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 #25 Pacers vs Heat

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

  • #46
    truth of the matter is that this team hasn't liked each other since like january of last year when i said they needed a players only meeting and a lot of you mocked me for it, but it's been a consistent down slope since.

    team is a joke across the board right now. there is no leadership at all.


    Comment


    • #47
      The Dipo injury and exit just seemed to zap all of the soul out of this team .

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
        Just a really terrible basketball team. What else is there to say. Pritchard is a con man
        I prefer the term "Snake Oil Salesman." Rick Carlisle and TJ Warren returning to health were KP's Magical Elixir.
        Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
          The Dipo injury and exit just seemed to zap all of the soul out of this team .
          Outside the 94-2000 run injuries and injury timing to key players has been a real impact to this franchise. O'Neal's durability slipping away at age 25 or 26, Granger not getting one more year out of his knees and syncing up with PG's breakout season, PG injury playing for Team USA after the 2nd ECF etc. The 80's were generally a mess but had Kellogg & Stipo stayed healthy.......

          Comment


          • #50
            Same Heat team that whipped the Pacers are getting blown out to the Bucks without Giannis

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post

              Outside the 94-2000 run injuries and injury timing to key players has been a real impact to this franchise. O'Neal's durability slipping away at age 25 or 26, Granger not getting one more year out of his knees and syncing up with PG's breakout season, PG injury playing for Team USA after the 2nd ECF etc. The 80's were generally a mess but had Kellogg & Stipo stayed healthy.......
              I think PG's injury was a heartbreaker at the time, but looking back, that team wasn't about to go back to ECF. That seemed pretty clear to me by that point. Lost Lance, and it was Hibbert's last year. CJ Miles and Rodney Stuckey weren't good enough to rely on as the only wings behind PG. I don't see how we were going to do much of anything that year, especially given George Hill ended up missing time as well.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Ichi View Post

                I think PG's injury was a heartbreaker at the time, but looking back, that team wasn't about to go back to ECF. That seemed pretty clear to me by that point. Lost Lance, and it was Hibbert's last year. CJ Miles and Rodney Stuckey weren't good enough to rely on as the only wings behind PG. I don't see how we were going to do much of anything that year, especially given George Hill ended up missing time as well.
                Yes Bird made some questionable moves that year and the year after but much like Dipo his relationship with the team, city & organization was never same after he was away for rehab.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post

                  Outside the 94-2000 run injuries and injury timing to key players has been a real impact to this franchise. O'Neal's durability slipping away at age 25 or 26, Granger not getting one more year out of his knees and syncing up with PG's breakout season, PG injury playing for Team USA after the 2nd ECF etc. The 80's were generally a mess but had Kellogg & Stipo stayed healthy.......
                  We’ve been chasing the next longterm “franchise player” ever since Reggie got old and retired. It was supposed to be JO....then Granger....then PG.....then Dipo.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                    We've been chasing the next longterm 'franchise player' ever since Reggie got old and retired. It was supposed to be JO....then Granger....then PG.....then Dipo.
                    I'll agree, but so has 90% of the rest of the NBA. If you look at the current franchise superstars and where they were drafted - it's easy to see that it's not an exact science and there's a buttload of luck involved.

                    Curry, Giannis, Joker, etc ....... if they were locks to be what they've morphed into, they all would have been #1s. All the Pacers can do is hope to luck into something similar.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                      it's funny how much people hate brogdon in the stands and he's literally the one guy we literally can't trade right now lol
                      This year would almost be bearable if it weren't for this idiotic and totally unnecessary move by our moron of a GM. It's painfully obvious that tis guy (Brogdon) should be the first guy out the door (followed shortly thereafter by KP).
                      "I mean, you'd walk into our dressing room and run into Mel Daniels holding a .45 -- it makes you wonder."

                      Bob Netolicky

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Drewtone View Post

                        This year would almost be bearable if it weren't for this idiotic and totally unnecessary move by our moron of a GM. It's painfully obvious that tis guy (Brogdon) should be the first guy out the door (followed shortly thereafter by KP).
                        Question - if you want to tank why would you want to make a big trade by the deadline? Brogden would not get us good young players or multiple 1st round picks. If he DID get us good young players wouldn't that cause us to *gasp* win games? If he could net us draft picks won't he be able to do that after the season when his extension might be more valuable?

                        I think the whole concept of value for an expiring contract has been proven to be overrated in recent years. The general consensus out in the world is that Brogden's contract extension is about where it should be, not overvalued, so all it really does is keep us from trading him at the deadline rather than the end of the year.

                        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


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by BillS View Post
                          Question - if you want to tank why would you want to make a big trade by the deadline? Brogden would not get us good young players or multiple 1st round picks. If he DID get us good young players wouldn't that cause us to *gasp* win games? If he could net us draft picks won't he be able to do that after the season when his extension might be more valuable?

                          I think the whole concept of value for an expiring contract has been proven to be overrated in recent years. The general consensus out in the world is that Brogden's contract extension is about where it should be, not overvalued, so all it really does is keep us from trading him at the deadline rather than the end of the year.

                          Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk
                          Bill, I understand what you're saying, but I'm indifferent regarding a tank. I think Brogdon is purely addition by subtraction and a big factor in the dysfunction of this team.
                          "I mean, you'd walk into our dressing room and run into Mel Daniels holding a .45 -- it makes you wonder."

                          Bob Netolicky

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Indycornrows has questioned some of Rick's coaching decisions this season, but they've done it with kid gloves. They took the gloves off a bit in their latest podcast. Other than the rebounding jump, Rick's done a **** job with these guys. He's not going anywhere obviously, but what I've seen so far doesn't give me alot of confidence going forward.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by BillS View Post
                              Question - if you want to tank why would you want to make a big trade by the deadline? Brogden would not get us good young players or multiple 1st round picks. If he DID get us good young players wouldn't that cause us to *gasp* win games? If he could net us draft picks won't he be able to do that after the season when his extension might be more valuable?

                              I think the whole concept of value for an expiring contract has been proven to be overrated in recent years. The general consensus out in the world is that Brogden's contract extension is about where it should be, not overvalued, so all it really does is keep us from trading him at the deadline rather than the end of the year.

                              Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk
                              I agree completely with the Brogdon contract. But Bills, Brogdon is more productive than any decent young player will be here. When people say "good young player," they don't necessarily mean Trae Young and Evan Mobley. People are trying to find guys with skills that are relevant and highly valued in today's game, but probably haven't put it all together yet, or haven't received their opportunity to. Brogdon will never fetch good young players or Multiple 1sts (of any significant value). He could probably get us a high 1st, a solid young player, and salary filler.

                              Deals like:
                              LA Clippers - Brogdon for Eric Bledsoe (2 year deal for 14mil) and Keon Johnson plus their '22 2nd rounder and Heat 2023 1st (lotto protected til '26). I don't really believe in Keon Johnson as a player, but he has a lot of what you would want in a 19 year old wing prospect.

                              Minny - Brogdon and Justin Holiday for Pat Bev (expires this year), Taureen Prince (expiring), Leandro Bolmaro (I don't see it with him, but has ball skills and shooting potential), their 1st round for '22 or '23, plus a couple of their many 2nd rounders in the coming years. Swap Craig in for Holiday if they prefer.

                              Boston - Brogdon and Craig for Josh Richardson (2 years left bleh), Juancho Hernangomez, Aaron Nesmith, Grant Williams and '22 or '23 first. Could swap in Payton Pritchard for Williams or Nesmith if you want... I don't think many would.

                              Atlanta - Brogdon and Oshae for Dan Gal (2 years left at a hefty price), Cam Reddish, and '22 or '23 first. Idk if they'd do it because of potential Nate/Brogdon stuff, but Brogdon finally solidifies the team when Trae is off the court. He can also play bigger when sharing the court. Gives them another PnR ball handler, and just loads them up with shooting.

                              I'm not in love with any of these deals, but they're all things I could see as semi-realistic possiblities if Brogdon didn't get the extension. Most of these (that don't rely on an expiring) could still be done in the offseason, when picks are more clear. Brogdon could be a splashy move for a team on the cusp of contention, or one that desperately wants to win (see Minny, but not easy to partner with when Bev expires). I think most of these are not great returns, and may not be equal value, but a player's value isn't the same for every team, and if we can't make some changes around him, he's not really valuable for us.

                              I see absolutely no reason to have both towers or LeVert on this team if they aren't seriously rolling by the deadline.
                              Last edited by Ichi; 12-05-2021, 11:40 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X