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

27 games in: What works?

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

  • 27 games in: What works?

    God knows there's a plethora of threads about what is wrong with the team, but I'd like to see everyone's thoughts on the other side of the coin:

    Thus far, what is this year's team doing right?

    * What does Jim O'Brien do right/well (would-be smartasses need not answer)
    * Individually, what does each player do right/well?

    Break down the pros of this year's team.

  • #2
    Re: 27 games in: What works?

    The defense is the best it's been.... well since.... I can't even remember, pre-brawl, I guess.

    They play defense with exceptional effort, which is the launching off point.

    2nd is they play with very high intelligence as a group.

    Rarely do we see opponents get open jump shots, often they run 3 point shooter off the line.

    Obie talks about them being tied together and thats EXACTLY the way I'd describe it.

    They protect the rim with Roy, JMac, Danny and BRush blocking shots. Also, with Dun, Posey, and Jeff they take charges which also protects against the drive.

    They play accountable one on one defense almost across the board. This is a huge change from recent past.

    I'd call Danny an sporadic/elite defender at times, this year. He made Ariza look like he shouldn't even be on the court, but also he takes the best wing and sometimes PF at crunch time and is very effective.

    I think Brandon has extremely quick feet and is playing at a very high level.

    Even your Dunleavy's are playing within themselves defensively, he makes up for his lack of foot speed with using his length in ways I haven't noticed before. He played Clevelands Anthony Parker, exceptionally well. You say, Antony Parker, wow, really? Well, yes, since in the past winning those type battles were about 50/50.

    I think DC is improving quickly, even in 2 months, defensively.

    I could go on and on, but I just could not be happier with how this team is playing defensively and I think they have room to improve.

    Stat wise,

    4th in FG% defense (Tied with Boston)
    1st in Blocks per game


    I'll take that!!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 27 games in: What works?

      These are what things I think are positive and "working".

      Granger has played well for the most part.

      Ford has played better overall this year for whatever reason.

      Rush has played better overall, and with more consistency than in the past.

      There was an early season attempt to change strategy offensively to allow Hibbert to get more touches while installing the PnR for Collison.

      Dunleavy has played well at points, and his shot has fallen pretty well at points.

      Solomon Jones has proven more effective than he had previously.

      McRoberts has been a starter until now, and provided energy and defense at a level not seen out of a 4 in many years which provided a basis for the overall team defensive effort.

      Foster apparently still has a little gas left in his tank for short stretches.

      Hibbert is both quicker and tries to be more aggressive than he has been previously.

      Collison can score in bunches and attack the basket aggressively.

      Posey can hit threes in streaks that can make him dangerous in short stretches, he takes charges when he is able to get in position to do so, and he seems to understand what O'Brien wants.

      Hansbrough is apparently healthy.

      The franchise has cap space going forward, and attractive expiring contracts to upgrade talent with in the future.

      The CIB helped the Pacers financially by making the deal that makes it more palatable to Herb Simon to keep the franchise operating and in Indy for another couple of years.

      The franchise is becoming more aggressive about trying to attract casual fans by deeply discounting tickets to put people in seats at games.

      Area 55 is an exciting concept that continues to evolve and looks like it will become a more important part of the overall atmosphere of the Fieldhouse.

      CNO Financial has decided to keep the name "Conseco Fieldhouse" as the name of the arena.

      There is a new $3,000,000 ribbon board around the perimeter inside the arena that is useful for both fan experience and advertising opportunities.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 27 games in: What works?

        We are in the top ten (9th) in Free Throw percentage!

        --------------------------------------

        Brandon Rush

        Even though down a few seconds in playing time per game, Brandon Rush is up in points scored (12.3 vs 9.4 last year), FG% (.459 vs .423), FGAs (10.1 vs 8.6), FT% (.738 vs .629) and FTAs (1.9 vs 1.1).

        That all supports the eyeball assessment that he's more aggressive, more opportunistic this year...and I don't think we've seen his potential fully realized yet. As Bird said, he's looking like the guy we thought we drafted.
        Last edited by kester99; 12-23-2010, 01:37 PM.


        [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 27 games in: What works?

          Originally posted by kester99 View Post
          We are in the top ten (9th) in Free Throw percentage!

          --------------------------------------

          Brandon Rush

          Even though down a few seconds in playing time per game, Brandon Rush is up in points scored (12.3 vs 9.4 last year), FG% (.459 vs .423), FGAs (10.1 vs 8.6), FT% (.738 vs .629) and FTAs (1.9 vs 1.1).

          That all supports the eyeball assessment that he's more aggressive, more opportunistic this year...and I don't think we've seen his potential fully realized yet. As Bird said, he's looking like the guy we thought we drafted.
          Those numbers are really really positive for him. I did not realize they were so dramatically different. 3 point FG% is still good too at .419 (best on the team).

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 27 games in: What works?

            TJ Ford: TJ's 3PAs are down, and his 3PT% is up! Both of those are good things.

            Mike Dunleavy:
            Mike has improved FG% (.450 vs .410 last year), 3pt% (.361 and trending upward vs .318 last year), Rebounds (5.3 vs 3.5), Assists (2.1 vs 1.5) and Blocks (.7 vs .2). Most of that says his legs are back.
            Last edited by kester99; 12-23-2010, 04:39 PM.


            [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 27 games in: What works?

              Originally posted by Speed View Post
              Those numbers are really really positive for him. I did not realize they were so dramatically different. 3 point FG% is still good too at .419 (best on the team).
              I'm really happy Rush is starting to turn things around. Hopefully Roy inspires him in a way, cause Roy is one hard working son a b*tch.


              Next year, hopefully we'll get a tandem of Rush and Lance than Rush and Dunleavy.
              First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 27 games in: What works?

                Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                I'm really happy Rush is starting to turn things around. Hopefully Roy inspires him in a way, cause Roy is one hard working son a b*tch.


                Next year, hopefully we'll get a tandem of Rush and Lance than Rush and Dunleavy.
                and Paul George.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 27 games in: What works?

                  Rush has figured out another way to score by taking the ball to the basket which also makes him more active on the offense.

                  We actually have more than one guy now in the paint but that isn't really working all that well since the rebounds aren't coming.

                  Chemistry is lots better as is noticeable by that group hug. Never saw that before. I think the biggest ego on the team is Danny's and by ego standards it isn't that huge.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 27 games in: What works?

                    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                    (would-be smartasses need not answer)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 27 games in: What works?

                      Originally posted by Speed View Post
                      and Paul George.
                      I'd figure Paul would split between SG and SF. I would like for Paul to work out at SG, but just have to wait and see.
                      First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 27 games in: What works?

                        Jim finally has settled(mostly) on a rotation. That's been helpful. Of course there are many who have desires to see others get more play in favor of certain somebodies, but overall the rotation has been, for the most part, the same all year. Especially the starting rotation. It can't be proven, but a solid, consistant rotation does wonders for continuity. Players know their role, and bench players are ready becasue Jim has shown them they will get opportunities to showcase their improvements. Those who don't get playing time are motivated by that rare, shining opportunity. This motivation creates better competition in practice and games, which only can make you better as a team.

                        It's not perfect, but thank God Jim has settled on a rotation, for the most part.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 27 games in: What works?

                          I will just comment on three players.

                          Brandon Rush has improved more than any other Pacer IMHO. He is much more aggressive and consistent and I think he plays at a high level on both ends.

                          Roy Hibbert has been able to stay on the floor and avoid fouls. He's also improved a lot, but just the fact he can stay on the floor is huge.

                          TJ Ford has gained my respect. Maybe more than any other player. Everything I've seen shows me that he keeps his head up and has a good attitude coming off the bench behind a virtual rookie...and he has played pretty well.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 27 games in: What works?

                            The defense, for the most part, has been significantly better. Rush has improved a bit, as has Roy (though he's regressed again of late). TJ has become a pass-first point and is solid.

                            At this point in time, that's about it.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 27 games in: What works?

                              Great idea for a thread! Here's hoping everyone keeps it positive.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X