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 #11 Pacers vs Rockets

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

    That was the difference. That and 47 three attempts versus 27.

    The Pacers need to take some notes. The Rockets play the right way and that's beyond the 3 point arc. In today's game you don't have a choice. The Rockets didn't even shoot that well and still racked up a ton of points from downtown.

    Also, Pacers are not even in this game without their second string C. The good news is he finally got 30 minutes.
    Rockets shot a terrible percentage from 3. 15 of 47. I honestly donít want to see this team ever put up 47 attempts. Just under 30 is a good number especially for the Pace we play. Rockets are a poor defensive team, play a faster pace, they gonna put up more 3ís to cover up how bad they are defensively. They are literally just counting on out shooting you. Work tonight because the Pacers are so bad from the free throw line this year. Otherwise the Pacers did everything you want against Houston.
    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by the_real_lg33 View Post
      It sickens me that an opponent can play so poorly and still beat us. I havenít felt this bad about a loss since the PG era.
      Seriously? Its the 11th regular season game of the year and we just came off a three game winning streak. We just let a game slip away to one of the best team's in the league and we're 7-4. Chill. This early in the season is pretty meaningless.
      Lifelong pacers fan

      Comment


      • #18
        Free throws undid us. I do think Oladipo's baseline floater should've been an and 1 however.

        I think McMillan is srarting to figure out who the better C is, in saying that though at the end of the 3rd quarter with Turner and Sabonis out there together they looked pretty good. I think Turner would benefit from playing more with a playmaker like Tyreke, where having Sabonis out there is almost a secondary playmaker to get Oladipo and Bogdanovic some good looks with passes out of the post.
        I'm not actively trading Turner, but I'm not hanging up if someone rings about him either.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
          Refereeing was disgraceful. Fans don't pay $$ to watch Harden shoot FT's. Any time Pacers were starting a run, refs bail out a bad Houston team on the road. Mark Jones should be fired tonight
          Why would they fire him? In their eyes, he did a great job

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

            Myles gets a ton of mileage out of his blocks. He did make a nice cross court pass tonight and a nice tip in. He has some moments. The issue is that so many times his decisions are slow or wrong.

            I really wish the Pacers would use him as a 3 point shooter and if he can't do that just bench him. When I say benching him I am saying for him to swap roles with Domas. I think it's time for him to prove he deserves more minutes than Domas.
            Maybe his confidence would build playing against others bench players. I just donít think they will bench him because of the extension.


            Name-calling signature removed

            Comment


            • #21
              I would not mind seeing this:

              Dipo
              Tyreke
              Bojan
              Turner or alternatively Thad
              Domas
              Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

              Comment


              • #22
                7 pts 2 rbs. Just another day at the office for Myles.
                Lifelong pacers fan

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by pacers_heath View Post
                  7 pts 2 rbs. Just another day at the office for Myles.
                  I heard it pays well...
                  Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                    That was the difference. That and 47 three attempts versus 27.

                    The Pacers need to take some notes. The Rockets play the right way and that's beyond the 3 point arc. In today's game you don't have a choice. The Rockets didn't even shoot that well and still racked up a ton of points from downtown.
                    No offense, but I find these statements to be truly idiotic. 3 point attempts had absolutely NOTHING to do with the final outcome. The Pacers were destroying the Rockets down low in the 2nd and 3rd quarters, and had they capitalized on turnovers/free throws, as any good team would, the Pacers would have won tonight going away. The issue in the 4th, was the lack of on/off ball movement. The Pacers controlled every aspect of the game until they began switching everything and rotating late defensively in the 4th, leaving Rockets players wide open.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I saw a joke on reddit the other day that said we should change the 8 pts 9 seconds website name to 8 pts 3 rbs in dedication to myles. Was hard not to chuckle.
                      Lifelong pacers fan

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                        No offense, but I find these statements to be truly idiotic. 3 point attempts had absolutely NOTHING to do with the final outcome. The Pacers were destroying the Rockets down low in the 2nd and 3rd quarters, and had they capitalized on turnovers/free throws, as any good team would, the Pacers would have won tonight going away. The issue in the 4th, was the lack of on/off ball movement. The Pacers controlled every aspect of the game until they began switching everything and rotating late defensively in the 4th, leaving Rockets players wide open.
                        It wasn't the main issue tonight. That I agree with. But for the season you better believe that shooting the least number of 3's in the NBA is a real problem. If we don't fix that, you will find that teams beat us because of it. Don't be confused by the fact the Rockets were a little cold shooting it.
                        Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Funny. Domas played 30 minutes, 0 fouls. I guess, if he had to guard some super uber mega star (like Grifin or whatever), he (as we know) wouldn't last 20 minutes on the floor. Today Dipo draw a short stick. Dipo is an excellent defender, but when money talks, even an All-Star status is not important anymore.
                          12-12-2018, 09:20 PM


                          Myles Turner during Vic's postgame interview: "Tell you what the East is in trouble now boy"

                          .

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I also think Myles simply doesn't fit our offense, it's designed for a guy like Sabonis. His pyshicl play in the post, he's a good passer out of there (to our perimeter shooters) & his ability to set screens, funny thing is that these are all things that O'Quinn is good at as well.

                            A team like Houston would be good for Turner as he could shoot as much as he wanted and his 3pt shooting would be a strength for them. (Obviously they got Capela, but you know what I mean)

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

                              It wasn't the main issue tonight. That I agree with. But for the season you better believe that shooting the least number of 3's in the NBA is a real problem. If we don't fix that, you will find that teams beat us because of it. Don't be confused by the fact the Rockets were a little cold shooting it.
                              Pacers shoot more 3s, they won't make the playoffs. The league will soon realize that there is only one Golden State, and that the analytics stating a team should shoot more 3s, just because, will actually result in far more game to game inconsistency, than a team that capitalizes on it's strengths. The Pacers controlled the Rockets when playing bigger and more physical, NOT, when they starting playing iso ball in the 4th. Playing copy cat to a team who is all time great at 3 point shooting when you have nobody close to that level of shooting talent, would cost us the playoffs.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Some bad calls by the refs down the stretch and our inability to hit FTs killed us tonight.

                                But I want to focus on something else. I want to focus on some coaching decisions in the 4th.

                                We started the 4th with CoJo, Reke, Doug, Leaf and Domas. That's not a good line-up. You cannot afford to play Doug and Leaf together if you don't have sets to get them open for 3. That said, we were still up 4 when Dipo and Thad replaced Doug and Leaf respectively so while this lineup hurt it didn't kill us.

                                What killed us was going away from what had worked earlier in the game. What worked earlier in the game? Going inside. Either driving to the basket or posting-up our bigs on their guards (Houston has a tendency to defends post-ups with Harden which got him into foul trouble tonight). We scored 42 points in the paint throughout the game. But ever since we got our starters back in the game in the 4th we only scored 4 points in the paint. 4.

                                Why did we go away from that? Personally, I think that the reason for that was the line-up we were playing. Domas played 16:27 minutes straight. He never got his 2-minute breather so he was dead tired by the end of the game. We couldn't go to him in the post down the stretch due to it. There's no doubt in my mind that had he rested for 2 minutes and then returned to close out the game we could go to him in the post and get an easy score inside.

                                But that wasn't the biggest issue here. Domas should absolutely close out that game and while I would have liked to see him get a small breather to allow him to be more rested and aggressive offensively he was still never hurt us. What hurt us was playing Thad alongside him.

                                Thad shouldn't be in to close out this particular game. Not because he played awful or anything (he didn't, he was decent) but because he didn't fit the match-up. The Rockets didn't have an elite scorer at SF/PF for him to guard. So, his defensive talents (elite one-on-one defense on those players) weren't needed. On the other end of the court, his man was free to sag off of him and close off Dipo's driving lanes. The match-up just weren't there for him even if he played decent individually. I feel that we would be better off had we replaced Thad in that line-up with someone who could shoot (Reke or CoJo) or someone who we could use to score inside (Myles).

                                With all that said, we're not losing this game if we don't shoot 20/30 from the FT line. Losing those 10 FTs was crucial especially because most of our misses came from some of our best FT shooters (Bojan, DC and Reke combined for 8 missed FTs). If they made those FTs we wouldn't lose.
                                People who try to win arguments are the worst. The point of an argument isn't to find a winner, it is to find the truth.

                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X