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

Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

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

  • #46
    Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

    Originally posted by greyhound80 View Post
    None of this amounts to one bit of importance.
    If Paul George plays like he did a couple months ago, Pacers will romp.
    If he plays like he has recently, they will lose.
    I don't know if he knows that or not.
    Does he realize he is our best player?
    Does he know it and can't handle it?
    Yes, you are correct. Those 15 minutes that these players are fighting for are completely unimportant, and have no affect on the game. The bench can't lose you a game or a series. Only the starters can do that, it doesn't matter than our starters consistently beat the Miami starters last year, and it was our bench that consistently lost the games for us. It doesn't matter that our sixth man last year was so terrible that it didn't matter who he played with that unit sucked against Miami. Despite everything that happened last year that says the bench does matter, you are correct in saying bench players do not matter.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
      Yes, you are correct. Those 15 minutes that these players are fighting for are completely unimportant, and have no affect on the game. The bench can't lose you a game or a series. Only the starters can do that, it doesn't matter than our starters consistently beat the Miami starters last year, and it was our bench that consistently lost the games for us. It doesn't matter that our sixth man last year was so terrible that it didn't matter who he played with that unit sucked against Miami. Despite everything that happened last year that says the bench does matter, you are correct in saying bench players do not matter.

      Sorry you can't read or comprehend.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

        Gotta go with the hot hand. GG has turned it around since getting DNP'd in February. 42% FG and 22 pts per 36 minutes. Sure, he has zero bball IQ, but OJ has hit the rookie wall and has gone ice cold.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

          Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
          point is, people act like he either shoots and misses or turns it over every possession which is not true, some people also act like Orlando Johnson is far better than Gerald Green and it is not even close which is not true, our bench is losing the lead in nearly every game as it is why would you put OJ out there over Green when Green can get hot and carry a benches scoring?

          sorry but i dont trust gerald greenes decision making. he is terrible at this point inhis career and i would rather OJ get the experience in the playoffs. i dont know if you watch time and tiem again GG just brick shots left and right; and i vividly recall the entry pass he made to hansbrough in which there were 4 OF THE DEFENDERS AROUND HIM. honestly ive never seen someone lob a pass into 4 defenders.

          GG is so bad he makes his teammates suck too. sorry. whatever stat you wrote above about GG scoring double figure points is a bit unfair to OJ.

          GG has doubled the minutes OJ has. primarily due to the beginning of the season Pacers having hope in the guy. he went from starter to bench to DNP.

          GG: 34% from 2pt; 29% from 3
          OJ: 42% from 2; 44% from 3

          +/- when on the court:
          GG: -.04 yes a negative
          OJ: 2.8

          moral of the story; OJ is not going to negatively impact the game.

          review the stats yourself:
          http://www.nba.com/advancedstats/pla...01213;season=r

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

            Originally posted by Trophy View Post
            YES!

            Gerald is a vital player in the rotation. When he's hot and the offense is being run through him, watch out!

            IMO, based on last night, I think it's a clear indicator that Frank is going to go with Gerald over OJ. Based on the minutes differential and the fact that OJ wasn't even on the floor in the 4th quarter is what leads me to believe that.

            I hope Coach continues to run the offense of the bench through Gerald more, when Paul's getting a breather.

            If Gerald does struggle and it hurts the team's play, then bring in OJ, in relief.



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

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

              Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
              point is, people act like he either shoots and misses or turns it over every possession which is not true, some people also act like Orlando Johnson is far better than Gerald Green and it is not even close which is not true, our bench is losing the lead in nearly every game as it is why would you put OJ out there over Green when Green can get hot and carry a benches scoring?

              People act like he shoots and misses all the time because he does in fact shoot and miss all the time.

              Someone pointing out he scores more than Orlando Johnson, I'd hope so seeing as he takes twice as many shots! Orlando Johnson attempts 3.5 attempts while Gerald Green averages 7.1. And here is where they differ drastically... Orlando Johnson shoots 40% from the field and 38.3% from 3. Gerald Green shoots 36.6% from the field and 31.4% from 3. If you can't see the problem there, I don't know what to tell you. Gerald Green takes twice has many shots but he doesn't average twice as many points. I'll play conservative and consistent and lose the lead slowly before I'd send Gerald Green out there to chuck it away. He takes awful shots and he's a ball hog. For someone who takes 7 shots a game, it sure is pathetic he doesn't even average an assist. And in comparison to his 7.1 attempts, Lance Stephenson averages 7.7 attempts. And here's the thing, Stephenson's percentage is 46.0% and is close to 10% higher. Gerald Green is a grade A chucker and it's easy to see why people believe as much about him. For every one game he's hot and makes everything, he shoots 1 for 8 in 5 others. He appears to have played better recently but that's also against the Cavs, Wizards, Magic and Philly's bench. If Orlando Johnson is open for 3, I think he's going to make it. If Gerald Green is open for 3... who am I kidding, he'd chuck a contested shot before he'd wait to get open but if he is open for 3, I'm planning on hearing a clanking sound. That's what it boils down to for me and I'll take Orlando Johnson.
              Last edited by TOP; 04-19-2013, 05:32 AM.
              "I have never taken the high road, but I tell other people to ’cause then there’s more room for me on the low road."

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

                Originally posted by TOP View Post
                People act like he shoots and misses all the time because he does in fact shoot and miss all the time.

                Someone pointing out he scores more than Orlando Johnson, I'd hope so seeing as he takes twice as many shots! Orlando Johnson attempts 3.5 attempts while Gerald Green averages 7.1. And here is where they differ drastically... Orlando Johnson shoots 40% from the field and 38.3% from 3. Gerald Green shoots 36.6% from the field and 31.4% from 3. If you can't see the problem there, I don't know what to tell you. Gerald Green takes twice has many shots but he doesn't average twice as many points. I'll play conservative and consistent and lose the lead slowly before I'd send Gerald Green out there to chuck it away. He takes awful shots and he's a ball hog. For someone who takes 7 shots a game, it sure is pathetic he doesn't even average an assist. And in comparison to his 7.1 attempts, Lance Stephenson averages 7.7 attempts. And here's the thing, Stephenson's percentage is 46.0% and is close to 10% higher. Gerald Green is a grade A chucker and it's easy to see why people believe as much about him. For every one game he's hot and makes everything, he shoots 1 for 8 in 5 others. He appears to have played better recently but that's also against the Cavs, Wizards, Magic and Philly's bench. If Orlando Johnson is open for 3, I think he's going to make it. If Gerald Green is open for 3... who am I kidding, he'd chuck a contested shot before he'd wait to get open but if he is open for 3, I'm planning on hearing a clanking sound. That's what it boils down to for me and I'll take Orlando Johnson.
                Just look at the stat someone earlier in here gave since his benching, he is getting 22 points per 36 on 42% shooting, a higher % than Paul George is currently shooting, he has started to turn it around here recently, sorry if. You haven't noticed

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

                  Why are many of you acting like every mistake a player makes turns into a turnover. You are using turnover stats to I guess proove that Green isn't that bad. But most mistakes don't lead to a turnover.
                  Last edited by Unclebuck; 04-19-2013, 09:39 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

                    Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                    some people also act like Orlando Johnson is far better than Gerald Green
                    He is. Aside from his abysmal stats, Gerald Green is a momentum killer. He, like Nate Robinson, Iman Shumpert or Jordan Crawford, is exactly the player I want playing on opposing teams that are up 10/15 points. His shot selection will give your team a chance to dig out of that deficit without much effort.

                    Continuing to play Gerald Green in a game is like continuing to double down in roulette. You may get hot and look good for a while, but if you keep playing you will get burned.

                    There's a reason our team had a poor start when Gerald Green started, and there's also a reason our team started winning when he was taken out of the starting lineup and then further out of the rotation. We're 4-8 when he plays 25+ minutes, 45-24 when he doesn't.

                    Orlando is a rookie and has a ways to go, but he's always within the flow of the offense. He'll occasionally force action at the rim, but other than that he's not a detriment to the team. He can guard strong point guards and shooting guards, and he's a shooting threat (despite his numbers).

                    I think it's a no brainer who should play between the two.
                    Last edited by imawhat; 04-19-2013, 09:35 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

                      After game #2, thought it might be a good time to dig up this thread. A few numbers: 2 games, 38 minutes, 9-19 shooting, 6-13 on 3's, 2 TO, 26 points total. Filled in nicely for Lance when he went down.

                      Waiting for the 1st "YEAH, BUT ............".

                      I'll take those numbers from a bench guy anytime.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

                        Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                        After game #2, thought it might be a good time to dig up this thread. A few numbers: 2 games, 38 minutes, 9-19 shooting, 6-13 on 3's, 2 TO, 26 points total. Filled in nicely for Lance when he went down.

                        Waiting for the 1st "YEAH, BUT ............".

                        I'll take those numbers from a bench guy anytime.
                        Just wake till he has a bad shooting game.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

                          Isn't it annoying to be a fan, watch the games and be waiting for bad stuff to happen ?? As for the bad shooting game - what happens when that does happen ?? Bench him ?? Maybe the guy that shot 3-13 in the 1st game should sit for a while.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

                            Damnit people don't jinx him with your, "I told you!" crap. Lest we forget, these two playoff games have been an incredibly small sample size and frankly he didn't play all that well in game 1, despite what the numbers may indicate. Let's just ride it out. If he keeps it up, then we are scary.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

                              I don't judge Green on how many shots he makes. I judge him on how many good shots he takes and how he 0plays in other areas besides scoring

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Gerald Green or Orlando Johnson

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                I don't judge Green on how many shots he makes. I judge him on how many good shots he takes and how he 0plays in other areas besides scoring
                                overall he did well, but turnovers and dumb shots are still evident
                                Smothered Chicken!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X