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

Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

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

  • #46
    Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

    I thought I heard Michael Scott/Chris Denari say during the game that TJ was told in either Milwaukee or Toronto that he needs to tune his athleticism down. If you go back and watch some of his games in Milwaukee he is much more explosive around the basket, and this was the player that I thought we would be getting. The reason, obviously, why he had to tune down his wreckless abandon toward the basket is to save his career. If he has one more mishap with his neck then his playing career is over most likely so maybe he's just taking care of himself.

    "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

      Originally posted by theboyjwo View Post
      i've noticed several games Granger has been able to hit a big shot in the closing minutes of the 4th to bring us with in striking distance of a win and they go away from him. Get him the ball and let him do his thing. I think they've only gotten him the ball a few times on buzzer beaters this season. Not enough. Best player should be taking the final shot. Especially on this team. Instead we have Quis, Rasho, Jack, Ford. Everyone but Granger taking the last shot on the crunch time rotation.
      As always, I'm a big fan of Danny, and I think that he's trying and making progress, but...

      He's still relatively easy to guard, particularly in a one-possession scenario. If you watch the final play last night, he drifted out to the arc and waited for about half the possession. He did make a nice aggressive cut to the basket, but it was pretty late in the clock. Also, while I would've like to have seen the pass be made to him, it would've taken good vision and a good pass from the PG, and Danny would've had a shot at the rim, but it would've been contested by both McDyess (on the help) and Prince (on the trail). So, even with that good cut, he hadn't created a fantastic opportunity.

      I think Danny will continue to learn, but I say for like the 4th time in the last week, he's got to get better and more active without the ball. (I was pleased to see, last night, Danny post up (and draw a foul) and Murph post up (and hit an ugly fade away). Progress.)

      Originally posted by Arcadian View Post
      My guess is that defenses are collapsing on TJ more in the lane now that he is playing with Murphy rather than Bosh.

      We don't have the defensive talent to be a good defensive team. The only way we could lower the score is slow down the pace.

      Danny was good.
      Well, I agree with the Danny is good part.

      As to "collapsing on TJ" part, I actually haven't seen that. For the most part, their switching on the screen and basically challenging Ford at the basket. Even at that, Ford's missed an inordinate number of shots, both challenged and unchallenged right at the rim.

      We don't have the defensive talent, but we don't have the offensive talent to run a slow pace game. In a set piece game, our offensive efficiency will drop, and we'll get fewer good looks. We may give up fewer points, but we'll score even fewer, and, IMO, actually reduce our chances to win. (even further)

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

        Originally posted by count55 View Post
        Prince took away the three, but Danny had beaten him on a backcut. It would've been tight, but the pass was there for Danny cutting to the basket.
        I just re-watched it and I must disagree, there was no tway he could have made that pass

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

          I wasn't suggesting that we should slow the pace down. My implication was that for us to focus on defense would mean slowing the game down rather than playing better defense. I guess I should have made a longer post to be more clear.
          "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

          "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            Pacers offense tonight was excellent - any discussion of "why the pacers lost" should begin and end with defense
            Originally posted by Bball View Post
            I'd like to see us de-emphasize the offense and work on defense.............We were really disruptive to the passing lanes earlier in the season and that has left us now..............I thought that was going to be the change in our defense this year that negated a philosophical difference I had with our approach last year.
            Well, the discussion finally moved from TJ Ford's shortcomings back to the root cause of all of these losses....poor defense.

            The Pistons scored 85, 89, 91, 92 and 94 in the preceding 5 games. Last night they scored 114 points. No, it was not an overtime game.

            So, defense is unquestionably THE issue.

            Generally, it seems like our defense was a little better earlier in the year.
            It seems like our defense became noticeably worse after the Houston game. That coincided to some extent with Rush's reduced minutes. Rush played 36 minutes in the Houston win....the most for him all year. Since his minutes were reduced, it seems we cannot stop anybody. Maybe this is a coincidence.

            Another interesting thing. Every single game Quis scored 20 points or more, which were 6 games, the Pacers lost. Quis has played over 30 minutes in 18 of 22 games. Other than the close loss last night in Detroit, the last time he played less than 30 minutes was the Houston game...which we won. The next previous game was Atlanta...which we also won. I seriously believe his inability to shoot from range hurts us badly. It allows the other team to rest on defense and collapse in the middle. This allows them to be more energetic on the other end when they get the ball back.

            Time to start Rush.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

              Well, Dr. Basketball did prescribe the same cure for both the Raptors' offense and Pistons' offense this week.

              We'll continue to make a lot of bad offenses look proficient. If we want to win, we've got to improve our strength - offense. Our defense needs to improve but it isn't going to. We're not physical, we're not particuarly big or long.

              We need to outscore opponents. It almost worked last night.
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                Well, Dr. Basketball did prescribe the same cure for both the Raptors' offense and Pistons' offense this week.

                We'll continue to make a lot of bad offenses look proficient. If we want to win, we've got to improve our strength - offense. Our defense needs to improve but it isn't going to. We're not physical, we're not particuarly big or long.

                We need to outscore opponents. It almost worked last night.
                I suppose that could win a few more games...but I doubt we can do it until Dunleavy returns. The supposedly good offensive players are getting all the minutes already....so it appears you are suggesting what is already being done.

                I would start by trimming the stat-boys minutes (e.g. Murphy and Quis) and adding some elbow grease (e.g. McRoberts and Rush...and maybe Baston). When I say trim, I don't mean replace or eliminate.

                To add to my previous post about Quis and Rush, I would add that McRoberts has played 10 minutes or more in three games...and every single game we won. Is it mere coincidence that we are 4-15 in the games where he sat?....and 3-0 in the games that he played meaningful minutes....one against LA?

                Anyway, I do know that the activity and disruption energy guys bring to the defensive end of the court should not be discounted. It never ever shows in the stats to the extent that it truly matters.
                Last edited by BlueNGold; 12-13-2008, 11:29 AM.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post

                  (maybe someone will say he called too many timeouts at the end


                  Since I'm just starting to read this thread, I'll give my answer b4 reading the any other post in the thread.

                  I've displayed my displeasure of recent about JO'B calling time outs late in the game, I have to say I have no complaint as to how he did them the last few minutes of the game. To be quite honest, I had expected him not to call a time out at 8 seconds left and to push the ball up the court. The out come was the same, a loss, but I thought it was a prudent call of a time out. If it happens again, it will be interesting to see if he calls a time out.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I just re-watched it and I must disagree, there was no tway he could have made that pass
                    I watched the TIVO several times before I made the initial post. Though, in realtime action, I thought Danny was more open, I still believe the pass could have been made. Though it would've required a good pass, I don't think it was an inordinately difficult pass.

                    The bigger question would've been about the quality of the shot Danny would end up getting. He would've been going towards McDyess and had Prince trailing. I'm not sure he could've dunked, so he may have had to try a reverse. It's very possible it could've been blocked.

                    Sitting here with the luxury of time and space to consider the right move, the highest percentage play would've been a hard pass fake to the cutting Granger, then a TJ pull up from 14.

                    However, hindsight is 20-20. My main objection with TJ on the last play was indecisiveness. I would've felt better had he gone hard at McDyess and gotten rejected, or tried to feed Danny on the drive.

                    My professional life has taught me that "in between" is the worst place in the world to be. We, as a team, spend a lot of time caught "in between".

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                      Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post


                      He's quick and he can dribble. But he has serious weaknesses with ball pressure and in traffic.

                      He may be quick, but he is a sloppy dribbler at times. I believe he gets sloppy and careless with his dribble b/c of his speed.

                      Your 2nd sentence is right on the money.

                      He had the ball with 8 seconds and his drive is awkward, but even with that when Dice came at him all he had to do was step into him for the foul.

                      Ford is not the PG we saw at the beginning of the season. He was so much better, wth authority, in his play. Statements were made that the Pacers hadn't had a PG like him since Mark Jackson. To be honest, bite my tongue, with his play right now, he isn't better than Tinsley was early last season. He needs to regain his form of earlier in the season play. I'm becoming disappointed in him with his play. It makes me really regret that Bird didn't get a early 2nd round pick from Portland in the trade so to draft Chalmers.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                        On a positive note GRANGER scored 42 points on prince and the Pistons defense.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                          Originally posted by justinDOHMAN View Post
                          On a positive note GRANGER scored 42 points on prince and the Pistons defense.
                          Rips was guarding him for the most part.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                            Originally posted by justinDOHMAN View Post
                            On a positive note GRANGER scored 42 points on prince and the Pistons defense.
                            1. The Pistons played zero defense last night.

                            2. He scored them on Rip Hamilton, not Tayshaun.

                            42 points is still 42 points, but the fact it was scored on the Pistons doe not make it more impressive.

                            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                              Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post

                              Ford is not the PG we saw at the beginning of the season. He was so much better, wth authority, in his play. Statements were made that the Pacers hadn't had a PG like him since Mark Jackson. To be honest, bite my tongue, with his play right now, he isn't better than Tinsley was early last season. He needs to regain his form of earlier in the season play. I'm becoming disappointed in him with his play. It makes me really regret that Bird didn't get a early 2nd round pick from Portland in the trade so to draft Chalmers.
                              I agree here

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Postgame thread Pacers at Pistons

                                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                                1. The Pistons played zero defense last night.
                                42 points is still 42 points, but the fact it was scored on the Pistons doe not make it more impressive.

                                If the Pistons had played zero defense the Pacers would have scored 500.
                                The Pacers have almost beaten Boston twice. Boston is pretty good defensively and the Pacers scored a lot of points against them also. Of course the Pacers defense is nothing to
                                write home about so they lose more than they win. As far as Danny was concerned what he did last night was impressive. He stepped it up a notch. He still is learning.
                                {o,o}
                                |)__)
                                -"-"-

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X