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

We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

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

  • Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
    Well, seeing as how one of those years he was +10% than the other three, yeah. Even though it's not a great % on its own.
    My problem with this type of thinking is that from a probability and statistics viewpoint it doesn't make sense to expect that. If I'm watching product roll off the end of the line and I have one widget who measures way different than the other 3, then I suspect it's the outlier, not the other 3.

    And in Bball terms Tyler is an "old dog", that's just the hard truth of it. Players (and people in general) get past a point where it's tough to throw away all you know and start from scratch. 4 years of play at his age is almost always an ideal indicator of what a player is. Go pull any NBA player's file and look at their output during the same 4 years of AGE, not NBA seasons, and find the ones that got a lot better at key items past this point.

    Comment


    • Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
      Tyler scores 1.4 points for shot, the next closest player on the Pacers is Ben at 1.24. That could just be a statistical anomaly though. So after Ben it is George Hill at 1.23, followed closely by DJ and Ian at 1.226 and 1.224, West at 1.216, and OJ at 1.2. Everyone else is below 1.2.

      While Tyler's FG% is inefficient, he still scores efficiently because of his free throws.

      I am not for or against keeping Tyler at this point. I would be fine with keeping him one more year at his qualifying offer, or 2 or 3 years between 3 and 4 million average or less.
      I don't disagree with his outstanding PPS. That's his thing, FTAs. It's an elite NBA skill.

      My problem is he also has an "anti" elite NBA skill which is FGAs blocked at the rim. This happens WAY more than it does for other players. Go look at his 82Games breakdown by shot attempt and how many "dunks" he's had blocked this year.

      He is strong and bullish and this leads to FTAs and to some great below the shoulders rebounding (scrum boards). Those aren't chump change and have big value. But OTOH neither of those challenge teams as a direct threat the way other skills do.

      He gets FTAs not by being the primary scoring attack but by living off of others. He gets the scrum boards not be being the guy above the rim tipping it away from a putback, but by tracking them down after this happens. And that's the issue for me and why he helps less than Pendy seems to be able to at times.

      Pendy can get up and contest at the rim on both ends. Not elite, but more than Tyler. Pendy's scrap boards tend to be more of that variety. Now Pendy is not a scoring threat that draws people either so that still needs to be addressed. But Ian draws FTAs at a decent rate and despite his clunky season he still shows more potential to be the primary offensive big off the bench, the guy you post or high PnR to draw the defense.


      I would just prefer to get similar numbers from a different guy doing it in a more traditional PF manner. I'll take a hit in PPS if I know that a guy can keep his FG% up at 50 and force teams to respect him at the rim. Having the floor open up because of this is key to me.

      I think the nature of this teams is that other guys can scrap for the scrum rebounds and I'd rather have an above the rim guy like a Birdman or McGee type, even if that caliber of player is outside the salary that can be offered.



      I just think that if you rename Tyler to James Thomas and put him on the Bucks then he's an afterthought at Digest, and no threads would be dedicated to getting him here. People love the IDEA of Tyler more than Tyler's actual production, and that's always been the case.


      OTOH, he's worked hard and I wouldn't shove him out the door or anything. I don't want Tyler "gone" in the sense that he can't be tolerated. I kinda enjoy rooting for him when he's doing his thing. I just think there are other players that could be brought in that would make me feel the same way.

      DJ might be the only player that at this point I just want to move on from, and even he seems like a nice kid. We are lucky to have a roster where from top to bottom the discussion is very performance oriented now and not about personalities or massive contracts (even DG is about to expire if the injury doesn't heal).

      Comment


      • Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

        Just a note that often in discussions I'm all serious and point-driven and it can come across as online p****d, but that couldn't be further from the truth in any of my responses on this page, even the sarcastic stuff. And definitely not in this one, ie I can take a joke....but I still go on to discuss the point anyway.
        Originally posted by shags View Post
        (well no, because the Knicks have Novak locked in at 3 years, $10.95 million after this season) (And the Kings have Thompson locked up for 4 years, $24.94 million after this season).

        (Are you saying those are bad contracts?)
        Actually I bet Kings fans get really tired of the new Thompson deal. And of course I was just pulling out some examples without browsing the Knicks or Kings boards. Were there threads dedicated to the thrill of making sure Novak got that contract before he did, or ditto Thompson? I mean discussions like this one about Tyler or the thread(s) about West?

        We can never use bad deals as proof that the Pacers did the "right thing" just by the definition that they are bad deals. The key is to not be the team that overpays Thompson or Novak or Tyler, not to be just like everyone else.

        Novak has a gimmick, the JOB gimmick, but ironically he could help this roster since bench 3s have been lacking. The main point I'm getting on about is that I want a player who demands a specific defensive adjustment in some way. If Novak comes in, now the opposing big is pulled out. Or if it's a Birdman type then you've really got to tighten up your block outs because he'll sky over you for scores or boards.

        They are players that demand some amount of immediate reaction, they make defenses make spacing choices. Tyler is the guy living off those reactions, the 2nd level that comes in and knocks them around after someone else got them off-balance. Maybe I'm undervaluing that, but right now I don't think the bench has enough/any of those "respond to me" players. It's all scraps guys. And this doesn't just fall to Tyler of course, but he doesn't get a free pass just because DJ, Green, Ian and Sam aren't that guy either right now.
        Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 04-10-2013, 02:44 PM.

        Comment


        • Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

          You know who puts up Tyler numbers if you trade FTAs and scoring for blocks and assists? Jeff Adrien. A guy making $350K.

          And that's the point to the thread. You can find guys like that and free up the money to keep your major impact players on the team. You get to still have your undersized PF who manages to bull his way to 9-10 REB/36.

          Comment


          • Re: We need to lock up Hansbrough this offseason

            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
            You know who puts up Tyler numbers if you trade FTAs and scoring for blocks and assists? Jeff Adrien. A guy making $350K.

            And that's the point to the thread. You can find guys like that and free up the money to keep your major impact players on the team. You get to still have your undersized PF who manages to bull his way to 9-10 REB/36.
            I don't even know this player but I doubt if he could step into West's shoes the way Tyler can. I'm open minded to letting Tyler walk if it means matching a long term 3 mil plus contract but I don't think we have to let him walk now. You bring up some good points in your 4 post with the exception of Ian becoming the best offensive big off the bench. Tyler is a better player on offense and overall has been a good defender at the 4 this year. I don't think Ian will ever develop an offensive game past where he is now. He didn't do it while playing with 2 HOF centers and he hasn't improved at all this year. I cringe everytime Ian touches the ball from beyond 8 feet.The bottom line is that I think an attempt needs to be made to keep Tyler. Either offer him a long term deal in the 2.5 mil range or offer him his Q.O. It doesn't matter that he isn't worth his Q.O. as long as it doesn't effect our long term cap plans. I'd rather lock Tyler down for 3-4 years on a much lesser annual contract but keeping him for 1 year opens up the Pacers options as they pertain to Granger and the teams long term cap position. We could let both players walk and have free agent money the following summer if Granger doesn't recover at all. We could still offer Tyler the lower end long term contract and keep Granger for a reasonable contract if Granger becomes a limited but effective player, or if Granger fully recovers we could offer him more money and just let Tyler walk.
            Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

            Comment

            Working...
            X