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

Shake Things Up...Maybe?

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

  • Shake Things Up...Maybe?

    Given how CoJo, T. Young, Wesley Matthews and Tyreke Evans have struggled offensively of late, do you think coach should bring them off the bench (briefly) and start Sabonis (PF) and McDerrmot (SG) and/or play Holiday more over whomever has performed worse between Matthews and Evans?

    Thoughts...?

  • #2
    No. Now is not the time to shake things up. That looks more like panic than strategy. Now is the time to dance with who brung you. If the Pacers are going to win a playoff series, CoJo, Thad, Wes and especially Tyreke are the guys that are going to do it. If the don't, then they don't. But the Pacers are not going to win without these guys.

    Now that doesn't mean that there isn't a chance that Aaron or McBuckets may get a chance to be the hero of a game. Nothing wrong with playing a guy that is hot extra minutes or seeing what Aaron can do if one of the other guys just doesn't have it that night. But these are not the guys that will win you the series. They are the guys that might win you a game in the series. The guys that will win you a \playoff series are the ones you mentioned. If they don't do it, it ain't gonna be done.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
      Given how CoJo, T. Young, Wesley Matthews and Tyreke Evans have struggled offensively of late, do you think coach should bring them off the bench (briefly) and start Sabonis (PF) and McDerrmot (SG) and/or play Holiday more over whomever has performed worse between Matthews and Evans?

      Thoughts...?
      I would switch up Wes for somebody else in the starting lineup. Pretty much any lineup he’s been a part of since he’s been here has sucked. It’s not all his fault, and I know we promised him a starting position, but I would still bench him and start Tyreke or Doug. There’s really no good reason to play Wes 30+ minutes a game. Besides playing ok defense, he doesn’t bring anything else to the table.

      That said, I highly doubt Nate would do anything this late in the season. Regardless, McBuckets should be playing 20+ minutes right now. Dude’s on fire and still can’t get more than 15 minutes.

      Comment


      • #4
        I don't think you shake things up with line up changes this late in the season. I'd rather see minutes reduced if they aren't performing.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by rimrattler View Post
          I don't think you shake things up with line up changes this late in the season. I'd rather see minutes reduced if they aren't performing.
          For the love of all that is holy, sit Corey Joseph! He hasn’t had a single decent game since before the All-Star break. I’d rather see Aaron Holiday, warts and all, than see 20 wasted minutes from CoJo.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
            No. Now is not the time to shake things up. That looks more like panic than strategy. Now is the time to dance with who brung you.
            I don't have a solution, but continuity is overrated. 4 of our last 5 playoff series losses have featured a starting lineup shift that benefited our opponent. Boston shifted their lineup tonight and won. It's not uncommon for championship teams to adjust their lineups.

            I don't think we have a shot against Boston, so a move would be futile. But we cannot continue to play Leaf, McDermott and Sabonis together.

            We need to run better plays too. Why on earth would we run a D.C./Thad pick and roll with 8 seconds on the shot clock? Our fifth option should not be involved in that moment. We need to be a lot smarter.

            Comment


            • #7
              U can’t have one of your main guards off the bench scoring 4 ppg like Joseph has been lately. Maybe he’s just not cut out for the nba. Not 20 mpg anyway. I would rather have Ish Smith, Tyus Jones, Elfrid Payton, Thomas Satoranski, Jalen Brunson, Patrick Beverly, DJ Augustine, Chris Dunn, Fred Vanvleet, TJ McConell, Malcolm Brogdon, Monte Morris, Spencer Dinwidie, Marcus Smart, Jordan Clarckson, Jalen Brunson, Eric Gordon, Deon Waiters, Derick White, Delon Wright, Tyler Dorsey, Emanuel Mudiay, Dennis Schroeder (who wanted to come here and cost a 2nd rounder?), and even Rondo to be honest. Can anyone think of many PG/Combos that generally play close to 24 mpg that he’s better than? Yogi Ferrel? Tyler Johnson? He’s certainly more in line with those two than any listed above. We should move on. I’m a fan of his tenacity but the talent isn’t there clearly. It will be probably be 5 years before the Pacers figure this out though.

              Comment


              • #8
                We are going to ride this thing out and then let the chips fall where they may. Point is definitely going to change this offseason. .
                We might see Holdiday occasionally but nothing is changing at this point
                {o,o}
                |)__)
                -"-"-

                Comment


                • #9
                  It's frustrating seeing Evans try taking his man 1-on-1 to the rim only to get bottled up 3-on-1 and he still tries unsuccessfully to fight through it. Common sense should tell him if 2 or more defenders are on you, that means TWO OF YOUR PLAYERS ARE OPEN somewhere on the court. FIND THEM - PASS THE DAMN BALL, MAN! And how many times can you miss from point blank range right at the rim? At this stage, I'd rather see Leaf, McDerrmot or Holiday get his minutes.

                  It's frustrating watching Thad Young take the ugliest 3PA ever!

                  I'm tired of see Turner get pushed around in the paint. But to be fair, he's not a Center and he's just not strong enough to handle the proto-typical Center. His body just isn't build that way. Moreover, he doesn't play that way like a traditional post-player. Great rim protector, just not your typical big man. To that, I don't understand why coach McMillan didn't use O'Quinn at all last night. I mean, the Celtics at times went with Horford and Baynes and we countered with Turner and Sabonis? Sabonis and Young? Sabonis and Leaf? Why not Sabonis, O'Quinn and Bogie in the front-court?

                  I know the odds are low that the Pacers make it out of the first round and I get what some folks here are saying about sticking with what brought you this far, but the Pacers aren't helping themselves If things don't change things up a bit. At this point in the season, if what brought you here is no longer being effective, it's time to shake things up a bit. We've lost every road game since March 7 and are on the verge of losing home court advantage. Something's got to change because if they lose home court, their odds will go completely out the window against a team they really can beat.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The shake up should have occurred at the deadline in utilizing any of our 6 tradeable expiring contracts to acquire talent for next season. And bringing in Wes at the expense of playing Holiday and Sumner or acquiring a player via trade, simply was not a wise move IMO.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                      The shake up should have occurred at the deadline in utilizing any of our 6 tradeable expiring contracts to acquire talent for next season. And bringing in Wes at the expense of playing Holiday and Sumner or acquiring a player via trade, simply was not a wise move IMO.
                      Acquiring Wesley Matthews should have been an "insurance policy". Instead, it was a desperation move on the Pacers' part. The reality was this: Evans/Holiday were performing well when Oladipo went down earlier with a sore knee. Once we lost him for the season, there was no reason to go completely away from that 2-Guard rotation since it was paying dividends. If mgmt wanted to bring in another Shooting Guard, ala, Matthews, to add more fire power to the Shooting Guard position, fine. Bring him in; but don't sit the guy who was a productive 2-way player for you as a rookie for a veteran whose been bounced around the league all season long just because he's a veteran. The Evans/Holiday rotation was working fine. I saw no reason to panic and break that apart. Get Matthews if you must. He adds an additional Shooting Guard to the mix, but DON'T sit Aaron Holiday just because you now have two veteran 2-Guards - one of which doesn't know your system.

                      Now, with this said, I have less of a problem with Wesley Mattews' overall performance than I do Tyreke Evans since the All-Star break although truth be told neither player is performing to the level I expected of veteran caliber. However, I think coach McMillan made a terrible gamble going with a Matthews/Evans rotation when he should have stayed with Evans/Holiday until that rotation proved ineffective. Put another way: We over promised Matthews at the expense of Holiday's development AND possibly the Pacers chances of securing home court advantage. The trigger to sit Evans or Matthews and play Holiday should have been pulled long ago. Now with five games remaining in the regular season, the team's in desperation mode but if what I read about Holiday's performance yesterday against the Pistons is true, he handled the pressure very well and stood up to the challenge.

                      IMO, Aaron Holiday should never have been relegated to the bench once Victor Oladipo was lost for the season and Wesley Matthews was acquired. I understand why they went after him and called up Sumner from the D-League and even experiemented with playing Holiday and Sumner some, but the decision to sit Holiday and go with a Matthews/Evans 2-Guard rotation may come back to haunt the Pacers throughout the summer.
                      Last edited by NuffSaid; 04-02-2019, 11:41 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Nate does not have the balls to do it, but for the last 4 games of the season I would keep Cojo on the bench and let Holiday have his minutes. The upside of Holiday contributing in the playoffs is better than the 5 points and solid defense that cojo will give us.

                        We should have shook things up when Oladipo got hurt and at the trade deadline but we didn't. We were so set on making the playoffs that we jeopardized the future of this team to get the fourth or fifth seed and a first round matchup with the Celtics.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Our best lineup last night was Holiday, McBuckets, Bogie, Domas, and Turner according to the eye test. It will never happen, but that's a solid starting 5 that can space the floor, and Holiday is by far our best distributor already and Doug's potential hasn't even been tapped. His shot is money. Pacers have been working with Doug and Bogie and their defense and it shows. They are a deadly combo from range.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Not getting Holiday regular and consistent minutes - particularly post Dipo injury - doesn't serve any logical purpose. He would have been that much more seasoned and well-positioned to contribute in the playoffs and then, by extension, that much more advanced in what he can provide next season. You've significantly slowed down his development by sticking with Matthews, Collison, Cojo, Evans (take your pick even though why Evans continues to play is the one I found most questionable) despite the fact that any legitimate deep playoff aspirations were quashed by Vic getting hurt.

                            While I so respect and appreciate the heart of the team, they are playing for the right to AT BEST win one playoff series. I don't think Holiday is necessarily clearly better than any of those vets right now, but he does have potential. Therefore, under the circumstances, I see no defense for not having played him more. And 3/4 of the guys in front of him would not have seen their role changed drastically by it and you likely are still a playoff team and probably still in contention for home court.
                            Last edited by D-BONE; 04-03-2019, 04:48 AM.
                            I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                            -Emiliano Zapata

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
                              Not getting Holiday regular and consistent minutes - particularly post Dipo injury - doesn't serve any logical purpose. He would have been that much more seasoned and well-positioned to contribute in the playoffs and then, by extension, that much more advanced in what he can provide next season. You've significantly slowed down his development by sticking with Matthews, Collison, Cojo, Evans (take your pick even though why Evans continues to play is the one I found most questionable) despite the fact that any legitimate deep playoff aspirations were quashed by Vic getting hurt.

                              While I so respect and appreciate the heart of the team, they are playing for the right to AT BEST win one playoff series. I don't think Holiday is necessarily clearly better than any of those vets right now, but he does have potential. Therefore, under the circumstances, I see no defense for not having played him more. And 3/4 of the guys in front of him would not have seen their role changed drastically by it and you likely are still a playoff team and probably still in contention for home court.
                              The way I saw it, Holiday was giving you solid production on both sides of the ball. Plus, he meshed with the starters and the reserves which meant production wouldn't have slide no matter who he played with. The Evans/Holiday rotation worked well when Oladipo went down the first time. It made no sense to bench him once Victor was lost for the season. If anything, I thought it would've made more sense to increase Holiday's playing time, not decrease it.

                              Above all else, the team lost one of their most viable play-makers once Oladipo went down. Thus, it made no sense to sit one of the few play-makers they had left even if he was a rookie. But this rookie - Aaron Holiday - showed he could score the ball by getting in the paint, getting to the rim or taking deep shots. He's not going to make up the difference in points the Pacers lost without Oladipo, but he's not going to be a "volume shooter" either. Holiday's a very efficient scorer. To me, that shows his smarts (high basketball IQ). I'm in no way saying he would've been the team's savior, but I am saying the kid was contributing in positive ways filling in as B/U SG. So, why not maintain that rotation, pick-up Matthews if you must (as an insurance policy) and keep things moving as they were previously?

                              To put things in some perspective: The Pacers were 32-15 before Oladipo's season-ending injury. They've gone 14-17 since. But here's the interesting part...

                              Between 1/26 and 3/7, the Pacers went 10-8. That span is important because it marks the period just after Oladipo's injury but right before the Pacers faced 17 +.500 teams between 3/7 and 3/29. I can't imagine what would've happened had coach made the early calculation/took the risk of going back to what was working (or had worked) before with an Evans/Holiday rotation. Perhaps the Pacers would've remained as the 3rd seed (at best) or maybe they would've dropped no lower than the 4th seed at worse, but I certainly don't think they would've been fighting for home court advantage right now.
                              Last edited by NuffSaid; 04-03-2019, 05:23 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X