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

07-08 starting lineup

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

  • #16
    Re: 07-08 starting lineup

    [quote=Peck;580786]If your asking who we think will start I will say this.

    Tinsley
    Dunleavy
    Granger
    O'Neal
    Murphy

    If your asking me who I would want to start?

    Diener
    Dunleavy
    Granger
    Williams
    Diogu[
    /quote]
    I'd be shocked if this line-up beat any team in the NBA, let alone got to .500. You've got only three guys playing out of position here and only one who has shown any kind of defensive consistency. Please tell me that you just want Eric Gordon that badly. Please tell me that's the reason for this magical lineup.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: 07-08 starting lineup

      I really have no idea - I really don't. I'll let you know in about 60 days

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: 07-08 starting lineup

        PG: Tinsley
        SG: Rush
        SF: Granger
        PF: Murphy
        C: Oneal

        This seems to make the most sense in Obriens system, You have two players who specialize in three pointers on the floor and one who can probably hit them when he needs to (granger). Oneal in the middle as the post player.
        "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

        - ilive4sports

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: 07-08 starting lineup

          Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
          PG: Tinsley
          SG: Rush
          SF: Granger
          PF: Murphy
          C: Oneal

          This seems to make the most sense in Obriens system, You have two players who specialize in three pointers on the floor and one who can probably hit them when he needs to (granger). Oneal in the middle as the post player.
          If that truly is the starting lineup. Maybe I'll just not watch the first 6 or 7 minutes of each half because I'll be begging the reserves to come in

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: 07-08 starting lineup

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            If your asking who we think will start I will say this.

            Tinsley
            Dunleavy
            Granger
            O'Neal
            Murphy

            If your asking me who I would want to start?

            Diener
            Dunleavy
            Granger
            Williams
            Diogu
            So then, I take it you're already on the tank wagon?
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: 07-08 starting lineup

              I think the rotation will look like this:

              G - Tinsley, Rush, Daniels
              F - Dunleavy, Granger, Murphy
              C - O'Neal, Diogu
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: 07-08 starting lineup

                Originally posted by Jay View Post
                I think the rotation will look like this:

                G - Tinsley, Rush, Daniels
                F - Dunleavy, Granger, Murphy
                C - O'Neal, Diogu
                I know you must just keep forgetting, or maybe your keyboard simply can't type the word FOSTER, but Jeff is still on the team.

                Actually, I tend to agree with you to some extent, as I said at the forum party a week ago, I think jeff will get fewer minutes under O'Brien - simply because Jeff, Ike and JO will be playing center only and OB will never have two of those three on the court at the same time. He wants an outside shooter at power forward.

                Although Jeff usually finds a way to get minutes, somehow

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: 07-08 starting lineup

                  PG - Tinsley
                  SG - Daniels
                  SF - Williams
                  PF - Granger
                  C - O'Neal

                  This will get the game started. Our guys will start by getting to the basket and this also gives us a quick defensive unit. Then the reserves can come in and bomb away as they please. It's hard to say though. This is the first time I looked at the team as it is and projected the starters. After looking at it, I'm pretty happy with a lot of the players we have as long as they can gel on the court. The question is, have we gotten that guy that will speak up and lead (besides J.O.)? The knock on the team from Carlisle is that they were all too quiet. They all got along and had good chemistry, but there was little emotion. Who's bringing the emotion? Have we addressed that issue yet?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: 07-08 starting lineup

                    I hadn't thought about that before: Make Danny a 4 again.

                    Tinsley
                    Rush
                    Dunleavy
                    Granger
                    O'Neal

                    3 shooting threats, Dunleavy at his natural position. I kind of like it, though I'd worry about post D. Although with Danny and JO that's smaller, but two guys who can block shots and I think Danny will look better defensively close to the basket (as opposed to chasing people around outside), while I'd worry about posting him up (he is a pretty tough guy though and he looked good as a 4 as a rookie).

                    I dunno. I kind of like it, but I need to see it work defensively.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: 07-08 starting lineup

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      I know you must just keep forgetting, or maybe your keyboard simply can't type the word FOSTER, but Jeff is still on the team.
                      I don't know who he is.

                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: 07-08 starting lineup

                        Originally posted by Mal View Post
                        I hadn't thought about that before: Make Danny a 4 again.
                        I think we're slowly but surely moving away from the 1-2-3-4-5 lineup where 2 and 3 might be interchangeable and 4 and 5 might be interchangeable and moving toward a G-G-F-F-C lineup.

                        From JO'B's description, JO is absolutely a "C".

                        Granger and Dunleavy should make a good pair of forwards, Murphy can back up either of them (and so can Shawne, if he's ready for a regular role.)
                        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                        And life itself, rushing over me
                        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: 07-08 starting lineup

                          Originally posted by rommie View Post
                          PG: Tinsley
                          SG: Rush
                          SF: Granger
                          PF: O'Neal
                          C: Murphy
                          6th Man: Dunleavy

                          Here is my thing, we signed two very good shooters in Rush and Diener which we do need. But if we don't play em then why sign them? We need Rush's shooting in the starting lineup because without him all we have is Murphy as far as shooters go and this is assuming we start him and not Foster.

                          Dunleavy may or may not do well as the 6th man IDK for sure. I'd try him there though. Hopefully he would excel there.
                          I really do not like a backcourt of Tinsley and Rush at all. Defensively that may be the worst backcourt of all time. I understand what you are saying, we brought guys in who can shoot so we need to find ways to play them but I just don't see any great options in the backcourt.

                          i do like the idea of Dunlevy coming off the bench being the 6th man I would like to see him utilized as a primary ball hander/point forward type.
                          Last edited by mike_D; 07-24-2007, 01:15 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: 07-08 starting lineup

                            Originally posted by Mal View Post
                            I hadn't thought about that before: Make Danny a 4 again.

                            Tinsley
                            Rush
                            Dunleavy
                            Granger
                            O'Neal

                            3 shooting threats, Dunleavy at his natural position. I kind of like it, though I'd worry about post D. Although with Danny and JO that's smaller, but two guys who can block shots and I think Danny will look better defensively close to the basket (as opposed to chasing people around outside), while I'd worry about posting him up (he is a pretty tough guy though and he looked good as a 4 as a rookie).

                            I dunno. I kind of like it, but I need to see it work defensively.

                            This is interesting, Ive heard Obrien pretty much considers the 3 and 4 interchangeable. I would rather see dun starting than troy honestly, cause his all around game is better, though I am hoping he has improved his three point shot.

                            Tinsley/Deiner
                            Rush/Daniels
                            Dunleavy/Williams
                            Granger/Murphy
                            Oneal/Diogu

                            With your gaurds you have a shooter and a "drive to the basket" guy with both your 1st and 2nd unit (of course, tinsley has to finish for that to work). And a bunch of forwards that can (hopefully) hit threes from outside.

                            It seems like the 2nd unit is in trouble defensivly with diogu at center, I would say a taller guy like murphy could help in this situation but his D kinda sucks... Hopefully Harter can work some miracles.
                            "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                            - ilive4sports

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: 07-08 starting lineup

                              I think it'll start of pretty much like last year

                              Tins
                              Dun Dun
                              Granger
                              JO
                              Murph

                              I think our bench is already better then last year. I like Diener more then ANY backup PG we had last year. We all know what a healthy Quis is capable of. Shawne has another year under his belt. Feisty is feisty. We should see what Ike can do. Rush is better then a lot of you think.

                              That's 6 guys off the bench right there I'm usually happy with a consistent 10 man rotation, throw in the extra guy and that's a solid core to me. I expect our defense to be better, as well as our offense. I see some pretty good things for us next year. Not great, but good.. which I can deal with as long as we continue to improve!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: 07-08 starting lineup

                                Originally posted by Peck View Post
                                Yes
                                To each his own I suppose.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X