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.
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
-
...Still "flying casual"
@roaminggnome74 -
Re: Pacers' youth movement hasn't stalled/Bruno
I read the article, I agree with much of it. Was it a puff piece? Sure, so what. I agree with the premise that the youth movement for players that have IMO a real future on this team or some real trade value has not stalled at all. Roy and Rush are progressing as well as they are able. Solo and Josh IMO do not meet the critieria of being players with a real future either here or as trade bait, so I don't count them. Price has had a decent amount of time and I expect more in the last 20 games.
But the reaction in this thread isso negative, I just get sick and tired of it. The bitterness IMO is over-the-top. Sometimes I wish I just either avoided these threads or the forum alltogether until the offseasonLast edited by Unclebuck; 02-24-2010, 10:21 AM.Comment
-
Re: Pacers' youth movement hasn't stalled/Bruno
Wow, the mob is forming.
I'm not even going to quote, I'm just going to point out some things and then go hide because I'll be beaten to death by accusations of loving JOB and Troy Murphy.
1) The article isn't a love-fest for JOB, it is saying the young guys are playing. WHY doesn't matter, and snide statements that "well, if <player x> was healthy they wouldn't play" are beside the point. For all we know if all the players were healthy we might be having a winning season - except that's not part of the mob statement of core belief, so isn't allowed to be speculated on. Pointing out what JOB HAS done to screw up is fair. Saying "well, IF another situation was in place THEN he would have screwed it up THEREFORE the current results don't count" is unfair.
2) The idea that the general, casual fans have given up on the season is probably true. The idea that all they want now is to see the young guys play is crazy. I would bet you that if the Pacers came out and said they are not playing anyone with more than 3 years experience in the league for the rest of the season so come and see the young guys, attendance does not improve and probably continues to get worse. I would bet you that if they played just well enough to start winning more games (which, according to the mob, is the kiss of death for the franchise), attendance would stop decreasing and might show a slight increase. Fans have given up because we're losing, not because AJ Price and Josh McRoberts aren't playing 35 minutes a game.
3) The idea that this franchise would gain more fans if the pacers.com web page was just filled with stories about how the season is over and we're going to keep losing and why bother going to games or watching them is also a bit ridiculous. Their job is to seize on anything they can that is positive and point it out. Please, feel free to highlight the lies (not the things you don't agree with, those aren't lies, those are differences of opinion) in the article. Until you can, don't go off on Bruno or Pacers.com or feel like you've been journalistically betrayed somehow.
BillS
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...Comment
-
Re: Pacers' youth movement hasn't stalled/Bruno
Yes the casual fans don't even know Josh is on the team have never heard of AJ Price (until you say you know the point guard from UConn)
The casual fan: knows Granger, maybe Dunleavy, asks who is that big guy from Georgetown how is he coming along, has never even heard of Solo or D. Jones, asks if Rush is even still on the team - if they even knew he was on the team to begin with. if you show them a picture of Earl Watson and explained his history they would look at you with a blank stare and say I have never heard of him and he's been starting?
The fact is most casual fans haven't followed this team in about 6 years. Scary, but true. if the team doesn't get turned around soon the central indiana sports fans under the age of 20 will have lived their whole lives without the Pacers even being on the radar screen as something to follow. I bet if you go to high schools - the pacers are not even a possible topic of discussion - they just haven't followed them - that is the way it was when I was in high school years ago, if you were too young to have followed the Pacers in the ABA, then following the Pacers wasn't a real option.Comment
-
Re: Pacers' youth movement hasn't stalled/Bruno
The only way to get the casual fans back, which are staying away in droves, is to win. The only way to win is to develop the future. And that means playing Price and McRoberts. They may not know the names of Price, Rush, McRoberts, and Hibbert now but they will if we're winning in 5 years."I had to take her down like Chris Brown."
-Lance StephensonComment
-
Re: Pacers' youth movement hasn't stalled/Bruno
I'd rather they keep their mouths shut instead of posting articles that most of us recognize as blatant lies.Originally posted by BillS View Post
Comment
-
Re: Pacers' youth movement hasn't stalled/Bruno
I agree, the only way to get the casual fans back is to win. Bottonline though is I don't think our young guys are the future, if they are, then I don't see us winning anytime soon within the next 3-5 years. We need new, different building blocks. I see Granger and I honestly don't see much else except maybe role players. But if we assume granger is going to be the second best player on a really good team, then we need a number #1, number#3, number#4 before we are winning enough to get the casual fans back. IMO the young players we have now are maybe at best players #5, #7, #8Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View PostLast edited by Unclebuck; 02-24-2010, 10:44 AM.Comment
-
Re: Pacers' youth movement hasn't stalled/Bruno
That's fine if you think that and very well could be the case. Price, Rush, McRoberts, and Hibbert may not be the future. But the problem is that they have a much better chance (as in 100% better) of being the future than guys like Dunleavy, Murphy, Watson, Ford, etc. Those guys are absolutely not parts of the future. So why do you advocate playing the guys who you know won't be here over guys who have a shot? They aren't winning more games than the young guys so that can't be your argument.Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post"I had to take her down like Chris Brown."
-Lance StephensonComment
-
Re: Pacers' youth movement hasn't stalled/Bruno
That is true - I would not be surprised at all if in just two or three years only 1 or 2 players on this curent roster are still here.Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
I don't believe I have ever advocated playing any certain players. What I object too is the suicidal and over-the-top complaints from people in this forum when the young guys don't get a lot of minutes.
I have no problem at all with the young guys playing, but I don't want to kill someone when they don't playLast edited by Unclebuck; 02-24-2010, 10:52 AM.Comment
-
Re: Pacers' youth movement hasn't stalled/Bruno
Yes. It is definitely possible.Originally posted by Anthem View Post
"Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus
"Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire
"Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William GreiderComment
-
Re: Pacers' youth movement hasn't stalled/Bruno
I agree with Buck and BillS a little in their sentiment. I do agree with the fact that our team is so young that it in a non-Pacers organization they would be happy giving the young players this level of responsibility and playing time.Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
However, what JOB and the article say, which I think is very accurate, is his assessment of bringing players along. He talks about beating good basketball teams and understanding the commitment to win. This is VERY true.
My issue with this is that our team is not constructed to win games. The Pacers are NOT good enough to develop the young players in this manner. If we were the Spurs, Jazz, Magic, Cleveland, Boston, or Lakers, you supplement the development of the youth with playing time with solid veterans. The young guys will get much better by hiding their faults amongst solid veterans. Perfect example is Jordan Farmar in LA. He would not be nearly as good for that team if he didn't have the opportunity to play consistent, yet spotty minutes behind Fisher and with Kobe for a couple of years. Would Perkins and Rondo be nearly as good playing without three HOFers in Boston's starting lineup. No.
You can even do this when you are a middle of the road team like the Bulls. Brad Miller has been an excellent example and role model for Joakim Noah. The worse your team is however, the more playing time the young players need to work through mistakes. They are not hidden by veterans. Rose and Noah are getting a ton of minutes though. Hinrich continues to back up Rose. Miller is getting the same amount of playing time as ROOKIE TAJ GIBSON. When your team is devoid of veteran ability, the burden on the young players is much higher (See Portland a few years ago and OKC more recently). The Pacers need to place the burden on the young players and that's all there is to it. Our veterans are not so much better than our young players that the veterans should be stealing minutes. If Dun, Watson, and Murphy were at 15-20 minutes per game and we would not be complaining so much. I would much rather see Ford and Price at PG. I really like Earl Watson, but we are guaranteed another year of Ford, and honestly Ford is a perfect backup PG. Let AJ log about 50% of the minutes. If it helps to have Watson in the game when you have McRoberts in the front court or Murphy when you have Price, that is understandable. But to have Watson, Murphy and Dun on the floor in tandem is regression.
Sorry so long, but there is validity to both sides of this argument. It just seems that the difference is in the opinion of this team's ability to win games with the veterans.Last edited by pacergod2; 02-24-2010, 11:18 AM."Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."Comment
-
Re: Pacers' youth movement hasn't stalled/Bruno
What are the lies in that article? Quote them and link to something that says they are factually disproven.Originally posted by chrisjacobs7 View PostI'd rather they keep their mouths shut instead of posting articles that most of us recognize as blatant lies.
... recognize as THINGS WE DISAGREE WITH - an OK statement.
... recognize as QUOTES THAT CONTRADICT OTHER QUOTES - an OK statement.
... recognize as BLATANT LIES - implies there's a TRUTH out there rather than an OPINION or STATEMENT. Not true.
Because someone is quoted saying something that doesn't match what they were quoted as saying in the past (or, in the O'Brien case, doesn't seem to match what they actually do) does not make the article a lie, or the article writer a liar, or the Pacers organization liars. Especially when the quote is just a filler, really, and the rest of the article is based on numbers.
I really get hot when people call differences of opinion "lies" or "facts". They aren't, they are just opinions, no matter how strongly held or how many or how few people agree with them.Last edited by BillS; 02-24-2010, 11:21 AM.BillS
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...Comment
-
Re: Pacers' youth movement hasn't stalled/Bruno
Another thing I forgot to mention.
You get a TON of veteran involvement in practice and film sessions to help mentor the youth. We have very intelligent veterans from a basketball IQ perspective. But our young players need more floor time to be able to try to apply what they learn in these film sessions, practices, etc.
I would like to also reiterate my agreement with Buck and BillS's sentiments about the overreactions. I agree with most on this board on this topic and I believe they do too, but they are trying to be a bit more rational, a bit devil's advocate, and a bit less volatile in their assessment of the team."Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."Comment
-
Re: Pacers' youth movement hasn't stalled/Bruno
Larry Bird has already stated that Roy, Hans, Price, and Danny are part of the core. That means he intends to keep them.Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
Rush may or may not be. And DJones has been signed for four years, so I'd expect he's part of the "core" as well.
These aren't "over the top suicidal complaints"
These are complaints that the team needs to address.
1. Why the hell isn't Price playing? Seriously? You've identified him as part of your core. You've identified TJ and Earl as not part of your core. In fact, if the Pacers get what they want, those two won't be here past the summer. We aren't making the playoffs. Why make Price have a second rookie year? There's no reason to be playing TJ and Earl right now. It's just DUMB.
2. Why use Dun, Granger, and Djones at PF, when you have a young PF that you need to give quality minutes to evaluate. Who knows, maybe UB is right, and he's not an NBA player. We don't know. He hasn't been able to get adjusted to the speed of the game, nor has he been given adequate time for us to see. But bottom line, when we aren't going to the playoffs, it's just dumb to play our SG, SF and coming back from injury SF at the PF position, when we have a young guy there that needs to see time. It's just DUMB.
3. Why has Troy been given backup center minutes. He's not a center, heck, he's too weak to be a PF. Why not see if Solo is a guy we'd like to keep and develope? Once again, just a dumb decision.
4. The shooting guard rotation..Why have we seen TJ and Earl in together? Not only are you sucking minutes from Price in that scenario, but also sucking minutes from Rush. Just dumb.
Why is Head being given more minutes than DJones? One's going to be here, one isn't. Just dumb.
No one is saying DO NOT play TJ, Dun, Troy (unless playing them means the younger guy doesn't get any minutes) What we are saying, is the only thing this organization could to do, that would make sense, is to play the younger guys, and try to see how some of the "core group" can gell together.
These complaints are simply a "WTF is JOB doing. He's hurting the future" not suicidal, not over the top, just plain true.
These complaints are coming for a certain reason too.
It does us no good to win with the vets. None. All we do is decrease our lottery odds.
Losing with the vets does nothing, except sting a bit because that means the vets aren't doing anything better than the kids could have done.
There is absolutely no point in playing the vets. Now, on the other side. If you play the kids then..
It does us good to win, as we feel more confident about the younger guys, they feel more confident about themselves.
If we lose, still helps our lottery chances, and at least the younger guys are on the court developing..perhaps even learning how to win.
Makes no sense to play the vets, makes perfect sense to play the younger guys. That's really all we're saying.Last edited by Sookie; 02-24-2010, 11:50 AM.Comment
Tweet
Comment