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 #16 Pacers vs Pistons

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

  • #91
    Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
    I don't mind the Brogdon extension, as long as the plan is to move him to the 2 in the future. The problem with Brogdon isn't his skill level, it is his role. That role can always change.

    The reason there may be a correlation between the Pacers playing well and Myles playing well has mostly to do with how our wings are playing. How well Myles plays offensively is dependent on two things is he makings his threes and are others able to get him the ball in a good position to score. When our wings are not playing well that generally means they are not going to be getting Myles the ball in a position to score.
    But that’s the problem, right? Brogdon wants to be a point guard. Scott Agness was recently on a podcast where he recalled an interview question to Malcolm at the end of last season where he was asked about moving off-ball to the 2 spot and his response was something along the lines of “I’m a point guard.”

    EDIT: I think our team has a lot of guys who severely lack self-awareness. Or maybe it would be referred to as overconfident.

    We have a shooting guard who thinks he’s a floor general.

    We have a slashing sixth-man who thinks he’s a three-level scoring threat.

    We have a stretch big who can block shots that thinks he’s a 20/10 player.

    We have a strong big who is a playmaker and force down low that thinks he has the same standing with refs as LeBron.

    We have a feisty back-up point guard with no range that thinks he should be a starter.

    The list goes on.

    What we lack is either clearly defined roles for each player or players that are willing to accept their roles.
    Last edited by indyman37; 11-18-2021, 11:16 PM. Reason: Needed to rant.
    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


    • #92
      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post


      Brogdon the player is fine.

      Relying on Brogdon to be a top 2 player on your roster (whether intentional or by default) is not fine.
      I completely agree with this, and I think this is where people get lost. A good/great GM could have made proper moves in the last 2 or 3 seasons to at least make the team look like a possible 2nd round team by now, or have us in position to have a few decent young players. Brogdon is not at all the problem imo, but the position the team has put him in (regardless of what he wants) is the problem. Now, if they will never recognize this, then sure, the extension is a big pile of whatever. But the move itself is not a bad move at all, and is a good value move. I try to grade these moves individually, and think that having assets for longer is a good way to operate in the NBA for a small market. Grading things individually sometimes doesn't work if your GM/Pres is an idiot, but I'm not one of those that thinks Pritch is. I think he's completely in denial and his hands are tied.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by PaceBalls View Post

        The key to butts in seats is winning, always has been, always will be. Indiana has a very fickle, very fairweather fanbase. It's "Positively 4th Street" in Indiana as far as the Pacers are concerned. Now maybe the best way to have a winning competitive team is to have a star player, but that absolutely is not necessary. If the Pacers had a superstar player and were 13trh or 14th seed, you would not see much difference in attendance.
        I kinda disagre with this; but it also depends on what you define as a "superstar".
        For example, if our superstar was Jordan-caliberesque, but we weren't winning games, I bet fans would still be excited to watch.

        But for those that considered Reggie a superstar...in my opinion, that type of superstar and losing, fans aren't excited about.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by indyman37 View Post

          But that’s the problem, right? Brogdon wants to be a point guard. Scott Agness was recently on a podcast where he recalled an interview question to Malcolm at the end of last season where he was asked about moving off-ball to the 2 spot and his response was something along the lines of “I’m a point guard.”

          EDIT: I think our team has a lot of guys who severely lack self-awareness. Or maybe it would be referred to as overconfident.

          We have a shooting guard who thinks he’s a floor general.

          We have a slashing sixth-man who thinks he’s a three-level scoring threat.

          We have a stretch big who can block shots that thinks he’s a 20/10 player.

          We have a strong big who is a playmaker and force down low that thinks he has the same standing with refs as LeBron.

          We have a feisty back-up point guard with no range that thinks he should be a starter.

          The list goes on.

          What we lack is either clearly defined roles for each player or players that are willing to accept their roles.
          Yea I was in the same headspace as Eleazer prior to listening to that podcast with Agness. I still don't mind the extention because I think he can be easily dealt, but If Brogdon's gonna have a problem moving off ball at some point, then I'd just as soon deal him when we get the opportunity.

          Last edited by CJ Jones; 11-19-2021, 01:19 AM.

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post

            I'm not a big Brogdon fan either, but statistically, he is our best player

            And that's the sad truth
            I mean whatever, he's shooting 28% from 3 this season 6 attempts per game. He is legitimately not a good basketball player right now, same with Levert.


            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
              Brogdon would be fine as a 2. As PG - he just doesn't have the skills to handle the position. Trade LeVert for a true PG, move Brogdon to the 2 and see what happens. Can't be worse.
              We should have gone after Lonzo this offseason harder than we did. He would have solved a lot of issues for this team, but I'm guessing KP still is afraid of Lavar calling him a ***** or something.


              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post


                Yeah but by the end of the year they will have something like a 37-45 record and will give us spin about how they would have been so much better if not for injuries to x, y, and z. One could almost write the future press conferences verbatim.

                The Pacers' goal is to not bottom out. Players like Brogdon, Turner, Sabonis, and LeVert are too good for us to sink too far in the cellar, but obviously nowhere near good enough to make us into any sort of serious contender. My dream is for us to get a desperately needed top 5 lotto pick talent, but we will just never allow ourselves to sink to that territory. That's why we give big extensions to players like Brogdon. The franchise is way too scared to ever take a risk so they lock up the players who pretty much guarantee that they won't win less than 35 games and can keep fooling people into thinking the team might go somewhere.
                I think right now they will be lucky to be 37-45. I see like a 30-52 team right now.

                Which, hey, better pick, so I'm not necessarily against it especially if KP hits the road and we finally clean up some of the roster issues, but I still can't imagien that's what Simon was thinking.


                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by doctor-h View Post
                  Brogdon is not a leader. He is not a point guard. The pacer management has forgot what a point guard is. He is slow. Can't defend quickness. Can't handle ball pressure. Just watch how far he is pushed out on the floor when pressured. He can't handle double teams. Holds the ball too long. Makes nobody on the team a better player. He is a boring personality and player. It's sad to say that if this team brought up Lance, he would be the most popular player on the team and he is a buffoon. He is fun to watch though and has some passion for the game. This is how far this franchise has sunk. It is time this fan base demand change and it's time Simon listens.
                  I had a weird thought ht eother day that Brogdon just reminds me of a slightly more talented/bigger Anthony Johnson and I shuddered.


                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post

                    I think right now they will be lucky to be 37-45. I see like a 30-52 team right now.

                    Which, hey, better pick, so I'm not necessarily against it especially if KP hits the road and we finally clean up some of the roster issues, but I still can't imagien that's what Simon was thinking.
                    Yeah but down the stretch the bad teams will be in full tank mode and the contenders will be resting for the playoffs. The Pacers meanwhile will treat April games in a lost season as if it’s game 7 of the NBA FINALS. We will rack up a bunch of worthless late season wins. I’ve seen this movie too many times.

                    Comment


                    • one thing i'll say about the pacers and brogdon, it's wild that he essentially got two coaches fired in two years and somehow came out of it on the other side with the team pushing him as even more of a leader.

                      most guys would get killed for that especially when the team stinks.


                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by pogi View Post

                        I kinda disagre with this; but it also depends on what you define as a "superstar".
                        For example, if our superstar was Jordan-caliberesque, but we weren't winning games, I bet fans would still be excited to watch.

                        But for those that considered Reggie a superstar...in my opinion, that type of superstar and losing, fans aren't excited about.
                        If we had the exact same record we have today but Luka Doncic was on the team, we would have a 3 year waitlist to get season tickets. Hell the statue in front of the Fieldhouse would probably be about done by now.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post

                          Yeah but down the stretch the bad teams will be in full tank mode and the contenders will be resting for the playoffs. The Pacers meanwhile will treat April games in a lost season as if it’s game 7 of the NBA FINALS. We will rack up a bunch of worthless late season wins. I’ve seen this movie too many times.
                          We can look at the schedule right now and pretty much see that we could win out March & April with the Mad Ants on the floor. It's the balance to having one of the hardest schedules in the league for October & November.

                          Unless you are advocating the Pacers just forfeit their last 20 games you need to get off the high horse about everyone else tanking better than us because we're somehow stupidly greedy for wins. The fact of the matter is that even our bench all by itself isn't really the worst team in the NBA, and outright telling players they have to suck or be benched for 2 months is ludicrous.

                          Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

                          BillS

                          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by BillS View Post
                            We can look at the schedule right now and pretty much see that we could win out March & April with the Mad Ants on the floor. It's the balance to having one of the hardest schedules in the league for October & November.

                            Unless you are advocating the Pacers just forfeit their last 20 games you need to get off the high horse about everyone else tanking better than us because we're somehow stupidly greedy for wins. The fact of the matter is that even our bench all by itself isn't really the worst team in the NBA, and outright telling players they have to suck or be benched for 2 months is ludicrous.

                            Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk
                            I agree

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by BillS View Post
                              We can look at the schedule right now and pretty much see that we could win out March & April with the Mad Ants on the floor. It's the balance to having one of the hardest schedules in the league for October & November.

                              Unless you are advocating the Pacers just forfeit their last 20 games you need to get off the high horse about everyone else tanking better than us because we're somehow stupidly greedy for wins. The fact of the matter is that even our bench all by itself isn't really the worst team in the NBA, and outright telling players they have to suck or be benched for 2 months is ludicrous.

                              Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk
                              The whole team just lost to the worse team in the league
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post

                                The whole team just lost to the worse team in the league
                                Then if they are truly that bad they should easily lose at the end of the season.

                                I suppose the six teams who have actually lost to us so far should be all in on their tanking, since the season is defined by the worst team you lost to in November.

                                Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

                                BillS

                                A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                                Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X