Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Danny Granger knee issues history

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

  • #31
    Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

    [QUOTE]
    Originally posted by Peck View Post
    Here let me approach this from another level.

    First thank you for actually taking the time to post these, if nothing else you have shown that saying he has had issues with his knee's in the past and currently is also an issue is a true statement.
    No problem.



    What I would like to do now is give you a scenario and see if we can agree over the end result.

    Let's say that several years ago you fell and broke your wrist. It was a clean break, it healed and you went on with a normal healthy life with no deficits to your arm, wrist or hand.

    Then several years later while playing basketball at the gym you sprain your wrist. It's a light sprain and the Doctor has you ice your wrist and keep it elevated for two weeks. Again you fully recover with no long term ill effect to your arm, wrist or hand.

    Now after years of typing on the internet you have developed carpel tunnel syndrome. Your Doctor is currently treating the problem but see no reason to suspect you will need surgery to correct the issue. You have a wrist guard and he has given you a shot to reduce the swelling. You are expected to make a full recovery but there is no guarantee that this issue won't come back or be a long term issue.

    Is it fair to say that you have had and issue with your arm?

    If you say that it is fair to say that then can we agree that one has nothing to do with the other in regards to the three listed conditions?

    If we can agree on that then can we agree to say that Danny has had issues related to his knees, none of them are related and therefor one has nothing to do with the other?

    If not then tell me where we can come to some form of agreement here.
    Peck I believe you are talking to the wrong guy about wrist injuries I broke my wrist when I was 8 and 12 years of age and now that I'm 31 I still feel pain and discomfort in my wrist, the same thing with my right knee(dislocated knee cap).

    I guess that we can agree that Danny have had knee issues on his right knee(surgery, missed games, etc) but he never had issues on his left knee, making this new problem a first time issue.

    To tell you the true I actually feel better about him returning because I always though that his left knee has been the problem all this time when in fact the right knee was the problematic knee, could it be possible that he feels better in both knees after this rehab? maybe and I hope so.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

      Okay so we are all in agreement then and Vnzla81 has even stated he is now more optimistic since by researching this information he has found that this is a totally different knee.

      There really shouldn't be much more to say from here.



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

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
        Sorry, but given how most of the Posters here respond to your posts on this very topic outside of this thread.....how can you not know that this is how most Posters would respond in this thread?
        I expected people to understand what I was posting, I didn't expect so many people crying, my bad I guess.

        Correct me if I am wrong on your stand on Granger and what the Pacers should do with him in the near and long term.

        The sense that I get is that YOU DON'T hate Granger....you just think that because of his knee injuries that his trade value isn't as high as we'd hope ( as to how high or low his trade value is...none of us really knows ) it would be. Given the way this Team is made up, you'd rather move Granger...not because you think he sucks....but for the best offer that the Pacers can get to improve the depth of the Team ( either through Free Agency or through trades )....which sounds like will be an Expiring Contract+Prospect+2nd Round Draft pick ( hopefully ).

        To be clear, you're not a Granger-Hater ( per se ) but recognize that he's the only asset that can likely fetch something of value in return to improve the existing roster that ( in your opinion ) isn't good enough to get to win a Championship....even with PG leading the way. Bottomline is that you don't think that Granger's trade value is that high.

        Sound about right?
        Note that I'm just answering your question so it doesn't have anything to do with this thread.

        My position has always been to sell when value is high, regarding Danny, Dunleavy, Murphy, Foster, etc.

        Right now to me the priority should be to build around Paul George, Roy and Hill but especially PG, I have seen teams never do anything championship wise because they decided not to build around their stars, or some teams like the Cavs with Lebron they never did a good job to draft or trade for a young star to complement Lebron for when he was going to reach his prime, I mean they got players pass their prime and told him to compete, my ideal scenario would be for the Pacers to use West's high value and Danny in the future to bring a player or two that can be part of the future and be there when Paul George is in his prime so he is not wasting it on a rebuilding team like Paul Pierce few years ago.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

          Here is the post that made me look for all the info by the way:

          Originally Posted by vnzla81
          Wrong, Danny has been having knee issues for a while now.(since college)

          Anthem:Are we back to this? I thought you'd been totally shut down on this line of thinking.

          Danny's career missed games: 4, 0, 2, 15, 20, 3, 4.

          Some "knee issues."
          And here is Hicks response:

          Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
          There's no arguing with stubborn.
          Yeah he thought I was making s*** up, hey at least he didn't call me a troll this time....
          Last edited by vnzla81; 01-31-2013, 04:19 AM.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

            Hey for the record VNZ, I love like half your posts lol

            This is a pretty informative thread.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

              Danny has not been consistent and seemed to regress in his game. If it turns out he's been battling a problematic knee issue (afterall, the current knee issue didn't just 'happen') then that could explain some things that people have speculated upon (such as why doesn't Granger drive more, what happened to his defense, and why does Danny shoot so many 3's (especially when they aren't going in)). To me, the question isn't games missed, it's why his game has regressed and lost consistency and if the current lost 1/2 season to a knee problem is finally the beginning of turning that around... or the next step in a process that will continue with his consistency and overall performance in decline.

              We shall soon see. But I'm not going to be surprised either way.
              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


              • #37
                Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                Here is a Danny Granger interview I found:

                http://www.aolnews.com/2009/06/30/on...danny-granger/


                Note: If PD's administrators feel like this info shouldn't be posted here go ahead and close the thread.
                The thread is providing some excellent info that I was searching and couldn't find. So, thank you for that

                But let me ask you something? Is his knee stil swollen from that college injury?
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  for those that are overreacting there is an option were you can ignore the thread if you don't like it
                  You cannot ignore a thread that you created yourself.
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    Here is the post that made me look for all the info by the way:

                    And here is Hicks response:

                    Yeah he thought I was making s*** up, hey at least he didn't call me a troll this time....
                    What Anthem posted was right, though. Even with the existing problems he had, he didn't miss a lot of games.

                    Thus, he's not as big of a risk as you make him out to be.
                    Originally posted by IrishPacer
                    Empty vessels make the most noise.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      Here is a Danny Granger interview I found:

                      http://www.aolnews.com/2009/06/30/on...danny-granger/







                      Note: If PD's administrators feel like this info shouldn't be posted here go ahead and close the thread.
                      Really?

                      So now we are supposedly violators of the 1st amendment of the US Constitution as well? Not that I have much to do with that seeing as I live in the UK and am Dutch, but still..

                      You are now officially pissing me off.

                      What you do is not partaking in discussion where opinions can vary, but what you are doing is throwing **** against the wall (preferably on one of your own pet-peeves) and than see if and what sticks, and if you don't like the answer, you ignore it and throw something else.
                      There is a few description of what you are but some of us only speak about one when we talk about kennels, the more modern version is called trolling.

                      Before I would close a thread where one person with a whole host of pet-peeves tries to solve his psychological problems by venting to the world what he sees is right, I would remove said sad person from the forums with the advise to post only on a limited subset of forums around the world but to leave the basketball ones and this one in particular alone for a while.

                      The rest of our members can than continue to discuss the topic should they so desire or the thread goes to where 77+ thousand went before it and are now resting in peace, be it that even that is relative.

                      I suggest you do something with your issues without wrecking everyone else's experience on the board.
                      So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                      If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                      Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                        I understand disagreeing with Vnzla, and I understand getting irritated with his "glass half empty" perspective on most things. But I don't understand why people don't get the jist of his argument.

                        We have one of the best up and coming 3's in the NBA. We have cap and tax issues looming on the horizon. We have a very expensive 3 who arguably won't be as good as our up and comer. In fact, Paul may already be better.

                        Trading Granger, let's say, on draft day last year, would have made all kinds of sense—without even the factor of knee injury history. To Vnzla's credit, he has been talking about Danny's potential knee problems, his college knee history, and him icing his knees after many games, for several years. He has been calling for a Granger trade for all sorts of good reasons.

                        You may disagree that trading Granger now or before is a good idea. You may disagree that Danny's past with knee complications had any bearing on the current knee injury. (I don't. If somewhat is inclined toward a knee injury, the other knee is inclined as well, especially when compensating for the first knee.) But do you have to so vehemently disagree that the idea of trading Granger in the past, and the idea that his past knee complications just might have been foreshadowing of the future? I mean, these are plausible arguments.

                        And . . . he DID end up having major knee trouble.

                        Personally, I sure would like to have a solid backup four on our team right now who could ease into West's position if we can't resign him. Pre injection Granger could have landed us a number of them.
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                          McKey, there is a reason why several people here are not willing to trade Granger.

                          There is a reason why we are not beating a lot of good teams on the road. Paul is amazing but he has yet to take this team on his back in a road game. Granger is able to do that. At least, he was.

                          There is a reason our 3 point shooting is not consistent. Granger is our best shooter and he has not played yet. Teams do not respect Lance and Gerald Green as much as they respect Danny.
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                            Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                            McKey, there is a reason why several people here are not willing to trade Granger.

                            There is a reason why we are not beating a lot of good teams on the road. Paul is amazing but he has yet to take this team on his back in a road game. Granger is able to do that. At least, he was.

                            There is a reason our 3 point shooting is not consistent. Granger is our best shooter and he has not played yet. Teams do not respect Lance and Gerald Green as much as they respect Danny.
                            No question about it. But similar to the circumstance with Memphis, we'll have to see when Granger comes back if he really takes us to the next level, in the same way they did with Gay. I'm not convinced it's a foregone conclusion that he will be a game changer.

                            I sure hope he is, though, as I've always really liked him as a player, and have a personal attachment to his involvement with the team. He was the lone bright spot for the team through the nadir of the past few years. His defining moment for me was the Boston game after he got the contract extension. He played so hard that game, ultimately broke his front teeth during the game, and got right back in there and kept playing. Given the circumstance, I just thought: "man, this kid really cares about winning and about doing our team proud". It gave me hope.

                            But as much as I feel an affinity to Granger, I would prioritize competing for a championship higher.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                              McKey, there is a reason why several people here are not willing to trade Granger.

                              There is a reason why we are not beating a lot of good teams on the road. Paul is amazing but he has yet to take this team on his back in a road game. Granger is able to do that. At least, he was.

                              There is a reason our 3 point shooting is not consistent. Granger is our best shooter and he has not played yet. Teams do not respect Lance and Gerald Green as much as they respect Danny.
                              I think those are plausible arguments. I think it's also plausible to wonder if better distribution because of Lance and better defense and two-way play (BBall's theory that the knee is the reason Danny is off and on with defensive effort?) might make the current situation better than when Granger returns.

                              Not saying it's true. Just that it's plausible. I don't think plausible speculation should get flamed.
                              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                                This may be resolved, but if Danny really has had a "history of knee issues" then wouldn't missing few games be more of a testament to his ability to still stay on the court?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X