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

Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

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

  • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
    I agree with some of what you're saying, but Foster was never talked about as a potential all-star at times.

    Also, Tyler was a lottery pick. Of course you still have a point because he's being compared to a 5th pick in Kevin Love.
    Perhaps I was thinking of Dale Davis. In any event, Jeff started on several contenders over the years. Started. And we are talking about a player in Hans who arguably has greater upside than Jeff.

    Lottery pick? I don't think a #13 pick is lottery. Jeff was certainly a lower pick, but in the end you need to consider how good these players really are anyway. Foster and Murphy have started for years in the NBA and I believe Tyler definitely has a good chance of being better than either of them. Blake Griffin he is not...but no one reasonable thinks he's a potential superstar. At #13, I don't think you can ever expect that.

    Comment


    • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

      A lottery pick is any pick #14 or higher.

      Comment


      • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

        I have enjoyed watching Buckaroo Banzai play, and I find myself looking forward to seeing him on the floor.

        Comment


        • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
          A lottery pick is any pick #14 or higher.
          I am dating myself. I am stuck in the early 90's when they only had 11 teams who could potentially get the #1 pick.

          Comment


          • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

            All I have to do is go to NBA.com and sort stats by rookies. He's above his draft pick in every important category but FG%, which is trending up.

            Comment


            • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

              Tyler missed all of training camp, all of preseason and the 1st 4 games this regular season.

              Out of the 17 games he has appeared in, he has only played 20 or more minutes 7 times. He's been in double digits scoring in 7 games as well.

              He's grabbed 5 or more rebounds in 8 of those 17.

              I know last year Kevin Love scored in double digits 5 of his first 17 games, and that's with training camp and he had 8 games in which he shot 35% or less in that time.

              Brook Lopez had 9 of 17 in double digits, 7 games under 38% with training camp and preseason

              Could be meaningful stats, but these guys struggled out of the gate as well, and stats don't show everything that a player does on the court.

              It's hard a enough for veteran players to come off and injury and get back in a groove, and we're talking about a rookie who's never played an official game in the NBA yet.

              I understand he's still got plenty of flaws in his game, and things he can work on, but if you're a Pacer fan, I doubt see how you're not positive about his performance recently?

              And not only has he played well the last couple of games, but the team has won those games as well.

              It's fine to want to stay grounded, and not get all excited over a handful of games, but let's not bring down those who want be positive about our players or our team during a stretch where there hasn't been much positive.

              It's personally good to see our 1st round pick be one of the productive picks that we've seen so far this year in the draft. There's maybe a handful of guys that have been more productive and the majority of them were taking before him, were healthy and able to play in the preseason and be partake in training camp, or simply have gotten more playing time.

              To answer the question to the thread, I'm not surprise that he's playing well now. He was an excellent college player, and that's why so many non Tar Heels fans disliked him in the first place. That's why Knicks fans were screaming overrated when he was drafted, while the one they should have been yelling that to was their own 1st round draft pick. That's why he's one of the only rookies that get the respectful boos from the opposing NBA fans on the road. It's not like he's some bad guy who everyone hates, or some superstar that's crushed their dreams.

              You wonder why Tar Heel fans are crazy about him and show up on the road wearing Tar Heel blue and Hansbrough apparel.

              They were crazy about him for the same reason fans of the Pacers will be crazy about him. He knows how to play the game of basketball and will lay it out on the line for his team, and though I'm an IU fan, I watched plenty of college basketball in general and saw what Hansbrough does for team and for a fanbase in general, and for that reason I'm not surprise by any early success, and will not be surprise in the future

              Comment


              • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                I just refuse to be the parent that insists that their child is the best singer in the choir.
                I think you've one of the most knowledgeable posters on Pacers Digest, and I like reading your posts. I also think you are right about Tyler's warts. (You have pointed them out at least a couple times. )

                However, using your analogy you are coming across as one of those parents that put a damper on their children. You won't let them enjoy their singing because you insistently and continually harp on their mistakes.

                Comment


                • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                  Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                  "...if you want a litmus test for rational fans vs irrational fans just go by which ones say I will never be satisified vs ones where people point out that so far Tyler isn't there but think there are signs that he's turning it around and finding his game."
                  Guess you'd consider me an irrational fan for saying your avatar is offensive. Oh well - Gerald Henderson probably wanted to be famous for something.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                    Originally posted by MissBumptious View Post
                    Guess you'd consider me an irrational fan for saying your avatar is offensive. Oh well - Gerald Henderson probably wanted to be famous for something.
                    To be fair, Henderson is somewhat famous for never winning a home game against his biggest rival.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                      In 2004 (the year we won 61 games and went to the conference finals), Jermaine O'Neal shot .431 for the season.
                      And we heard about that for YEARS.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        That's the only point, along with the fact that plenty of other rookies who are almost all much younger than Tyler are having seasons with more impact up to this point.


                        Did those players miss all of training camp and preseason? Tyler missed out on all of that and had to start his career in the regular season. He didn't have the luxury of working out his kinks before the regular season started like those guys did. Never underestimate the importance of training camp and preseason in professional sports. Peyton Manning is one of the greatest quarterbacks ever and yet we saw how rusty he was at the beginning of last season after missing all of training camp and preseason. It took him a quarter of a season to get into his groove, and that's an 11 year pro we are talking about.

                        Of course Tyler was going to be a bit sloppy at the beginning of the year. Instead of getting into the groove during training camp and preseason like everyone else, he had to work his kinks out in actual games. The beginning of the season was his training camp and preseason. Those early games are why his percentages are low. But now he has knocked a lot of that rust off and is starting to be more consistent. The FG% will be where it should be by the end of the season.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                          His "skeptics" will continue to focus on his first month, but the 15-32 (.469) shooting from Hansbrough's past two games is almost certainly the norm for a healthy, rust-free Psycho T. We'll soon see I suppose.

                          What's exciting is the thought of just how good of a scorer he'll be once his FG/FT% are at his norm (45-50%, 80-85%).

                          I predict he'll average 30+ mpg and 15+ ppg for the second half of the season.
                          Last edited by Lance George; 12-13-2009, 09:36 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                            There was one play against the Wizards that I thought he was out of position on but after watching the play he made the right choice.

                            It was on one of Jamisons 3 pointers ( I think it was in the 3rd ).. He chose to collapse in on Heywood to stop an easy dunk but that left open Jamison and he knocked down the 3.

                            You can see that play on the NBA.com highlights if you want to look.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                              Originally posted by Mr. Sobchak View Post
                              He looks great (so far) compared to everyone that was drafted around him...

                              T Will - Shooting 34% from the field

                              Henderson - Getting only 9 minutes a game in Charlotte

                              Earl Clark - 9 minutes, 3.5 pts

                              James Johnson - Riding the pine in Chicago

                              Taj Gibson is the only one drafted after him having sucess, oh and also Crisppi in Sacremento
                              Sittin on top of the world!

                              Comment


                              • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                                Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                                Taj Gibson is the only one drafted after him having sucess, oh and also Crisppi in Sacremento
                                the hell?

                                Jerebko, Blair, Maynor, Lawson and Budinger are having success, I''d say.

                                Terrance Williams also leads all rookies in double doubles. He's hardly having a bad rookie season.

                                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

                                Working...
                                X