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

2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

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

  • #61
    Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

    Gotta love Hibbert.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

      Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
      5 of the seven losses have been on the 2nd night of back to backs, the good news is that there are NO back to backs in the playoffs.

      The thing that's worrying me is how is it, that in a game like this Copeland gets zero minutes. If you look back at all of the championship teams the thing that ALL of them had was a guy whose job it was to just come in and hit three's thats it. Paxon, Kerr, Horry, Ray Allen etc... Heck even the Pacers one trip to the finals was helped by having big smooth come in and just hit three's.

      On top of that we do need a distributor and normally that's Lance. I think if Lance misses another game they should start Watson at the point and move Hill to the 2. He is not a "pure" pg but I thought things ran much smoother last night while he was running the point.
      Yeah but Perkins was a good post defender against Centers. He didn't have to deal with Pick and Rolls. Copeland is good on post defense but horrible in the pick and roll and defensive rotation. I think giving him minutes last night might have been good. But we wanted that one in Atlanta. West wanted it. And when West wants to play. He plays.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        Wait, who was ill?
        No one announced as such, but it is that time of year and the sluggishness could very well be attributed to a nagging cold. Not trying to make up an excuse, just thinking along the lines of a bunch of little ducks nibbling us to death.
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

          Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
          On top of that we do need a distributor and normally that's Lance. I think if Lance misses another game they should start Watson at the point and move Hill to the 2. He is not a "pure" pg but I thought things ran much smoother last night while he was running the point.
          To add to this point: I've always been down on Hill, so it's hard to take my own ideas seriously, but does anyone else think the team - and GH himself - might be better served with Watson starting and Hill coming off the bench (even when Lance plays)? That way, Hill can concentrate more on scoring than distributing. Watson can be a caretaker point guard, making occasional drives to the hoop, but, more importantly, playing solid D and camping around the arc on O. The minute distribution wouldn't change much from what it is now.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

            Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
            Alot of you guys are being real careful in what you are saying. I'm just going to put it out there. We would have won that game if Lance was playing. He is the playmaker on the team. Last night's game shows me how important Lance is to the team and why we have to keep him.
            And I'll disagree. Lance doesn't fix Roy, he doesn't cause Antic to stay in the post on offense, he doesn't rotate fast enough to cover 2-3 guys by himself.

            We've lost almost exactly like this WITH Lance in the lineup (slow start, dig hole, can't get out in spite of second half improvement). What would have made last night different from those other losses?

            Do we need Lance? Yes, like we need any part of the lineup as currently constructed. Was he so important that by being out he caused us to lose? No.
            BillS

            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
            Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

              Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
              Who'd run backup PG in that scenario?
              Same guy who ran it when Hill was out earlier in the year. Not ideal but ok for a game or two.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

                Originally posted by Major Cold View Post

                The Pacers are only 6-5 in the second game of back-to-back sets with all 5 of those loses coming on the road. Good thing there are no back-to-back road games during the playoffs.


                Let's also give a lot of credit to the Hawks. They are one of the best offensive teams in the league. They actually lead the league in Assists per game. The Pacers could learn a lot from their ball movement and spacing.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

                  Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post

                  I just don't feel like the Pacers have played well a lot lately, even our wins just seem like bad basketball.

                  It seems they have developed an attitude they can dig themselves a hole in the 1st half with poor sloppy lackadaisical lethargic play, and then win the game in the 2nd half by exerting some effort. They seem comfortable with this notion. Well boyz, guess what? It won't work in the playoffs, so you had better change your view!!!

                  I know teams like SA and Miami feel reg season games don't matter that much, but you can't bring season long bad habits to the playoffs and win!!!!!!!!!!
                  This team has the talent to win it all, so don't squander it away with the type of lethargic sloppy play you have been producing. There is no guarantee this same team will be in tact for another try next season. Now is the time for all good men(players) to come to the aid of their country(team), and do what's necessary to win a championship. This year, the present, is what's important not sometime down the road. Put your blue work shirts and hard hats on, grab your lunch pails and do what's necessary to bring home the trophy with plenty of blue collar effort and hard work! Rah rah rah siskboom bah!

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

                    Don't worry

                    Be happy!

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

                      Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                      Lance is important and not having him was a huge factor but we don't win this game with Lance either. We're not winning many games without a front court showing up.
                      Lance sets up our front court far better than any player on the team. There is a reason Roy and West and Scola couldn't find a groove.
                      Last edited by McKeyFan; 01-09-2014, 11:23 AM.
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

                        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                        Lance sets up our front court far better than any player on the team. They is a reason Roy and West and Scola couldn't find a groove.
                        West has been in a funk for awhile now. Not really sure what is going on there.

                        But you're right. The offense moves and flows so much better with Lance in the lineup. His passing becomes contagious and the offense just looks better. I'm not sure if the stats back that up, but otherwise all of our guys are pretty much one-on-one types for their offense. Roy, West, PG, and DG are all more one on one type of scorers. Hill is kind of just the glue--he will do what needs to be done. He can create, although he doesn't get to the rim that often. His bread and butter offense is getting past his defender and either pulling up for that free throw line jumper where he more or less tries to draw a foul from the scrambling defender he lost, or he uses that floater over the big men.

                        TL,DR: Offense better with Lance.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

                          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                          Paul had to take those shots tonight. No one else had it going and he had to try to bring us back.

                          Also, I have no problem with Paul taking as many shots as he wants in the RS. I'm perfectly fine with it if our players are fine with it and he's scoring on a good clip. It honestly saves the forum from a lot of whining from certain posters.

                          I disagree that it's ok for PG to take as many shots as he wants in the reg season. It becomes a habit that can carry over into the playoffs that can create a problem. This team has plenty of players that can score w/o PG having to take as "many shots as he wants." With the players this team has, it's not necessary. I cringe when PG thinks he has to score and tries to weave his way to the basket only to turn the ball over or take a poor shot. Other players stand around and ball gawk when he's doing this. More ball movement is needed to give another player a good shot instead of playing gunner.

                          It's one thing when you need a basket to win a game, and you expect your best player to to take the winning shot verses being down 20 points and feeling it's ok for PG to take as many shots as he pleases to try to get the team back in the game. The focus is lost on on team play with hero ball with shots not taken in the context of the game. There is no I in the word TEAM. It's a team for a reason.

                          Horford was out, "Atlanta's role players" along with Teague won this game. They won it as a team. The Pacers couldn't contain Teague. Extremely poor "D" played on Teague all game. The Pacers seem to have a problem playing teams with good b/c and quick PG's. Something needs to be changed.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            I just don't understand how that conclusion can be reached. The Pacers DID lose 6 games with Lance in the lineup. Does that not matter at all? We've seen plenty of games where they looked tired and couldn't pull it out, and others where they could. Which category does this fall into? I don't know, but I know it doesn't mean much long term by itself.

                            Just watching the game and seeing the lack of any playmaking or chemistry on the court. Lance is the engine driving this team. It seems obvious to me. I'm surprised you don't see it too.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

                              The Pacers are built as a team, and when you take one piece out, there is going to be some falling of other pieces. Doesn't mean that piece is more important than the others. I agree Lance is a big part of what the Pacers do, but I also remember just how bad the Pacers defense looked last year without Roy against the Clipps, and I also remember how bad the Pacers looked overall last year during the playoffs against the Knicks without GHill. I also remember just how bad the Pacers looked two years ago after Danny went down.

                              I think the message that's being sent is that when your team is built as a team, it's pretty important to keep the individual pieces healthy.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: 2014-01-08 Pacers lost to Hawks. Post game thread

                                Originally posted by pogi View Post
                                Back when we had the debate about whether Lance or Danny should start, I was on Lance's side; and maybe the main reason (I don't remember if I mentioned it then, or not) was because when Danny starts, we turn into a jump-shooting team. Lance brings that unpredicatable factor that's hard to gameplan against. I'm not saying that we would've won with Lance last night, because honestly we were technically still in it until we decided to start jacking up threes the last few possessions, but, it seems to me, when Danny starts everyone stands around too much.
                                Although there maybe times when he takes a jumpshot when he tries to go "iso" on another Player.....but more often than not....I notice that he only takes jumpshots when someone else creates an opportunity for him to take an open shot.

                                I have noticed that when Danny "plays" ( not "starts"...cuz that...to me is irrelevant ) he is driving to the basket and trying to pass the ball out to other Players. To me, he is making a real concerted effort to drive to the basket ( where the defense collaspes on him ) and then tries to dish it to an open Player.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X