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

Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

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

  • #31
    Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

    I've said it before and i'll say it again. Danny's biggest problem is that he isn't Lebron James.
    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

      Deng magically gaining the ability to hit the 3 opened up his game a bit. He hit 115 last season, most any season before that was 32. It's strange because in arguably his best season, '06-'07, he went 1 for 7 from the 3.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

        Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
        I've said it before and i'll say it again. Danny's biggest problem is that he isn't Lebron James.
        Yeah Danny and the rest of Basketball players in the world ........
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          Yeah Danny and the rest of Basketball players in the world ........
          No i say that because as SF's go Lebron James is the best and sets the bar, and in the East, Danny is easily the 3-4th best SF. But Danny is way more complete than Carmelo and more a more complete player than Joe Johnson.
          If i'm ranking SF's and abilities
          James- Excels at everything but shooting
          Pierce- Good at everything, excels at scoring
          Granger - Good at everything, excels at shooting
          Carmelo - Decent at everything, excels at scoring
          Johnson- Streaky at everything- excels at scoring

          Lebron James is the #1 option
          Pierce plays with 2 other HOFers
          Granger is forced to be the #1 option.
          You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

            Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
            No i say that because as SF's go Lebron James is the best and sets the bar, and in the East, Danny is easily the 3-4th best SF. But Danny is way more complete than Carmelo and more a more complete player than Joe Johnson.
            If i'm ranking SF's and abilities
            James- Excels at everything but shooting
            Pierce- Good at everything, excels at scoring
            Granger - Good at everything, excels at shooting
            Carmelo - Decent at everything, excels at scoring
            Johnson- Streaky at everything- excels at scoring

            Lebron James is the #1 option
            Pierce plays with 2 other HOFers
            Granger is forced to be the #1 option.
            Joe is a sg but I would say him and Danny are about the same none the less. You cant really believe Danny is a better player than Melo though. Yes Danny is more well rounded, but Carmelo is a year after year all star for a reason. I personally dont care for his game, but I cant deny he's a great player.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

              Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
              James- Excels at everything but shooting
              Pierce- Good at everything, excels at scoring
              Granger - Good at everything, excels at shooting
              Carmelo - Decent at everything, excels at scoring
              Johnson- Streaky at everything- excels at scoring
              no way is granger 'good' at everything. his ball handling is below average and his ability to finish is average-above average. what he is 'good' at is volume shooting. i have no problem keeping him on our team, but he's NOT a number one option. carmelo is also a 'more complete' player than granger by far, on the offensive end. granger's post game is all but non-existent.
              Last edited by adamscb; 08-08-2011, 05:55 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

                Originally posted by Peck View Post
                I don't know about Roy being better but I do know that there is no way on God's green earth that Brook Lopez should be ranked this high.

                Ahhhhh....lists, subjective till the bitter end.
                I feel like both guys are pretty similar in different ways.

                As far as having more potential to be a pure center, Roy definitely surpasses Lopez. That's really what I meant when I said Roy is better.

                Roy can be soft at times, but Lopez can't even play the post. He's standing out there shooting FGs about a foot inside the 3 point arc and that's his game.

                When Roy's head is on straight, he's a dominant center play the post extremely well and blocking shots left and right. More importantly, it benefits us a lot.
                In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

                  Granger totally outplayed Deng. Did he not see the playoffs?
                  whatever.
                  In my opinion Granger is about top 40, and you could make an argument whether he belongs in top 5 SFs (top 4 are locked; the 5th is a battle between guys like Granger, Gay, Iguodala, Deng)
                  Originally posted by Piston Prince
                  Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                  "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

                    Originally posted by Scot Pollard View Post
                    Lopez can't even play the post. He's standing out there shooting FGs about a foot inside the 3 point arc and that's his game.
                    That's simply not true.
                    Brook's low post game is amazing. He has the moves and he draws a ton of fouls.
                    He does take mid range shots slightly more often than Roy but he also shoots them better, so...

                    Btw, I'm talking about last year here. When it comes to going for a mid range jumper over their careers... Roy and Brook are nearly identical.

                    Offensively, I'd take Brook over Roy any time. The bigger question is defense, rebounding and generally love for the game. Does Brook care enough? Or maybe Avery Johnson is simply a bad fit for him compared to Lawrence Frank?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

                      The overarching goal here is to find two-way players. If you’ve been a regular reader of this blog, you know how much attention is paid to defense and efficiency with the ball. Those 18 points per game look nice in the box score, but if a player gets them by chucking up contested 20-foot jumpers and lazily watching opposing ball-handlers stroll into the lane, he’s going to have a hard time making this list (hi, Andray Blatche). A one-dimensional player seeking to make the top 65 or so better be darn good at that one dimension. Finding truly accomplished two-way players for the bottom 10 spots was basically impossible, making those places more a matter of taste than I’d like.
                      If you're of the opinion that this guy has Danny too low...

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        Here is the last list:

                        50. Elton Brand PF, Philadelphia 76ers
                        49. Brook Lopez C, New Jersey Nets
                        48. Ray Allen SG, Boston Celtics
                        47. Luol Deng SF, Chicago Bulls
                        46. Paul Millsap PF, Utah Jazz
                        45. Carlos Boozer PF, Chicago Bulls
                        44. Monta Ellis SG, Golden State Warriors
                        43. Joakim Noah C, Chicago Bulls
                        42. Kevin Martin SG, Houston Rockets
                        41. Stephen Curry PG, Golden State Warriors
                        Originally posted by LetsTalkPacers View Post
                        In what world is Deng better than Granger?
                        In what world are any of those players better than Granger?

                        Allen, a few years ago yes. Now, probably not.

                        Monta Ellis, is the closest, but I wouldn't want him on my team over Granger.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

                          I won't argue with current placement based on Danny's poor year, but he's one decent season away from drastically climbing this list.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

                            at Danny's absolute worst, I still think he should be higher than that. Biased or unbiased, it's just the truth.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

                              Originally posted by yoadknux View Post
                              Granger totally outplayed Deng. Did he not see the playoffs?
                              whatever.
                              In my opinion Granger is about top 40, and you could make an argument whether he belongs in top 5 SFs (top 4 are locked; the 5th is a battle between guys like Granger, Gay, Iguodala, Deng)
                              It's absolutely amazing to me that anyone could have watched that playoff series and concluded that Granger outplayed Deng.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Danny Granger is the 51st best player in the NBA/SI.com

                                Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                                It's absolutely amazing to me that anyone could have watched that playoff series and concluded that Granger outplayed Deng.


                                Elaborate. They were directly matched up (actually granger was routinely double teamed while luol saw single coverage over and over again), rebounded at a superior rate (per minute) Shot drastically better, comfortably outscored luol and was the only consistant offensive player on a team that played the number one seed much more closely than they had any right to.

                                The real question is how anyone can watch that playoff series and conclude that deng outplayed granger...

                                I'm sure you realize that they were matched up head to head and granger was the one player on the entire pacers roster that performed well on the offensive side of the ball, and deng himself had a putrid offensive series...

                                There really isn't a single objective measure that suggests granger didn't outplay deng in that series, and the only subjective one that suggests that is granger hatred.

                                (that is unless you're placing the blame for our 8 seed losing to the one seed on granger or giving credit to luol for putting us away... Korver killed us more in relative terms than deng, and they have a guy named rose that is... pretty good...)

                                Despite way more attention payed to him by chicago's defense than the other way around granger was significantly better than deng in basically every single way, and in less minutes.


                                As for the list, danny had an off year. Personally he could have been as high as 40 or so, but he didn't have that amazing of a regular season last year. I think he's more efficient next year, and if some of our youth like George, Collison, Hill, and Hibbert/hans can take more of the offensive load off of him he can have a great bounce back season. Danny was easily top 30 in the NBA during his all-star season, and he can get back to that form, even if it doesn't mean being top five in scoring in the league again.
                                Last edited by daschysta; 08-09-2011, 12:21 AM.
                                Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X