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

Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

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

  • #31
    Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

    I watched the Bulls play the other day and having Boozer out there takes them to a whole other level. When we beat them Boozer was out. I don't know who I am more worried about really. Boozer or DRose.

    With DRose, I'd like to see Dahntay get a lot of time guarding him. Our little guards don't really stand a chance vs him.

    With Boozer, Having Tyler on him is probably best, but he is so crafty around the rim. I think that will be a fun matchup.

    Kurt is going to give Hibbert a really tough time. He is one of the most difficult matchups for Hibbert in the NBA. Roy might do better in the high post when Kurt is on the floor.

    The rest of the team we can match up with decently. Deng is a great talent, but we can shut him down with Granger/George/Rush.


    The advantages we have are that we can show them multiple looks. Our team is very dynamic and we can switch up our offense and defense with our many interchangeable parts.

    When Mike and Josh come in off the bench, the Bulls are facing a completely different offense.

    Jeff Foster is still as good as Noah, in fact he might be better at rebounding.

    When old Kurt takes a rest, Hibbert can exploit them big time.

    I think our bench is the key to this series. We need our Starters to keep it close, but the bench is where we can beat the Bulls.

    I expect them to win one game at least.
    Last edited by PaceBalls; 04-10-2011, 01:27 PM.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

      Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
      Everyone thinks Boozer will be the difference maker? Everyone? That doesn't make sense in as much as a lot of us have already posted in this thread think Rose will be the difference.

      And as for are second unit being better than Chicago's that really doesn't matter much. In the playoffs the first unit always plays a lot more minutes. I think you're counting chicken's in your analyse that will never hatch. I'm very agreeable to your being right though! Very agreeable!
      I meant difference maker as that some people believe that J-Mac/Hansbrough can't handle Boozer, while I think it's the other way around.


      Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

        Originally posted by The Jackson shimmy View Post
        I didn't see any of the 4 reg season games. So, the following
        are just interesting stats that jumped off the page while
        perusing the box scores.

        In those games, Hibbert scored 6, 2, 2 and 15 pts. The latter was
        the only game the Pacers won.

        Boozer had 18 rbs in the 1st game, Thomas had 18 in the 2nd game
        and Gibson had 16 in the last game.

        The Pacers collective Ast/TO ratio vs the Bulls #1 Def was 1.36 which
        is higher than their ratio of 1.28 against the league for the entire
        season.
        Here's something that I posted in a different thread...

        Game # 1
        http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=301213004
        No Danny Granger. Hansbrough, George, and Foster were DNP-CD while Posey had 33 minutes had the PF spot. Chicago had their full squad. Final score 92-73, Bulls win.

        Game # 2
        http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=310114011
        This game I can say that Chicago just outright whupped us, BUT Josh McRoberts only played 4 minutes while racking up 4 DNP-CD before that game. Chicago had their full squad. Final score 86-99.

        Game # 3
        http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=310129004
        THE GAME that got JOB fired. Personally, I feel that JOB coached this game to the loss, so he could get fired. The decisions that JOB was making in this game were not making any sense. No Tyler, but Chicago had a full squad. Josh had 3 DNP-CD, and only played the Bulls and Nets games, because Tyler had pneumonia. Final score 89-110


        Game #4
        http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=310318011
        Ahhh...this is where it gets interesting. The starting 5 have played 5 games with each other. Before that point, the players individually have been getting consistent minutes, and playing their intended roles. The Pacers survived a 42 point from Rose to win the game. However, Boozer didn't play this game. Final score 115-108 (OT).

        Personally, I like our chances against the Bulls, and I don't expect Rose to score 40+ points in each game.

        EDIT: Looking at the box scores, the X-Factor seems to be Roy Hibbert. In the losses, Hibbert had 6, 2, and 2 points while basically being a non-factor. If a recall, Hibbert was having confidence issues during those particular games. If Hibbert and Hansbrough play to their talents, then Chicago will not be able to stop us. ESPECIALLY, if Tyler gets Noah into foul trouble.
        We have to keep in mind that Posey played some heavy minutes at the PF spot, and we didn't have our completely healthy, CONSISTENT PF rotation in the first three meetings. In a sense, you can almost dismiss the first three games, since there is so much night and day difference between the JOB and Vogel teams.


        Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

          Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
          We have to keep in mind that Posey played some heavy minutes at the PF spot, and we didn't have our completely healthy, CONSISTENT PF rotation in the first three meetings. In a sense, you can almost dismiss the first three games, since there is so much night and day difference between the JOB and Vogel teams.
          We also have to keep in mind though that the Bulls were playing horrible defense up until the 4th quarter in the game we won.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

            Originally posted by KingGeorge View Post
            We also have to keep in mind though that the Bulls were playing horrible defense up until the 4th quarter in the game we won.
            Or we was playing great offense, until the 4th quarter.


            Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

              Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
              Or we was playing great offense, until the 4th quarter.
              You're right. We were playing great offense in that game. I also remember the refs were giving Rose every call at the end of the game too.
              Last edited by KingGeorge; 04-10-2011, 02:25 PM. Reason: People make mistakes

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

                Originally posted by KingGeorge View Post
                Your right. We were playing great offense in that game. I also remember the refs were giving Rose every call at the end of the game too.
                You're. You are right equals the conjunction you're right.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

                  Originally posted by mattie View Post
                  You're. You are right equals the conjunction you're right.
                  Thank you eighth grade English teacher

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

                    I don't see how inside rotation of Noah, Boozer, Gibson, Asik, and Thomas cannot be considered formidable in terms of a rebounding, physical challenge, KSuttonjr76.
                    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                    -Emiliano Zapata

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

                      If the Pacers constantly play their A game I expect them to take it to 7 games, and give them a 50/50 chance to win. The Pacers player there A game can compete and beat anyone, they are good enough to win a championship. The problem is they have problems with consistently playing their A game. The ultimately will be the difference in this series. It isn't what the Bulls do, it is what the Pacers do. We know exactly what the Bulls will do, we have a whole season of tape. We do not know what the Pacers will do. We only have a little less than half a season, and they have been inconsistent.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

                        Jameer just said to Rose "I'll catch you in the second round" lmao

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

                          Originally posted by PacersForever View Post
                          Jameer just said to Rose "I'll catch you in the second round" lmao
                          I saw that too. Man I want the Pacers to win...
                          Last edited by focused444; 04-10-2011, 04:20 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

                            Originally posted by focused444 View Post
                            I saw that too. Man I want the Pacers win...
                            I hope the Hawks heard that lol.

                            Same. If everyone says focused they can. The Bulls are honestly not that great.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

                              I'll repeat what I've posted in other threads.

                              When the Pacers lose this series and we look back at and try to determine why, the biggest problem will be the Pacers were unable to score well enough against the Bulls great defense.

                              Having said that I think the best way to defend Rose is to throw the kitchen sink at him. He is really their only playmaker, if you take the ball out of his hands, he doesn't have a teammate that can create offense.

                              When I say throw the kitchen sink at him, I mainly mean change things up, sometimes double team him hard as soon as he gets across midcourt, sometimes double team and trap him hard on all pick and rolls - and change away from those approaches as soon as it appears the Bulls are adjusting. But in general I would try to take the ball out of Rose's hands as much as you possibly can.

                              If that approach ions't working, I might try playing Rose more straight up through three quarters and then in the fourth quarter I would do everything possible to take the ball out of Rose's hands. Why? Because if you go through three quarter with Rose scoring a majority of the Bulls points, and then force other players to score in the 4th when the pressure is on and when they are in a rhythm of scoring.

                              As far as a stat is concerned, the pacers shooting percentage will tell us who won the game. In the 1 or maybe 2 games they ight win the pacers will have to shoot 45% or better

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Pacers/Bulls Playoff Series news/thoughts thread

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                I'll repeat what I've posted in other threads.

                                When the Pacers lose this series and we look back at and try to determine why, the biggest problem will be the Pacers were unable to score well enough against the Bulls great defense.

                                Having said that I think the best way to defend Rose is to throw the kitchen sink at him. He is really their only playmaker, if you take the ball out of his hands, he doesn't have a teammate that can create offense.

                                When I say throw the kitchen sink at him, I mainly mean change things up, sometimes double team him hard as soon as he gets across midcourt, sometimes double team and trap him hard on all pick and rolls - and change away from those approaches as soon as it appears the Bulls are adjusting. But in general I would try to take the ball out of Rose's hands as much as you possibly can.

                                If that approach ions't working, I might try playing Rose more straight up through three quarters and then in the fourth quarter I would do everything possible to take the ball out of Rose's hands. Why? Because if you go through three quarter with Rose scoring a majority of the Bulls points, and then force other players to score in the 4th when the pressure is on and when they are in a rhythm of scoring.

                                As far as a stat is concerned, the pacers shooting percentage will tell us who won the game. In the 1 or maybe 2 games they ight win the pacers will have to shoot 45% or better
                                I hope they try these exact strategies, and anything else they can come up with. I want to see if he's unstoppable. I want to know they tried everything in their power to make it tough on him.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X