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 #12 Pacers vs 76ers

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

  • #61
    We're 12 games into the season. Generally it take 20-30 games for teams to get accustomed to each other and you see what the team is really going to be like.

    Looking at the bright side, both Turner and Sabonis played 30+ minutes last night. Turner sucked for the most part but they did play together, so it is possible.

    Now for the negative. There are some concerns. McDermott sucks on both sides of the ball. He showed he can hit 40-50% from 3. That's why we brought him in and yet...as others have said...we don't run plays to get him open looks. If he is not hitting 3's, he is not helping the team. Collison sucks so far this year. He has had a few good games but overall he has struggled. Bojan is playing pretty much as expected in my opinion. I think the last half of last season and the playoffs he played well...I think he played above his normal game. He is now back to normal. Evans has been inconsistent...but it is early in the season. I'd give him a few more games to get settled down.

    Overall I think we are a playoff team..as long as Vic stays healthy. How high of a seed we get and how far in the playoffs we get will depend on how well the rest of the team improves...except Sabonis...he's already nails.

    Comment


    • #62
      We held Philly to 10 points below their season average including holding Embiid 7 points below his and having Simmons only slightly above his (2 points). We were pretty much dead even in rebounds.

      The problem is not the defense, even though some of the individual defensive plays broke down.

      The problem is the offense. You can't start a game shooting below 20%. You can't keep taking contested shots instead of running plays to get guys open. You can't keep having supposed shooters who can't buy a basket. YOU CAN'T KEEP MISSING FREE THROWS.

      Interestingly, I thought the Myles/Domas combo worked pretty well on defense last night and in general also helped spread things on offense (though they need to actually have Turner shoot from outside instead of getting the ball to someone else). I thought the lineup of Oladipo/Domas/Tyreke/Turner/CoJo looked pretty good when it was on the floor, particularly in the 2nd quarter.

      If I were coach I'd seriously consider a few practices of nothing but defended catch-and-shoot drills at one end and free throw shooting at the other.
      BillS

      A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
      Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

      Comment


      • #63
        One thing to keep in mind we have 7 players on the last year of their contract? This team this season is not supposed to compete for a championship. Win 50 games? Yes homecourt in the first round? Yes. But that is it. So big picture I am not getting all worked up.

        Our obvious need is another star player to play with Vic - that is obvious and clear to see. Almost impossible to get such a player during the season.

        Last night was probably the best game the Sixers played all season - especially on the road - so they were really good. Losing to them when they play like that is not an issue.

        My thought coming into the season is the only way the pacers are noticeably better than last season is if Evans and Vic play together a lot and are really good together - too early to close the door on that, but so far they have played little together and need more time to see if it works.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          One thing to keep in mind we have 7 players on the last year of their contract? This team this season is not supposed to compete for a championship. Win 50 games? Yes homecourt in the first round? Yes. But that is it. So big picture I am not getting all worked up.

          Our obvious need is another star player to play with Vic - that is obvious and clear to see. Almost impossible to get such a player during the season.

          Last night was probably the best game the Sixers played all season - especially on the road - so they were really good. Losing to them when they play like that is not an issue.

          My thought coming into the season is the only way the pacers are noticeably better than last season is if Evans and Vic play together a lot and are really good together - too early to close the door on that, but so far they have played little together and need more time to see if it works.
          Last night was not a good night for Philly. Embiid had an off game missing shots he normally makes, JJ was also way off on a lot of his FGA as well including 0-7 from 3. The team as a whole shot 31% from 3. Defensively they were a mess in the first half allowing penetration at will.

          Saric had one of his best games of the season, but outside of he, Shamet and Simmons, Philly struggled imo.

          Comment


          • #65
            I think is time to start Sabonis over Turner and see if that brings better offense to the starters and better defense to the bench. My ideal scenario would be to bench Young for Sabonis but that is not gonna happen.

            Comment


            • #66
              Nate isn’t using Evans as a secondary ball handler next to Vic, which is what he was brought in to be.

              Evans should be playing late in games where he can utilize his ability to drive to the rim and create. If he’s not going to be used within that role, he isn’t going to be much use to the team.

              Comment


              • #67
                DC and Bojan has career years last season at the age of 30, so their regression shouldn’t be a surprise. At this point, neither guy are strong starters. And they both seem to lack a lot of confidence

                Comment


                • #68
                  I didn’t like the McDermott = Korver comparisons when they were originally made, so hopefully those are put to rest.

                  The guy does one thing well, so Nate should at least try and see if he can do that one thing when he plays. That longer deal doesn’t look the best right now, but it’s still very early.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                    Nate isn�t using Evans as a secondary ball handler next to Vic, which is what he was brought in to be.

                    Evans should be playing late in games where he can utilize his ability to drive to the rim and create. If he�s not going to be used within that role, he isn�t going to be much use to the team.
                    I'm sick of Evans. Need to trade him for Stephenson.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      I don't want to hear any excuses for McDermott. Whether plays are being ran for him or not, most of shots are open but he can't make ****. Supposed to be a sniper out there.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Sixers lose to the Nets but beat the Pacers. FOH. Wherever the money flows. If Adam Silver took a polygraph test and was asked if the games are rigged, that **** would be off the charts.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Not sure if Dipo is talking about Turner or Roy Hibbert


                          His recent funk prompted one reporter to ask Victor Oladipo if Turner was pressing too hard to make an impact. At first it seemed like Oladipo was going to dismiss the question.

                          "I think people should not really concern themselves about that," Oladipo said. Then the star guard paused before following with a long, impassioned defense of Turner, saying that people need to stop worrying about him and that his time is coming.

                          Here's the full quote:

                          "I think he shouldn't concern himself with what people are saying or thinking. He's just got to play within himself. He'll figure it out. He's still young. I'm not making no more excuses for him, but the truth of the matter is he's just got to find it within himself.





                          "He's perfectly fine. He's going to find his groove, and then everybody's going to be like, 'Whoa, he's playing great. So what do you think about him playing great?'

                          "Everybody's so quick to judge someone when they don't play well. But everybody's not in here. Nobody is in his shoes. Nobody's putting on the jersey he's putting on. Nobody's out there playing the game he's playing. So you can't really judge him. We have no right to. But people are going to anyway. Me, personally, I really don't care what people think about him. I love him to death. His upside is huge, and he's just going to continue to keep getting better. And when he figures it out, watch out."

                          "That's all I have to say. Simple as that. Drop the mic."

                          Last year, when Turner was going through a rough stretch, Oladipo paid a late-night visit to the young big man at his house in order to help restore some of his confidence.

                          https://www.indystar.com/story/sport...ht/1927089002/
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Honestly -- and feel free to take this with a grain of salt -- I think this team, on paper, is good enough on offense and defense to where an 82-game season should balance them out to around where we expect. I don't really have huge roster qualms. Outside of the McDermott/Bojan/Sabo lineup, I don't really have huge coaching qualms.

                            I do just have general attitude qualms though. It's hard to quantify this in any way, but outside of Vic and Sabonis, this team just feels neutered compared to last year's team. There's no bite, no edge, no chips on shoulders. There's just a lot of guys like Collison or Bojan or Myles doing the "aw shucks" routine.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                              Turner+Evans+Leaf for Whiteside
                              Good ****ing god, no.


                              Comment


                              • #75
                                The coach is bad. He's a hard cap on this team. The offense is archaic. Nate is who he is, a .500 coach who can be slightly buoyed by great guard play.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X