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

Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

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

  • Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

    Going into the season, it seemed like one of our biggest issues was the 2 guard position, with the arrival of Lance this year and OJ finally getting it together is this still a area that we need to improve or should we just consider this position settled for the near future?

    To add a 2nd part to the question, what do you consider our biggest need area now if not the 2?

    Thanks
    Why so SERIOUS

  • #2
    Re: Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

    PG........we need a true point guard.
    I'm not perfect and neither are you.

    Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the esteem of Elohim,
    Ephisians 4: 32 And be kind towards one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as Elohim also forgave you in Messiah.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

      A reliable post scorer off the bench. Outside of West, and I guess you can include Roy along with him, the Pacers don't have any scoring down low. Tyler gets his off of hustle, Ian is a better jump shooter and one/two dribble driver than he is on the block.

      That would be the ideal scenario, IMHO, but a just a reliable scorer in general would be the next best thing. Not a Crawford level player, who gets 16-17pts, but just one that gets 11-12 points. Something steady that can be relied upon.

      The best position would be the 4 though. Or a 5, and you can slide Ian over as I think he's got the phsyical tools to play there.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

        We still need a steady 13-15 ppg scoring shooting guard I like Lance but I still see him as perfect combo guard off the bench.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

          I think we have our starting 5 set for as long as we can keep them. That's the thing though. How long can we keep them?

          I agree with Since86, another post scorer would be nice. Hopefully we can draft someone with some post up moves.
          Last edited by PaceBalls; 03-11-2013, 11:48 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

            Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
            I think we have our starting 5 set for as long as we can keep them. That's the thing though. How long can we keep them?

            I agree with Since86, another post scorer would be nice. Hopefully we can draft someone with some post up moves.
            Yeah this is one of the reasons I am wondering, depending on Lance's development or lack of development, he could be a good value for this team if he fits the profile of what we need from our 2 and maybe we could keep him for cheaper than getting a top guy.

            He has 1 year and OJ has 3 I believe, with teams getting in financial trouble easily the next few years will be interesting for the Pacers.
            Why so SERIOUS

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

              Even if you resign West it's probably only 3 years, and after that even if things are going well you'd expect a reduced minutes West by year 4 and beyond, if not retirement perhaps.

              I've thought all along Tyler wouldn't be resigned and I think you can see that with his play and minutes the last few months. Pendergraph is fine as a deep bench guy and sure they just drafted Miles, but I'd go right back at another PF/C with their pick. If you could count on Ian to handle the ball better then he could be the backup frontline scorer, so I'm torn about drafting a PF that can only score. They do need the help but they'll also need a rebounder off the bench, and hopefully one that can contest ABOVE the rim for a change.


              I don't think they need a true PG because I think Hill, George and Lance do fine in getting the ball up and working out of PnR or post-feed offenses, at least while West is hear to hit that mid-range jumper. But you do need a backup DEFENSIVE PG. I'd give up the 3pt shot from a strong defensive PG.

              Keep in mind that the Pacers will be drafting in a spot where the player will be a bench guy with limited areas, perhaps just 1 or 2 strengths. You can't wish for starters or guys with no holes to their game because they can't get them and certainly can't afford them.


              If they deal Danny and let DJ and Tyler walk, then that changes the dynamic of what you need and/or can add. But that deal would bring something back so it's hard to speculate at that point. However even if they move Danny they still WILL NOT ADD SALARY, so take the Milsap's of the world off the list of caliber of players being added.

              Danny will only go because they feel they can't afford everyone. That would mean the current starting 5 stay the same with OJ and Ian off the bench for sure. Hopefully Young is resigned. Green is an unknown and shouldn't be counted on as an asset at this point. So you'll have about 5-6m plus a 25th pick to fill backup PG and PF.



              Summary - modest FA and 25th pick for defensive PG and rebounding PF are my needs, depending on what happens with Danny.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

                I don't disagree with Dave about maybe having a true SG in the starters, so what about this possible situation. What if OJ continues to come along and shows his jump shot ability as he's done so far. At some point don't you put OJ into the starters and Lance on the bench due to Lance's nature to create and push the tempo for himself balanced against OJ with more ability to spot up for shots?

                OJ is good off the dribble, definitely starting SG good. He doesn't have great size for defense but he does play a smart game.


                This is not a knock on Lance at all, but there was a reason why Detlef was BOTH an all-star and 6th man of the year in the same season. His multi-faceted game was best suited for coming off the bench for the Pacers and taking things over as the starters rested. He could fill in for multiple players and was a go-to offensive player. That's Lance, and that's a big compliment.

                A 6th man ideally is a special set of skills, not just "guy not good enough". Many teams have a 6th man that's better than at least one starter.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  A reliable post scorer off the bench. Outside of West, and I guess you can include Roy along with him, the Pacers don't have any scoring down low. Tyler gets his off of hustle, Ian is a better jump shooter and one/two dribble driver than he is on the block.

                  That would be the ideal scenario, IMHO, but a just a reliable scorer in general would be the next best thing. Not a Crawford level player, who gets 16-17pts, but just one that gets 11-12 points. Something steady that can be relied upon.

                  The best position would be the 4 though. Or a 5, and you can slide Ian over as I think he's got the phsyical tools to play there.
                  It's now apparent why Larry Bird wanted a player like Jamal Crawford and OJ Mayo on the team. As much as I like Lance, he's not as good as either of them offensively. Defensively I like him a lot better and I certainly like his contract better. He has the potential to be as good offensively but needs to develop a mid-range shot. Having one of those guys next year will really be a plus.

                  I guess I'd prefer a veteran that's had a lot of playoffs experience coming off the bench but if not, I'm happy to let Orlando Johnson develop into that role.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

                    Originally posted by diamonddave00 View Post
                    We still need a steady 13-15 ppg scoring shooting guard I like Lance but I still see him as perfect combo guard off the bench.
                    If Lance is done growing, I agree. Not sure that's true, though. He may become that.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

                      Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
                      If Lance is done growing, I agree. Not sure that's true, though. He may become that.
                      Yeah, he's 22 years old and this is just his first season of getting minutes. He's gone from never playing to being an important starter in the matter of one season. I'll bet anything that he will continue to get better and better for the next few years. I can't wait to see him next year after another summer of hard work in Indy.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

                        probably better suited as a 6th man who can create for others, b/c his jumper still needs a lot of work. i wouldn't call it reliable despite his good shooting numbers.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

                          Yes and his name is Paul George, once we get our best player back .....
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            I don't disagree with Dave about maybe having a true SG in the starters, so what about this possible situation. What if OJ continues to come along and shows his jump shot ability as he's done so far. At some point don't you put OJ into the starters and Lance on the bench due to Lance's nature to create and push the tempo for himself balanced against OJ with more ability to spot up for shots?

                            OJ is good off the dribble, definitely starting SG good. He doesn't have great size for defense but he does play a smart game.


                            This is not a knock on Lance at all, but there was a reason why Detlef was BOTH an all-star and 6th man of the year in the same season. His multi-faceted game was best suited for coming off the bench for the Pacers and taking things over as the starters rested. He could fill in for multiple players and was a go-to offensive player. That's Lance, and that's a big compliment.

                            A 6th man ideally is a special set of skills, not just "guy not good enough". Many teams have a 6th man that's better than at least one starter.
                            I agree with this, and I'm a big Lance fan. I'm getting more and more interested in seeing what Lance can do as the number option for initiating the offense. Your scenario allows for that, but I also would see him finishing games, so it would work really well, like it has with Ginobli, Jason Terry, etc.
                            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Have we found our answer for the future at the SG position

                              Not really. I could easily think of 15 shooting guards that are better than Lance, if not more, He's not a legit starter, not yet. And OJ hasn't shown anything so far. It reminds me of the days people thought the Hansbrough-Mcroberts PF rotation was good
                              Originally posted by Piston Prince
                              Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                              "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X