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 #10 Pacers vs Boston

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

  • vnzla81
    replied

    Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
    I dont understand why people assume that Sabonis is going to become disgruntled. He needs to play more minutes and that is on coach, but Manu Ginobli played as a sixth man and had a HOF career, made money, won championships, etc.

    Its all about the money, Sabo is averaging 14/9 and 3 as a backup his agent and him know that him starting and getting more minutes gives him a chance to get a max or close to max contract.

    Im not even taking into consideration all star games and all NBA awards, etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mourning
    replied
    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post

    He was a rookie, different system, different teammates, this happened two years ago, small sample size, etc, etc.


    Let it go.


    Now we have almost two years with him as a Pacer and know it doesn’t work, the end.
    Almost 2 years? Lol? We haven't even had him for one and a quarter season yet, so your samplesize argument doesn't hold nearly true as much as you try to make it look like.

    Leave a comment:


  • BringJackBack
    replied
    I dont understand why people assume that Sabonis is going to become disgruntled. He needs to play more minutes and that is on coach, but Manu Ginobli played as a sixth man and had a HOF career, made money, won championships, etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • BringJackBack
    replied
    Originally posted by imawhat View Post
    It's still early, but players that have owned Myles in the past (Horford, Gasol, KAT) haven't owned him this season. Part of it is Gasol and Horford being past their prime, but part of it is Myles' improvement. He is closing the gap and improving, even if it isn't immediately noticeable.
    Keep in mind that Gasol's grizzlies are doing very well this year, and Gasol went off for 35 last year against Myles.

    Leave a comment:


  • BringJackBack
    replied
    Wow, judging from the comments it looks like the Pacers lost. That sucks.

    If anyone is to blame for the long closeouts, its Thad. Hes the worst at long closeouts imo. He goes for the steal and gives the 3/4 just enought time to perfectly line the shot up and shoot it accurately. And Morris/Brown had all the looks they want. Yet, when we played the Bucks Thad played Giannis tight on the perimeter. Just odd.

    Leave a comment:


  • vnzla81
    replied
    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

    Why? Because it doesn't fit your narrative that Domas cannot defend PFs?
    He was a rookie, different system, different teammates, this happened two years ago, small sample size, etc, etc.


    Let it go.


    Now we have almost two years with him as a Pacer and know it doesn’t work, the end.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nuntius
    replied
    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    You can let the OKC and rookie year thing go any time now.
    Why? Because it doesn't fit your narrative that Domas cannot defend PFs?

    Leave a comment:


  • Nuntius
    replied
    Originally posted by D-BONE View Post

    It seems so common sensical, yet it still hasn't happened. Will give Nate the benefit of the doubt. He knows more about basketball than me, and he's done an excellent job with this core so far (last year and this year).
    It has happened but not as much as we'd all like. I can give Nate the benefit of the doubt on this but I also have my issues with his offensive scheme at times so, you know, that benefit comes and goes. I do agree that Nate has mostly done a good job, though. He has exceeded my personal expectations.

    Leave a comment:


  • BillS
    replied
    Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
    The box score +/- is a little odd, Myles, Sabonis, Evans, CoJo all of who I thought played extremely well tonight, and Oladipo all had a negative +/- while McDermott, Leaf(best game as an NBA player), and Thad who I thought had a pretty bad night, all had a positive +/-.
    From watching the game (not analyzing the play by play, so I could be wrong) I felt like the Myles/Domas/CoJo/Collison/Dipo lineup is where Boston went on most of their 3-point binges during both halves. That would explain it.

    Leave a comment:


  • vnzla81
    replied
    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

    It's true that neither Myles nor Domas did a good job at closing out last game. But Domas can do this. He did it throughout his rookie season in OKC and he was great at it. It is my belief that this is his natural defensive position.

    You can let the OKC and rookie year thing go any time now.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nuntius
    replied
    Originally posted by iogyhufi View Post

    Of course, then you put Sabonis in a position where he has to guard little zippy 4-men, e.g. Jaylen Brown last night (at least I think it was last night, I caught the game from a red-eye to Shanghai, so I'm a little messed up time-wise lol), which he was pretty bad at.

    Honestly, my biggest cringe moments came 1) when Turner completely failed to stick close to Horford on the perimeter on the PnP and gave up a ton of open 3s and 2) when Sabonis exhibited basically no understanding of how perimeter closeouts work (either they were too short and the guy got an open shot or he overpursued and gave up a lane to the hoop). Sabonis' 1-on-1 post defense is really excellent, though.
    It's true that neither Myles nor Domas did a good job at closing out last game. But Domas can do this. He did it throughout his rookie season in OKC and he was great at it. It is my belief that this is his natural defensive position.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nuntius
    replied
    Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
    You are using that stat incorrectly. You are making it conform to an assumption instead of drawing a conclusion based on that stat. All that stat says is Turner gets more opportunities to defend shots at the rim, it does not tell us why that is the case. We can deduce that 1.4 of the 3.3 difference is because of the amount of time spent on the court playing. The other 1.9 we cannot know for sure from that stat. There could be, and most likely are, many reasons for this. One of the biggest reasons I would say is because Sabonis is typically in better position so the player never takes a shot at the rim like they would against Turner. Either way, even if teams are scoring more at the rim with Sabonis on the court than Turner overall they are still scoring less with Sabonis on the court than Turner. I would happily give up a few more points at the rim for fewer points overall.
    I want to clarify that the "When Domas has to choose between contesting a shot and blocking out an opponent to get the rebound he will choose the latter. It's what he's wired to do as he is a rebounder. When Myles has to choose between contesting a shot and blocking out an opponent to get the rebound he will choose the former. It's what he's wired to do as he is a defender." part of my post was simply my hypothesis.

    So, no, I didn't try to use the stat to confirm any kind of assumption here. I don't know why Myles is contesting more shots than Domas. As you said yourself, some of it can be attributed to the MPG difference between the two.

    What I wanted to do with that post was to clarify that DFG% only takes into account shots that you are contesting at the rim. Domas, for whatever reason, isn't contesting as many shots as Myles does which can explain the difference in their numbers. Note that I'm not saying that not contesting as many shots is a bad thing. It's not always a bad thing. We'd have to go over it on a case-by-case basis.

    Leave a comment:


  • vnzla81
    replied
    Sooner or later Pacers are gonna have to make a decision between Sabo and Turner and one of them is gonna have to go.

    I know people think either one of them is going to be OK with been a backup for a long time but that is not going to happen.

    Last edited by vnzla81; 11-04-2018, 12:12 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • vnzla81
    replied
    Originally posted by iogyhufi View Post

    Of course, then you put Sabonis in a position where he has to guard little zippy 4-men, e.g. Jaylen Brown last night (at least I think it was last night, I caught the game from a red-eye to Shanghai, so I'm a little messed up time-wise lol), which he was pretty bad at.

    Honestly, my biggest cringe moments came 1) when Turner completely failed to stick close to Horford on the perimeter on the PnP and gave up a ton of open 3s and 2) when Sabonis exhibited basically no understanding of how perimeter closeouts work (either they were too short and the guy got an open shot or he overpursued and gave up a lane to the hoop). Sabonis' 1-on-1 post defense is really excellent, though.
    Morris was killing them both when Pacers decided to go big.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mourning
    replied
    Maybe it's just me but I LOVE seeying Domas killing the opposing bench, especially his chemistry with Tyreke is off the charts! So, if we want Domas to start imho we also better make sure Evans either starts aswell or gets into the game earlier then he does now.

    Personally I like getting that Sabonis-Evans tandem off the bench at the sametime. Now if Doug could get out of his mini-shooting slump.... he might be worth playing too, I really hope he does because spreading the floor for that bench unit makes everything so much easier and that Evans-Sabonis link potentially even more potent, especially as the season progresses and Tyreke gets better in our system, etc.

    Also it was good seeying TJ get some rebounds and points on the scoreboard. Keep it up!
    Last edited by Mourning; 11-04-2018, 11:02 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X