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

Is Danny Granger overrated?

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

  • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

    Originally posted by Will Galen View Post

    I think most of us think he's stepped back, not up.

    I'd say you are correct. I believe the word regressed has been used in describing Granger since his Allstar year.

    Comment


    • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

      [QUOTE=mattie;1242043]Sure.

      almost as a whole the entire board feels we need a true all star to play with Danny. /QUOTE]


      OR 2 more players the caliber of Granger.

      Comment


      • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

        He's not overrated but I think people forget about his age. He wasn't a one-and-done product and has a youthful appearance. Even I can't believe he's 28 years of age, seven years older than Paul George.

        Comment


        • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

          I'm not sure if Danny is over rated, because I'm not sure he's that highly rated. IMO his strengths are he's a very good scorer, fairly athletic, good at drawing fouls and great foul shooter, excellent 3 point shot. Weaknesses: He turns the ball over a lot, get's a lot of his shots blocked, plays poor defense, can't go Iso, is lazy on defense (he's not bad on defense, just lazy. He blames other people instead of himself for his defensive lapses) and he is NOT clutch. In the last five minutes of the first game against Chicago he scored 0 points. In the last five minutes of the second game against Chicago he scored 0 points. Two close games we should / could have won, and our best player who the plays are being run for can't score.

          I'm in the trade Granger if we can get something good in return camp. The NBA is not about loyalty, it's about paychecks and winning, and there are other types of players that would help our team more. His stats and his hustle have both declined over the last 2 years, and it might be best for the team and the player to part ways. Also, I don't think he's good for the locker room. I don't think he's a hard enough worker and that he shed's responsibility, not traits to have in our senior leader.
          Danger Zone

          Comment


          • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

            He is what he is. What you see is what you have and in my opinion what you are going to get going forward. Some are expecting him to get better. I think he has peaked. If I recall correctly Bird said at a press conference after the season he thought Danny had regressed a little.

            Don't misunderstand. I think he if a fine player, a good offensive player. I am not knocking him. I think he may even look better next year than this year even if we do nothing by way of free agency, trades, draft picks, whatever but it will be because the team has gotten better (my opinion) making him look better.

            All just my opinion. I am glad he is a Pacer. I just think he has peaked.

            Comment


            • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

              Danny Granger is a top 5 SF..hands down Lebron, Carmelo and Durant IMHO would be an upgrade, and maybe Paul Pierce. In the big scheme of things the SF pack in the league is fairly weak these days. There are about 20 players I would take over DG in a 1-for-1 swap.

              The weakest part of his game seems to be when he has to create his own shot. This wasn't as big of a problem back in 2009, but our ball movement has really fallen off since then. If only we could talk Mark Jackson out of retirement!

              Comment


              • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                No.

                It's pretty funny that the person who posted this thread can't even post anymore.

                Looks like a troll to me.
                In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

                Comment


                • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                  Originally posted by mattie View Post
                  Sure.

                  Some people on here probably think he's a little better than he is. Some think he's a little worse. But of almost all the topics that this board is polarized on, Danny I don't think is one of them. For the most part the majority of the board understands who Danny is and acknowledges his weaknesses.

                  We could argue over and over on what his actual ranking is, but almost as a whole the entire board feels we need a true all star to play with Danny.

                  Edit- Also, I was just letting croz get under my skin. Literally every one of his posts is negative.
                  This.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                    WetBob on Danny Granger It seems to me that a "concussion" that mild is nothing more then a headache. If he was tough, would he have ever left the floor at all?
                    This topic gives me a headache.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                      Originally posted by Rogco View Post
                      He turns the ball over a lot, gets a lot of his shots blocked
                      For the first half, you're incorrect.
                      For the second, I'm going to need a link.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                        He is overrated on PD for sure, some here wouldn't trade the guy for Dhoward.
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                          He is overrated on PD for sure, some here wouldn't trade the guy for Dhoward.
                          There is the mistake you and others make, one or two wouldn't and you try to pretend PD is like the borg and all share the opinion. That gets tiresome on message boards.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                            Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                            I really don't find anything wrong with what Hicks said. Its pretty damn accurate.
                            It's interesting to read that again, that as January of 2009. Wow, 2 1/2 years ago already.

                            I still stand by what I wrote, more or less, though now it's pretty obvious Danny isn't going to improve any further.

                            But that just means he's "only" a very good, not great, player.

                            I still prefer to add pieces to go with him, rather than trading him away. I'd only advocate it if I thought it was a steal or as part of a package for a great player.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                              It's interesting to read that again, that as January of 2009. Wow, 2 1/2 years ago already.

                              I still stand by what I wrote, more or less, though now it's pretty obvious Danny isn't going to improve any further.
                              I don't know about that... The problem is that somewhere along the line Granger seemed to lose some fire. Not that his skills declined or that injuries took over. His intensity and passion slipped, his attitude changed (on the court), and so it doesn't just seem a matter of him plateauing as a player that's led to the question marks that now arise when his name is mentioned.

                              So, figure out the reason for the attitude change and fix it and then let's see where he is in regards to using his skills and the veteran savvy acquired by having all this game time under his belt.
                              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                              ------

                              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                              -John Wooden

                              Comment


                              • Re: Is Danny Granger overrated?

                                I don't believe he has any presence in the mind of the casual fan, so in that regard he is underrated.

                                I think there are some people here that think he can be the best player on a contending team, so in that regard he is overrated.

                                There are some people here that think he is good enough to be the third best player on a contending team, and in that regard I agree.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X