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

Postgame thread

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

  • #31
    Re: Postgame thread

    If Lance can play shooting guard, that would solve a lot of our problems. As others have said, we need a wing player who can dribble and right now it's not Granger or Paul George. Collison, Stephenson, Granger, David West, Hibbert is a line-up i'd like to see get some minutes. That line-up could potentially (Lance still needs time) be the starting line up, with George and Hansbrough playing heavy minutes off the bench.

    As one of Tylers biggest supporters, I am fine with him off the bench...he is one of the few players who isn't going to get his feelings hurt over it and also is going to play the same regardless. I think he deserves to start, but that is not really the issue. We have two starting caliber power forwards, not enough minutes to go around. I guess having Tyler destroy other teams second unit isn't the worst thing in the world :-)
    *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Postgame thread

      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
      One takeaway I had was our tentativeness. It seemed like there were a lot of times when we would make a pass, be in a position to either shoot or attempt to score, but the player would hesitate because the first thing he would do is look for another pass. That's a big factor, too.
      And most the time they'd toss up a shot after the hesitation, and miss. Just need to find our rhythm offensively I think.
      "man, PG has been really good."

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Postgame thread

        Originally posted by Freddie fan View Post
        If Hansbrough keeps playing like he did in the two preseason games, he will be the team's best player, right? I will be very interested to see if he can develop consistency in playing at close to this level, and, if he does, how well the Pacers will do in getting him enough minutes.
        Another thing to consider is that Hansborough's motor and strength are his greatest strengths. His motor will show up a lot more in preseason games, so let's not expect him to be a 20 and 10 guy all year.
        "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Postgame thread

          Originally posted by Freddie fan View Post
          If Hansbrough keeps playing like he did in the two preseason games, he will be the team's best player, right? I will be very interested to see if he can develop consistency in playing at close to this level, and, if he does, how well the Pacers will do in getting him enough minutes.
          Hansbrough will get his minutes regardless if he starts or not.
          *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Postgame thread

            I think Bird made it quite evident in this brief off season , where the team needs upgrades

            To me clearly, he thinks PG and Center

            I think the rumors that we were after Rondo and Gasol/Nene prove this

            Just my speculation but I feel bird thinks Roy and DC are good back ups
            Sittin on top of the world!

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Postgame thread

              Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
              This is a big point that no one has mentioned! That is the biggest team positive. The Bulls were the best rebounding team in the NBA last year and we held our own. Mark Boyle tweeted about this very thing.

              Even Roy did a decent job on the boards. 8 rebounds. That was easily our strongest team suit.
              Agreed but how much of that can be attributed to our poor shooting percentage, and extra chances at rebounds?
              Sittin on top of the world!

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Postgame thread

                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                I think Lance provides everything you are asking for . . . except for great D. Nevertheless, he can provide decent defense because of his height and length.

                A BIG PG has been on my X-mas list for years. I'm "really hoping" Lance can get the PT to figure out and hone his game as a PG. I would absolutely be elated to say the least. I'm just tired of 6' and under PG's who in reality are SG's.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Postgame thread

                  I was really hoping for Hill to play better so we could send DC to the bench, I guess we are gonna have to wait.
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Postgame thread

                    Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                    I think Bird made it quite evident in this brief off season , where the team needs upgrades

                    To me clearly, he thinks PG and Center

                    I think the rumors that we were after Rondo and Gasol/Nene prove this

                    Just my speculation but I feel bird thinks Roy and DC are good back ups
                    Regarding the Gasol rumors, we know now that was ******** spun by some person or another because Herb Simon doesn't allow Bird to go after restricted free agents, which Gasol was.

                    And Nene was going to be brought in as our starting PF.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Postgame thread

                      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                      It's simple.

                      Granger's emergence as a serious NBA player coincided with JOB becoming coach. JOB's emphasis was always offense, 3 point shooting, and a fast pace. He gave lip service to defense but his actions betrayed the rhetoric. He considered Troy Murphy a great player.

                      This was preached to Granger every day for many years. It clearly had an effect.
                      I'm not much in the mood to relitigate Jim O'Brien, but I am curious to see how long this crutch will last. I find it remarkable that a coach can be accused of not giving proper emphasis to defense when the actual defensive outcomes of all of his teams betray that narrative--in his 6 full seasons as an NBA coach no matter the personnel or adversity, all of his teams finished top 15 in FG defense... And I have a hard time believing that all of this somehow happened in spite of him or that it was just a product of dumb luck (I'm one who believes that defense is the one area where coaches can make the biggest difference, which is also why I think a team like Washington would benefit from a coaching change since that team has not defended well under Flip Saunders--but to be fair most young teams will struggle on D regardless of who is coaching). In fact, if you look at the numbers under Carlisle after the 2006-07 trade deadline vs O'Brien's first full season which I outlined a year ago, we improved a full point defensively under O'Brien.... I think that on a team that was lacking in offensive options he sometimes made the (unpopular) trade-off of setting up a guy in Murphy who was 3rd in the NBA in effective field goal % so that we wouldn't completely suck on that end of the floor--but I've never been one to read into this that we had a coach who didn't place value and time on defense--just a coach lacking in good options (no reliably efficient big man, PG or top 40 talent) whether you agreed with his choices or not and certainly most here disagreed with them. Fine, let's move on.

                      Bottom line--If Danny Granger still needs cover from a former coach, then it's time to consider moving on from Danny Granger. We need to hold current players responsible, not former coaches.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Postgame thread

                        http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsi...or-the-pacers/


                        A rocky start for the Pacers

                        1:39 AM, Dec. 21, 2011 | Written by Mike Wells | 2Comments
                        AAAYes, the Pacers have been practicing together for less than two weeks.

                        Yes, they played the Chicago Bulls, the team with the best regular-season record last season, in their two preseason games.

                        But no, that doesn’t excuse some of the problems they need to overcome.

                        My Twitter timeline was filling up with people complaining about the outcome of Tuesday’s game against the Bulls.

                        Fans should be looking at the big picture of things, not the final score at the United Center (preseason records don’t carry over to the regular season unless the NBA changed the rules without notifying the media).

                        It was a matter of seeing how well the Pacers moved the ball on offense, executed the defensive schemes and how the new players blended in the returning players.

                        “We have to get tougher defensively and we have to get tougher offensively,” Vogel said. “We’re not executing…We’ve got to be tougher offensively in terms of executing our stuff and not letting some pressure defense take us out of what we’re trying to do.”

                        Tyler Hansbrough has clearly been the team’s best player so far in camp. He’s been on a mission, totaling 43 points and 24 rebounds in the two games against the Bulls.

                        “Tyler is going to have success against anybody he plays,” Vogel said. “I don’t think it’s the Bulls. He’s a big part of what we’re doing. He’s going to play a lot.”

                        David West obviously looked rusty (eight points on 4-of-8 shooting in 15 minutes) in his first game since March. But you saw flashes of how he’s going to help the Pacers on both ends of the court.

                        “It felt alright,” West said. “This has literally been my first six or seven days of basketball in nine months. I’m trying to learn a whole lot. But physically I felt okay.”

                        Danny Granger and Roy Hibbert have struggled so far.

                        Granger, who was the focal point of the offense the past four years, has a history of not shooting well in the preseason. That’s the case again this season, but he’s not shooting well while also taking bad shots (9-of-28) in the offense. It doesn’t help that Granger let’s his offensive play dictate what else he does on the court.

                        Hibbert is still having to catch the ball too far away from the basket (Chicago’s Joakim Noah does a heck of a job fronting Hibbert and also pushing him out of his comfort zone in the post). It wouldn’t be surprising if Vogel goes with Hansbrough at power forward and West at center at times during games when Hibbert struggles.

                        The Pacers are no longer a team where one or two players do the bulk of the scoring.

                        This is a team where point production should be pretty balanced. They’ve got about six players who can lead them in scoring on any given night.

                        The Pacers have the pieces to make a decent jump in the Eastern Conference this season.

                        But in order to do that, though, players will have to make sacrifices in the scoring department in order for them to have success. No more forcing shots because you’re not getting what you believe is enough touches in the offense. The shots will be there if they move the ball and execute the offensive scheme.

                        Are these fixable problems for the Pacers? Very much so.

                        Will it take time? Yes, but time is not on the Pacers’ side. They can’t afford to get off to a slow start, especially since their first five games are very winnable.

                        Twitter.com/MikeWellsNBA
                        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Postgame thread

                          1. I wouldn't give up on Roy yet. He's a really tall guy with a lot of skills. He just needs to be comfortable in his body.

                          2. Paul George really does have the potential to be something special. I like that he's going to the boards more. And I've found him to be more aggressive..and funny thing, I thought his shot had been off, but he shot 40% from three in the preseason and 44% field goals..which isn't amazing, but I thought it was worse. And then he's our team's best defender.

                          I think he just needs to practice on his shot. He's got a pretty shot, he just needs to keep shooting until he's comfortable. His ball handling is already pretty good, but he needs to tighten that up too. But this kid...

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Postgame thread

                            Too early for me. I want to see how Hibbert plays alongside West after West has adjusted to his new team. I think he can help Roy. It's admittedly awful to watch Hibbert right now, though.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Postgame thread

                              Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                              JT, absolutely agree on the Collison points. The one thing about it though, is that we got great value in that trade. I think Collison is a backup PG. I've thought that since we have had him. He can be a hell of a change of pace PG coming in for spot minutes.

                              We match up poorly with the Bulls. Their best two aspects are their front court toughness and DRose. Our weakest aspects are front court toughness and terrible PG play.

                              I think we are going to struggle with giving guys enough playing time to make them happy. It could be a bad recipe for the locker room this year. Hill should start, but won't. Hansborough won't start, but I think West might be the better fit with Collison, for now.

                              Again, we have some easier early games, although on the road. I hope we win a few of those games and get our confidence and chemistry going. That will be the key to our season is how do we do getting out of the gate.


                              I truly believe we will match up far better with the Bulls in regards to toughness this season. They haven't had to deal with JP or Lou yet. I realize JP and Lou are b/u b/u, but they are there to be used for just this purpose... their toughness.

                              Is it just me or has anyone else seen what they feel is Boozer trying to hurt Hans? I'm more in tune to watching it now after Hans got his bell rung in the playoffs. I thought I noticed last night Boozer going after Hans. I expect to take in kind what we dish out, but not intentionally trying to hurt Hans in the head though. It might just be me seeing what I think is there or nothing there at all. I must admit the fear of Hans getting hurt again really bothers me.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Postgame thread

                                Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
                                I really liked that the Pacers went toe to toe with the Bulls in rebounding. I also liked how often they were able to get to the line.
                                well when you shoot close to 33% you are gonna get a lot of rebounds.

                                Also wasn't a fan of the Hill trade I think he was just a product of the Pop system he is a decent role player but I had players in both rounds I would of took instead of George Hill.
                                Last edited by pacer4ever; 12-21-2011, 01:21 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X