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 #54 Pacer vs Nets

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

  • #91
    I always feel better coming here after losses because I think I feel more sane. I don't particularly care about this streak. It absolutely sucks. Nate has had some bad decisions. The team has shot, defended, and rebounded poorly. While the close losses are super frustrating, it also means they could be 3-4 or 4-3 maybe during this stretch which would be a little less worrying. A few buckets shouldn't be the difference between being a little worried about the team's ceiling and freaking out about the entire organization.

    It is also February, so maybe they're just worn out. A high usage star who hasn't played in a year just came back. Two players were concussed. I believe it, at the end of the season, we will look at this time as what lost us a seed or two for the playoffs, but also was just a abolition for the season. I believe the team/coach we saw the first ~45-50 games more closely resembles the real Pacers than the one from the last 7 games with Vic back.

    I want to see how they look after the break with some rest and some practice. I want to see how they look with average shooting from the guards. If the team looks like this through February I will be very worried. If they start looking at least average, I think it would be reasonable to hope that they are turning it up and will be hopefully be rolling in time for the playoffs.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Drewtone View Post

      I just sent that question to my colleagues in Toronto, but I would be surprised if the Raptors used a 10-man rotation, if not by design, then via adjustment to injuries. Last night, Quinn was talking about Nurse's willingness to try 'anything at anytime' in terms of defensive schemes and lineups. It drives me nuts to see how they've invested in developing O.G. vs what we've done (or haven't done) with Leaf.

      With as many 'pleasant surprises' that we've had this year (my personal: TJW, TJM, early-season Lamb and Malcom, Dougie figuring it out, Tall-iday and flashes of Holiday, The big jump by Domas), we're drifting to one of those existential funks that make us scratch our heads for the next several seasons (god, I hope not).

      Peck, I hate to bring this up, but play-calling and adjustments aside, do you think Nate is starting to approach Coach He-Who-Shall-Not-be-Named in terms of player management and development?
      How the heck do you name 8 players (so everyone except Turner and Oladipo) who you've been surprised by and then ask if he might be a terrible player developer. A month ago, Nate was being praised for taking this brand new mix of players and making a good team out of them, and now he's trash because of freaking TJ Leaf??

      If you want to argue he leans heavily toward developing veterans instead of younger guys, I'd definitely buy that. That's still player development though. I think there's something to be said for trying different lineups when things are getting bad like this, but I also think there's a lot to be said for letting guys work through things and show that you trust them. maybe they'll get discouraged from losing multiple games, or maybe they'll get even more discouraged if they get benched and still lose. All I know is we were hoping to be about .500 when Vic came back before the season, we were way better than that, and now we are still 8 games over .500 after 6 straight losses.

      Comment


      • #93
        I think what we are seeing with Nate is a good early regular season coach who through discipline gets the team ahead of most others early in the season but then falters as other teams
        figure the Pacers out and talent rises to the top.
        {o,o}
        |)__)
        -"-"-

        Comment


        • #94
          Myles was playing good and was benched almost all 2nd half
          I think seriously Nate needs to be fired

          Comment


          • #95
            Once Dipo took that early three in the 4th when we were up by two points I knew this game was over. That was selfish basketball right there. We did not need a 3 especially with that much time on the shot clock. I wish I could watch the play again but it looks like he had some space to possibly try to get in the lane and get a better shoot, or draw in the defense and make a play for someone else. When will Oladipo realize that he is not Lillard and Curry? Jacking contested three's is not his game.

            watching our fourth quarter comeback which was led by McDermott, TJMC, Sabonis and even Lamb hit some big shots was great, but as soon as we brought back in our starters I just had a feeling the game would slip away. I don't know if our bench unit was tired, but maybe nate should have left them out there. At least leave McDermott out there and let him close the game. He was playing better than Dipo.

            Can we start calling Brogdon George Hill 2.0 or is it to early? His play recently has looked a lot like DC last year and George Hill. He's using the sabonis pick just to pull the back out to the top of the key and reset. I feel like earlier in the year the sabonis and Brogdon pick and roll was one of the best in the league.

            Myles had a solid game and he was real aggressive. He should not be mentioned in this thread at all. I think if we had to point fingers at some of our players for this loss I would blame Dipo and Brogdon. It's going to be hard to win when your back court shoots that bad and can't make open 3's. It's going to be hard to win when Dinwiddie has an off night shooting but somehow ends up with 21 6 and 11. Half of those assists were probably easy lobs at the basket. We can thank Dan Burke for that, but at this point our defense probably deserves its own thread.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by LucasRL13 View Post
              Myles was playing good and was benched almost all 2nd half
              I think Nate did that because of matchups. Bklyn went small - with the exception of Jordan. And Domas did nothing to keep him off the boards. Not saying Myles would have shut him down, but he certainly should have been given the chance.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by LucasRL13 View Post
                Myles was playing good and was benched almost all 2nd half
                I think seriously Nate needs to be fired
                I don't think Myles will cause problems during the season but I think in the year-end exit interviews he will asked to be traded.

                I can't blame him. He could be a pretty good starting Center for a playoff team and play 30+ mpg, scoring around 15 ppg and getting 8-9 rpg.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by festar35 View Post
                  Not sure what is going on all I know is I am not a fan of it, but this is the team we have, this is the coach we have & we have to make the best out of it.

                  Positives are that we have a genuine 23yr old franchise talent in Sabonis & I fully expect him to keep getting better. He is super smart & has an insane work ethic, that's a great combination. We need to 100% look after this one though, put the right pieces around him to succeed.

                  As for Brogdon I have a theory which is probably nothing close to what is happening, but I liken it a little bit to Turner's situation. He said he chose Indiana because off the role they were offering him (I'm sure the money was a factor) the role as I see it that he thought he was getting was to be our 2nd guy next to Oladipo once back. Since then he has almost found himself in the 4th spot as Sabonis has essentially taken the reigns for the team, Warren has proven himself to be the same guy he was in Phoenix but doing it on a winning team & now you got Oladipo back. I think he is a little confused about his role right now & that doesn't excuse the missed shots or lack of energy on D, but it can definitely be a contributing factor.
                  This is starting to sound like we have too much talent on the roster, and Nate doesn't know how to properly use all of them.


                  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


                  • #99
                    Might as well add another item: FREE THROWS

                    Brooklyn shot 32.

                    Pacers - 11.

                    To me - that's just a team playing passive, settling for a jump shot instead of trying to get to the rim.

                    They outscored us by 16 at the FT line. On our home-court. Something's wrong with that.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post

                      This is starting to sound like we have too much talent on the roster, and Nate doesn't know how to properly use all of them.
                      I think the Pacers have too much average to good talent but not upper level talent. Domas and Victor are upper level but not superstar by any stretch.
                      Joe Harris is a free agent and will be a good one to get. Shoots for a high 3pt %. Smart. Better than Lamb certainly.
                      Pacers need to clear space in the off season.
                      {o,o}
                      |)__)
                      -"-"-

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by owl View Post
                        Pacers need to clear space in the off season.
                        That's going to be difficult.

                        https://hoopshype.com/salaries/indiana_pacers/

                        Comment


                        • Brogdon need to FACILITATE instead of trying to make plays that do nothing but bricking and turning the ball over! You're the point guard for god sake
                          Dipo need to stop chucking up bricks, once you realize your 3s aren't hitting, do what you do best and drive the ball. you're a good passer, make the defense collapse on you and dish to someone open
                          Sabonis needs to focus on defense as much as he wants the score all the damn time.
                          Warren...you're exempt
                          Myles..for once you're exempt

                          Comment


                          • Vic - 0 FT attempts
                            Brogdon - 0 FT attempts
                            Domas - 1 FT attempt

                            TJW with 5 and Myles with 3 led the team. That's playing a passive game.

                            Comment


                            • This team just lacks talent. Brogdon has fallen off a cliff and doesn't even look like the same player that started the year. Myles has been bad all year, outside of one or two good games sprinkled here and there.

                              Oladipo looks awful (I guess this was kind of to be expected and should change). Lamb also looks like he has regressed.

                              I think this is just what we have right now, look at our best player (Sabonis) compared to the other good teams in the east...that kind of tells the story. If Sabonis is your best player, you probably aren't a contender or even near being one. That is not a knock on Sabonis, I think he can be a 2-3 best player on a championship team but if he is your main guy you are lacking talent.
                              *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by LucasRL13 View Post
                                Myles was playing good and was benched almost all 2nd half
                                I think seriously Nate needs to be fired
                                If by good you mean letting Allen get easy lobs and getting lost on D so yeah he was playing "good"


                                Nate made the right decision to bench him as Brooklyn was playing small ball and their guys were getting easy shots from 3.
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X