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

Who thinks it can work?

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

  • Who thinks it can work?

    Turner & Sabonis will be a conversation we have yet again next season as McMillan has all but flatly refused to play the 2 bigs together.
    So simple question, who thinks that they can work together? Not only that, but who thinks it'll translate into winning games?

    I think we know what Myles Turner is at this point an elite rim protector with a jumpshot aka Milwaukee Brook Lopez.
    Sabonis to me is a question mark. He has a lot of tools offensively, but that lack of a mid-range shot as well as limited foot speed could ultimately be his downfall.
    Last edited by festar35; 04-20-2019, 08:38 PM.

  • #2
    Commit to getting a real point guard and commit to shooting twice as many threes all season long. That would be a start. But I have serious doubts about Domas on defense and foot speed and
    his offense leaves much to be desired. KP deserves severe criticism for his moves this past off season.
    {o,o}
    |)__)
    -"-"-

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by owl View Post
      Commit to getting a real point guard and commit to shooting twice as many threes all season long. That would be a start. But I have serious doubts about Domas on defense and foot speed and
      his offense leaves much to be desired. KP deserves severe criticism for his moves this past off season.
      I am on the same page as you about Sabonis. I absolutely love having him on the team, but I think he will really be a weakness on the defensive end. He has poor foot speed & on top of that he doesn't have a big wingspan to make up for that.
      (He reminds me of a better passing Enes Kanter & OKC punished Portland/Kanter by running constant pick'n'roll plays which Kanter couldn't do anything about)

      Agree about PG position:
      #1: Kemba Walker
      #2: Malcolm Brogdon or trade for Jrue Holiday
      #3: Emmanuel Mudiay
      Last edited by festar35; 04-20-2019, 10:24 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        I think it very possibly could work, but only if the following conditions are met:

        1) Both Myles and Domas need to continue to evolve and grow their games, which I believe they will.

        2) There is a key 3rd big on the roster who is interchangeable with the other two and can compliment skillsets as dictated by matchups, performance, etc. Whether or not that this is Thad in an accepted bench role, perhaps TJ or a new player remains to be seen.

        3) Our starting 1, 2 and 3 must be SOLID and have the ability to create off the dribble. One example would be to resign Bogie, reintroduce Vic and somehow sign Kemba (probably wishful thinking, unfortunately) - that could potentially check all the boxes and make some real noise in the East, if the bench is up to the task as well.

        One positive that should be mentioned is that it appears both Myles and Domas (for the time being, at least) are willing to make it work. Both seem like solid teammates with manageable egos that genuinely pull for one another. Domas, in particular, just seems like such an excellent teammate. Will be really curious and telling to see if the two will workout again together in the off-season.
        Last edited by 712Jefferson; 04-20-2019, 11:10 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by GizzyStardust View Post
          Will be really curious and telling to see if the two will workout again together in the off-season.

          If they do they need to spend a majority of their time working on shooting. That means the Pacers need a bad attitude rebounder. They let one get away last off season
          Last edited by owl; 04-20-2019, 11:19 PM.
          {o,o}
          |)__)
          -"-"-

          Comment


          • #6
            Guys the only reason Brook Lopez isn't still considered a joke of a center is because he plays with Giannis who is 7' himself and grabs rebounds and pounds the paint. Brook Lopez on the Pacers would make you long for Myles Turner. If we are going to stick with Myles, which I believe they will, then as Owl said our power forward can NOT be Thad Young. We need a bruiser who can play above the rim and work a little in the post. Someone like Bam Adebayo, were not getting him but someone like him.

            Do I think they can work together? Some lineups for sure others not so much. But here is the real truth, if they cant or the team wont play them together they need to trade one of them now before we lose Sabonis in free agency for nothing.


            Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

            Comment


            • #7
              The Bam Adebayo - type comparison is a good one. In fact, I think Adebayo would be a great complement to Myles or Domas in the starting lineup. Better than a Myles - Domas tandem. Any discussion of Domas requires him to develop a legit right hand around the basket and consistent shooting beyond the paint. Otherwise, he really can't aspire to be more than a backup, IMO.

              Thad Young either must be let go or retained as a bench contributor. If you get the upgrade at PF, you then look at PG, but now you need a player who not only creates for others, but also is effective creating his own shot. Kemba Walker? SF is Bojan or upgrade. In theory, you have:

              -Kemba - type
              -Dipo
              -Bojan or similar 3-pt threat
              -Adebayo-type
              -Myles or Domas

              Not sure about the Dipo.Kemba fit, but, in theory, you push Bojan and Myles/Domas all down a notch to 3rd and 4th options respectively. That seems like a much more reasonable expectation for their offensive role.

              The big wrench in that plan is how do you get Kemba or Bam? When I look at the FA list, once you get beyond the top-shelf names - the ones we've never been successful getting - the best available guys are our own FAs. What that could turn into scares me.
              I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

              -Emiliano Zapata

              Comment


              • #8
                I know it works. It has some obvious cons, but I think the pros far outweigh them.

                However, as long as Thad's here and Nate's the coach and KP isn't interfering, it will never happen. Thad is Nate's security blanket, who gets to play regardless of his performance. It took Thad telling Nate what to do to keep Sabonis and Turner on the floor in the clutch.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I love Sabo. He is my favorite current Pacer. However, I think he'd be exposed as a starter. He looks great cause he plays against bench players. He's too slow to play PF and struggles against bigger Cs. I like him coming off the bench where he is a beast. I also think playing Thad next to him to help on defense is a smart move. We need a big, rebounding PF to start with Turner. I wanted him in the Paul trade and still want him next to Turner and that is Randle.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    There's a reason why there is a debate about Myles and Domas playing. There's a reason why Nate will not play them together. It's because they don't fit well. Sure, against some teams it will be a winning combination and I would even argue that's true against many teams.

                    But don't you guys want the right set of players to compete at the highest level? Why settle?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think it can work on offense, but defensively they don't fit at all. Neither of them can guard the modern PFs.
                      In my opinion the Pacers are kinda trapped with them for two reasons, first it's not really clear who will be the better player. Turner is a better defender and rim protector, but he's not a good inside scorer. Sabonis is the better scorer and he's strong enough to wrestle with other big guys inside for rebounds, but his defense is weak. The second reason is that we're in an odd position to trade them. Turner just signed a contract extension, and Sabonis would see his 3rd NBA team in 4 seasons if he's traded, which affects his value for sure.
                      I think we counted on the Oladipo-led Pacers to be good enough so people wouldn't question the issues between Turner and Sabonis, and frankly it was the right call. But now with Oladipo down, and who knows if he'll be able to return to his prime self, we're stuck with them.
                      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


                      • #12
                        If this playoff series is any indication of Turner or Sabonis's ceiling or future, the Pacers are in serious trouble.

                        Both are shooting below 40% in this series on less attempts than last playoffs. Domas is shooting 30%. I guess you could attribute that to Boston's defense, but great players find a way normally. I do not believe either will ever be great players based on this performance level.

                        Maybe they are still too young. But Myles will be entering his 5th year in the NBA and is already 23 years old. There are a lot of bigs who have already matured by this time. He may well be better than Domas, but 8.7ppg on 39% shooting as your starting C in the playoffs isn't cutting it.

                        In other words, pick one and trade him. I'd pick Domas at this point. Get better at another position.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by jrwannabe View Post
                          I love Sabo. He is my favorite current Pacer. However, I think he'd be exposed as a starter. He looks great cause he plays against bench players. He's too slow to play PF and struggles against bigger Cs. I like him coming off the bench where he is a beast. I also think playing Thad next to him to help on defense is a smart move. We need a big, rebounding PF to start with Turner. I wanted him in the Paul trade and still want him next to Turner and that is Randle.
                          I think that myth would die pretty quickly if he were given a chance to start.
                          Lifelong pacers fan

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Myles and Domas would look a lot better if Vic were out there. He'd take a lot of pressure off of them. Domas has been constantly double teamed this series.
                            Lifelong pacers fan

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              For those that believe we should play Turner & Sabonis together instead of Thad the numbers favor your argument.

                              For the season Turner & Young played 1557 minutes together and had a net rating of +2.5

                              https://stats.nba.com/lineups/advanc...roupQuantity=2

                              Turner & Sabonis played 429 minutes together and had a net rating of +3.1

                              https://stats.nba.com/lineups/advanc...roupQuantity=2

                              Obviously other factors go into it as well such as the match ups and the other players on the floor.

                              I believe they would improve over time and also benefit from being matched with more athletic players around them.

                              Turner & Young is a much larger sample size and probably has no upside and seems to have led us to a plateau so we will never know the real answer until we commit to making the change.

                              I think it is time to let Young walk.

                              If Turner & Sabonis doesn't work we make a trade and move on.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X