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

Lakers postgame

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

  • #46
    Re: Lakers postgame

    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    If he "criticized Troy and Roy equally"...why do you say he "never criticized Roy's defense"?
    I'm not sure what happened, in my first post about this specific point i said that Jim was critical of Roy's defense. I think what I meant to say and what I stand by is that Jim never said that Roy had a bad game and that alleged comment is what was being used to insinuate that Jim O'brien had completely lost it

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Lakers postgame

      The fair weathered hate for Dun gets ridiculous the guy should not even be playing this year but he is.

      Also the complaining about the Lakers fans being vocal at your home court and you are arguing about it from a computer is also ridiculous...for those who complain about that why were you not at the game in the cheap seats at least showing up in numbers. Sorry but the hate scale after this loss has gone to the extreme. We played the Lakers what did you expect?
      JOB is a silly man

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Lakers postgame

        I'm done pointing out whether it's JOB's fault, or Murphy or the young guys or the vets. It's over done. The only thing that matters ....

        .... we're not good.

        I don't care why at this point, I'm just ready for 2011 and to blow this damn thing up.

        At the same time, I'm seriously debating getting season tickets next year. I think I finally got a good friend sold on the idea. I just didn't want to go to every game by myself. WooT!

        -- Steve --

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Lakers postgame

          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
          Maybe so.

          I'm getting tired of fighting it. I feel like I'm in a dream or a deja vu.

          Just give me morphine.
          Mmmmm...Morphine! Makes one feel good!

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Lakers postgame

            I watched closely early in the game... then moved on to other things with the game on in the background.

            I saw several quick Pacer shots during an early Laker run and these all led to Laker baskets going the other way. We fueled their run with our great offense. We did close that gap though.

            At one point I saw either 4 or 5 Laker jerseys in or around the paint and NO Pacers and yet whoever the first Pacer to reach the 3 point line with the basketball was, he heaved up a shot... missed... and the Lakers were off the other way. Honestly, I'm not even sure there was another Pacer in the camera frame...

            It's no wonder we lose. You lose by not valuing possessions and bad defense. Rushing shots leads to bad defense. It's gift-wrapping points for the other team. Our defense doesn't even look that bad when we have time to setup.

            We don't have the players to run another team out of the gym nor do we even use the bench enough not to wear down the players we do have. This only makes it worse.

            Jim O'Brien is a horrible, horrible coach.

            There's no shame in losing to the Lakers. There is a shame when you can't or refuse to utilize the team you do have to at least maximize their potential.

            Did I mention Jim O'Brien is a horrible, horrible coach?
            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


            • #51
              Re: Lakers postgame

              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
              Oh. Well, then I'm back to "**** him."
              Poor Hicks. You're on an emotional roller coaster when it comes to JO'B tonight.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Lakers postgame

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                He implied everyone played bad defense, but he never said riy had a good game. Someone said that Roy played well offensively and Jim got a disgusted look on his face and said the defense was bad. If you want to infer that Jim implied that Roy's defense was bad - OK sure he said that. But posters are claiming that O'Brien said Roy had a bad game - Jim never said those words nor did he imply that either.

                O'Brien: "He got off on Troy (Murphy) then when Roy (Hibbert) came in he got off on Roy." -- O'Brien on Andrew Bynum
                To be fair....because some of us didn't see the Post Game Conference....I think that many of us were simply reacting to your initial post and the highlighted part:

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                O'Brien's press conference which they showed the whole thing on TV - it was very short- just said that the alkers scored easily on Troy and Roy, and that Bynam scored well on our big. At no time did Jim say that Roy had a bad game - but he certainly implied that Roy's defense wasn't good as the pacers whole team's defense wasn't good. Jim was not happy about the pacers defense - he seems as his wits end
                You then go on to say this:

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                Jim never said Roy had a bad game though. I watched the entire press conference - it was only maybe 45 seconds
                Honestly, I was confused by whether he actually said something or not based off of your posts. All you ended up doing was make Hicks go from "Eff JO'B" to "You're Cool JO'B" back to "Eff JO'B" again in the span of 10 minutes.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Lakers postgame

                  Even Phil Jackson thought it was a horrible move by the Pacers. "I don't know if Jim was baiting us by starting Murphy at center," Lakers coach Phil Jackson said. "It was impossible for them to cover Pau and Andrew.

                  http://www.nba.com/games/20100127/LALIND/gameinfo.html
                  "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

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

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Lakers postgame

                    Originally posted by Cactus Jax View Post
                    Even Phil Jackson thought it was a horrible move by the Pacers. "I don't know if Jim was baiting us by starting Murphy at center," Lakers coach Phil Jackson said. "It was impossible for them to cover Pau and Andrew.

                    http://www.nba.com/games/20100127/LALIND/gameinfo.html
                    Queue JO'Bs standard response: "Oh Yeah Phil.......Murphy can stretch the offense....can Bynum or Pau do that?"
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Lakers postgame

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      Outclassed obviously, but my take-away came in the post-game show.

                      While JOb is touting small-ball as the best way to win, he is getting closer to the truth....maybe by accident.

                      He believes small ball helps his offense. Well, it helps this particular team win but not offensively. While it could not be done down the stretch effectively against the much bigger Lakers, it worked against the 76ers.

                      Now, why is that?

                      Small ball helps our defense considerably when Granger is at the 4. Not a perfect place for him, but when he spends time there...D Jones and Rush can cover the swing positions greatly improving our defense. The proof is that we kept the 76ers under 100 points...only the 3rd time this month. The same thing happened during the infamous, stupendous, tremendous 5 game winning streak earlier this year. The defense is simply better when you have Granger at the 4 instead of T-Roy covering the front court. It really is that simple....yet JOb continues to think his offense is where he's seeing the improvement.

                      Love is blind you know.
                      The best reasoning for Danny at the 4 is the fact that Rush and Jones are better perimeter defenders at this point than Danny has ever been, and playing Danny at the 4 minimizes the impact of his defensive difficulties on the perimeter. He definitely has problems defending at the 4 against quality players too, though.

                      The Lakers are the Lakers are the Lakers are the Lakers.

                      Overmatched teams throughout history have attempted to beat better teams by drawing fouls and getting to the line while getting the opponents stronger players in a little foul trouble, thereby evening things up.

                      However, O'B is O'B is O'B is O'B. He is probably thinking "Wow. If we had shot 50% from 3 for the game, we would have had 21 more points and would have nearly won this game. I think I am on to something here. I know Murphy can shoot 50% from there if he just keeps shooting, and I've seen Granger and Michael do so, too. And, Brandon has been shooting well from the arc recently as well, so I just need to figure out how to get them all more touches and shots at the arc. I know, speed up the game even further and reduce our over-reliance on movement and throwing the ball into the post. After tonight, I think we can put that whole strategy of to rest once and for all. The quicker we shoot, the more possessions we will have, therefore the more uncontested shots we should have early in the clock."

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Lakers postgame

                        What a sad excuse for a team, coach, and organization. All I can say about this season is, "Is it over yet?"

                        You could go on and on about what's wrong with this team 'till you get carpel tunnel, but really what's the point? It's a throwaway season and I think some of these players realize it as well.

                        Oh well... on to the next game.
                        2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Lakers postgame

                          "I don't know whether Jim was baiting us or not, but he started Murphy on him [Bynum]," Jackson said. "Drew is a plus-7-footer with probably 30 pounds, 40 pounds on him at least. It's almost an impossible feat for them to cover Drew."

                          -Phil Jackson on the small-ball lineup we countered with (ESPN.com).

                          Seriously Jim? One of the most obvious situations where you NEED to put a big guy on Bynum...he had 10 of their first 18 points. Ridiculous...so pathetic. Get this guy out of town.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Lakers postgame

                            No McBob in the title?
                            You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Lakers postgame

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              Roy's offense ws very good tonight, but his defense was not good at all, so lets not let him of the hook.

                              I want to see a quote from JOB saying that our best lineup is our small lineup with Troy as the big guy. I don't think he has ever said that
                              OFFENSE
                              Roy >>> Troy, especially because he was able to attack their bigs

                              DEFENSE

                              Roy>Troy, though both weren't very good at stopping Bynum

                              Thus the +/-.

                              Rush shot poorly and has a +/- to reflect it.


                              Buck, you're killing me at this point. It's all just a game of runs and the runs come when one team lets up??? That's the great nuanced theory you've got?

                              Maybe, just maybe, both teams impact when a run comes and when you put in a better player your team makes a run without requiring the other team to let up. I mean doesn't it work in reverse? If Kobe goes out and the Pacers make a run it's because Kobe is out, but if Troy goes out and the Pacers make a run it has nothing to do with the Pacers.

                              Let me flip your theory, the ONLY REASON the Lakers made runs when Kobe or Bynum were in was because that's when the Pacers got tired and started to let up.

                              Hmmm, sounds kinda dumb that way, doesn't it.


                              Who is on the court for your team does impact your chances of making a run, and Roy wasn't just facing their backups. He saw plenty of Bynum and Gasol.


                              I feel like the UB post game is on autopilot at this point: 1) not JOB's fault 2) not Troy's fault 3) the young players aren't that hot.

                              In any event, JOb should be at the 5. He certainly has experience defending Troy at least.
                              :


                              The best reasoning for Danny at the 4 is the fact that Rush and Jones are better perimeter defenders at this point than Danny has ever been, and playing Danny at the 4 minimizes the impact of his defensive difficulties on the perimeter. He definitely has problems defending at the 4 against quality players too, though.
                              100% agree Brad. Danny can actually be a little frustrating on defense, but as the PF it somewhat showcases his better help defense/shot blocking while Rush and Jones do a better job of getting up on a guy and making all his moves tougher, plus they both have a sense for driving a player into help defenders also. That also benefits Roy who can block a shot if you put the guy in a weak position where he can't draw Roy out to him for the foul.

                              Neither Price or Watson are really kicking butt at defense, though I'm more frustrated with Watson because I think his defense has dropped off some in the last 2-3 weeks.

                              Still either of those 2 with those 4 seems to give you the best overall defensive look, and you still have the Danny and Roy offensive options out there.

                              Originally posted by Cactus Jax
                              Even Phil Jackson thought it was a horrible move by the Pacers. "I don't know if Jim was baiting us by starting Murphy at center," Lakers coach Phil Jackson said. "It was impossible for them to cover Pau and Andrew.
                              It's officially embarrassing when the most successful NBA coach ever (by rings at least) is making fun of your coach's decisions.


                              Originally posted by jhondog28
                              The fair weathered hate for Dun gets ridiculous the guy should not even be playing this year but he is.
                              I think you just gave yourself the answer. We all agree, he should not be playing but he is.

                              Does this mean you are also a fair weather hater of Dun?


                              Originally posted by Anthem
                              A fair point.

                              In the spirit of scientific inquiry, I'd like to see Obie move Roy to the starting spot and bring Murph off the bench, just to see if the trend continues.

                              You know, for science.
                              Exactly. Hey, I'll even wear a lab coat and goggles. Someone bring a Bunsen burner and a petri dish. We're going to get to the bottom of this.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Lakers postgame

                                Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
                                I'm starting to get numb to J O'Brien's logic for why giving Troy heavy minutes is his best chance to win. I'm just glad that Roy and AJ Price are doing what they can in the minutes that they are getting. I'm just starting to reserve myself to the fact that we are good enough to beat teams like the Nets, Pistons and other teams similar to us in the standings, but are more times then not lose to the play-off teams or teams slightly better then us resulting in our standard drafting position in June.

                                On a happier note, it was nice being honored at center court 15 minutes before tip-off with my wife, daughter and Duke Dynamite for being Season Ticket Holders of the week in January.
                                Oh dear, I'm sorry to hear that. Thousands of people saw you associated with the team. You'll never shake off the stigma of that. Expect hisses and catcalls for the next 6 months.*





                                *IOW, congrats man. Very cool. Too bad I have the Cavs game and not the Lakers, coulda got a nice photo of that.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X