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

The injury excuse this year is just that...an excuse

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

  • The injury excuse this year is just that...an excuse

    It's bugged me all year, yes no Levert/Warren, but people act like last year's team that went 45-28 was blessed with health when in reality....

    No Oladipo for 54 games.

    No Brogdon for 19 games

    No Sabonis for 11 games

    No Turner for 11 games

    No Lamb for 27 games


    They won anyway. They started 31-19 with Oladipo literally not playing a single minute.

    This year's team has actually been relatively healthy so far outside of the Warren injury. Levert's thing was really more of a freak occurrence so it's hard to even count that in some ways. Sabonis has missed no games, Brogdon has missed only one, Turner has missed only 2. Tall Holiday, Small Holiday have been available every game. McDermott has missed one game. McConnell has missed 3 and they were because he had a kid. Lamb's played, I believe, every game since he became available.

    The Pacers have had good health. Frankly, better health than last year.



  • #2
    Maybe Warren is better than what people give him credit for. Maybe he is a legitimate all-star.

    Comment


    • #3
      I think we overachieved some last year and Warren's loss probably hurt us more than I expected. The shortened off season didn't give us time to implement the new defense either. We went from elite to average and that's the main difference this year compared to last.

      Still we should be playing better than we are.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by sav View Post
        Maybe Warren is better than what people give him credit for. Maybe he is a legitimate all-star.
        I was going to say the same thing.

        Losing Warren has been huge - Not that he is a great player - but he not being in the lineup changes our offense so much. The latest stats basically show the Pacers are terrible in the clutch - except for Clips, Nets, and Bucks game every other game Pacers have been in and yet they re losing almost every really close game. Warren had turned into our best clutch scorer last season. Also how many other players do we have that is capable of scoring 53 points in a game. No one else except - oh yeah - LeVert an he's out also.

        My overall take of the Pacers is this. Old Nate and his coaching staff did a great job of getting the Pacers to win as often as they did - they over achieved big time in the regular season - but lack of outstanding offensive talent hurt in playoffs . That is why I always pushed back when others were critical of old Nate. However that is not to suggest if old Nate was still here that the team would be much better or any better - it was time for a change - players needed a change. Is new Nate the answer? i don't know yet - he is creative I will give him that. He's tried to change the style of defense and offense and i think it has taken longer than expected because the change especially defensively is huge.

        Last edited by Unclebuck; 03-01-2021, 05:49 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          This team was good last year with Brogdon-Warren-Sabonis.
          This team was good this year with Brogdon-Oladipo-Sabonis.
          This team has been bad this year with Brogdon-[insert bench player here]-Sabonis.

          There is one big difference, the team is missing a third wheel. I expect the team will do well with Brogdon-LeVert-Sabonis. As good as Brogdon and Sabonis are, neither of them is an elite scorer (I think Sabonis could get there in a year or two). In today's NBA, if you want to be more than a .500 team you either need an elite scorer, or three damn good scorers. Right now we only have two damn good scorers.

          Comment


          • #6
            I feel like Mr. Obvious. But no good team should have Brogdon or Domas as their number one offensive option. Pick either Brogdon or Domas whoever you think is the number 1 option and then compare him to other teams number 1 option. How many NBA teams have a worse number 1 option? 5 or 6? teams? Just for reference Brogdon is 29th in scoring and Domas is 28th. And I would argue that their scoring average 21 per game are inflated

            How many team have a third option better than either Domas or Brogdon? When i say "better" I mean just from a scoring standpoint
            Last edited by Unclebuck; 03-01-2021, 05:50 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              This is another reason we're not winning..

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                I feel like Mr. Obvious. But no good team should have Brogdon or Domas as their number one offensive option. Pick either Brogdon or Domas whoever you think is the number 1 option and then compare him to other teams number 1 option. How many NBA teams have a worse number 1 option? 5 or 6? teams? Just for reference Brogdon is 29th in scoring and Domas is 28th. And I would argue that their scoring average 21 per game are inflated

                How many team have a third option better than either Domas or Brogdon? When i say "better" I mean just from a scoring standpoint
                I couldn't help but list the teams & players, at least for me.

                Boston - Kemba Walker (Struggled early, but started to get back to his oldself)
                Brooklyn - James Harden/Kyrie Irving (Take your pick, KD is #1)
                Charlotte - Lamelo Ball (Has been killing it lately, but I guess Hayward & Rozier are options 1 + 2)
                Denver - Michael Porter Jr (Pure scorer, opportunities are growing rapidly)
                Milwaukee - Jrue Holiday (I'd kind of put him on par with our 2 guys, doesn't need to do as much this year so not averaging as much)
                Philadelphia - Ben Simmons (He isn't relied on to score, but again his 16ppg as 3rd scorer on team is more in line with what Sabonis & Brogdon should be scoring)
                Toronto - Kyle Lowry (I mean he is their 3rd leading scorer, but Norman Powell is right there with him they do it by committee)
                Utah - Mike Conley/Bojan Bogdanovic (Kind of down year for Bogdanovic, but again as a pair what we kind of need from Sabonis & Brogdon)



                Not as many teams as I thought to be fair & their are 2 teams that catch my eye out of the list, Toronto & Utah. Toronto has 4 guys scoring between 17-20ppg, this is what I expect to see from the Pacers fully healthy. They have VanVleet & Siakim both at 20.1ppg, Lowry at 18ppg & Powell at 17.7ppg. This is probably the way I feel the Pacers should look to play & honestly the reason I believe Bjorkgren is currently the coach. All going to plan, Levert & Warren would be in that VanVleet/Siakim zone with Sabonis & Brogdon the next 2 down.

                The other team that jumped out was Utah, but where they differ is they have a guy dropping 24.5ppg in Donovan Mitchell & I don't think we have that guy on our roster unless Levert truly is that guy those last 5 games of his Nets career. Then you had Clarkson, Conley & Bogdanovic complimenting him with Gobert anchoring the defense. Could we get that out of Warren, Sabonis, Brogdon & Turner as our defensive anchor? Who knows.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I just wish this team would embrace what it is sometimes. If Levert and Warren are ?s to return this season, then recognize the season for what it is. Get Goga, Sumner more burn so you can at least make a call on their futures with the organization. That matters FAR more than treading water for a life preserver that may never come and may only keep you afloat an additional week at best.

                  Anyway, more to the point of this thread: yes, Unclebuck is correct in terms of the burden at the top of roster when the workload can't be shared. But it's also just -- barring further exploration of my first point -- a pretty shallow roster. So this is a team feeling it from both ends right now (or if not the team, then the fans are feeling that way for sure.)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
                    I just wish this team would embrace what it is sometimes. If Levert and Warren are ?s to return this season, then recognize the season for what it is. Get Goga, Sumner more burn so you can at least make a call on their futures with the organization. That matters FAR more than treading water for a life preserver that may never come and may only keep you afloat an additional week at best.

                    Anyway, more to the point of this thread: yes, Unclebuck is correct in terms of the burden at the top of roster when the workload can't be shared. But it's also just -- barring further exploration of my first point -- a pretty shallow roster. So this is a team feeling it from both ends right now (or if not the team, then the fans are feeling that way for sure.)
                    And this would be the PERFECT season to ditch the Pacers trademarked “stay afloat at all costs” philosophy since they can only sell a small amount of seats anyway. In previous years there was always the excuse that they needed to keep people interested so that they’d buy tickets. That’s not the case this season with the attendance restrictions.

                    But it’s the Pacers so we know they’ll be full steam ahead with this mediocrity like they were in the O’Brien years when they’d go on annoying late season runs to mess up the lotto position. At least back then we were starting to add some really interesting young talent through the draft. That’s not the case today though due to us not adding squat in the draft recently.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      When your starting SG and SF is McBuckets and J Holiday you wont win many games. I love these guys off the bench but they are not starting caliber wings. Once Levert and Warren get healthy and inserted into the lineup I feel like the game will get easier for everyone. Brogdon can play off the ball more. Sabonis will have other pick and roll and DHO partners. I have a feeling it will get better, but that won't be this year.

                      Our best option for this year is to miss the playoffs and get a top 10 pick. If we somehow turn this around, at best we are a 7th or 8th seed and that is not good enough to get past the first round. We also need to give Sumner and Goga more minutes. At this point i'm okay with treating this year as a developmental year similar to how the Warriors treated last year. Look at everything that we are dealing with this year. New coach, injuries to our 2 best scorers, Oladipo trade, shortened season. This year is a wash.

                      Starting now from the rest of the season I would like to see the pacers give more time to their young players with potential. That is Sumner, Goga and Holiday. Holiday has looked solid recently, Sumner and Goga looked good against Philly. Why not cut Sabonis and Brogdon's minutes and give them to Sumner and Goga.

                      Time to Tank!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Pacers open wide open shots from 10 feet or farther away 38% shooting (24th in the league) 37% from deep (27th in the league)
                        Is making shots important?




                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by LilSean320 View Post
                          Goga looked good against Philly.
                          Huh ??

                          10 minutes, 0-4, 1 rebound, 3 TOs and a complete unawareness of what the other 9 guys on the court were up to.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by PacerDude View Post

                            Huh ??

                            10 minutes, 0-4, 1 rebound, 3 TOs and a complete unawareness of what the other 9 guys on the court were up to.
                            I'm a Goga fan. I like him. I am rooting for him. But the evidence for my position is not overwhelming.

                            Remember all the behind the scenes propaganda about how good Bender and Rush and Leaf, etc, were in practice? We're not getting that line with Goga. I fear he's not good in practices, either. And perhaps demonstrates the same amount of passion (i.e. none).
                            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Man this thread is BS.

                              We are missing like 40 points of scoring from the starting unit. You are not making that up across the other players. You can manage that if it were just one starter out and you have to replace his production. Ala the Pacers from the last 2 years. Even if we did have more injuries in previous years. We always had another horse who was ready to step up their game... like Warren, Bogie, Sabonis...our stalls are bare this year.

                              Not to mention our defense outside of Myles is horrid this year. We kicked a 22 year defensive institution in Dan Burke to the curb over the offseason. Who is having a resurgence in Philly this year. We replaced him with a coach who by admission from our All-star just talks about defense in film sessions, we don't actually practice defense.
                              Last edited by graphic-er; 03-02-2021, 11:16 AM.
                              You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X