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:
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

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

Preseason Game #1 Pacers vs Rockets

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    I really hope that Sumner sticks with the Team and that he's able to get some minutes as Joe Young's replacement in the lineup. I was really impressed by his aggressiveness on the offensive end.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.


    • #77
      Couple questions for those who watched the game:

      #1: Did Turner and Sabonis see the floor together at all tonight?
      #2: Any reason that Myles didn't get any 3's up?

      From the highlights I saw looks like Sabonis has worked on his right hand which is awesome & was playing some nice defense. I think he will be the better overall player out of him and Turner.


      • #78
        Many thought Sumner was a lottery level talent before the knee injury. Kid could always play and has a great combo of ball skills, size, length and athleticism. Hopefully this is one of those situations where the cards fall right for the Pacers & Sumner too. The size & skill set looks like a pretty good fit for the current team make-up and his development could have been the reason the Pacers were so comfortable giving Evans a 1-year deal.

        Give McBuckets some time. Many were ready to send Bogie down the road early last year.......


        • #79
, I had no idea he was that quick. He is electric with his speed. I had Vern as his comparison, but he's so quick. His ACL really slowed him down last season.

          Victor was the 2nd most improved player, imo. He's added some arch to his shot and he's somehow creating way more space between his defender. I didn't think Vic could get that much better, but he's clearly taken it to another level.

          Leaf was a solid offensive contributor. On defense he was the same sieve he's been with other players scoring at will. Same with McDermott, who looked worse than I expected on D.

          Myles is moving a lot better. He looks thinner but stronger and faster, for sure. Sabonis looked 3rd most improved to me.


          • #80
            With the preseason it is hard to see what will transfer to the regular season. One thing for sure is the rotations will not transfer. So if you are worrying if McBuckets got 30 minutes in the season don't be.

            We can asses players conditioning. Not shooting (Granger had a horrible preseason %). Not executing on offense (preseason defense is horrible--Rockets played horrible defense. No effort).

            And the list could go on. A player might look better or worse than the previous season, but we won't really get an honest sample until the season is budding.

            We are playing the passing lanes more aggressively. I think we can be top 5 in turnovers again. This aggressive play doesn't result in us being sloppy on the other end. This is our identity and I think it is safe to say we will not have a dropoff from last year. Time will tell if their weaknesses (rebounding, halfcourt offensive diversity, and defending the paint) will keep them from being better.


            • #81
              I saw the game 2 when it was very exciting for preseason game and quite interesting I think Turner looks more fluid and I think he's going to have a great year I thought Sumner looks very aggressive and is a remind me of the young Joe Johnson sabonis look good Vic looks like he's ready to take it to another level I'm not worried about mcbuckets it's his first game with a new team that shadow Fall it's not an accident that you had almost 50% last year from 3 I think the only one that really didn't impress me was DC Buddy's of that and it's preseason
              Sittin on top of the world!


              • #82
                Daughter my apologies I hate text to speech
                Sittin on top of the world!


                • #83
                  Really happy with the look of the team. For the first preseason game, things looked pretty organized. The young guys looked better. Myles was nice, Domas was great, Sumner was extra super great, TJ was extra super duper great. The vets looked like they were getting ready for the season and most important, Vic looked like last season Vic. Based off the first look, this team looks like a team that will compete for a home playoff series or two.

                  If Sumner learns how to shoot, he has a chance to be a good player. It is easy now to see what the Pacers have seen in him all along.


                  • #84
                    I think I was most encouraged by the continuity of the group. They are lightyears ahead of where they were exactly 1 year ago. They look like they're already clicking from the familiarity of playing with each other. Replacing TJ with Thad will be a major plus, so it's only going to get better.

                    Oh, and the CoJo/Sumner defensive backcourt? YES Please! I love, love, loved watching them play defense together.

                    I don't see how Sumner makes it into the regular rotation barring injuries or trades, but if he develops an acceptable jumpshot and gets stronger, he will be an absolute force.


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                      Some soccer style player ratings:

                      Turner - 6. Looks bigger, had some nice blocks, offensive game similar to last year.
                      Leaf - 6. Looks playable against smaller teams.
                      Bogie - 5. Solid, didn't do much.
                      Victor - 8. Picked up where he left off
                      DC - 5.5 quiet game, got to the hole well.

                      McBuckets - 2. Looks like a slower, softer Dunleavy. Nowhere to go but up from here.
                      Sabonis - 5. Little heavy on the turnovers, overall solid.
                      Sumner - 7 Saw some flashes of Lance.
                      Joseph - 6. Just as solid as last year. New haircut.
                      In what universe does Myles Turner get a 6 and Domantas Sabonis get a 5 for that game?

                      Sabonis started off a little shaky but once he got rolling there was nothing Houston could do to stop him. We ran a lot of our offense in the second half through him in the high post and he did not fail to deliver. The only shot that McDermott made for the entire night was off of a pass that Sabonis gave him for a wide open layup. Myles did not look bad but Domantas once he got going looked on completely on another level.

                      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13


                      • #86
                        Dipo still looks so quick and explosive. This was a huge part in his improvement last year. Removes some doubt that he might just be a one year wonder for me.
                        Lifelong pacers fan


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Peck View Post

                          In what universe does Myles Turner get a 6 and Domantas Sabonis get a 5 for that game?

                          Sabonis started off a little shaky but once he got rolling there was nothing Houston could do to stop him. We ran a lot of our offense in the second half through him in the high post and he did not fail to deliver. The only shot that McDermott made for the entire night was off of a pass that Sabonis gave him for a wide open layup. Myles did not look bad but Domantas once he got going looked on completely on another level.
                          Either of them look fluid enough to go out and guard the stretch-4's of the league?


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by festar35 View Post

                            Either of them look fluid enough to go out and guard the stretch-4's of the league?

                            But the Rockets tried to guard both of them with either Harden or Paul a lot and Sabonis made them pay for it.

                            Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Peck View Post


                              But the Rockets tried to guard both of them with either Harden or Paul a lot and Sabonis made them pay for it.
                              Nice! That's kind of another question - can teams defend us if we go big with Turner & Sabonis.


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by Peck View Post

                                In what universe does Myles Turner get a 6 and Domantas Sabonis get a 5 for that game?

                                Sabonis started off a little shaky but once he got rolling there was nothing Houston could do to stop him. We ran a lot of our offense in the second half through him in the high post and he did not fail to deliver. The only shot that McDermott made for the entire night was off of a pass that Sabonis gave him for a wide open layup. Myles did not look bad but Domantas once he got going looked on completely on another level.
                                Agree with this, at some point in the next few years itís going to be totally viable to run the offence for periods through Domas, loved seeing that in the 4th. He also had a great sequence shutting down Eric Gordon on the peremiter and blocking ennis at the rim after containing dribble penetration

                                Myles looked way thicker, Domas looked ripped. Clearly plenty of work went into the off season for these guys.

                                Beyond curious that Domas and Myles played literally 0 minutes together.

                                Sumner is an athletic freak - didnít see anything like that in the G league or summer league he played, must be back to 100%.

                                Leaf deserves some credit too, heís got a real nose for the offensive glass, made some nice passes, stretched the floor - not the right team to test him defensively but he was generally in the right places.
                                "I’m your favorite player’s favorite player. And it’s not enough for me for him to know that. I want the world to know that." -- Michael Beasley