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 to consider adjustments. Montieth article

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

    http://www.indystar.com/articles/7/151861-8167-179.html





    Pacers to consider adjustments


    By Mark Montieth
    mark.montieth@indystar.com
    June 2, 2004


    When Donnie Walsh hired Larry Bird as the Indiana Pacers president last July, he knew exactly what qualities he was getting.

    "I think he sees the issues very clearly," Walsh said later. "Once he sees what the issues are, he responds to them very directly."

    That's a good thing because the Pacers' roster has issues. As young and impressive as it is, it is a complex puzzle, and the pieces aren't likely to fit as well next season as they did in this one when prideful veterans and anxious young players were willing to sit quietly amid a 61-win season.

    Next season promises to be different. Bird's challenge will be to upgrade their talent and maintain stability amid so many changing circumstances.

    The confusion surrounding the roster became evident in the Eastern Conference finals loss to Detroit, when coach Rick Carlisle tried three different starting lineups. Jeff Foster, who had 20 points and 16 rebounds in Game 5 of the second-round series with Miami, played just two minutes in Game 6 against the Pistons.

    The Pacers don't need an overhaul, and they're almost assured of being a contender next season. But something will have to give.

    Many of the changes will hinge on the status of Reggie Miller, who turns 39 in August. His contract runs through two more seasons, but he has stated repeatedly that he doesn't want to play past the age of 40. In that case, next season would be his last. He said earlier this season he might retire if the Pacers won the championship this season, but that didn't happen.

    Miller fueled media speculation, however, by declining to answer when asked whether he would return following Tuesday's loss. His father, Saul, reached by telephone today, said he has heard nothing that makes him believe Miller will retire, adding "a decision like that wouldn't be made for another 30 days at least."

    One thing is clear. Nobody within the organization wants him to retire. Miller averaged 10.0 points in the regular season and 10.1 points in the postseason, but his shooting percentages didn't drop much and his intangibles remain essential.

    "He's been one of the best teammates I've ever had," said Austin Croshere, Miller's teammate for the past seven seasons. "We live close to each other in Los Angeles in the summer and I'll be over at his house every day to talk him out of it if that's what he decides."

    Miller stated two summers ago he would be willing to come off the bench someday if that was best for the team. A trade for a starter is a possibility, but a successor already could be on hand. Fred Jones is athletic, a strong defender, an able passer and shot 49 percent from the field and 50 percent (11-of-22) from 3-point range in the postseason. He also is affordable, still working on his rookie contract.

    The Pacers have tradable commodities, however, should they want to seek outside help. Al Harrington, runner-up for Sixth Man of the Year, doesn't want to continue in that role forever. His best chance for starting would be if Ron Artest is moved from small forward to shooting guard, but Harrington might always be frustrated on a team with plenty of scoring threats.

    His contract, with two years remaining at $13.3 million, is not prohibitive and he is viewed by some as a potential All-Star.

    A newspaper report out of Chicago claims the Bulls would trade the third overall pick in the draft for Harrington if the Pacers also took on one of their "bad" contracts, such as those belonging to Eddie Robinson or Jerome Williams.

    Another logical trade target is Golden State center Erick Dampier, who would address the Pacers' need for a bigger frontline to compete with the Pistons and the Western Conference powers. Dampier, who led the NBA in rebounds per 48 minutes (17.7) during the regular season, will opt out of his contract this summer and wants to play in the East.

    He will command a major contract but could be available in a sign-and-trade. Chris Mullin, Bird's counterpart at Golden State, has a strong relationship with Bird, having played for him when Bird coached the Pacers and with him on the 1992 Olympic Dream Team.

    Harrington and Artest seem to bring a glut of talent and ambition to the frontline, but Artest finished the season almost as enigmatically as he began it. He became one of the league's success stories by playing in the All-Star Game and earning Defensive Player of the Year honors after having been suspended for 12 games the previous season. But he still had more than the usual number of missed flights and practices, and ended the season with a controversial flagrant foul at a crucial point in Game 6.

    Afterward, as was sometimes the case following disappointing losses, he voiced frustration.

    "I want the ball more, so I've got to prove myself," he said. "Obviously we couldn't score the ball at the end. So I blame myself. I still have a lot to prove to people."

    So does Jonathan Bender. The fifth pick in the 1999 draft, Bender has yet to play consistent minutes and remains a mystery. He averaged 10 points in 17 minutes in the first-round sweep of Boston but was ineffective in sporadic appearances against Detroit. Walsh never traded a player before he was sure of that player's ability, and Bird likely will take the same approach. A major move will have to be made, however, for Bender to get an opportunity.

    Some players want out if more playing time can't be assured. Kenny Anderson, a reserve free agent, has stated he prefers to sign elsewhere. Jamison Brewer, the Pacers' other free agent, feels the same.

    Scot Pollard, acquired in the sign-and-trade for Brad Miller last summer, played just 13 minutes in the postseason and has value as a veteran center. Neither he nor the front office wants him to spend another season in layaway.

    The possibilities are endless. The players seem ready for almost anything.

    "It's a strange world in professional sports," said Jermaine O'Neal, their most stable foundation. "Teams make changes. I've learned to handle what I can handle and that's just basketball. I'm going to let Larry and Donnie and our owners handle the movement part."
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

    #3 draft pick and a crappy contract... eh...
    Here, everyone have a : on me

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

      Some players want out if more playing time can't be assured. Kenny Anderson, a reserve free agent, has stated he prefers to sign elsewhere. Jamison Brewer, the Pacers' other free agent, feels the same.

      Scot Pollard, acquired in the sign-and-trade for Brad Miller last summer, played just 13 minutes in the postseason and has value as a veteran center. Neither he nor the front office wants him to spend another season in layaway.

      You knew this was coming , too much talent and little playiing time ,we knew Kenny was gone anyways and there is a article in one of the Papers that NJ is very intrested in Kenny Anderson. I know it wasn't mentioned but I have heard bender is unhappy and wanting more mins also or he wants to go.

      Glad too see Bird and Walsh are on the same page , but I wouldn't have expected anything less
      Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

        Who are, say, the top 10 players in the draft, would you all think?

        Because if there's a kick-*** shooting guard that we could nail with the #3 pick, and get a Foster-type player in Jerome Williams to come off the bench too, I might be for that. But again, only if there's a well-known talented shooting guard who could help right away.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

          As I predicted in another thread, Reggie will not retire but he will tell Rick that he wants to come off the bench.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

            Personally I think this years Draft is terriable , not much to go ahhh I need that guy he will be the bomb.
            Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

              Again, whenever I read something by Montieth I always wonder how much of this is news analysis or propoganda?

              It has always been the policy of the Pacers to keep all of the dirty laundry out of the public eye, so whenever I read things about players I have to wonder if this isn't Donnie's way of preparing us for something. Then again in the electronic age a lot of this stuff get's out so Montieth is just repeating what has been reported.

              The Artest thing for example was played live for the world on WTHR, so that isn't new news.

              But for him to bring this up in this fashion always makes me wonder.

              "Harrington and Artest seem to bring a glut of talent and ambition to the frontline, but Artest finished the season almost as enigmatically as he began it. He became one of the league's success stories by playing in the All-Star Game and earning Defensive Player of the Year honors after having been suspended for 12 games the previous season. But he still had more than the usual number of missed flights and practices, and ended the season with a controversial flagrant foul at a crucial point in Game 6.

              Afterward, as was sometimes the case following disappointing losses, he voiced frustration.

              "I want the ball more, so I've got to prove myself," he said. "Obviously we couldn't score the ball at the end. So I blame myself. I still have a lot to prove to people."


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

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

                This might surprise you, but I don't mind what Artest said. I hope he works every day this summer, like I know he will, trying to prove something to people.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

                  Here are some past #3s

                  2003: C. Anthony
                  2002: M. Dunleavy
                  2001: P. Gasol
                  2000: D. Miles
                  1999: B. Davis
                  1998: R. LaFrentz
                  1997: C. Billups
                  1996: S. Abdur-Rahim
                  1995: J. Stackhouse
                  1994: G. Hill
                  1993: A. Hardaway
                  1992: C. Laettner
                  1984: M. Jordan

                  Maybe a number 3 pick wouldn't be so bad, but I there are no standout SGs... hoopshype only predicts 1 in the top 21 picks, at #9 in Andre Iguodala, but it says that he is not a scorer. We could get Gordon there probably.. I think he is ready to contribute and is definently a scorer, but is probably limited to PG (although perhaps a iverson like SG)
                  Here, everyone have a : on me

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

                    Of course you don't mind what he said.

                    But in all honesty can you say you are even slightly objective when it comes to Ron?


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

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

                      Some players want out if more playing time can't be assured. Kenny Anderson, a reserve free agent, has stated he prefers to sign elsewhere. Jamison Brewer, the Pacers' other free agent, feels the same.
                      This is news.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

                        Some players want out if more playing time can't be assured. Kenny Anderson, a reserve free agent, has stated he prefers to sign elsewhere. Jamison Brewer, the Pacers' other free agent, feels the same.
                        This is news.
                        For some reason I don't give a crap.
                        "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                        ----------------- Reggie Miller

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

                          We shouldn't be worried about brewer, I think we all see the need for a shooter/scorer...that is exactly what jesus isn't.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

                            so kenny and brewer both want to leave? not surprising since they haven't played much lately.

                            how about aj though? people seem to assume he'll be with the pacers next season. weird about aj, he's gone from the most hated pacer to a backup pg most people can live with.

                            however, he has an opt out on a paltry contract (1 year left - not exactly job security), after playing his best series ever. dontcha think he'll opt out and test the market? he's not risking much, and at worst he'll probably find another one year deal, pacers would be sure to have him back if they're losing kenny and siggy.

                            so we might end up losing all our backup pgs. frankly, the yearly rent a pg doesn't appeal to me. or maybe we'll give aj a long term deal? i don't think he's that good. maybe the draft?

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Pacers to consider adjustments. Montieth article

                              Of course you don't mind what he said.

                              But in all honesty can you say you are even slightly objective when it comes to Ron?
                              That is why I said tongue in cheek, this might surprise you.


                              I think I have been critical of Ron this year at times. Pointing out some of his strange behavior in game #2. In this Pistons series, there were games like #4 and #6 when Ron did a good job of staying within the offense, but there were games like #2 and #5 where he did not.

                              Ron is not an easy guy to coach,

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X