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

Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

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

  • #31
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

    Originally posted by ejwallace View Post
    ^^^^THIS^^^^

    If the NBA would go back through games reviewing calls and no calls, then pointing out the miss calls, it would work as kind of a checks and balances thing....Officials would miss a lot less calls due to the scrutiny of the NBA and the public.....As it is, the NBA knows which refs call tighter games....There is a reason they moved Joey Crawford's assignment to the Knicks/Celtic game following the Anthony/KG debacle....Crawford takes no ****, keeps the game moving, and calls it honest (I still VERY much cringe when he is assigned to any of our games)....

    Think of it this way, if you let a kid lie repeatedly, and never draw attention to it or call them out on it, you are doing nothing more than teaching them that they can get away with it. Ultimately, you are condoning the behavior. However, you oust the lie to the public and the kids friends, or even make the kid aware that what they are doing is wrong, you submit them to the humility of their actions, the kid will be a lot less likely to lie again (or at least get caught doing so)....

    Not saying it would be a perfect solution, but it would be a way for the NBA to begin policing and ultimately equalizing the playing field....
    Only 369 more days of David Stern's tyrannical reign.....
    "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

    "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

      Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
      Only 369 more days of David Stern's tyrannical reign.....
      Is there reason to believe Silver will be better?

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

        He's not David Stern. That's good enough for me.
        "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

        "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

          Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
          Denver attempted 32 FGA at the rim and we attempted 24. So they attempted 33% more shots at the rim than us.

          Now, Denver also attempted 30 FTA and we attempted 17. So they attempted ~76.5% more free throws than us.

          Something about that seem wrong to you?

          It sure felt to me like they were getting away with more physical fouls than we were, and this seems to support that.

          By the way, we made 48% of our three point shots, so as long as that % stays at or above 40%, I say keep shooting them.

          http://www.hoopdata.com/boxscore.aspx?id=330128007

          Oh, and speaking of shots at the rim, Paul was 3-3, Hill 0-1, Lance 4-5, West 1-4, Roy 1-6, Ian 2-3, DJ 1-1, Tyler 0-0, and Orlando 0-1.



          There's your ballgame. Starting 4 and 5 go 2-10 at the rim.

          Annnnd, now I'm pissed again.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

            Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
            Denver attempted 32 FGA at the rim and we attempted 24. So they attempted 33% more shots at the rim than us.

            Now, Denver also attempted 30 FTA and we attempted 17. So they attempted ~76.5% more free throws than us.

            Something about that seem wrong to you?

            It sure felt to me like they were getting away with more physical fouls than we were, and this seems to support that.

            By the way, we made 48% of our three point shots, so as long as that % stays at or above 40%, I say keep shooting them.

            http://www.hoopdata.com/boxscore.aspx?id=330128007

            Oh, and speaking of shots at the rim, Paul was 3-3, Hill 0-1, Lance 4-5, West 1-4, Roy 1-6, Ian 2-3, DJ 1-1, Tyler 0-0, and Orlando 0-1.
            How can that be accurate? Paul was stuffed at the rim by Koufos once so shouldn't it at least be 3-4?

            Also you would need to look at every shot to get a feel if this stat really tells the truth. To me there is a vast difference between Roy lofting up some hook shot at the rim that will never draw a foul vs. a player driving to the basket drawing contact and getting a foul. So to me anyway that's why I can't look at a raw number and come up with a conclusion here.


            Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

              The non-foul on Iggy is totally bizarre. Crashing into Paul's shoulder, far away from the basketball, was the ONLY reason he lost control of the dribble. Then the last call is not made 95% of the time, but It's not as totally ridiculous, since there is some contact. I'd be OK to call both. To call neither wouldn't be fair either but I could live with it. To not call the more blatant foul and then to call the game-deciding lesser foul though, is a travesty of epic proportions.
              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

                At first, I blamed this loss on not getting the ball to West late. And I've always been one of the people that has been fine with Roy's scoring as long as he bring the % up and continues to anchor the D. But honestly, it's getting really annoying seeing a guy who can get 15 a night struggle like this. 3 for 12? I think last night was the first time Roy grabbed a pass and dunked all season, instead of pump faking and falling on the ground.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

                  Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                  At first, I blamed this loss on not getting the ball to West late. And I've always been one of the people that has been fine with Roy's scoring as long as he bring the % up and continues to anchor the D. But honestly, it's getting really annoying seeing a guy who can get 15 a night struggle like this. 3 for 12? I think last night was the first time Roy grabbed a pass and dunked all season, instead of pump faking and falling on the ground.
                  His drop in offensive productivity is dumbfounding. His FG% has dropped from .497% to .414%. His PPG has declined from 12.8 to 9.8. He averaged 10.3 FGs last year compared to 9.9 this year, so he's basically getting the same amount of looks. He is also only averaging 2.2 FTs a game, down from 3.7 a year ago. That shows a lack of aggressiveness. You don't get fouled when you mostly shoot hook shots inside 10 feet. He should get to the line more than he does.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

                    Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                    This small market inferiority is getting to be a little ridiculous on here. I understand we wanna b*tch about the refs (especially on the last two possessions) but WE cost ourselves the game with the terrible 3rd QT, and some missed opportunities when the game was tied and Iggy bricked 4 straight FT's.

                    We should know by now, do NOT leave the game in the officials hand...especially on the road.

                    If we want to win games like that, we have to play better and with better effort--especially defensively. Bottom line.
                    I find the above to be a very short sighted view. We, as Pacers fans, know that if the team plays better they would have won that game, but that could be said about every team, every game, everywhere. There isn't a lot that separate's NBA teams, and to work hard and to have done enough to have won the game, but to still lose due to two horrible calls, is a slap in the face. Complaining about the ref's isn't ridiculous when the ref's are the reason we lost the game. Saying that if we played better we would win is ridiculous because the Pacers obviously played well enough to win, but didn't, because of the one factor that they couldn't control.

                    What you seem to be saying is that we know we're going to get screwed and we should just accept it. Bottom line. But the point of the ref's is to create an even playing field, not to create a disparate one where the small market road team not only has to play better, but significantly better, to win the game. WE didn't cost ourselves the game, the refs did, and that's the point. That's why everyone is pissed off.
                    Danger Zone

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

                      Ok so I downloaded two videos of the last two plays, sorry about the quality but youtube usually removes them if they look too good.

                      This one is the supposed foul on Iguadola, it looks like a foul from the stands angle but when they show the other angle it looks like Paul George's arm is all over Iguadola's chest.





                      Here is the foul on Iguadola.

                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

                        IMO, the contact doesn't even matter. From the ref point of view, you would think they would rather decide the game in OT than end it on two rare, questionable calls.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

                          Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                          His drop in offensive productivity is dumbfounding. His FG% has dropped from .497% to .414%. His PPG has declined from 12.8 to 9.8.
                          Some might say, he's just averaging just 3 points less this year. Well, that's just wrong imo. You have to see him playing to understand how much he has regressed from last season.
                          Never forget

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

                            I don't know about the foul calls, but I do know the call for a PG isolation against literally the best isolation defender in the league was stupid. As soon as it got down to 5 seconds and PG was isolated 30 feet from the basket there should've been a timeout.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              Ok so I downloaded two videos of the last two plays, sorry about the quality but youtube usually removes them if they look too good.

                              This one is the supposed foul on Iguadola, it looks like a foul from the stands angle but when they show the other angle it looks like Paul George's arm is all over Iguadola's chest.





                              Here is the foul on Iguadola.

                              Ugh, forget whether there is a foul or not. Look at the 22 second point of your video and you can see that Paul had a clear open path to pass to West who only had Gallinari between him and the basket with 5.7 seconds left.

                              But if we are looking for a foul again pause it at the 23 second spot and you will see Iggy's arm clearly extended inside Paul's space and by league definition that is a foul. But even going on the angle you want to use go to the 1:37 mark and you can clearly see Iggy's gold arm band below Paul's right shoulder. Also from that angle you could even make the argument that there could have been a blocking foul called.

                              But either way my contention is the same, if we hadn't played so poorly before hand this would be a moot point.


                              Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Odd Thoughts: Mile High Surprise

                                Originally posted by Johanvil View Post
                                Some might say, he's just averaging just 3 points less this year. Well, that's just wrong imo. You have to see him playing to understand how much he has regressed from last season.

                                Exactly. The 8% drop in FG% is the most important stat. That's a drastic drop off. He really needs to quit shooting so many hooks and try to get to the foul line more. 2.2 free throw attempts per game is sad.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X