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 Playoff #3 Pacers vs Celtics

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by Banta View Post

    We can agree to disagree. He’s an excellent shot blocker and nothing more. And I happen to think blocked shots are vastly overrated. His body is wasted on him.
    And he can shoot threes better than most bigs in the league and can also switch on defense and not embarrass himself against most smaller guys.

    Myles definitely has deficiencies, but he has huge strengths as well. He needs to be playing the Brook Lopez role in Milkwaukee for example (a better version of that since Myles can't be played off the court defensively). The Lakers would love to put him next to LeBron. If Kyrie changes teams that team would love to pair Myles with him.

    Myles is ideally suited to be the third guy on a big 3, where he becomes the 3 and d big man. The Pacers are not currently constructed that way and may need to decide what kind of team they want in the future and if Myles fits that vision or not.

    Comment


    • #77
      I guess it’s good that we didn’t tank. Who wants lotto picks or a future? Who cares when you have culture. The culture to get bounced 4 years in a row round 1. That’s our culture. Also when a guy gets going like Evans last night, let’s not give him any more shots except a dump off at end of shotclock, let’s get him out of his groove. Pacers weren’t out matched, not by a mile. They were outcoached and outplayed. Also Cojo is the reason we lost. He has ball way too much for a dude who can niether get his own shot, nor generate a shot for someone else. His bad pass to Bogdanovic from a few feet away led to the Kyrie steal and the 4 pt lead late in 4th.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by natjjohn View Post
        Becoming more disillusioned with the Pacers and NBA in general. Barring an unforeseen player that is a revelation as a late draft pick, can’t see where this team is getting out of the muck of mediocrity. Vic improves things for sure, but he at best was taking this team to the ECF.

        I totally agree and I think a lot of pacers fans are finally waking up and seeing what this franchise is truly about. It wants to be good but never great. As long as we sell most of our tickets at home games and make the playoffs everyone is happy. It’s the same movie with the same horrible ending every single year. I know it’s easy to say “well go root for another team” but I’ve grown up a pacers fan since I was in grade school (I’m 34) and I don’t want to switch. I just wish that for once we could go all in and truly bring a championship to Indiana a place that is supposedly a basketball Mecca.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Peck View Post

          Holy crap, I knew it was bad but I had no idea it was that bad.
          I mean, it just consists of getting swept against Lebron, taking lebron to 7 games last year, and this series. Given the circumstances, 3-11 is about the record we should have been in those series and Nate didn't exactly choke away huge expectations - we've been huge underdogs the past three years.
          Lifelong pacers fan

          Comment


          • #80
            These are different types of posts, but I consider them similar. Peck's post scares me because I'm afraid that is what this franchise does. That is, it gets decent journeyman players like Wes Mathews, Tyreke Evans, Darren Collison, Monta Ellis, Rodney Stuckey, etc., who are A-list players on B level Teams...and then they start them. Specifically, they are not pieces moving you toward a title. Let me explain.

            We acquire a lot of players that tend to be good enough to start on bad teams but are not useful to contenders because they either need the ball in their hands to be effective (and they aren't good enough to make a dent in the playoffs)...or they are poor defenders. But they are good enough to win a lot of regular season games.

            This really is your Indiana Pacers...and it's not a formula to ever win a title like this franchise used to do in the ABA days.

            Originally posted by Peck View Post
            In fact I'm going to put up a poll later spring to see who this years version of Rodney Stucky/Monta Ellis/Tyreke Evans will be.
            Originally posted by Reggieslegkick View Post
            I totally agree and I think a lot of pacers fans are finally waking up and seeing what this franchise is truly about. It wants to be good but never great. As long as we sell most of our tickets at home games and make the playoffs everyone is happy. It’s the same movie with the same horrible ending every single year. I know it’s easy to say “well go root for another team” but I’ve grown up a pacers fan since I was in grade school (I’m 34) and I don’t want to switch. I just wish that for once we could go all in and truly bring a championship to Indiana a place that is supposedly a basketball Mecca.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post

              And he can shoot threes better than most bigs in the league and can also switch on defense and not embarrass himself against most smaller guys.

              Myles definitely has deficiencies, but he has huge strengths as well. He needs to be playing the Brook Lopez role in Milkwaukee for example (a better version of that since Myles can't be played off the court defensively). The Lakers would love to put him next to LeBron. If Kyrie changes teams that team would love to pair Myles with him.

              Myles is ideally suited to be the third guy on a big 3, where he becomes the 3 and d big man. The Pacers are not currently constructed that way and may need to decide what kind of team they want in the future and if Myles fits that vision or not.
              Myles shot over .38 from 3 this year, definitely needs to take next step with it and attempt 6 to 10 a game.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by bumpercar3 View Post

                Myles shot over .38 from 3 this year, definitely needs to take next step with it and attempt 6 to 10 a game.
                Collison, well over 40% from 3, attempted only 1 three last night. He's only attempted 5 so far in the series. You can't win if you don't use the limited tools you have. I agree Myles should shooting it more. He's averaged 4 per game.

                Worse, the first game Bojan shot 3, Collison 2 and Myles 2. You can't win if you have good shooters not shooting it. Pacers don't have a play-maker like Kyrie or athleticism and they really need to use the skills they have more than they have been. The one thing this squad still has are good shooters, 5th best from 3 in the league. But they don't shoot it.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Peck View Post

                  Nope, you have two more years to enjoy that trash bin of a signing.
                  I meant for the series. I know he'll be in the thick of the rotation next season after Bogey signs elsewhere.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Many of the Pacer players have a hard time getting their 3 point shot off against defense either due to lack of length or quickeness or lack of repetition during the year.
                    Frankly I want Carsen Edwards in the second if possible as he is fearless and is used to shooting from beyond the NBA 3 line. A microwave off the bench.
                    Rebounding is a big problem due to our wings and center both. Should have gotten Montrezl Harrell who was available.
                    Not sure how you fix the rebounding. New players I guess
                    {o,o}
                    |)__)
                    -"-"-

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      I think it’s time to make a decision. Either we are going to start and play Turner and Sabonis together...giving each player 30+ minutes or we need to trade one or both this summer.

                      This team desperately needs at least one more star players.

                      This series has shown us that Kyrie can dominate a game. If we game plan to slow him down, someone else steps up and hurts us. We have seen Hayward, Tatum and Brown...not to mention Morris all take turns at burning us.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by owl View Post
                        Many of the Pacer players have a hard time getting their 3 point shot off against defense either due to lack of length or quickeness or lack of repetition during the year.
                        Frankly I want Carsen Edwards in the second if possible as he is fearless and is used to shooting from beyond the NBA 3 line. A microwave off the bench.
                        Rebounding is a big problem due to our wings and center both. Should have gotten Montrezl Harrell who was available.
                        Not sure how you fix the rebounding. New players I guess
                        Just replacing the guards should at least stabilize the rebounding. The Pacers from game 1 through game 47 (the game Oladipo got hurt in) would have finished 16th in offensive rebounding rate and 13th in defensive rebounding rate. Not a strength of theirs, but completely respectable.

                        The Pacers from game 48 through 56 (games without Oladipo or Matthews) would have finished 26th in offensive rebounding and 5th in defensive rebounding.

                        The Pacers from the 57th game (the first game Matthews played) through the 82nd game would have finished 26th in offensive rebounding rate and 29th in defensive rebounding rate. One of the worst in the league over a pretty decent sample.

                        Schedule imbalance has something to do with that, but from looking over the league leaders in rebounding I don't think it has all that much effect, and it certainly doesn't against the Celtics who were a bad rebounding team during the season.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

                          Nothing that we didn't already know. Without Dipo, we are a .500 team. That's an improvement from last year where without Dipo we were a lottery team (and a bad lottery team at that).
                          A first round sweep against the 4th seed is lottery in disguise. I'd rather be in the lottery and maybe get a better pick

                          Originally posted by Piston Prince
                          Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                          "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post

                            Just replacing the guards should at least stabilize the rebounding. The Pacers from game 1 through game 47 (the game Oladipo got hurt in) would have finished 16th in offensive rebounding rate and 13th in defensive rebounding rate. Not a strength of theirs, but completely respectable.

                            The Pacers from game 48 through 56 (games without Oladipo or Matthews) would have finished 26th in offensive rebounding and 5th in defensive rebounding.

                            The Pacers from the 57th game (the first game Matthews played) through the 82nd game would have finished 26th in offensive rebounding rate and 29th in defensive rebounding rate. One of the worst in the league over a pretty decent sample.

                            Schedule imbalance has something to do with that, but from looking over the league leaders in rebounding I don't think it has all that much effect, and it certainly doesn't against the Celtics who were a bad rebounding team during the season.
                            Not coincidentally imo, Myles’s offense immediately took a nose dive when Matthews joined the starters. DC is the only guy in the starting lineup that’s an average (at best) playmaker and Myles needs set up to score. I’m not entirely absolving Myles for his lack of production the 2nd half of the season, but the Wes signing and guaranteed starting position didn’t do Myles any favors. It didn’t help the team at all really, it possibly made it worse. Just a bad signing by KP.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post

                              Not coincidentally imo, Myles�s offense immediately took a nose dive when Matthews joined the starters. DC is the only guy in the starting lineup that�s an average (at best) playmaker and Myles needs set up to score. I�m not entirely absolving Myles for his lack of production the 2nd half of the season, but the Wes signing and guaranteed starting position didn�t do Myles any favors. It didn�t help the team at all really, it possibly made it worse. Just a bad signing by KP.
                              And playing the young guys would have made it better ?


                              Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                People bringing up Nate playoff record without context is silly.

                                Blazers dealt with epic injury problems and Pacers have the Dipo injury and the roster Bird put around PG for Nate run almost every player that got minutes was out of the league next season.

                                I would love for the problem in Indy to be coaching. That’s way easier to deal with the problems we actually have and that’s a severe lack of talent. And now with Dipo injury who knows what direction this team will be going in for the length of our only stars contract.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X