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

  • #46
    Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

    Two things:

    He's had knee injuries before, he's returned to damn near full strength, lacking consistency. So saying we don't know that he won't be half the player he was before the injury flies in the face of history. If you trust history, He'll come back relatively fine.

    Second, this history includes both knees. Brandon Roy's problem stemmed from one knee. Greg Oden just keeps breaking his kneecaps(most recently getting out of a chair!!! Microfracture surgery required.) Having an injury in his right knee three or four years ago has nothing to do with his currently recovering left knee.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

      I just wish that the title of this thread actually would have been "Danny Granger knee issue's history", and therefore it would have been revealed from a reliable source that his knee issue is history.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

        http://blogs.1070thefan.com/2013/01/...source=twitter


        With the NBA trade deadline three weeks away (Feb. 21), the Pacers are in a position of great temptation.

        Even without Danny Granger, they have remained within striking distance of the top spot in the Eastern Conference, in part because Miami has not approached the dominance expected, but also because the Pacers have played well in the absence of their leading scorer of the previous five seasons.

        The question thus becomes: Is the team one bold move away from bridging that gap?

        The roster’s biggest need is for one more scorer, preferably a perimeter sniper, a threat that would space the floor for the big men while helping deliver some punch to the second unit.

        In other words: Danny Granger.

        “Every time we talk about the trade deadline we just keep talking about the guy we need to acquire is Danny Granger,” Frank Vogel said last night. “And hopefully that all goes smoothly.”


        GRANGER PROGRESSING TOWARD RETURN

        So far, so good in that department. Granger has increased the frequency and intensity of his workouts, but has not yet been cleared for full contact. Vogel said the goal is for Granger to be in uniform before the All-Star break but there is no firm timetable.

        Granger’s return would have a domino effect on the roster strengthening both units. Assuming he would quickly return to the starting lineup, Granger would push Lance Stephenson to the second unit – which desperately needs his playmaking, energy and aggression.

        One problem is there is no certainty about Granger’s return. If they stand pat and Granger is unable to return to form – a remote but distinct possibility – the Pacers will be left holding the bag.

        Of course, it’s also possible Granger himself could become the bait. If he is able to show he is physically sound before the All-Star break, and thus in advance of the Feb. 21 deadline, he might become the team’s most valuable commodity.


        SMALL STACK OF BARGAINING CHIPS

        The Pacers certainly are not going to trade Paul George, David West or George Hill.

        Roy Hibbert would have some value on the market but that has been mitigated by his dramatic decline in productivity this season.

        If you want to make a bold move, can it be done with the likes of Tyler Hansbrough or Gerald Green? You know the answer.

        It really comes back to Granger and/or Hibbert, and neither is in position to attract anything close to full value.

        How the team takes advantage of its current stretch of road games – which brings Miami Friday, Chicago Monday and Atlanta Tuesday in a parade of contenders – could influence management’s stance.

        Get on a roll, creep closer to the Heat, and all of a sudden the scent of a deep playoff run could become intoxicating.

        Struggle a bit, threaten to slip deeper into the pack in the East, and a sense of desperation might develop.

        Either way, the next three weeks are going to be the most compelling, interesting — and ultimately meaningful — of this season.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

          I don't see any way where he could show he is "physically sound" before the February 21 deadline. That's just three weeks from today and there are no reports of him participating in a full contact practice yet. No one is going to give us anything good for him after just watching him for a couple of games. The chances of trading Granger are zilch.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

            Well, what do you think of EJ? Didn't he come back and produce immediately? Since Granger hasn't had a history anything close to EJ's, couldn't coming back and stringing together 5 good games in a row do the trick?

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

              Originally posted by docpaul View Post
              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.
              Do you feel that the moves that Memphis made brought them closer to a championship, though? I thought that they took some steps back. Especially for this year.

              Plus, you have to take into account that Gay's contract is much, much worse than Granger's. This combined with his poor play as of late resulted in those trades for them.

              Personally, I'd hate it if a similar trade was made by our team regarding Danny.
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                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.
                Lance is a better distributor than Danny but our offense is not better this season. If anything it is worse.

                Also, Lance while playing good defensively this year is still prone to having off nights defensively. He wasn't great yesterday, for example.

                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                Not saying it's true. Just that it's plausible. I don't think plausible speculation should get flamed.
                No opinion should get flamed. People can disagree and still have civil discourse. More often than not, the problem resides in the manner that this opinion is expressed rather than the opinion itself.
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                  Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                  Well, what do you think of EJ? Didn't he come back and produce immediately? Since Granger hasn't had a history anything close to EJ's, couldn't coming back and stringing together 5 good games in a row do the trick?
                  EJ is not there yet, he is still not able to play in back to back games and they are limiting his minutes, yes he is producing but I don't think he is even 80% healthy yet, his knee issue is also different.
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    EJ is not there yet, he is still not able to play in back to back games and they are limiting his minutes, yes he is producing but I don't think he is even 80% healthy yet, his knee issue is also different.
                    That's why I ended with that qualifier. If Danny came back and played 5 games in a row, regular minutes, good production. Is that enough to stabilize trade value given his decent history of not missing games?

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                      Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                      That's why I ended with that qualifier. If Danny came back and played 5 games in a row, regular minutes, good production. Is that enough to stabilize trade value given his decent history of not missing games?
                      I don't think is enough, maybe some GM think otherwise? we don't know.
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                        Originally posted by billbradley View Post
                        That's why I ended with that qualifier. If Danny came back and played 5 games in a row, regular minutes, good production. Is that enough to stabilize trade value given his decent history of not missing games?
                        Absolutely not, IMHO. We wouldn't get anything desirable in return.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                          Good news I guess.


                          @MikeWellsNBA: Danny Granger took part in a live half court scrimmage for the first time 2day. And before u ask there's still NO timetable for his return.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                            @ScottAgness: Danny Granger took part in his first live action in practice -- 20min in half-court. Then, he took PG's and Hill's money in their shoot-off.


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

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              @ScottAgness: Danny Granger took part in his first live action in practice -- 20min in half-court. Then, he took PG's and Hill's money in their shoot-off.


                              20 minutes is something
                              Intriguing. Nice to know he's shooting well (in practice nonetheless)

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Danny Granger knee issues history

                                What a fascinating thread. I appreciate you quoting me (multiple times), vnzla, because I still think that the post you quote is a pretty reasonable position: for all the talk of continued knee issues, Danny's not missed many games over the course of his career. Most NBA players are playing hurt at some level. For all the talk about how the knee is holding him back, he's still managing to produce at a high level. I also really liked the quotes on page 1:

                                Originally posted by Somebody
                                Danny Granger dominated the NBA while hobbling through the final month of the season.
                                If the dude can produce, then I certainly want to keep him around.

                                Now, that being said, I think Bball has a really good point here. If you framed your conversation more like this, I think you'd get a lot less pushback.

                                Originally posted by Bball View Post
                                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.
                                I'm an incurable optimist and so I think Bball is chronically negative, but overall he's a reasonable guy that is fun to discuss basketball with. This is a reasonable post that would generate a reasonable discussion, although ultimately he and I would have to end up agreeing with "we'll have to wait and see."

                                I personally wonder if the degenerative nature of Granger's knee condition has been holding him back over the past few years. If the procedure and rest are effective and he's physically recovered, we could get 2009 Danny back. That would be best news I've heard all year.
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X