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:
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

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

So what do we think?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by festar35 View Post
    So I kind of did a potential breakdown of minutes. On the premise of us signing Rubio, Bogdanovic & a guy like Hood or Hezonja for SG spot.

    C. Turner 31mpg
    PF. Sabonis 29mpg
    SF. Bogdanovic 30mpg
    SG. Oladipo 32mpg
    PG. Rubio 30mpg
    Warren 24mpg
    Holiday 18mpg
    Bitadze 16mpg
    Hood/Hezonja/Other 16mpg
    Leaf 14mpg

    I mean to me this is pretty well balanced, if Warren, Holiday or even Bitadze really looks good there would be room to give them a little more.
    Ultimately though it's a decent 10-man rotation where our young guys get to see a decent amount of court time to prove their worth.
    If you don't mind, Festar, let's use your numbers to examine the distribution of minutes by position. Something like the following:

    C: Turner 28 / Bitadze 16 / Sabonis 4
    PF: Sabonis 25 / Leaf 14 / Warren 6 / Turner 3
    SF: Bogdanovic 30 / Warren 18
    SG: Oladipo 32 / Hood 16
    PG: Rubio 30 / Holiday 18

    Something like that, right? So which position looks weakest? Can you (or anyone) conjure a trade based on McDermott, whoever on the above roster would be replaced, and perhaps next year's #1 to improve this projected roster?

    "Sumner reminds me of a young Paul George."

    - Clyde Drexler.


    • Originally posted by bumpercar3 View Post

      I think it's nonsense; It's called google, try searching most valuable position in nba. You will see that versatile wing/forward is agreed upon by GMs, analysts, and fans to be the most valuable position for dozens of reasons. What u won't find is what u just said.
      I said ANY position can be the most valuable. That obviously includes the SF position. The SF spot produces more stars because they have increased responsibilities in the new NBA and are forced to have an all around game. Therefore, those few that do possess all the skills are more likely to be more efficient offensively. Most are 3 point shooters and 3 point shooters are statistically more valuable but that isn't always the case (like Brown). Also their physical attributes allow them be able to guard more players because they are essentially "in the middle". But in this case Domas has been extremely more efficient on both sides of the ball and now that he's moving to his more natural position of PF, he looks to be even better.

      Last edited by Pacersalltheway10; 06-26-2019, 02:12 PM.


      • Originally posted by DrFife View Post

        If you don't mind, Festar, let's use your numbers to examine the distribution of minutes by position. Something like the following:

        C: Turner 28 / Bitadze 16 / Sabonis 4
        PF: Sabonis 25 / Leaf 14 / Warren 6 / Turner 3
        SF: Bogdanovic 30 / Warren 18
        SG: Oladipo 32 / Hood 16
        PG: Rubio 30 / Holiday 18

        Something like that, right? So which position looks weakest? Can you (or anyone) conjure a trade based on McDermott, whoever on the above roster would be replaced, and perhaps next year's #1 to improve this projected roster?
        So to me I don't see an weaknesses, but we don't stand out anywhere, this team has some ridiculous depth though.
        McDermott won't be sort after until free agency I feel, when a team has missed on the free agent shooter they were after. I'm probably moving him for very little, just move the cap.

        This season will be a fantastic time for us to experiment (it's a shame Nate is the coach) as with Vic out till January we may should try change things up somewhat. We have 3 C's who I believe have All-Star capability so play them. We have a back-up forward who could challenge for a 6th man award given his scoring ability, a back-up PG who is going into 2nd year & has shown flashes of being very good. 2020-21 is the time to pursue a Mike Conley type player if that looks like a reasonable thing to do, but internal growth is going to be the aim of this game.

        Look at the ages:
        25yrs old - TJ Warren
        23yrs old - Myles Turner, Domantas Sabonis, Aaron Holiday
        22yrs old - TJ Leaf
        19yrs old - Goga Bitadze

        That's 6 guys who are going to be key parts of the team 25yrs & younger. All of them capable starters (except Leaf - sorry TJ) & all got a lot of upside to go as well. I think we figure out our big man, log jam this season then things can take shape.


        • If I get any say, TJ Warren just plays SF. I'd give the small ball PF role to Alize Johnson until he proves he can't handle it. In a late game, gotta get a bucket situation I might use Warren at PF. But for just normal game play we need to let Alize Johnson sink or swim and find out what he can do.


          • Originally posted by DrFife View Post

            If you don't mind, Festar, let's use your numbers to examine the distribution of minutes by position. Something like the following:

            C: Turner 28 / Bitadze 16 / Sabonis 4
            PF: Sabonis 25 / Leaf 14 / Warren 6 / Turner 3
            SF: Bogdanovic 30 / Warren 18
            SG: Oladipo 32 / Hood 16
            PG: Rubio 30 / Holiday 18

            Something like that, right? So which position looks weakest? Can you (or anyone) conjure a trade based on McDermott, whoever on the above roster would be replaced, and perhaps next year's #1 to improve this projected roster?
            Id be very, very satisfied with that distribution. All of that actually. I could see Leaf getting some small-ball 5 minutes although I generally dont see him as a center. Gotta admit though I find it hard to see Nate giving Goga that many minutes.

            The only thing is Id take a chance on Hezonja rather than signing Hood. He looked surprisingly convincing in a few games as a point-forward for the Knicks so he could slot in as a ball-handler/playmaker. And of course had that game winning D on Lebron. Maybe thats talk for another thread...


            • Heres an update to what I think:

              We have one of the top GMs in the league with Pritchard.

              We have one of the best scouting departments in the NBA.

              We have an average coach in McMillan.

              We have the following actual assets:
              Most of our future draft picks
              Two extra second round picks

              We have the following potential assets:

              We have the following liabilities:

              If you compare our circumstance 3 years ago to now, we have more actual or potential assets than we did back then.

              The fact of the matter continues to be that we need to accumulate more talent. We will do that primarily by either converting potential assets into actual assets or by trading assets for others and hopefully gambling correctly.

              We convert potential assets by letting them play and mature... cut bait from those that look to be more liabilities than potential assets, and lock up or trade actual assets.

              Pritchard has a very small room for error, or else all of his assets will leave in FA. That is the state of the NBA at the moment.


              • I honestly think our roster is pretty much complete, minus a few minor acquisitions to finish the team off. A 3rd string PG & I think another vet C is on the agenda. So what do we have & what should we expect:

                C - So Turner will be the starter comes opening night I think think we see more improvement from him again, in particular on the offensive end. It will more be from a slightly increased role & playing alongside a facilitator like Sabonis. I think Turner gives us 15-16ppg, 7-8rpg, 2-3apg & 2+ blocks a game yet again. I still anticipate a bit of struggle for him against guys like Embiid & Jokic, but who doesn't they are huge & talented. Sabonis will back-up a bit here & Bitadze will get some opportunities as well to get adjusted. I don't think he gets as much time as I first thought, more like 12-14mpg depending on how the game is going.

                PF - Sabonis is looks like he will be our starting PF & I am excited to find out one way or the other how he & Turner work together. Sabonis should be used as a secondary playmaker out of the post, he could do some really nice things (we all know the Horford comp by now). I actually anticipate his impact to improve, but numbers to drop. 12-13ppg, 11-12rpg, 4-5apg are stats I think we see from him, key to get the ball moving through him. Leaf will likely be the first big off the bench, so he has a lot to prove this season. If his 3pt shot comes back that'll be really nice to see, he is a pretty fluid athlete, good rebounder, can block shots, but he needs minutes to get better.

                SF - TJ Warren looks like he will get the start here, he was a nice insurance policy for Bogdanovic leaving. I would prefer a better defender at this spot, especially with Sabonis starting at PF, but Warren is a solid player who can score the ball. 13-14ppg & 4-5rpg would be nice numbers from him, especially if he buys in defensively. McDermott will be the back-up here, but I think once Victor returns we see Lamb getting a lot of minutes at SF as well as SG. I think McDermott will be battling Sumner for the position of the 4th wing in the rotation.

                SG - Oladipo is obviously out till around Jan & while I don't expect him to come out like he did in 2017-18 I can see him giving us 17-19ppg, 4-5rpg & 3-4apg once back in the starting line-up feeling more comfortable. Lamb will start in his absence & then I anticipate him being our 6th man after that. As a 6th man 10-11rpg would be fantastic, but as a starter I think we see him around that 14-15ppg mark. Lamb has outstanding length & very good defensive instincts which I hope we can draw out of him. I wouldn't be surprised if he snuck in as our starting SF over Warren, but his 6'5 slender frame might prevent that from occurring. Sumner will back up Lamb initially & as I mentioned it'll be him vs McDermott as too who stays in the rotation once Vic returns.

                PG - Welcome to Indiana Mr Brogdon, we are all excited to have you. Hopefully Indiana can unlock all your potential like Detroit did for Chauncey Billups. The biggest question is how much scoring can we get from him, we know he is super efficient when he gets good looks, but what will he be like when the volume increases. I think he will thrive as our 1st option initially, giving us 19-20ppg, 5-6rpg & 5apg. Once Vic comes back maybe slides back to 17-18ppg & can see the assists creeping up to 6-7apg. Defensively he is an absolute stud, he is big enough (6'5 with 6'11 wingspan) & strong enough to guard PG, SG & SF's he did a stellar job on Kawhi in playoffs. He & Oladipo should compliment each other well. Aaron Holiday should get some good burn as well as the primary back-up. I think he will be inconsistent, but him in a back-up role is absolutely perfect in my eyes. He will get 16-18mpg & hopefully gives us 6-7ppg & 3-4apg with the 2nd unit.

                This season will be about growth & establishing a rythm. We will finally get an answer to the Turner/Sabonis question & have the flexibility to play around a little bit as well as our young guys (except Sabonis) are all locked up for multiple years.


                • I think a backup SF is our biggest necessity. McDermott could hardly stay on the floor due to his lack of defense and if someone would go down with a sprained ankle wed be in a world of hurt.

                  We need a 3 and D type forward.


                  • Originally posted by Handoverfist View Post
                    I think a backup SF is our biggest necessity. McDermott could hardly stay on the floor due to his lack of defense and if someone would go down with a sprained ankle wed be in a world of hurt.

                    We need a 3 and D type forward.
                    This is where I think Sumner could come into play, as well as Jeremy Lamb.


                    • Originally posted by festar35 View Post

                      This is where I think Sumner could come into play, as well as Jeremy Lamb.
                      Thats sure spreading things a little thin between the 2 and 3 positions.


                      • Originally posted by Handoverfist View Post
                        Thats sure spreading things a little thin between the 2 and 3 positions.
                        We have Oladipo, Brogdon, Warren, Lamb, Sumner & McDermott who can all play SG or SF, that's 6 guys for 2 spots. We are all good.


                        • Originally posted by festar35 View Post

                          We have Oladipo, Brogdon, Warren, Lamb, Sumner & McDermott who can all play SG or SF, that's 6 guys for 2 spots. We are all good.
                          I doubt Vic, Brogdon or Summer will log any significant minutes at the 3 and who knows when Vic will be back.


                          • Originally posted by Handoverfist View Post
                            I doubt Vic, Brogdon or Summer will log any significant minutes at the 3 and who knows when Vic will be back.
                            We'll most likely see Warren and McDermott log a majority of the SF minutes. They're the veterans. However, Brogdon and Lamb could slide over, as could Sumner. Despite being wiry thin, Sumner is strong for his size and could easily play the 3. It would be my preference to see Sumner play 15-20 minutes, either at backup PG/SG/SF. I also want to see Aaron Holiday, so I'd prefer Sumner's minutes come from McBuckets.

                            Also, Goga has to play now unless we sign some big time veteran PF or Warren plays a ton at 4 (which could be the plan). Don't be surprised if our game 1 startling lineup is Brogdon/Lamb/McDermott/Warren/Turner (or veteran PG we haven't signed yet/Brogdon/McDermott/Warren/Turner)
                            Last edited by imawhat; 07-03-2019, 08:35 AM.


                            • Trusting Pritchard that Warren, Brogdon, and Lamb pan out. Seems to me there's a level of following the Oladipo script with Warren and Lamb - guys with clear potential that have - although they've had PT - have been in bad situation team-wise. Obviously, the hope is they break out or continue to do so even more successfully in our environment.

                              I'm sad to see Bojan andThad go for the role they've played for the franchise, but not that much from a performance standpoint given their career trajectory. In other words, they've peaked and are teetering on the down side of their careers.

                              Hoping Goga is as good as the hype. If so, we'll have a lot of options.

                              Finally, again, putting my faith in KP, but personally not as confident as many around here in Brogdon. Yes, he's clearly a good player. Honestly, it's the injury history that really worries me for 4 years and 85 mil.

                              McConnel is a strong backup/3rd string point guard.
                              I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                              -Emiliano Zapata