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 thread Pacers vs Clippers game #73

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

  • #31

    Originally posted by Peck View Post

    I really like Aaron, however I think Rick like's Aaron just a little to much.
    The concern I have is that Carlisle relies too much on having our 2 best defenders on the team ( specifically Nembhard and Nesmith ) to defend the opposing Team's best non-Center #1 or #2 scorers.

    Either of them defending Curry, Kyrie or Brunson? Sure, NP.

    But constantly being given the job of defending Lebron, Giannis or Tatum? Yeah, maybe switching to defend them. But I'm not too fond of having them defend against super strong Forwards on a regular basis. I'd think that Siakam gets that job of defending them more often than not, which he is able to adequately defend.

    Right now, I get why he has to do that. But my hope is that in the Offseason that KP and Carlisle is able to sign a Tweener Forward scorer that is a slightly above to above average defender at the Forward spot.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by CableKC View Post

      The concern I have is that Carlisle relies too much on having our 2 best defenders on the team ( specifically Nembhard and Nesmith ) to defend the opposing Team's best non-Center #1 or #2 scorers.

      Either of them defending Curry, Kyrie or Brunson? Sure, NP.

      But constantly being given the job of defending Lebron, Giannis or Tatum? Yeah, maybe switching to defend them. But I'm not too fond of having them defend against super strong Forwards on a regular basis. I'd think that Siakam gets that job of defending them more often than not, which he is able to adequately defend.

      Right now, I get why he has to do that. But my hope is that in the Offseason that KP and Carlisle is able to sign a Tweener Forward scorer that is a slightly above to above average defender at the Forward spot.
      Agree with your point. Regarding the free agent desire, isn't that kinda sorta what we're hoping Jarace can become (especially with Pascal on the roster)?

      Comment


      • #33
        Great freaking game from everyone playing excellent...

        Question is, who would we rather play in the playoffs in the first round between Cleveland and New York ?

        I believe we can beat the Cavs, but with their full roster healthy, it's going to be extremely tough if we can't contain either Mitchell or the rest of the team as a whole..
        New York on the other hand will be equally as tough, but in a different way ...
        I am more scared of the Cavs than I am of NY .. plus we do seem to still have some of that chippiness and rivalry going with NY this year...
        What yall think?
        "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by 712Jefferson View Post

          Agree with your point. Regarding the free agent desire, isn't that kinda sorta what we're hoping Jarace can become (especially with Pascal on the roster)?
          I hope that Jarace can become a solid rotational Player that can come in to continue to be a solid defending version of Harrington.

          But I still think that we are still 1 Player away from building the best Deep Playoff Team that KP can come up with. Besides, the way that this Team is headed when it comes to the offensive end, you can always have better defensive Players.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by CableKC View Post

            The concern I have is that Carlisle relies too much on having our 2 best defenders on the team ( specifically Nembhard and Nesmith ) to defend the opposing Team's best non-Center #1 or #2 scorers.

            Either of them defending Curry, Kyrie or Brunson? Sure, NP.

            But constantly being given the job of defending Lebron, Giannis or Tatum? Yeah, maybe switching to defend them. But I'm not too fond of having them defend against super strong Forwards on a regular basis. I'd think that Siakam gets that job of defending them more often than not, which he is able to adequately defend.

            Right now, I get why he has to do that. But my hope is that in the Offseason that KP and Carlisle is able to sign a Tweener Forward scorer that is a slightly above to above average defender at the Forward spot.
            I just don't think they are going to have the ability to do that in free agency. They will be able to offer the mid-level exception (and that's realistically assuming that at least one of Toppin/Smith are gone). A player like that who is solid at both ends usually is in demand, so several teams will be chasing them, and sometimes like with Bruce Brown's case they end up going to a team who can offer them more than the mid-level.

            And I don't know if the Pacers will even want to offer 4 years to a player like that. They have several young guys who will need paydays during that time, and even if they pay only half of them they will have a serious money problem. And if you can't offer 4 years, you just don't have a realistic shot at those types of players.

            I think if the Pacers sign somebody like that it would have to be a damaged asset that the league has fallen out of favor for some reason and that the Pacers would hope to revive in their system.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post

              I just don't think they are going to have the ability to do that in free agency. They will be able to offer the mid-level exception (and that's realistically assuming that at least one of Toppin/Smith are gone). A player like that who is solid at both ends usually is in demand, so several teams will be chasing them, and sometimes like with Bruce Brown's case they end up going to a team who can offer them more than the mid-level.

              And I don't know if the Pacers will even want to offer 4 years to a player like that. They have several young guys who will need paydays during that time, and even if they pay only half of them they will have a serious money problem. And if you can't offer 4 years, you just don't have a realistic shot at those types of players.

              I think if the Pacers sign somebody like that it would have to be a damaged asset that the league has fallen out of favor for some reason and that the Pacers would hope to revive in their system.
              Turner plus Mathurin for a solid two way 5. That is our ticket to contending, but won't be popular around here.
              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post

                Turner plus Mathurin for a solid two way 5. That is our ticket to contending, but won't be popular around here.
                What level of player are you thinking? Are you talking about a Jarrett Allen level player? I think Turner+Mathurin is enough to get you anybody besides the 7-8 centers who simply won't be traded, so I'm interested to hear what players you would want.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post

                  I just don't think they are going to have the ability to do that in free agency. They will be able to offer the mid-level exception (and that's realistically assuming that at least one of Toppin/Smith are gone). A player like that who is solid at both ends usually is in demand, so several teams will be chasing them, and sometimes like with Bruce Brown's case they end up going to a team who can offer them more than the mid-level.

                  And I don't know if the Pacers will even want to offer 4 years to a player like that. They have several young guys who will need paydays during that time, and even if they pay only half of them they will have a serious money problem. And if you can't offer 4 years, you just don't have a realistic shot at those types of players.

                  I think if the Pacers sign somebody like that it would have to be a damaged asset that the league has fallen out of favor for some reason and that the Pacers would hope to revive in their system.
                  I know that we have young mouths to feed; but when I look at the current roster, I don't see a Deep Playoff Championship run team. This suggests that the young Players are going to take a huge leap over the next season or two. Mathurin is the only one that can possibly make it to the next level and even I don't see him as some elite Starter. I look at Sheppard and Jarace as solid bench Players but not Starter material without a few more years under their belt.

                  I'm not suggesting that we can go out and get a top tier Free Agent that we can sign with whatever MLE that we will have to use in the offseason. I'm suggesting that we get the best one that we can afford to get that will fit our needs and go from there. For me, the goal is to become a solid and expect ed 2nd round Playoff Tier Team over the next season or two and hope that Sheppard, Nembhard, Jarace and Mathurin can help get us furrther beyond that.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #39

                    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post

                    Turner plus Mathurin for a solid two way 5. That is our ticket to contending, but won't be popular around here.
                    I'm not in favor of trading Mathurin. I would be reluctant to include Nembhard, Sheppard or Jarace unless we some get back a true difference maker. This isn't because I think that the Young Players will turn into All stars. It's because I think that it is super critical and an underutilized tool that the Pacers have not taken advantage of, specifically developing cheap and long term talent through the draft. This allows for young talent to fill key roles on this team at a cheap and locked up price for 7 to 8 years. The benefit is that this will allow the team to have more Salary Cap flexibility when it comes to signing Free Agents.

                    I have no problem trading Turner as long as we get back a solid Starting Center that makes sense to play next to Haliburton and Siakam. I know that he sucks at times, but is also inconsistent enough where he is pretty solid.

                    To be honest, I'd settle for a solid but unspectacular average level Starting Center. The problem is that by just trading Turner, what Starting level Center are you going to get that isn't any better than him?





                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post

                      What level of player are you thinking? Are you talking about a Jarrett Allen level player? I think Turner+Mathurin is enough to get you anybody besides the 7-8 centers who simply won't be traded, so I'm interested to hear what players you would want.
                      Jarrett Allen is straight up worse than Myles.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Lateral moves at best. Play out his contract
                        and see what the market brings.
                        {o,o}
                        |)__)
                        -"-"-

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Rick on the radio this morning he said they didn't expect Jarace to be able to play on the wing at the 3 and now they see him as a 3/4. Exciting times ahead may take next year to finally be in the rotation every game but much needed size.


                          I also find it funny he said the team plays much better when we play a bigger lineup for rebounding and we hardly ever do lol.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post

                            Turner plus Mathurin for a solid two way 5. That is our ticket to contending, but won't be popular around here.
                            The hate for Turner is insane. Turner is a solid two way 5 if you said elite maybe I understand that but like others say who?


                            Turner gets so much hate for no reason dude is a top 15 center easily and paid 9th highest in the league. The way he is talked about you would think hes the 5th highest paid in the league and a 25th best center.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by dal9 View Post

                              Jarrett Allen is straight up worse than Myles.
                              Different strengths, imo, but agree in not liking that trade at all.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by owl View Post
                                Lateral moves at best. Play out his contract
                                and see what the market brings.
                                Given the Pacers salary cap situation, a lateral move may be the best that we can hope for. As in, get another solid bench Player that can fill a specific role or hope to make a run at a "diamond in the rough" RFA. The guy that I hope that we can go after is to offer the full MLE for D'Anthony Melton, whose a UFA. Solid wing Defender and is young enough to fit with the core. But he will probably go for a lot more than the MLE.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X