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

Pacers legend Reggie Miller makes shocking admission about ‘soft’ NBA

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

  • Pacers legend Reggie Miller makes shocking admission about ‘soft’ NBA


    Indiana Pacers legend Reggie Miller acknowledges that the NBA has made the league a lot softer than past eras.

    In the 90s, Reggie Miller was considered as one of the most durable shooting guards in the NBA. Despite his slim and lanky appearance, Miller had quite a tough guy reputation inside the court, having clashed with the likes of Michael Jordan and John Starks.


    Sharing his thoughts on the modern-day NBA, Miller, who played 18 seasons with the Pacers, stressed that unlike today, players were not pampered during his time and even injuries didn’t stop him from playing basketball.
    “I felt guilty when I didn’t play, even when I had a sprained ankle and I was able to play at 70, 75 percent, and I knew I could go,” Miller said on The Dan Patrick Show. “I felt guilty sitting out. I knew I could probably still shoot. Would I be able to move laterally on that ankle? Probably not, but I knew if the ball came to me and I was wide open, I still could be able to shoot, and that would help my team. So I felt guilty for not being on the floor. I felt guilty by leaving Dale and Antonio, and Rik Smits out there, so I always wanted to play.”

    “I just felt if you was healthy enough if you could run up and down, if you can contribute to your team, you play,” he added. “On the flip side, I get it. We made this league so soft nowadays, and I get it, but it wasn’t in my DNA to sit out. It’s hard for me to do that.”


    Video on the link, but couldnt embedd the code

    Former Indiana Pacers shooting guard Reggie Miller acknowledges that the NBA has made the league a lot softer than past eras.
    Sittin on top of the world!

  • #2
    People talk like this like 95% of the guys in the league don't go pretty much every night.


    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
      People talk like this like 95% of the guys in the league don't go pretty much every night.
      I’m not disagreeing with you, but I think this is more targeted at the “leaders” of each team.

      Like, “what kind of leader am I if I sit out for not being fully healthy, even if I could still contribute at some level to our success?”

      Again, not disagreeing. But I think we’ve invested more over time into being cautious with injuries and taking a long-term approach with player’s careers rather than focusing on a single season and putting everything on the line.
      I think KP is a Captain Planet fan. He believes that the collective will of five decent starters can outweigh the power of top-level talent. Too bad Herb won't cut the check for their Planeteer rings.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
        People talk like this like 95% of the guys in the league don't go pretty much every night.
        43 guys scored at least 20 points last season, and only 3 played at least 70 games. Only 19 played in at least 60 games. So no, most of the guys aren’t playing every night.

        Comment


        • #5
          Yeah, yeah . . . . And Reg walked 4 miles to UCLA uphill both ways in the snow. With earthquakes.

          Each generation is always going to say their generation was the 'toughest'. That they had things worse than today's generation. And especially athletes with A personalities.

          And while Reg made a nice chunk of change in his career - he's nowhere near what these guys are making now. They're each a business. Gotta be healthy to get that next contract. Repeat.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by kent beckley View Post

            43 guys scored at least 20 points last season, and only 3 played at least 70 games. Only 19 played in at least 60 games. So no, most of the guys aren’t playing every night.
            Should be noted there were only 72 games last season. So playing 60 games would be about the equivalent of playing 69-70 games in a normal season.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by kent beckley View Post

              43 guys scored at least 20 points last season, and only 3 played at least 70 games. Only 19 played in at least 60 games. So no, most of the guys aren’t playing every night.
              There were 72 games last season? And there's way more than 43 players in the league, plus what determines a legitimate injury?

              Also my point is saying the league as a whole is weaker because a handful of guys do load management is silly.

              It goes both ways, did Kevin Durant get enough credit for playing obviously injured for the Warriors and potentially tearing his achilles because of it?


              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post

                There were 72 games last season? And there's way more than 43 players in the league, plus what determines a legitimate injury?

                Also my point is saying the league as a whole is weaker because a handful of guys do load management is silly.

                It goes both ways, did Kevin Durant get enough credit for playing obviously injured for the Warriors and potentially tearing his achilles because of it?
                Yeah, I know there were 72 games last year, which is why I started at 70 games, because you said guys were playing “pretty much every night”.

                92-93 season had 19 guys scoring over 20 points. 9 of them played at least 80 games. Only 2 of them played less than 70 games.

                93-94 season had 16 guys scoring over 20 points. 7 of them played at least 80 games. Only 3 of them played less than 70 games.

                This is an easily visible fact to verify. Guys are either getting “legitimately injured” more, or they just aren’t playing through stuff like the guys 30 years ago did.

                And I am looking at the elite players because we are a star-driven league, it isn’t as visible if the Sumners of the league aren’t playing.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                  Yeah, yeah . . . . And Reg walked 4 miles to UCLA uphill both ways in the snow. With earthquakes.

                  Each generation is always going to say their generation was the 'toughest'. That they had things worse than today's generation. And especially athletes with A personalities.

                  And while Reg made a nice chunk of change in his career - he's nowhere near what these guys are making now. They're each a business. Gotta be healthy to get that next contract. Repeat.
                  The last paragraph is true, but you can’t have it both ways. It didn’t used to be that way, so if you want to protect yourself, you can’t act like you are just as tough as previous generations. It is easily verifiable that Reggie’s generation was tougher.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I wish Reggie was around for this era. Imagine him taking 10 threes a game instead of 4.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      "Shocking" ?

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

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        It can be argued that AAU, high school ball, Olympics, etc has put so much mileage on some guys at a younger age that injury problems are more prevalent now. Idk though. But the NBA has also definitely specifically changed the rules to fit superstars that has actively made the game much softer, no doubt.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Look if you asking about physical toughness the older guys are going to have the advantage. I'm not even talking about the 80's and 90's players, I mean go back to the 50, 60 & 70's players as these guys had virtually no physical therapy and training mostly consisted of running plays and maybe some weights and calisthenics.

                          Also, yes it was more expected for players to rush back after an injury or even try and play through an injury I'd say probably up until the turn of the century.

                          However the one thing the modern player has going against him and what I believe also is causing some of these radical injuries is the pace of the game. I mean even back in the run and gun 70's era there were some moments of the game where teams pulled back and didn't go 100% and the bigs were never expected to play outside of a certain area and never were expected to guard a guard on a switch. I mean if you watch Kareem in the mid to late 70's the man just ran from free throw line to free throw line at his own pace.

                          Now bigs are expected to switch off on guards, they are often times expected to run back from the perimeter to guard the rim. So you don't have the collision injuries we used to see but you do now see lots of ankle & knee injuries. It also seems to me that we are seeing more ligament injuries than we used to.

                          Look I watched Dale Davis dislocate his shoulder and saw him bang it back in place on the stanchion under the rim. I also saw David Craig re-set his broken finger that was so angulated it was gross, tape it and him not miss two plays. So yes, there is that to say for the older guys. But let's just say under Brown and Bird and even Carlisle we were not running a lot of full court offense.


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

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Peck View Post
                            Look if you asking about physical toughness the older guys are going to have the advantage. I'm not even talking about the 80's and 90's players, I mean go back to the 50, 60 & 70's players as these guys had virtually no physical therapy and training mostly consisted of running plays and maybe some weights and calisthenics.

                            Also, yes it was more expected for players to rush back after an injury or even try and play through an injury I'd say probably up until the turn of the century.

                            However the one thing the modern player has going against him and what I believe also is causing some of these radical injuries is the pace of the game. I mean even back in the run and gun 70's era there were some moments of the game where teams pulled back and didn't go 100% and the bigs were never expected to play outside of a certain area and never were expected to guard a guard on a switch. I mean if you watch Kareem in the mid to late 70's the man just ran from free throw line to free throw line at his own pace.

                            Now bigs are expected to switch off on guards, they are often times expected to run back from the perimeter to guard the rim. So you don't have the collision injuries we used to see but you do now see lots of ankle & knee injuries. It also seems to me that we are seeing more ligament injuries than we used to.

                            Look I watched Dale Davis dislocate his shoulder and saw him bang it back in place on the stanchion under the rim. I also saw David Craig re-set his broken finger that was so angulated it was gross, tape it and him not miss two plays. So yes, there is that to say for the older guys. But let's just say under Brown and Bird and even Carlisle we were not running a lot of full court offense.
                            #Facts!!!
                            Sittin on top of the world!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Peck View Post
                              Look if you asking about physical toughness the older guys are going to have the advantage. I'm not even talking about the 80's and 90's players, I mean go back to the 50, 60 & 70's players as these guys had virtually no physical therapy and training mostly consisted of running plays and maybe some weights and calisthenics.

                              Also, yes it was more expected for players to rush back after an injury or even try and play through an injury I'd say probably up until the turn of the century.

                              However the one thing the modern player has going against him and what I believe also is causing some of these radical injuries is the pace of the game. I mean even back in the run and gun 70's era there were some moments of the game where teams pulled back and didn't go 100% and the bigs were never expected to play outside of a certain area and never were expected to guard a guard on a switch. I mean if you watch Kareem in the mid to late 70's the man just ran from free throw line to free throw line at his own pace.

                              Now bigs are expected to switch off on guards, they are often times expected to run back from the perimeter to guard the rim. So you don't have the collision injuries we used to see but you do now see lots of ankle & knee injuries. It also seems to me that we are seeing more ligament injuries than we used to.

                              Look I watched Dale Davis dislocate his shoulder and saw him bang it back in place on the stanchion under the rim. I also saw David Craig re-set his broken finger that was so angulated it was gross, tape it and him not miss two plays. So yes, there is that to say for the older guys. But let's just say under Brown and Bird and even Carlisle we were not running a lot of full court offense.
                              Absolutely and also overall mileage.

                              AAU basketball has drasticlaly changed the amount of mileage guys are hitting the NBA with. Back in the day you played high school ball, then college and that was it. Now kids are playing anywhere between 60 and 100 games a year from the time they are like 10-12 years old and sometimes they are doing 2-3 games in a single day. The landscape has just changed.

                              I agree with your point also about players HAVING to be tougher back in the day because we just didn't udnerstand as much about health or physical therapy or how to take care of the human body.

                              It's why I think the whole conversation is just kind of silly. It's like saying people were tougher 100 years ago because they could get polio. Well ok sure, but I'm glad my *** isn't getting polio now.


                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X