-
This space for rent. -
@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!
Comment
-
Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion
I'm 48 son and watched George McGinnis live. I know a good basketball player when I see one. Danny Granger, in no way and against no player, is as good at defense as Paul George. You know what? YOU fail to realize that Granger was playing LeBron WELL before he was in his prime.
You saying a 21 year old LeBron going against a 23 year old Granger is equivalent to a 29 year old LeBron going against a 23 year old Paul George. Really? Why don't you think before you post son.Last edited by BlueNGold; 12-21-2013, 01:00 AM.Comment
-
Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion
I honestly don't get the Granger vs. George flamewars. It's pointless. It's not like these guys can't co-exist. Were Colts' fans upset when we had Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne?Comment
-
Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion
He never said Danny was a better defender than PG.
Comment
-
Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion
My god guys, how about instead of insulting Paul George or Danny Granger in order to make the other look better, we just be happy we have both of these guys on our team?
Comment
-
Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion
Go back and read the context. He was responding to this: "But I would hate to have seen a 22 year old Granger (who happened to still be in New Mexico) attempting to guard a prime LeBron James." Which was a response to Eleazer comparing Paul and Danny. Note PRIME LeBron. Anyway, I'm done with this. There is no comparison.Comment
-
Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion
Idk Lebron was pretty ****ing good that year. Prime or not, was the best player in the NBA. Danny Granger was a defensive stud early in his career. A very different defender than PG. He couldn't defend the 1 or 2 like PG can.
Plus he didn't even compare Danny and PG. He just showed that Danny did a pretty good job against Lebron at a young age, something you said people would hate to see because no way Danny could ever guard Lebron
Comment
-
Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion
I'm happy to agree that Paul George is an epic defender. Even on his off days, he's still a better defender than 80% of the NBA, including Danny.
That doesn't make Danny a bad defender.This space for rent.Comment
-
Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion
No, please don't put words in my mouth. I said a prime LeBron James. Do you all really believe he hasn't gotten better? People used to think the man was a loser. A choke artist. Ron Artest pretty much had him pretty well locked down. Wouldn't happen now would it?Comment
-
Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion
Ahhh...now u wanna move the goalposts???? who said anything ever about paul george and him defending at a level of danny????? certainly not i....u went on and on about a 22 year old granger not being able to guard lebron...nothing about george...i never said one thing about george....not one...
Youre 48???? guess what im 48....and yet why is it i remember vividly grangers rookie season and artest working with him and Danny playing lebron quite well and all of us around here being excited about the possibilities and many saying ron who? and yet u...also 48...thought he was in new mexico??????? how are u gonna know a good basketball player when ur looking in new mexico for a guy whos already in Indy???? This isnt about Paul George...this is about Danny Granger...and you not being able to imagine a 22 year old Granger defending lebron...
You dont have to imagine it...it took place...4 times in fact....and you really think its me that should think before i post??????
And a bit of advice...not that it matters, but you might want to be a bit careful calling out people when you really have very little knowledge of what u speak...ur 48 and saw Big Mac play....im happy for you....and again not that it matters as you have unfortunately proven it doesnt matter how old one is and who they watched play...but some on here know me...and its very simple...ive been to games at the coliseum...ive been to games in msa..ive been to games in conseco and blf and most nba arenas in the league...i was 5 rows behind the pacers bench in miami on wednesday....ive attended well over 1000 Pacer games across the country...i handed my piggy bank personally to slick at the telethon...and all that along with 1.50 might get me a cup of coffee...cause it really doesnt mean squat when it comes to trying to justify something like a 22 year old Danny never guarding lebron when indeed it happened 4 times....now it can make for some really great conversation amongst those of us that have been around that long and know whats it feels like to win a championship...to talk about listening to joe mcconell on the radio as well as jerry baker on channel 4 broad casts etc...but "son" it wont help u gain any credibility on here...because theres some young bucks that can run circles around u with facts and figures that will make ur head spin if ur not careful....and being 48 and having seen big mac play ball or run the lottery wont help you...Last edited by cinotimz; 12-21-2013, 01:22 AM.The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with IdiotsComment
-
Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion
I didn't move the goal posts. You apparently didn't note where they were located. You responded to a post and didn't read the context. Go back and read Eleazer's post and it might make more sense...
Edit: Post #1184.Last edited by BlueNGold; 12-21-2013, 01:26 AM.Comment
-
Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion
Did I say he hasnt gotten better? Nope. But he was still an amazing player then. And people were wrong about Lebron then. Cleveland just built **** teams around him. Kebron was never a loser. And lebron still plays the same I'm clutch situations in miami. He just has teammates who hit the shots he creates now.
And Ron Arrest was probably the best defender that Lebron will ever have to go against. Ron was strong enough and fast enough for him. He had great defensive instincts and played aggressive. His physical build alone caused difficulties that PG just cannot. A prime Arrest vs a prime Lebron would be something. Scottie Pippen is the only other guy that comes to mind that I would want to see matched up against Lebron.
Comment
-
Re: Danny Granger 13-14 Discussion
Well the season in question he averaged 31.4 ppg, 7 rebounds, 6.6 assists and 48% shooting in 42.5 minutes...still regarded as one of the better statistical and all around years in the modern era...he was a monster, very simple....is he smarter now? yea....hes matured...but to say he wasnt in his prime? he was in his prime his senior year of high school....
but to answer the question would an in his prime ron artest handle an in his prime lebron the way he did back then? yes...they were both that good at what they did...thats what it made it so fun...ron was the perfect specimen to guard lebron...he was close to a physical equal-something lebron never sees...and he was crazy...which made him incredibly dangerous and incredibly good...there were nights lebron got his....but thats why i was crying so much when ron got traded instead of jermaine...because my thought was simple...ron was just never gonna lose the battle to his man on just about any night...even with lebron...hes the only guy that has ever been really able to handle lebron one on one with any degree of success...The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with IdiotsComment
- If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
- 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:
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star
Rule #6And I would put the pasted article in quotes like this.
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.
Tweet
all rights reserved Nije Dei Ltd
Powered by vBulletin® Version 6.0.7
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba vBulletin. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba vBulletin. All rights reserved.
All times are GMT-5. This page was generated at 08:21 PM.
Comment