to watch.

          I chugged a six pack in celebration so sorry in advance for any spelling mistakes.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

            Best performance by the Pacers this year, especially as a team. The team defense, the rotations and aggressive movement on PnRs was at a season high. Every single player was on track with the scheme. Outstanding hustle on transition defense. Several times they turned the Pistons away on breaks and forced them to set up instead.

            A lot less running, a lot better offense overall out of the half court. Lots of post work for Al and JO, good motion away from the ball when needed. Finally got to see that slog ball that people hate where JO would just wait out the defense and then hurt them for not doubling hard or kick out of it if they did.


            JO - same old, same old. He's pushing his numbers back toward that MVP season level.

            Tinsley - he's had a couple nice games but this was different. This was CLASSIC TINSLEY. Slinging passes ala Bryon Leftwich, working the behind the back when it was helpful for spacing, feeling the court, attacking when he caught guys getting lax or laying off.

            Best offensive play of the game IMO - Tins hard sling to JO right under the rim from way out on top. JO ended up having to go back up to get the bucket, but it's passes like that that me loving his half court ability.

            Jackson - finally found a little hot streak on the jump shot in the 3rd. He had a couple of misses inside you can't have and a few rough plays, but then he came right back and made a tough play. He makes those 2 inside buckets and doesn't get robbed on that foul no-call by Rip and he's got a strong night shooting and scoring (should have been 8-14 for 18 points). I think his offense is just about getting on track.

            Best defensive set IMO - ended with that Jackson block under the rim on Murray in the 4th right after the offensive play I mentioned above; before that all 5 guys had made strong rotations and displayed good team help defense. Great plays at both ends that ended up bringing the crowd to their feet shortly after that.

            Sarunas - this is the Saras you want. He was effective and in control running the 2nd unit offense. He's clearly the best transition offensive player and if the team is going to break it's better when he's involved.

            Team chemistry moment of the night - Saras makes a great pass to JO in the 4th for the layup and one. Cabbages shoots both arms in the air like they'd just won the game, and then he and JO high five, share some slaps and back patting and generally look really happy to be playing together. It's not the first time this has shown up, it's just that this moment was a perfect example of the growing and improving chemistry that we've seen all season.

            Foster - hustled his butt off, one of his better games this year. I've pointed out him getting beat coming back the other way, but tonight thanks to some help from teammates to turn back the initial break attacks most of the time Jeff was able to bust it and get back into plays, including that fantastic block on what looked to be a sure layup.

            Harrington - every now and then he is still showing lapses on defense, but it's getting there. What was remarkable about this game was the way he impacted it without really feeling like a ball dominate player. His post game carried the team in a few spots and overall another strong effort that like JO has become typical of him.

            Granger - saw some time on Rip tonight and was pretty solid. He still bit hard on a couple of fakes that he shouldn't have, and that's probably where he's been weakest on defense. He's not a stopper at this point, not like he appeared to be last year. No problem, that'll get better.

            On offense I've been saying that he's adjusted his game to mix inside with outside and since then he's been outstanding. He forced a couple of ugly jumpers but mostly he was dominate with the ball. I really think going to the bench helped expand his offensive game back to where it needs to be. To me he's looking a lot more like Pippen on offense than on defense so far (and shooting the 3 way better than Pippen every dreamed of).

            Shawne - showed poise yet again. He's in to stay unless he has a total breakdown. This will keep Rawle and Harrison from seeing minutes on normal nights (they will stay smaller rather than use Harrison). His only mistake was drifting too far from the ball when the Pistons started trapping in the 4th. Delfino would attack the ball hard and Shawne wouldn't make himself available to Tins for the return pass, so Jack was brought back in.

            Otherwise he looks good matched with Danny, a big (JO or Foster) and then a couple of guards.

            Baston - better off the bench, better when paired with Saras, better when a couple of starters stay out there with him. He's not starter-level talent or saavy, but he's a solid bench guy that can play against starters that stay on the court during rotations. How he was used tonight was perfect I think.

            DA - didn't get to do much, but you had to love his half court near miracle.


            Gotta credit RC on all of this, he moved Foster up and Granger to the bench and that really improved on-court chemistry. Granger's offense is better since then and the starters have had good starts in every game except the ones JO missed (IIRC).

            The other changed Rick has made is to make an effort to avoid all-bench moments during the game. He's staggered rotations more and seems to be finding the best match for those situations, such as Saras and a starting big going with Danny, Shawne and Jackson. Then as Jack and, say JO, rotate out you see it switch to a 2 PG set with Tins and Saras or other good chemistry matches.

            Rick has typically been more likely to run a full 10 deep with 5 man substitutions being common. That's changed noticeably in the last couple of weeks.


            They weren't going to win the CLE game, hitting the road while CLE spent 2 days off after their previous home game. The Chicago game was the crap situations, partly Jack of course, partly caution with JO, and then food poisoning (I heard Denari saying some of the staff got sick as well I think). At least those trips to Chicago are over unless they meet in the playoffs.

            Make this home stand pay off and everything will be looking good.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

              Originally posted by D23 View Post
              I really liked the combo of Sarunas (PG), Granger (SG), Shawne (SF), Maceo (PF), and Foster (C) they used at one stretch in the 4th quarter... long, lean, and good ball movement. It was fun to watch.
              This is the one lineup that I like to see run because I think Granger and Baston are strong finishers and Saras is clearly the best breakaway transition passer on the team. Shawne also appears to match Granger athletically and has looked comfortable running on offense and defense.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                Slinging passes ala Bryon Leftwich
                Nap, you did not go with the Fatty McButterpants reference, did you?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

                  This season more than any other in my memory - I'm confused by this Pacers team. There are times like tonight when I say, we might develope into a pretty good team, and then there are games when I think we might not ever win a game again. I cannot figure this team out. And my confusion isn't just about the team in general it is also about almost every player on the team - one minute I want to get rid of a guy and then the next game I don't.

                  I've been following the Pacers closely for 25 years and I don't ever remember feeling quite like this.

                  Friday night's game - I have no idea what will happen, the Knicks might win by 18 points or the Pacers might win by 18 points - I have no idea.


                  If someone told me the Pacers are going to win 32 games this season, I'd say - yes I can see that. If someone else told me they were going to win 52 games - I'd say - yes I can see that.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

                    Originally posted by IUColtPacerFan View Post
                    Nap, you did not go with the Fatty McButterpants reference, did you?

                    Well Tinsley was bringing some of his passes all the way back in full baseball pitcher windup much like old FMcB when he almost drags the ball on the turf before trying to throw it harder than a cross between Elway and Nolan Ryan.

                    It gives me dodgeball flashbacks.



                    Buck - I think we would have seen this effort in Chicago if JO, Jack and Al had played. Cleveland was a slow offensive start more than anything. Harrison came in and the team really tanked. Then it was over. And no JO.

                    To me I see real trends developing. Have the "normal 5 starters" had a slow start yet? I don't think they have, maybe I forgot one. Harrison is looking like a bust and probably is in danger of missing a lot of games at this point. Baston proved his way in, Shawne has too. Daniels has been off and on, not sure if he sat still ill or just out of the rotation. I think he could see some of Shawne or Jack's time normally, but not 20 mpg at this point. Rawle has been decent but clearly not a main bench guy and certainly not a starter.

                    Recall that before Granger hit the bench Rick first tried to work Jack from there which brought Daniels and then Rawle into starting roles. That didn't really work.

                    So you see them figuring things out just like many of us thought they would be. And you saw some tough road time. But I don't think we've seen letdown efforts from the full roster since things have started to come into shape, and even in the Chicago game the team hung tough.

                    Tins and Saras have both found their scoring and are both playing much better on offense than they were. JO and Al have found their spots.

                    Oh, and the team has backed way off the running game. I think they've found some identity and have just about stabilized the rotation. If they get jumped on by the Knicks I'll be sincerely shocked (barring another round of the flu or something).

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

                      Glad to see JO playing like his old self again. Tinsley has been a nice surprise of late. I still got Iverson on the brain though.
                      Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

                        I do wonder why Tins got the tech immediately for complaining about a foul but Rashweed was allowed to go on for a couple minutes with no call by the refs??
                        Dude was on the FT lane after the first make and STILL you could hear him say "Violet, I didn't push him, etc". He had 2-3 moments like this that were pushing it even with the tech calls being loosened back up.

                        Speaking of calls, how in the F did Jack not get the foul call on Rip? Tell me that's Wade or James and that's not called a foul. It was good to see Rick flipping out on the sideline. Of course he didn't get a tech call either which was surprising. He was pretty PO'd.

                        I hope TPTB are not that short sighted. We're not a contender, with AI we are.
                        Obviously I disagree. I think the Pacers are getting back to their core game, the half court offense, and finding the right rotations. They can score inside or out. Oh and I think Denari said it's been something like 24 games since the Pacers put triple digits up on Detroit (I looked and it goes back at least before the 02-03 season, the year RC was still in Detroit). If those teams were contenders and couldn't do that, then this team has to be.

                        They've got home wins over ORL, DET and CLE. They haven't played CHI in Indy yet. They won a game in ORL. If those aren't the contenders then I don't know who in the East is.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

                          the pacers really need to start granger over al. harrington just isn't as serviceable as he should/could be when he is in the lineup with sjax and jo. we have too many scorers starting for us and need another role/defensive player starting. al would instantly become one of the top 6th men, if he'd accept the role.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

                            Great all-around game tonight. Defensivly they played one of the best games they've played all year IMO. Gotta give props to JO and especially Tinsley, but tonight everyone that played deserves credit.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              This season more than any other in my memory - I'm confused by this Pacers team. There are times like tonight when I say, we might develope into a pretty good team, and then there are games when I think we might not ever win a game again. I cannot figure this team out. And my confusion isn't just about the team in general it is also about almost every player on the team - one minute I want to get rid of a guy and then the next game I don't.

                              I've been following the Pacers closely for 25 years and I don't ever remember feeling quite like this.

                              Friday night's game - I have no idea what will happen, the Knicks might win by 18 points or the Pacers might win by 18 points - I have no idea.


                              If someone told me the Pacers are going to win 32 games this season, I'd say - yes I can see that. If someone else told me they were going to win 52 games - I'd say - yes I can see that.

                              I am with you. Just remeber the Heat turned it on late for the NBA title, so did the Steelers for the SuperBowl, and the Cardinals for the world series. Goes to show that medocrity in the regular season does not mean a thing. And maybe as fans we need to be more patient. If we had the patience of Walsh we truly could be considered the best fan base in the NBA.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Post Game Thread: Why is it not suprising?

                                Rick -
                                “We couldn’t have won the game without him (Jermaine O’Neal). I was concerned about playing him long stretches. When you work as hard as he did last summer the conditioning holds over."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X