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

Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

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

  • Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

    We have a 3 man rotation in Danny, Paul and Hill to cover the SF, SG positions with Hill having to cover the PG position.

    This is not good at all. Jones is terrible, he is everything the word team doesn't stand for and Stephenson, well he just isn't ready (to be nice). Price may not perform to the level needed. Famous was a stick out there on the floor. Lazare seemed ok but was quite slow on his feet.

    We have lost Dunleavey and now Rush (our best shooters off the bench) and there isn't much left in FA. I am really upset and getting concerned here. This is not a deep bench at all and we don't really have a legit starting SG.
    I think I'd rather have Rush, Dunleavey, McRoberts and West added to the team, then Pendergraph and Amundson. This just doesn't make sense and it's giving me a Big Freakin Headache.

    Please, tell me I'm missing something here and stop my panic.

    Hibert / Amundson / Foster
    West / Hans
    Granger / George
    George / Hill
    Collison / Hill
    Last edited by Pacer Fan; 12-18-2011, 04:29 PM. Reason: Changed wording on Price
    Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

  • #2
    Re: Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

    I think your making a big stink about nothing. Most teams only go 8 maybe 9 deep in their rotation. We need another wing who can shoot, i agree with that wholeheartedly. But I think we have a much more balanced/big team than what we've had in the past.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

      I'm right there with you, except for the part about Price.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
        I think your making a big stink about nothing. Most teams only go 8 maybe 9 deep in their rotation. We need another wing who can shoot, i agree with that wholeheartedly. But I think we have a much more balanced/big team than what we've had in the past.
        Just because most teams do it, doesn't mean it is the best way to do it. Most teams actually do go 10 deep in the regular season, it is only once you get to the playoffs that they only go 8 deep. Most teams only go 8 deep because it is difficult to find 10 players worth playing in the playoffs.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

          This trade didn't make much sense. It's like we traded Rush for Solo.
          Maybe Bird plans on signing AK or Afflalo (or w/e his name is)
          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


          • #6
            Re: Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

            So let's say we look to bring in a 2 guard. We can either:

            A. Severely overpay for someone like Affalo or Nick Young

            or

            B. Sign a veteran (with the options being Redd, Arenas, Bogans)

            or

            C. Try and work with what we've got.

            Am I missing anything/anyone?
            Check out my autographed 1972-73 Topps basketball project

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

              Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
              Just because most teams do it, doesn't mean it is the best way to do it. Most teams actually do go 10 deep in the regular season, it is only once you get to the playoffs that they only go 8 deep. Most teams only go 8 deep because it is difficult to find 10 players worth playing in the playoffs.
              exactly, and with the season the way it is, its all the more reason to be deep on the bench.
              Sorry for the Price remark, I was hard, my bad.
              Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

                I say work with what we've got, I think we can do this mainly by giving Lance Stephenson all the rest of the 3rd string minutes.

                Hibbert/Foster/Amundson
                West/Hansbrough/Pendergraph
                Granger/George/Jones
                George/Hill/Stephenson
                Collison/Hill/Stephenson

                I think we're set.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

                  Originally posted by Deadshot View Post
                  So let's say we look to bring in a 2 guard. We can either:

                  A. Severely overpay for someone like Affalo or Nick Young

                  or

                  B. Sign a veteran (with the options being Redd, Arenas, Bogans)

                  or

                  C. Try and work with what we've got.

                  Am I missing anything/anyone?
                  D. Live with what we have, give as many minutes to DC/PG/Granger/GH that they can handle, use Lance/Inferno sparingly and wait til the Trade Deadline and see if some opportunity comes up.

                  or

                  E. If there aren't any good opportunities that result from "D", ( assuming that he doesn't sign an extension ), save the Capspace and make a MAX run at EJ. If the Hornets/NBA/Stern matches....fine...if not...we at least tried to get a top tier SG.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

                    Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
                    exactly, and with the season the way it is, its all the more reason to be deep on the bench.
                    Sorry for the Price remark, I was hard, my bad.
                    i dont know many teams that consistantly go 10 deep, with end of bench players getting double figure minutes a game. Right now we have a very solid 8 man rotation. It could be 10 if your willing to give pendergraph and stephenson spot mins here or there. Do we need another wing? Yes. Is it 100% necessary for a successful season? Prob not

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

                      Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
                      exactly, and with the season the way it is, its all the more reason to be deep on the bench.
                      Sorry for the Price remark, I was hard, my bad.
                      i dont know many teams that consistantly go 10 deep, with end of bench players getting double figure minutes a game. Right now we have a very solid 8 man rotation. It could be 10 if your willing to give pendergraph and stephenson spot mins here or there. Do we need another wing? Yes. Is it 100% necessary for a successful season? Prob not

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

                        Originally posted by Deadshot View Post
                        So let's say we look to bring in a 2 guard. We can either:

                        A. Severely overpay for someone like Affalo or Nick Young
                        or

                        B. Sign a veteran (with the options being Redd, Arenas, Bogans)

                        or

                        C. Try and work with what we've got.

                        Am I missing anything/anyone?
                        I'd give him the 9 million he wants a season if I were the Pacers GM

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

                          Originally posted by Pacer Fan View Post
                          We have a 3 man rotation in Danny, Paul and Hill to cover the SF, SG positions with Hill having to cover the PG position.

                          This is not good at all. Jones is terrible, he is everything the word team doesn't stand for and Stephenson, well he just isn't ready (to be nice). Price may not perform to the level needed. Famous was a stick out there on the floor. Lazare seemed ok but was quite slow on his feet.

                          We have lost Dunleavey and now Rush (our best shooters off the bench) and there isn't much left in FA. I am really upset and getting concerned here. This is not a deep bench at all and we don't really have a legit starting SG.
                          I think I'd rather have Rush, Dunleavey, McRoberts and West added to the team, then Pendergraph and Amundson. This just doesn't make sense and it's giving me a Big Freakin Headache.

                          Please, tell me I'm missing something here and stop my panic.

                          Hibert / Amundson / Foster
                          West / Hans
                          Granger / George
                          George / Hill
                          Collison / Hill
                          I'm really ok with this trade. Amundson is simply a warm body admittedly but I think it really opens up time for guys like Lance. Although acquiring Mayo would have been nice, I was concerned that had that happened in the end, no one is happy with their PT.

                          I think it will end up being:

                          Hibbert/Amundson-Foster (with Foster's minutes being limited until playoffs)
                          West/Hansbrough
                          Granger/George
                          George/Lance/GHill
                          Collison/GHill/Price

                          Not including Price or Foster in the above scheme, that is a 9 man rotation...which is really as much or more than any team really runs anyway. I'm ok with Amundson because he knows he's a role player, plain and simple...doesn't need the ball. George Hill and Paul George are the interchangeable pieces at PG-SG (GHill) and SG-SF (PGeorge) and maybe even Lance at PG-SG as well. Hopefully guys like Dahntay and AJ will also realize they're role players and won't be upset about PT.
                          If the Pacers can somehow land Redd for reasonable $$, that would bring in the second team scorer we need.

                          Another plus is that I think, with the possible exception of Dahntay (and this is just an impression, nothing more), I don't see any malcontents or underachievers anymore. To me we have guys who fall loosely into three categories now...those who are playing at the peaks of their careers (DG, DW), role players (JF,DJ, AJ, LA), and those still with some upside (DC, LS, GH, RH, TH, PG).

                          I was not a fan of Bird as the GM/Walsh successor, but I have to admit, he's done a really great job of assembling a team in a small market, took some reasonable gambles when he needed to, and didn't get the team mired in a financial wasteland for years. This team is really good now...and if they stay healthy and Lance turns out to be a good as Bird suspects, who knows where they'll go?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

                            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                            i dont know many teams that consistantly go 10 deep, with end of bench players getting double figure minutes a game. Right now we have a very solid 8 man rotation. It could be 10 if your willing to give pendergraph and stephenson spot mins here or there. Do we need another wing? Yes. Is it 100% necessary for a successful season? Prob not
                            I understand what you are saying, but I am concerned about the 3 man rotation of SG and SF with 1 of those 3 guys being Hill, which will have to also back up Collison. Not the other 4 man from the C and PF positions. We have no perimeter shooting except Danny.

                            Larry has talked about having the best bench in the league....where is it. Pacers FO has talked about this schedule and the advantage the Pacers will have with a strong bench. All I see is the strong bench is leaving the building and FA's are thinning.

                            You talk about other teams having a 8 man rotation, but for the Pacers to be able to beat these teams, our bench has to be better then theirs, because our starters will get beat more times then not. To balance the 48 minutes and challenge the NY's, Boston's, Miami's, ect., our bench has to outperform theirs or we will be lucky to win 30 games.

                            To think Redd is going to be our savior to help spread the floor and score without getting railroad on defense is a joke. If we do get him I can only hope he makes me eat my words. History says he is gonna have a hard time doing that tho.

                            PS. I'm not mad here with anyone, i'm just trying to express my concerns.
                            Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Shooting Guard and Small Forward Positions

                              Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                              i dont know many teams that consistantly go 10 deep, with end of bench players getting double figure minutes a game. Right now we have a very solid 8 man rotation. It could be 10 if your willing to give pendergraph and stephenson spot mins here or there. Do we need another wing? Yes. Is it 100% necessary for a successful season? Prob not
                              What do you mean you don't many, just about every team goes 10 deep. In fact a lot of teams have 11 or 12 guys who average double digit minutes, with 9 or 10 of them play 60 games. Teams don't cut itdown to 8 until the playoffs, the idea that teams do that in the regular season is just a myth. The season is just too long to not go 10 deep.

                              If you want to make the argument that most teams don't have the talent to go 10 deep I won't disagree, but all but very few go 10 deep because of the length of the season.
                              Last edited by Eleazar; 12-18-2011, 08:00 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X