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

Collison still confused by point guard rotation

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

  • Collison still confused by point guard rotation

    http://www.indystar.com/article/2010...IndyStar.com|s

    CHICAGO -- There wasn't supposed to be any drama at the point guard position, not after the Indiana Pacers traded for Darren Collison during the summer.

    Collison, a star in the making, was supposed to be the starter, with veteran T.J. Ford backing him up and second-year man A.J. Price getting sporadic minutes, as needed.

    It hasn't played out that way the first seven weeks of the season.

    Pacers coach Jim O'Brien has added in some theatrics by using a few unconventional rotations. Collison has sat in the fourth quarter at times while Ford played in crunch time, which has frustrated him.

    Friday night in Atlanta, he sat the entire fourth quarter in favor of Price, which really hurt, Collison said.

    "I don't know why I didn't play," said Collison, who has started all 19 games he's appeared in.

    "I'm not going to lie, it's been tough. Right now, I'm not used to it. It is what it is."

    O'Brien liked what Price could bring to the Pacers, so he got his shot.

    "I thought our best chance of coming back was with A.J. in the game because he spaces the court, he shoots the 3 and he also needed playing time," O'Brien said. "I also think he did a nice job."

    O'Brien has sat Collison in the past because he prefers Ford's experience. Collison's problem is that he's still having a difficult time running the offense and playing the type of aggressive defense O'Brien wants.

    Collison is averaging 13.5 points and 4.2 assists in more than 28 minutes a game.

    "It's real tough, but I guess you have to control things when you're in the game," Collison said. "When you're not in the game, you just have to stay in tuned and try to help other guys."

    For Price, Saturday was an opportunity to show he can be an effective player when given an opportunity. He had three points, three assists and two steals in 10 minutes against the Hawks.

    "Coach just told me to be ready," Price said. "I'm always ready to play."

    Price was on the court when the Pacers cut Atlanta's 16-point fourth quarter lead down to seven twice.

    "It's coach's decision on who plays," Ford said. "A.J. did a good job. I know my role, I know my situation. I'm cool with anything that happens."

    Saturday was just the fifth appearance of the season for Price, who had an impressive rookie season last year.

    "It's been tough, but like I've been saying since the beginning of the season, it's all about being professional," he said. "I just come in with the right mentality and stay ready and be out there and produce when he does call my number."
    This is twice now. It's happened with Ford and now Collison is having trouble. What's the problem here? Difficult system? Difficult coach? Difficult player? Is O'Brien not teaching his sytem good enough? It's just my opinion but it seems, to me, that the lack of consistency with the Pacers lineup is reflective of the Pacers win/loss record. Too much time playing the matchup game instead of playing our best players and forcing other teams to matchup with the Pacers.
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 12-13-2010, 09:21 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Probably not a good idea to **** off our point guard of the future

    No big deal, we just need to wait three more years for DC to learn the system
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Probably not a good idea to **** off our point guard of the future

      Not good.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Probably not a good idea to **** off our point guard of the future

        The problem is the coach!!!! I've said before Collison was having an allstar season as a ROOKIE before the Pacers and their coach. Now he can't average 5 assist.
        I'm not perfect and neither are you.

        Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the esteem of Elohim,
        Ephisians 4: 32 And be kind towards one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as Elohim also forgave you in Messiah.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Probably not a good idea to **** off our point guard of the future

          Then coach is going to have to go or Collison is going to have adjust to the system if you want any satisfaction. Within his system/expectations, I don't disagree with JOB. Collison has not been that good. Mediocre. Careless handles and inconsistent defensive effort.
          I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

          -Emiliano Zapata

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Probably not a good idea to **** off our point guard of the future

            Well I can't say I blame him, allthough I'm a bit dissappointed that he feels that way. I think it would be much healthier for him if he had AJ's attitude. We are strongly running for the playoffs, we are likely better than your last year's team, you are new, you are starting and getting good minutes. Relax and do your best to fit in for now.

            I'd hate him to lose his confidence and spirit because of this.
            Last edited by ballism; 12-13-2010, 07:42 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Probably not a good idea to **** off our point guard of the future

              Why is he acting like he's some big-time established player? He's a second year player. His time will come.

              I would have played AJ at the end there too. He wasn't letting friggin' Jeff Teague go off on him.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Probably not a good idea to **** off our point guard of the future

                Ain't it strange?

                We get down 20 and are playing a team that is overwhelming us. What does JOB do? He puts in AJ Price.

                If AJ is that big of a secret weapon, why doesn't he play on a regular basis?

                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Probably not a good idea to **** off our point guard of the future

                  DC hasn't been terrible and is honestly the best PG we've had here in a while. He's had a huge impact on our success this season.

                  I'm not worried about him getting less time.

                  DC will improve and be a better PG for the future and guide the offense a little bit more and assist more.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Probably not a good idea to **** off our point guard of the future

                    Sookie and other AJ lovers,

                    Have you heard/read anything about Price's physical condition this season? Based on reports from other athletes who have gone through rehabilitation, many of us speculated that last year Price was maybe 85-90% healthy and that this would be the year for him to show himself at (near? above??) 100%. I wonder about any recent news to that effect.

                    (How cool if AJ were to reveal that he, in fact, is even better than what we were hoping Collison would be!)


                    "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

                    - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Probably not a good idea to **** off our point guard of the future

                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      No big deal, we just need to wait three more years for DC to learn the system

                      Yeah, him and Hansbrough who will be 28 by then. Must take a Ph.D. to get it down. Red Auerbach said in the Feinstein book "Let Me Tell You a Story" that coaches over coach. I think he had a point. You see it even at the high school level today.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Probably not a good idea to **** off our point guard of the future

                        If I hear the term "stretch the floor" one more time...
                        http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
                        "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Probably not a good idea to **** off our point guard of the future

                          I am as ready as most of you for a change at the coaching position.

                          That said, DC wants to be the team leader, and I want to see him get there. If so, then he needs to keep his mouth shut to the media on these types of things, get better on defense, and make it obvious that he should be playing instead of anyone else. Right now it's not that obvious.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Probably not a good idea to **** off our point guard of the future

                            Originally posted by DrFife View Post
                            (How cool if AJ were to reveal that he, in fact, is even better than what we were hoping Collison would be!)
                            That would be a great 'problem' to have. The Price/Collison tandem is the future. I'd like a heavier dose of those 2.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Probably not a good idea to **** off our point guard of the future

                              I want to post this before I read any of the posts in this thread.

                              I think Collison should start and play around 32-34 minutes a game and price should get the oother available minutes. I've seen a few glimpes of better defense from him - but he needs to do it more often

                              Of course if you trail by 20 points heading into the 4th quarter all bets are off.

                              OK, let me read the other posts in this thread

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X