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

Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

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

  • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

    Brandon Rush is next-to-last on the team in assists-per-36 (1.3) and assist percentage (5.7%), behind Tyler on both accounts. That's just atrocious for a shooting guard. Horrendous. I'll be so glad when this talentless, pot smoking bum is out of here and we have a legitimate starting shooting guard.

    Comment


    • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

      I think Seth has written a whole series of well-reasoned posts. I just wish he would learn that the word is COMPLEMENTARY. Two Es. No I. Being complimentary (with an i) is saying nice things...'love your shoes.'

      Anyway. Carry on. Good points, Seth.


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

      Comment


      • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
        Larry believed in Shawne Williams.
        So did you (!) To the point where you trumpeted trading Danny Granger to make room for Shawne.

        Larry couldn't get the TJ or Dun contracts traded in a world where teams are begging to lose contract money.
        That is a fantasy world. More than once I read that this time around, the combination of teams who were already financially solid after the 2010 free agency sweepstakes along with the higher than usual quantity of expiring contracts significantly diminished the typical value of expiring contracts. I flatly reject the concept that Bird failed to steal candy from a baby.

        Furthermore, even in a tougher-than-usual climate to make such a trade, didn't Mark Spears or someone like him say we were close to a deal for Dun anyway before he broke his thumb?

        TJ is easy to figure out: Combine point A (the current climate for expirings) with the concept that nobody wants or needs TJ Ford to be their point guard. Sure, you could possibly make some bad-to-terrible trade (taking on a bad player and/or bad contract) just to say "See, I traded TJ's expiring!", but I'm glad they didn't.

        I'm not saying you can't swap Josh out if you are saying David West. What I'm saying is that if you get West then you must ALSO GIVE UP ON Roy. West becomes the low post scorer and you move Roy to get a role playing defender/rebounder.
        I don't agree with this at all. First of all, there appears to be this concept held by many NBA followers that you must only have one significant offensive threat in your front court, while the other one must be a Dale Davis/Ben Wallace/Josh McRoberts/Jeff Foster kind of guy. I think that's BS. Tell that to the Lakers when they traded for Pau Gasol. They didn't punt on Andrew Bynum. Whenever he was healthy, they started both of them, and it was a pain in the other NBA contenders' asses to have to deal with that much size and firepower up front.

        That's not to say it's an unstoppable force; clearly they also frequently used a smaller Odom/Gasol front court, but there's a reason they stuck with starting the bigger two together, and there's a reason they kept going to it at least part of the time: It can be used to great effect.

        I welcome David West to play WITH Roy Hibbert offensively. First of all, David West has a money jump shot, so he can provide space for Roy to work down low, and at the same time we know Roy can be utilized in the high post for when we want to try posting up with David West. You don't have to limit yourself that way by saying "Well, we got West, so Roy you know what you have to do: Stop trying to be an offensive player."

        Obviously there's some hyperbole there, but nonetheless.

        Comment


        • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

          Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
          I think it was the garbage minutes for Price that elevated his +/-

          For some reason our best PG has become the third string PG. Just what the hell is Frank and TPTB thinking? They need to be starting AJ now if they want to have a shot at the playoffs. I am all for Lance showing us what he can do, but not at the cost of a playoff berth...

          The same goes for DC and his entitlement issue with starting. Screw that.

          Lance should be the one getting the 3rd string minutes... actually no DC should get the 3rd string minutes, he needs to earn his spot back with good play. Let Lance back up AJ.

          At any rate AJ should be playing the most minutes at PG right now. That or bring TJ back, anything but the horrible crap we have been seeing with DC.
          Price was +3 in the first half too, when the rest of the team was -.

          Most of it was because of garbage minutes, (Vogel put up the white flag in the third, which is why Lance got the time) but he was a big part of the push in the second to get the game close (err..reasonable), which is how he ended up +3. It was just by the time the subs started going in, in the third, it was about a 30 point lead.

          AJ gets beat on defense at times, but everyone does. His defense isn't the problem. (In fact, once he figures out how to foul without the refs seeing it, he'll be really good.) Even when he gets scored on, the guy isn't open.

          I think starting him would be a good idea though, him and Dahntay might need to break up.
          Last edited by Sookie; 03-06-2011, 12:26 PM.

          Comment


          • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

            Originally posted by Jared Sullinger View Post
            Hansbrough went toe-to-toe with Luis Scola, dropping 17 & 10 in 25 minutes. Ineffective would be Brandon Rush doing next-to-nothing while getting lit up like a Christmas tree by Kevin Martin.
            11 & 8 of which came in the 4th quarter when Scola had long since sat for the night.

            And those 17 points came on 18 shots. Not exactly the picture of efficiency.
            "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

            -Lance Stephenson

            Comment


            • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
              I don't agree with this at all. First of all, there appears to be this concept held by many NBA followers that you must only have one significant offensive threat in your front court, while the other one must be a Dale Davis/Ben Wallace/Josh McRoberts/Jeff Foster kind of guy. I think that's BS. Tell that to the Lakers when they traded for Pau Gasol. They didn't punt on Andrew Bynum. Whenever he was healthy, they started both of them, and it was a pain in the other NBA contenders' asses to have to deal with that much size and firepower up front.

              That's not to say it's an unstoppable force; clearly they also frequently used a smaller Odom/Gasol front court, but there's a reason they stuck with starting the bigger two together, and there's a reason they kept going to it at least part of the time: It can be used to great effect.

              I welcome David West to play WITH Roy Hibbert offensively. First of all, David West has a money jump shot, so he can provide space for Roy to work down low, and at the same time we know Roy can be utilized in the high post for when we want to try posting up with David West. You don't have to limit yourself that way by saying "Well, we got West, so Roy you know what you have to do: Stop trying to be an offensive player."

              Obviously there's some hyperbole there, but nonetheless.
              Thank you.. The "There has to be two garbage men," argument doesn't make any sense to me. If anything, Danny is begging for shots to be taken away from him (His FG% is bad and he needs to be more of a deadly off the ball shooter) because we need more talent at the wing there; particularly someone who has capabilities of having 40 point games and can create his own shot and sometimes create for others. Brandon Rush has been averaging about seven points per game and he has been completely invisible since he's been starting again.

              As for the power forward spot, a guy like Josh is fine, I guess, if he isn't giving up points due to his lack of boxing out and his lack of post defense. I would prefer a ZBo/West myself, but a garbage man like Josh/Varejao is fine as long as they actually are garbage men. Josh has been giving up a crap load of boards to the other team (Roy and Tyler too, so I will be fair there) as well as letting power forwards post him up three feet away from the basket. That's not work of a hard hat guy.

              We just need a lot more talent right now; It's simple. Danny is fine, I don't care what anyone says. If we get enough talent to where other teams can't afford to trap/double Danny as well as forcing him to drive by playing him tight (In other words, making the opposing SF invisible in the team defensive schemes) than we will be better off.

              PS: To get our offense to actually work, we need a point guard that can make easy buckets for us and that can adequately defend other point guards as well as create for himself at times when the shot clock is down. We were hoping that that person would be Collison but he doesn't have the court vision or the defense for it. Hopefully Lance can be that player in 2 years or so but we have a lot of time until then. We're probably going to need a stop gap there..

              Comment


              • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                The problem you're missing is this - Bosh wouldn't end up being a Josh upgrade, he would end up being a ROY UPGRADE. Roy would be moved to Josh's role.

                You think they'd just keep feeding the low post or running PnR with Roy/Collison if Bosh came in? Nope.

                They'd use Roy as a defensive guy and work all the post(ish) offense through Bosh. Meanwhile Miami could return to focusing on just Wade/Lebron offense and let Josh just keep the ball moving and set shot screens for them.

                It's about diversity of skills.

                Bosh is a better player (specifically a better scorer) than Josh without a doubt, but you don't need 5 scorers who want 15 shots per game. That does not work. It never works. And it's not like Bosh is famous for how aggressive his defense is at the rim.


                You might as well say what's holding back the 92 Bulls isn't Jordan's slump but Cartwright's post offense.
                Correct me if I am wrong....but based off of your posts here....my impression is that you are suggesting that getting an upgrade at the PF spot requires that he compliment Hibbert ( specifically doing stuff that Hibbert doesn't do that would allow Hibbert to command the low-post on the offensive and defensive end )....not mirror Hibbert's contributions.

                Although I can understand getting a Player like Bosh ( despite my guess is that he is becoming more JONeal like as he gets older ), I never got the impression that David West is the type of PF that lives "inside the paint". I recall West killing Teams with his mid-range game.

                But if West is not that guy that can compliment ( not mirror ) Hibbert on the offensive end...then who is?

                Is there a Player out there like that?
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                  Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                  Is there a Player out there like that?
                  Josh Smith would be the prototype.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                    You swap Josh for Bosh and it helps Miami and hurts the Pacers because Bosh just overlaps Danny and Roy while Josh makes it easier for all the scoring to go through Wade and Josh.
                    Damn you are overrating Josh big time, this has to be one of the most ridiculous statements I have seen on PD in a long time.


                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                      Originally posted by Bball View Post
                      I don't think Jeff Foster particularly helps the defense.... and his offense is questionable at best...
                      I don't know why I need to keep coming to Jeff's defense on his defense and worth. Did you see the box score from the game? He had 10 rebounds in 12 minutes of play. If you read the box, you'll notice that this total is the same as what the leading rebounder, Tyler, got by playing twice as long and in garbage time. The rest of the team including Roy played twice as long and did not come close.

                      The guy does what he does. On offense, he rarely shoots, he scores about 45-50% of the time when he does.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                        Originally posted by cdash View Post
                        Josh Smith would be the prototype.
                        Defensively, maybe, but I'm not a believer in his offensive game. Not saying he can't or doesn't put up points, but I would not feel comfortable depending on his offensive production.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                          Is there a Player out there like that?
                          Yes, Varejao, Scola, Ubaka, Okafor, Horford.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                            This thread is a depressing read

                            I will try to make the case that there is one huge glaring issue with this team. It returns every game. It is an ongoing stat in every game, regardless of how well any one player plays.

                            Look at the game stats: Pacer | Houston boxscore

                            Review the guard statistics. They tell the same collective story EVERY GAME.

                            WE DO NOT HAVE AN EFFECTIVE PG. You know, the one that has more assists than everyone else. The one that sets up the offense. The one that ensures the bigs get the ball in the place on the floor that makes them most effective. The one that doesn't turn it over.

                            To repeat. I do not know why we traded for DC. For a PG, he is a good under-sized SG. He was that way in college.

                            Without a true PG, any team is going to look way worse than it is. With a true PG, the offense flows. He will improve chemistry.

                            And chemistry is huge in team sports. I am still scratching my head why Vogel is not preserving his two lines more. The Goon squad was special. Especially with a player like Grainger, who affects the whole offense on the court, you can not just sub players in and out on the floor.

                            One idea is that Grainger should play the PG position on the starting line. He is controlling the game from the SF position anyway. One could even make the argument that it is difficult for any PG to play the position in the starting line-up because Grainger is already playing it! Either he is doing so because he is over-compensating for the lack of floor general at PG, or that is the way he prefers to play. Either way, it does not matter right now. I would tell the team Grainger is playing PG for the next 10 games. He is miles ahead of our PGs at the position anyway.

                            On a related note, 4 games ago, it was Vogel's starters that were struggling. Robbing one line for the other will only make the whole team worse. He needs to either make it a permanent thing, or stop doing it, so that players know where they are and develop a rapport.

                            Chemistry is not a factor in winning. It is the factor in winning. IF you want further evidence, ask yourself why Miami will not win the trophy this year.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                              Defensively, maybe, but I'm not a believer in his offensive game. Not saying he can't or doesn't put up points, but I would not feel comfortable depending on his offensive production.
                              Just curious, what kind of offensive game/production would you feel comfortable with?

                              Comment


                              • Re: Post game 3/5/11 vs Rockets

                                Great post Whiskeyjim.

                                With one caveat. Granger at point guard is not a good idea at all. He is a terrible ball handler, and not a good passer. I don't see any way that would help us.

                                If you are going to play a forward out of position at point guard, McRoberts is the better choice.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X