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 playoffs postgame thread

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

  • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

    I guess what I'm trying to figure out is what is the best way to limit the overall effectiveness of the Bulls Defense...especially when it comes to crunch time. This was how the Bulls beat us in the last 2 games. We were up until the last couple of minutes when the Pacers couldn't score.

    Although we can put partial blame on the Team's offense....the Bulls Defense was stifling. It's been argued that the best offensive lineup that we had that was the most effective was with the original Vogel Starting lineup of DC/Dunleavy/Granger/McBob/Hibbert. You have to wonder if we can't get our offense going...whether we should run with that lineup to close out the game. If there is nothing that we can do about limiting the effectiveness of the Bulls defense...then maybe the best thing to do is to put the most effective scoring lineup that we can out there.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      Maybe in today's NBA you are right. What counts as a foul today has probably turned the game into more of a physical ability contest than basketball. Basketball skills have taken a back seat to quickness, length and hops. Perhaps the rim needs to be raised another foot.

      If the Heat win the NBA championship, it won't be because they have the best strategy or because they can work the ball better than any other team and make the toughest shots. It will be because the refs allow Wade and Lebron to drive and dunk...getting the opposition in foul trouble...and living at the line. What a boring way to win.

      Teams have always had physical advantages and it's always been important to the game...and I do like some spectacular dunks and acrobatic plays....but I think with the rule change things are worse. A Derrick Rose wouldn't be nearly as effective in the mid 90's because he'd have his back broken by Charles Oakley. I don't condone that but I also don't think the Derrick Rose gymnastic show is all that interesting. Isn't that really what he is...a gymnast who can dribble the basketball? Yes, he is pretty amazing but he also gets calls he should not get and he's no where close to being as good as Jordan. Michael would get fouled every single time he drove to the bucket in today's lame version of NBA basketball.

      I just hope the Spurs win the championship because they're one of the few teams I enjoy watching play the game. A game that is less than what it once was at the NBA level.

      I could not agree more.

      The pansy superstar calls are so prevalent it really cheapens the game and makes it very "un fun" to watch unless you are a fan of the team getting the benefit of those calls. And about 85% of those "fans" are just bandwagoners in the first place who know nothing about basketball except for the fact that: "WTF REF!!1! BRON GOT HACKED!!11!!!"

      It's sad that the NBA has lowered itself to pandering to bandwagoners to sustain its income. It a slap to the face of those of us who actually care about the sport and want to see it played the right way.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

        I would have played Dahntay when Rush and PG were in foul trouble. Keep Dun at the backup SF..don't make DC and AJ guard Rose.

        Other than that, I say keep the rotation the same. Just have Dahntay be the third SG, and keep Dun completely at the SF spot.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

          Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
          I could not agree more.

          The pansy superstar calls are so prevalent it really cheapens the game and makes it very "un fun" to watch unless you are a fan of the team getting the benefit of those calls. And about 85% of those "fans" are just bandwagoners in the first place who know nothing about basketball except for the fact that: "WTF REF!!1! BRON GOT HACKED!!11!!!"

          It's sad that the NBA has lowered itself to pandering to bandwagoners to sustain its income. It a slap to the face of those of us who actually care about the sport and want to see it played the right way.
          Let's flesh this point out a little. The media only gives attention to the superstar element in a game sport. They are ruining it. The refs make the situation worse by in effect giving every 'superstar's' team a 10 point advantage with preferential calls. We have been watching this crap for decades.

          Now that we've taken 3 more pages to understand the situation (no insult intended), the strategical response is clear.

          If the Pacers want to beat the Bulls, they need to put Rose on the floor and make him unwilling to go in the paint. It is the logical tactical response to the current rules of the game, which are against them.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
            I guess what I'm trying to figure out is what is the best way to limit the overall effectiveness of the Bulls Defense...especially when it comes to crunch time. This was how the Bulls beat us in the last 2 games. We were up until the last couple of minutes when the Pacers couldn't score.

            Although we can put partial blame on the Team's offense....the Bulls Defense was stifling. It's been argued that the best offensive lineup that we had that was the most effective was with the original Vogel Starting lineup of DC/Dunleavy/Granger/McBob/Hibbert. You have to wonder if we can't get our offense going...whether we should run with that lineup to close out the game. If there is nothing that we can do about limiting the effectiveness of the Bulls defense...then maybe the best thing to do is to put the most effective scoring lineup that we can out there.
            This is a good question. Notwithstanding my previous post, I think both of your ideas should be tried. Both being judicious use of a more uptempo game and placing the best offensive players on the floor together. It's clear we need to try something unconventional because they simply have more talent and/or experience.

            I would also try something very unconventional particularly if they put Korver out there. Perhaps a lineup of Dahntay/Rush, PG, Granger, McBob and Hibbert would be a good combination. McBob could run the point and we all know he can pass better than anyone on the team. If they press him he's tall enough and quick thinking enough to burn them. Let's just say it's better than watching DRose do another spin in the lane for an And One. Why not try it?

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

              Originally posted by Whiskeyjim View Post
              Let's flesh this point out a little. The media only gives attention to the superstar element in a game sport. They are ruining it. The refs make the situation worse by in effect giving every 'superstar's' team a 10 point advantage with preferential calls. We have been watching this crap for decades.

              Now that we've taken 3 more pages to understand the situation (no insult intended), the strategical response is clear.

              If the Pacers want to beat the Bulls, they need to put Rose on the floor and make him unwilling to go in the paint. It is the logical tactical response to the current rules of the game, which are against them.
              Make him unwilling to go in the paint without playing dirty and I'm all for that. I just doubt that's possible.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                Make him unwilling to go in the paint without playing dirty and I'm all for that. I just doubt that's possible.
                Or maybe a bit of zone?

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                  Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                  This is a good question. Notwithstanding my previous post, I think both of your ideas should be tried. Both being judicious use of a more uptempo game and placing the best offensive players on the floor together. It's clear we need to try something unconventional because they simply have more talent and/or experience.

                  I would also try something very unconventional particularly if they put Korver out there. Perhaps a lineup of Dahntay/Rush, PG, Granger, McBob and Hibbert would be a good combination. McBob could run the point and we all know he can pass better than anyone on the team. If they press him he's tall enough and quick thinking enough to burn them. Let's just say it's better than watching DRose do another spin in the lane for an And One. Why not try it?


                  Thanks. I needed a laugh today.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                    Originally posted by IndyHoya View Post
                    Or maybe a bit of zone?
                    I agree, NBA players don't see a lot of zone, and if the Pacers could implement a good zone it would probably knock the Bulls out of rythm for a little while. I could also see a situation where Dunleavy plays point and gaurds Korver while George, Jones, or Rush guard Rose. In my opinion the more you change the defense up on the Bulls the tougher it will be for them to score against it. One time down be in a 2-3 zone, the next time man with the best defender on Rose, and the next time a 3-2 or 1-3-1. Just don't let them get comfortable, force them to think on their feet.
                    Last edited by Eleazar; 04-17-2011, 09:38 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                      Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                      you're right anthem. like always. there's no such thing as hyperbole. although that 95% number is probably pretty damn close. you think your ego will ever allow you to thank another's post?
                      It probably won't be one of yours.
                      Last edited by Anthem; 04-17-2011, 10:19 PM.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        Make him unwilling to go in the paint without playing dirty and I'm all for that. I just doubt that's possible.
                        IMO there is a HUGE difference between a hard "Make him think twice" foul and a dirty foul as you are referencing.

                        I think it's perfectly legitimate for us to keep hammering him like Jeff and Tyler did in game 1. In fact, I think it's damn near a necessity.

                        Since we're apparently 'pre-ordained by the striped gods' to send Rose to the foul line 20+ times a game, why not make him pay for each of those foul shots?

                        If he is fouled 10 times per game, I want all 10 of those fouls to leave bruises and welts.

                        It's been said in this thread so many times already, the good old days of 90's NBA where hard fouls were not only tolerated but expected is long gone. But THAT is what we need to bring to this series. Anything less will not be enough, and that's just reality.

                        I am sorry, but these are the playoffs. If we had a player of Rose's caliber on our team and he was absolutely destroying our opponent with dribble penetration to the lane, I would fully expect for him to get mangled a few times per game. Sure, I would be pissed, but I would also sure as hell not be surprised.
                        Last edited by TMJ31; 04-17-2011, 11:41 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                          You guys believe in a W tonight??

                          Today's game will be even harder, Chicago will get much more prepared and suspicious

                          What do you think guys?

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                            Originally posted by LucasRL13 View Post
                            You guys believe in a W tonight??

                            Today's game will be even harder, Chicago will get much more prepared and suspicious

                            What do you think guys?

                            Yes, I agree, if you read what the Bulls are saying since game #1 they are upset about their defense, so I expect their defense to be tougher in game #2. Plus I think the pacers shot the ball really well, hitting a number of shots that I didn't expect to go in. So I am expecting the Bulls defense to get better and my fear overall is that their defense will get better and better as this series goes along.

                            That is what tends to happen as most series move along, often times the scores get lower and lower from game to game. Each game is different and I'm not suggesting anything more than a general trend. Plus games at Conseco will be different. But I'd be shocked if the Pacers shoot 10 for 18 in threes in any of the remaining games even the home games.

                            So the pacers defense and rebounding needs to be much better tonight or it will be a double digit loss.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                              Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                              What counts as a foul today has probably turned the game into more of a physical ability contest than basketball. Basketball skills have taken a back seat to quickness, length and hops.
                              Getting the right player with the ball in position to score or to force the other team to foul to try to prevent a score is one of the most fundamentally important basketball skills ever, and it always has been. Tiny Archibald used his tremedous quickness to be unstoppable, Wilt used his tremendous length and atleticism, Connie Hawkins his length and great hops.

                              Rule changes and rule interpretation changes do affect how you can go about breaking down the defense, for example the no hand check rule makes the game more in favor of the penetrating/ slashing player. I would disagree though that baketball skills have been marginalized.

                              My only beef with how the NBA is played is that teams rely too much on "hero ball" when they need a key late basket, clearing out for their best player to pound the ball while everyone else watches. That went on some 40 years ago, for sure, and maybe I didn't mind it so much when it was Roger Brown. It just seems a shame that teams that typically got into position to win by playing as a team and being unselfish throw all of that out in the last minute.
                              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Bulls playoffs postgame thread

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                I didn't see his offensive fouls, he is great at sliding over and going around stationary defenders, he's like Jordan doing that
                                I don't have a problem with Rose avoiding the charge, I have a HUGE problem with him making contact with a stationary defender and drawing a foul.

                                I think there were plenty of defensive fouls that should have been no-calls.

                                No one defending those foul calls has yet explained what a defender who is planted, not shifting a hip or stretching out an arm, and taking his position is supposed to do when Rose twists in the air to make contact off-center? Jump out of the way? Position is position, and I think officials are getting a little lazy by calling any off-axis contact a defensive foul (similar to how I think they've gotten lazy and turned the "no charge" circle into a "contact is a defensive foul" circle).

                                I'm not even going to go with the situation when the defender rises straight up with arms straight above his head, because I can see how that one is difficult to sort out when the game is moving quickly. However, the defender is doing exactly what he is supposed to do, why should he constantly get punished for it?

                                ETA: In one of the ref threads the points were made that there is no "vertical leap" position defined in NBA rules. Also, at least one person disputes that the defender against Rose was stationary for the calls in the second half. I can't argue with the former, but I'd like to see some film on the latter (Seth?)
                                Last edited by BillS; 04-18-2011, 10:40 AM. Reason: Read another thread
                                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