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

Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

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

  • #46
    Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

    Originally posted by count55 View Post
    This pretty much sums up my position.

    I have the same general feeling about Jack that I've had about Foster over his career. He has flaws that will occasionally get exploited, and there will be times where you just want to choke him, however...

    He's the type of guy you want on your team. Now, we can't break the bank on him, but I believe that he is going to be our #1 priority for re-signing this summer for three reasons: (1) the note at the top of this paragraph, (2) he's versatile, and (3) he'll be relatively cheap.
    I was actually more on board with this view back at the start of the year. Now I think I'd rather have Quis starting at SG with Danny at SF, and I really am not blown away by Jack at either PG or SG. He's inconsistent, thus this feeling that he's wonderful now after frustrating so many people early on.

    I don't dislike him as a backup PG that can obviously swing to SG, but at this point I'm more a fan of having Quis/Rush as the SG situation and Ford(other)/Diener as the PG solution.

    And then on top of all this is another huge question that impacts keeping Jack - DUNLEAVY.

    If Dun is on the team he's starting at SG, so even if you don't keep Quis you run into that. Then you just took Rush with a high pick and while he's not been a great scorer (yet), he's more talented all around and a much better defender. He doesn't give up size to other SGs like Jack does either.

    The Pacers could use a combo of Dun and Rush, a great deep ball threat with strong defense, but short of that the team has a glut of 2nd tier SG options now...except that you then swing half of them to their unnatural SF spot. At least I don't think Dun or Rush are nearly as well suited for that position, and both would then come off the bench behind Danny.


    JJ is hot right now, but let's just temper that with maybe some December opinions too. I don't recall fans swooning for his 33% from deep or his 44% overall. Or his fading defense.

    I guess I just end up jocking Quis all the time, but I mean look at his year. He didn't have a hot month, he's been dead on the entire time except when hurt. He's controlled his 3PAs, keeping them at the same level despite playing 33% more time this year and I'd consider that his main weakness.

    Bottom line, the Pacers will probably have to let at least one of these 2 guys go and it's going to be a shame considering how well they fill their specific role on the team.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

      Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
      Because he had a habit of committing some stupid turnovers, and kind of killing the offense on occasion instead of creating offense by not passing it off and instead taking it himself, and not always successfully. Right now he's hot, so everyone is cool with him, but earlier in the season he frustrated me.

      My memory isn't that short.

      I'm very happy with his play in the last month or so. His previous play was not consistent... he had periods of good play mixed with periods of "wtf are you doin" kind of play.
      OMG it was pretty painful. He and TJ were hurting as much as helping down the stretch of many games. When you look at a blown 10 point lead and say "okay, well they had to not only score, but had to keep us from scoring" and then go look at truly empty possessions out on top where a guy just fumbled away his dribble...brutal.

      And that's not even adding in the fact that often this would then lead to a break the other way which denied the Pacers the chance to even D up and salvage the thing.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
        Also, Jack is generally very good in the clutch, when it really matters.

        He is really good at the free throw line at the end of games.

        He has made a couple game winners at the buzzer this year.

        I think this is the x-factor in whether to re-sign someone, more important than general stats.
        Haha please he's clutch Jack at times and at other times it's I can't make the right cut off of the screen Jack or dribble off of the foot with a few seconds left Jack or rushed jumper Jack. He's streakly clutch.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          I was actually more on board with this view back at the start of the year. Now I think I'd rather have Quis starting at SG with Danny at SF, and I really am not blown away by Jack at either PG or SG. He's inconsistent, thus this feeling that he's wonderful now after frustrating so many people early on.

          I don't dislike him as a backup PG that can obviously swing to SG, but at this point I'm more a fan of having Quis/Rush as the SG situation and Ford(other)/Diener as the PG solution.
          This is where I fall on the "Keep Jack or Marquis" question. I know that having Jack teamed with Ford/Diener works from time to time.....but it doesn't work for the majority of the time. We end up having situations where Jack is the one that has to defend the opposing SG...which doesn't always work out well. This also plays into my concern that JO'B would rely too much on a Ford+Jack Backcourt due to his apparent overuse of Small Ball lineups.

          IF we have other PG options in the Offseason ( like trying to sign Sessions or drafting Jennings ), then I would be more apt to resign Jack....simply cuz he's our best PG option that we would have. But if we are able to do one of the above....then I would choose to make an attempt at signing Marquis over Jack ( at the same $3-4 mil range ). As a SG, I think that Marquis fits better and complements Granger/Dunleavy better. This doesn't mean that I don't think that Jack hasn't stepped up since Granger/Dunleavy went down....it just means that I think that if we have our backup PG needs filled...I would much rather keep Marquis over Jack since he IMHO complements Granger or Dunleavy at the SF spot.
          Last edited by CableKC; 03-04-2009, 06:07 PM.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            I was actually more on board with this view back at the start of the year. Now I think I'd rather have Quis starting at SG with Danny at SF, and I really am not blown away by Jack at either PG or SG. He's inconsistent, thus this feeling that he's wonderful now after frustrating so many people early on.

            I don't dislike him as a backup PG that can obviously swing to SG, but at this point I'm more a fan of having Quis/Rush as the SG situation and Ford(other)/Diener as the PG solution.

            And then on top of all this is another huge question that impacts keeping Jack - DUNLEAVY.

            If Dun is on the team he's starting at SG, so even if you don't keep Quis you run into that. Then you just took Rush with a high pick and while he's not been a great scorer (yet), he's more talented all around and a much better defender. He doesn't give up size to other SGs like Jack does either.

            The Pacers could use a combo of Dun and Rush, a great deep ball threat with strong defense, but short of that the team has a glut of 2nd tier SG options now...except that you then swing half of them to their unnatural SF spot. At least I don't think Dun or Rush are nearly as well suited for that position, and both would then come off the bench behind Danny.


            JJ is hot right now, but let's just temper that with maybe some December opinions too. I don't recall fans swooning for his 33% from deep or his 44% overall. Or his fading defense.

            I guess I just end up jocking Quis all the time, but I mean look at his year. He didn't have a hot month, he's been dead on the entire time except when hurt. He's controlled his 3PAs, keeping them at the same level despite playing 33% more time this year and I'd consider that his main weakness.

            Bottom line, the Pacers will probably have to let at least one of these 2 guys go and it's going to be a shame considering how well they fill their specific role on the team.
            I have the same basic opinion of Jack that I had in December. He's shown me more ability to score, but really, I just think he's a good player. I suspect that Daniels will cost more, and I still think Jack will be a 4/$16 contract. That's about all that we can afford.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

              Jack's my favorite current Pacer. I hope that doesn't up his asking price.
              "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


              • #52
                Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

                I can't even really believe this is even a thought.This team should be looking forward to 2011 and saving as much cap space for that summer as possible. Guys like Jack are a dime a dozen. JMO
                "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

                  Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                  I can't even really believe this is even a thought.This team should be looking forward to 2011 and saving as much cap space for that summer as possible. Guys like Jack are a dime a dozen. JMO
                  We're going to need a Backup PG one way or another between now and then. What are we going to do? Resign Diener to another cheap contract and hope that he can run backup PG duties til then?

                  My hope is that if Monroe isn't drafted...that Jennings is an option as a future PG in the lineup....but even if that happens....we still need to add some depth to the SG/SF rotation. One way or another.....$$$ is going to be spent to fill the PG/SG/SF rotation.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

                    Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                    Because he had a habit of committing some stupid turnovers, and kind of killing the offense on occasion instead of creating offense by not passing it off and instead taking it himself, and not always successfully. Right now he's hot, so everyone is cool with him, but earlier in the season he frustrated me.

                    My memory isn't that short.

                    I'm very happy with his play in the last month or so. His previous play was not consistent... he had periods of good play mixed with periods of "wtf are you doin" kind of play.
                    So, in other words, just like everyone else on our team other than (arguably) Granger and Murphy.
                    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                    -Emiliano Zapata

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

                      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                      We're going to need a Backup PG one way or another between now and then. What are we going to do? Resign Diener to another cheap contract and hope that he can run backup PG duties til then?

                      My hope is that if Monroe isn't drafted...that Jennings is an option as a future PG in the lineup....but even if that happens....we still need to add some depth to the SG/SF rotation. One way or another.....$$$ is going to be spent to fill the PG/SG/SF rotation.


                      I think the best direction for next year is to slice payroll and pick up some cheaper young guys with some upside and hope a few of them pan out. I might offer Jarret a two year deal or something like that. But I assume he'll want more than that.
                      "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

                        Originally posted by Arcadian View Post
                        Jack's my favorite current Pacer. I hope that doesn't up his asking price.
                        See what you did!?

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

                          Here is an interesting stat for today .. per Pacers.com
                          .
                          .
                          .
                          .

                          Jack has averaged 23.0 points, 4.5 assists, 3.3 rebounds and 1.67 steals in the last six games, shooting .511 from the field and .360 from the 3-point line. In the last two games, he’s gone 80 minutes without a turnover.


                          .
                          .
                          "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


                          • #58
                            Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

                            Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                            I think the best direction for next year is to slice payroll and pick up some cheaper young guys with some upside and hope a few of them pan out. I might offer Jarret a two year deal or something like that. But I assume he'll want more than that.
                            If we had this conversation a few weeks back before the 2008-2009 trade deadline when we actually had some trading assets ( Marquis/Rasho's Expiring Contracts ), I'm guessing that we probably could have snagged a somewhat decent PG prospect.....but going into the 2009-2010 Offseason, we have very little ( if any ) Trading Assets that we could use to acquire a young PG via a trade. Any addition to our roster would come via FA.

                            What "cheap young guy with some upside" at the point is available via FA during the 2009-2010 Offseason?

                            Looking through the FA list for 2009-2010, I see very little PG options that can help us that wouldn't come cheap.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

                              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                              If we had this conversation a few weeks back before the 2008-2009 trade deadline when we actually had some trading assets ( Marquis/Rasho's Expiring Contracts ), I'm guessing that we probably could have snagged a somewhat decent PG prospect.....but going into the 2009-2010 Offseason, we have very little ( if any ) Trading Assets that we could use to acquire a young PG via a trade. Any addition to our roster would come via FA.

                              What "cheap young guy with some upside" at the point is available via FA during the 2009-2010 Offseason?

                              Looking through the FA list for 2009-2010, I see very little PG options that can help us that wouldn't come cheap.
                              I would much rather them make a run at Sessions with the MLE. But beyond that I'm not really sure. We do need a back-up point, but Jack isn't a real PG anyways. If Rush improves as expected, and Dun returns healthy, then Jack will have to be your back up point to get any minutes. And I would actually rather have Diener as my back-up point than Jack. Jack just turns the ball over too much for my taste. I would be fine going with Diener and Ford and take a shot at a guy like Lester Hudson in the 2nd round. But that's me. This team isn't going to contend next year so why not save that money for 2011 when we'll have a chance to make a splash?
                              "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Has Jarret Jack taken his game to a new level?

                                Since I seen him starting the season, I'm like this guy stepped his game up
                                R.I.P. Bernic Mac & Isaac Hayes

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X