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

TJ should play, AJ should sit

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

  • TJ should play, AJ should sit

    This is just my feeling, not an attack on AJ, nor meant to infuriate any AJ fans.

    The five games under Vogel I really have not been impressed at all with the way AJ runs the point. I think he is much better suited to play off the ball with the second unit. If it was my choice , I would put Dun on the second unit, and have him initiate the offense , similar to the way Hedo Turkolou does with the Magic. Let AJ do what he does best, shot the ball. Have him come off screens etc. I think this would help both our offensive flow with the second unit, and also the scoring.

    TJ, has been a good solider, and has taken his lumps with class. AJ has had a chance to show what he can do under Vogel. I think TJ deserves that chance. He is one of the few players on the team that can create his own shot off the dribble. He is much more of a PG , in my opinion than AJ, and when our offense gets stagnant, he can break his man down and either score or create opportunities for others.

    So I would like to see TJ get a shot, I feel he deserves at least that. I am not as excited about AJ as others on the board, and think he is a career back up at best. Maybe he will become a better PG later, as Chauncey Billups has done for example ,but I dont think he is close yet, and I think its time to see TJ

    This is only my opinion and more about TJ getting an opportunity, then about AJ weaknesses.

    JMHO
    Sittin on top of the world!

  • #2
    Re: TJ should play, AJ should sit

    Wow, I couldn't disagree more. Not in the fact TJ may play better, but TJ will NOT be here after this season. If we had a shot this year at a title I would look at all angles, but since we're not these young guys need the experience NOW.
    You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: TJ should play, AJ should sit

      Originally posted by RWB View Post
      Wow, I couldn't disagree more. Not in the fact TJ may play better, but TJ will NOT be here after this season. If we had a shot this year at a title I would look at all angles, but since we're not these young guys need the experience NOW.
      No problem, thanks for you're opinion.

      I think TJ gives us the best chance to win NOW, not AJ
      Sittin on top of the world!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: TJ should play, AJ should sit

        Disagree.


        Comment


        • #5
          Re: TJ should play, AJ should sit

          Doesn't really matter to me. I suppose I'm fine with AJ playing instead of Ford. Although for almost two years i still don't see what many of you evidently see in Price. I mean he is maybe an adequate backup

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: TJ should play, AJ should sit

            I'm not sure it will make much of a difference either way.
            "man, PG has been really good."

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: TJ should play, AJ should sit

              I disagree as well.

              It's part of the youth movement, that's all.

              TJ has no future here. We don't need to stunt AJ's growth by playing a guy who clearly is done here, barring injuries.
              Stop quoting people I have on ignore!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: TJ should play, AJ should sit

                Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                This is just my feeling, not an attack on AJ, nor meant to infuriate any AJ fans.

                The five games under Vogel I really have not been impressed at all with the way AJ runs the point. I think he is much better suited to play off the ball with the second unit. If it was my choice , I would put Dun on the second unit, and have him initiate the offense , similar to the way Hedo Turkolou does with the Magic. Let AJ do what he does best, shot the ball. Have him come off screens etc. I think this would help both our offensive flow with the second unit, and also the scoring.

                TJ, has been a good solider, and has taken his lumps with class. AJ has had a chance to show what he can do under Vogel. I think TJ deserves that chance. He is one of the few players on the team that can create his own shot off the dribble. He is much more of a PG , in my opinion than AJ, and when our offense gets stagnant, he can break his man down and either score or create opportunities for others.

                So I would like to see TJ get a shot, I feel he deserves at least that. I am not as excited about AJ as others on the board, and think he is a career back up at best. Maybe he will become a better PG later, as Chauncey Billups has done for example ,but I dont think he is close yet, and I think its time to see TJ

                This is only my opinion and more about TJ getting an opportunity, then about AJ weaknesses.

                JMHO
                If TJ is coming back next year I would play him and make him my backup point guard. I would really feel better about him because I dont think AJ will ever be the player he is. But, if there is no way he is coming back (which is the case) AJ needs the minutes. I really wish we could get a veteran like TJ to back up DC.

                Dunn, TJ, and Dante are veterans you would like to have coming off the bench on a winning team. Just not starters.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: TJ should play, AJ should sit

                  While I agree to an extent, I think it's best for Coach Vogel to get this team into the playoffs using the youth as much as possible. They need the experience.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: TJ should play, AJ should sit

                    I don't want TJ to play before the trade deadline. If he were to get injured it could kill any chance of trading him.

                    I don't think Price has played bad enough to lose the backup job. Not yet. I haven't been overly impressed with him either. I thought it was important to play the young guys to see what they could do. As the season winds down, I could see us going back to TJ if Price proves to be nothing special. If that happens we'll be looking at a drafted rookie or Lance to be the backup next year.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: TJ should play, AJ should sit

                      I realize that TJ has no future with the Pacers, however, I'm not sure that AJ does either.

                      As of right now, TJ is the better player. In fact, as a backup, he is probably the best PG in the NBA coming off the bench. TJ's defense has been pretty good this year as well. Overall, I think the drop off from DC to TJ is much smaller than the one between DC and AJ.

                      AJ really struggles getting the ball up the court and his defense hasn't been very good either. Perhaps he just needs more time and experience to adapt but other than being a good 3-point shooter, I don't really think he's that good right now.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: TJ should play, AJ should sit

                        Honestly, to be fair.....we haven't seen TJ play under Vogel...we know that TJ did his best to fit into JO'Bs system ( kind of like fitting a square peg into a round hole )...but Vogel's offense is more of one that attacks the paint while putting less reliance on the 3pt shot.

                        If the mentality is to do some combination of winning and developing the young...I wouldn't mind seeing how TJ would do. This just depends on what Vogel and Bird want...more emphasis on winning or developing young. At the very least...I'd think that Vogel's offense better fits TJ then the way that JO'B was using TJ.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: TJ should play, AJ should sit

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                          This just depends on what O'Brien and Bird want...more emphasis on winning or developing young. At the very least...I'd think that Vogel's offense better fits TJ then the way that JO'B was using TJ.
                          KC, sorry about the edit, just trying to make a point. See this is what scares me in what road do we go down. How long before we see Vogel get nervous and start leaning on a vet like Posey?
                          You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: TJ should play, AJ should sit

                            To me A J Price is a very mediocre shooter but when he enters the game he is a look for my own shot point guard . Lets look at the last 12 games in which he's gotten time least 10 minutes the most 27.

                            Over those 12 games Price has averaged 16+ minutes a night in that time here are his numbers:
                            Price is shooting 35% on 2 pointers 28 of 80 . On 3's even worse 33% on 10 of 33. From the foul line 68% on 15 of 22. He's averaged 1 rebound grabing 16 in 16 game of which 6 were in 1 game. As far as assist He has 20 in 16 games or 1.3 per game , even there its a misleading number he had 8 in 27 minutes in one game meaning in the other 11 games and 167 minutes he's had 12 assist or 1 per night in 115 minutes a night. His assist to turnover ratio is 20 assist to 17 turnovers.

                            I do not see Price as a long term back up to Collison unless we see a very radical improvement . Twice during this span he has put up over 10 shots in a game in his time played - one game it was 11 shot attempts in 14 minutes , thats shooting at a Kobe Bryant rate in fga's not what you want from your backup point.

                            Play Ford the next few games till the deadline under Vogel's freedom on offense he could show his real game and build trade interest as other teams scramble for a final piece for a post season drive.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: TJ should play, AJ should sit

                              While I haven't seen more than one game under Vogel because I've been out of the country, there's one part of the argument that always gets me.

                              If under Vogel (or a Vogel-type coach) TJ can be a better backup PG than AJ, why make the automatic assumption that TJ "isn't part of the future"? It isn't like TJ is 35 and falling apart, after all. If TJ is better, why wouldn't you move him up the rotation and use AJ as trade or as the 3rd string?

                              Now, I'm not saying TJ is better or that this is what you should do. But there seems to be an assumed baseline that anyone with more years in the league than Danny Granger is automatically "not part of the future of this franchise" and is therefore expendable. While giving the young guys time unless/until they show they've hit a wall is good, I still think you send the wrong message if playing time seems to be handed out based on fewer years in the league rather than actual ability. At some point guys need to be playing where they fit or where their ability puts them, not just playing because they're still on a rookie contract.
                              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

                              Working...
                              X