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

Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

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

  • #31
    Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

    Originally posted by Peck View Post
    Are we trying to say that Danny cost us the game?
    No. You interpreted me correctly, and I appreciate that.

    What I AM saying is that these bad decisions—which do NOT have to happen—have indeed cost us games in the past and will continue to do so. This one, probably not, though there is a small percentage chance. Over 82 games it ends up being several games it costs you, and in a playoff series, when every possession counts, if definitely costs you.

    Bball made my point pretty well:
    It's not any one play... It's that you can find several examples of questionable decision making... and they happen time and time again. The Pacers are not good enough to overcome these type of issues . . . If the Pacers plan to win with team basketball then they need to play SMART basketball.
    It's about a culture of good, solid, fundamental basketball. Bball is right: when your main player and your point guard both are faulty in this area, it affects the whole team and whole culture.

    I don't fault Granger for not being Tim Duncan. I fault him for not being the best player Danny Granger could be.
    Last edited by McKeyFan; 03-24-2012, 04:04 PM.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

      Actually, I'd say Danny is pretty smart. He's probably smarter than most of this board.

      And it's funny, because I remember early in his career the knock on him was that he thought too much and that he would be better if he played the game more instinctively. I guess things have a way of coming full circle.
      2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

        Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
        Actually, I'd say Danny is pretty smart. He's probably smarter than most of this board.

        And it's funny, because I remember early in his career the knock on him was that he thought too much and that he would be better if he played the game more instinctively. I guess things have a way of coming full circle.
        Lance and Tinsley and Stephan Marbury play the game "instinctively." Heck, World B. Free was phenomenal at it.

        If that's your thing, fine. Just don't expect to win many games.
        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

          How can you lay it on Danny for losing last night's game? If they would have played better throughout the course of the game they wouldn't be in that position. Danny kept us in the game. Danny is what he is and that is a guy that can consistently score points and plays ok defense. I thought we also looked a little gassed after fighting to win the night before in such a fashion. Hell, if we are gonna blame anyone how about the technicals against coach Vogel because if we didn't give them those foul shot points we would have been tied up. We need to start seeing Danny for what he is and not try to shape into a tier 1 dominant player, but as a very good tier 2 player that would be a heck of a complimentary player to a bonified tier 1 player.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
            Not me. I believe in disciplined, fundamental basketball. So does Indiana, as state (in theory, anyway). You are supposed to exhibit self control down the stretch to win a game, not go for some low odds steal.

            While Danny impresses in several ways, on this score he disappoints me. He certainly is no Tim Duncan.
            Danny knew he made a bad play, but how can you fault the effort? Danny wants nothing more than to be the Pacers' franchise player, and sometimes taking chances comes with the territory.
            "The greatest thing you know Comes not from above but below" Danzig

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

              Originally posted by Peck View Post
              No, I know Mckey fan is not saying it. I'm saying that I was reading others imply that.

              I get what Mckey Fan is saying and even thought obviously I like Granger I have to agree with him. There are times that he just does things that make me bang my head. The taunting foul in Toronto for example after he already had a "T" will always make me shake my head.

              Just not smart
              .
              I totally agree, but that was completely different than what happened last night.
              "The greatest thing you know Comes not from above but below" Danzig

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

                To me Danny committed that foul because he was trying so hard to be the Hero that he didn't have time to think that if he commits that foul that other player was going to get two freethrows.

                Sometimes I think that he wants to be Reggie so bad that he takes Crazy shots, makes crazy plays and forces things for no reason.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #38
                  My God people!! He's not blaming the loss on Danny! He's not saying nobody else on the team made any mistakes! He's just voicing concern about the leader of our team and his questionable decision making in crunch time! Danny is not a superstar in this league, but he is a veteran who should play smarter in tight games.

                  I happen to think Danny wants so badly to be our superstar and win the game that he presses a little too much.

                  McKey Fan, this is exactly why I don't start threads based on my opinions. Too many people get their panties in a bunch when they disagree. Thanks for sharing, though

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

                    To me last night's foul was just a blip on the radar. Unfortunately, the radar is filled with many blips and if you're watching the radar you'd better take notice when the screen fills with blips....

                    These continual bad plays by Granger are mounting and not correcting. It's a real problem now, it's not just a concern.

                    How can you as a coach preach solid basketball if your best player continually makes silly mistakes? It creates a ripple effect because you either have to bite your tongue when the underlings make silly mistakes or you have to run a double standard where you come down on the other players yet allow Danny's mistakes to go unchecked. ...Unless you're willing to challenge Granger's ego and NBA norms and take him to task for these mental errors.

                    Add to this you have your starting PG making questionable decisions as well. But can you hold him accountable and not Granger?

                    Of course my answer is you break some eggs to make omlettes and hold them all accountable... but there's no way Vogel does that. A rookie HC doesn't have that kind of gravitas and maybe not even the FO support to go there.

                    So the next thing on the list is what happens and you start seeing these players traded away.

                    Granger is frustrating in that he has the tools to be better than this. His problems, more than anything, ARE his fundamental basketball smarts. He could be one of the most rounded players to ever put on the uniform and a valuable piece to any team. But right now, we have several players on the team that could be the current version "Danny Granger".
                    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                    ------

                    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                    -John Wooden

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

                      Originally posted by Bball View Post
                      ...more than his fair share of inexplicable plays on the basketball court that doesn't fit in with a player in his position.
                      This is the deal. Inexplicable plays normally not done by a player of his caliber. I've seen many good players over the years in the NBA, but I don't think I've seen many as good as Danny...who is this careless at times.

                      To make this a bit more clear, this is like the A/B student who just about never gets a C, but he gets an F, not just once in a blue moon, but with some regularity.

                      Sure, his GPA is fine so I don't think anyone here is saying they don't want him on the team. But the F's are simply hard to understand. My theory is that he has a feel-good moment and decides he can be careless next time down the floor. That's not always the scenario, but I've seen it enough times now to see the pattern.

                      BTW, Granger wouldn't be a perfect basketball if he avoided what should be something easy to avoid like this. Not saying I don't think highly of his skills for those with thin skin...

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

                        I understand what is trying to be said here, but 1 thing really bothers me. This discussion pretty much boils down to fundamentals and while I can understand some of the points being made, I think it's rediculous to throw Tim Duncan's name in there. Here's why: when it comes to fundamentals Tim Duncan is the best of the best. Using Timmy against Danny would be like hearing a musicians ( even a very famous ones) song and saying, well he's no Bethoven!
                        Did you know Antonio and Dale aren’t actually brothers?

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Bball View Post
                          I'm not sure if you're missing the point that badly or if I'm missing your point.
                          No you are the one who doesn't understand...alot of people get an Internet message board types get a username and automatically start this hypothesis that they ate smarter than those out there...let me give you guys some reality. No one on here has a higher basketball IQ than Danny granger. You can say I am wrong but I am right, no one is smarter in basketball on here than granger. Watch something on TV and yell is one thing, do it in real life is something entirely different.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

                            Originally posted by TheDavisBrothers View Post
                            I understand what is trying to be said here, but 1 thing really bothers me. This discussion pretty much boils down to fundamentals and while I can understand some of the points being made, I think it's rediculous to throw Tim Duncan's name in there. Here's why: when it comes to fundamentals Tim Duncan is the best of the best. Using Timmy against Danny would be like hearing a musicians ( even a very famous ones) song and saying, well he's no Bethoven!
                            I agree the Tim Duncan comment could have been left out. I also would say that, while Danny isn't great at the fundamentals of the game (e.g. passing, dribbling, etc.)....in my opinion, fundamentals are not the issue here.

                            The issue is one of judgment or discipline. Being careless at times. But I don't think it's a big issue. I think it takes away from his game some though. It's basically the opposite of the way Chauncey Billups plays the game. It amounts to an unnecessary choice...often right after he's done something good. That's my problem with it.

                            Still, I think when we have an important game or series I bet Granger dials some of that down. But I do think it's part of his personality coming out...his confidence and aggressiveness which can also be a good thing....yet in other ways it's like a bad habit.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Our beloved, but less than brilliant, Danny Granger

                              While I am frustrated by what I see as careless, rookie-type mistakes that could easily be corrected with some discipline....I bet if we had another "star" on this team we'd have something else to criticize.

                              So, I suppose I'll take the good with the bad...as always. The good news is, the good is a lot more prevalent than the bad. Yet, let's not pretend this could not pretty easily be corrected.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                                While I am frustrated by what I see as careless, rookie-type mistakes that could easily be corrected with some discipline....I bet if we had another "star" on this team we'd have something else to criticize.

                                So, I suppose I'll take the good with the bad...as always. The good news is, the good is a lot more prevalent than the bad. Yet, let's not pretend this could not pretty easily be corrected.
                                Ding ding...that's kind of my point, I think there are some bad things but if we sit back and review every player...you will find mistakes...it happens.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X