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

Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

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

  • #16
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

    Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
    I can't say enough about Scola. This is the Scola I and vnzla wanted the year before when Houston let him go for cap reasons to be able to get D Howard.

    I can just hear vnzla saying "I told you so". Kudos to Scola for a great game!!

    I'm not much of a G Hill fan, and definately think less of his ability to play "D" than most, BUT it sure was great to see him come alive again in the 2nd half. This team needs his playing like this. Anyone think Hill came into his game, b/c Stephenson was on the bench?
    While I totally agree on Scola, and how huge he was for keeping the Pacers in the game, my biggest next-morning thought:

    For as much as I whined all game about how unsustainable Atlanta's offensive approach is, Indiana's (general) approach last night sure as hell isn't sustainable either...so they still have a lot of work to do.

    Not exactly solving for x there. And what I mean: Indiana can't assume it can just take its time deciding if/when it wants to get in a game, relying on long Scola jumpers to sustain them until the lightbulb clicks. The only sustainable approach for this team is ferocious defense from the tip, which serves to fuel the offense from there.

    Again, I know that's hardly a revolutionary thought. But if I'm going to say what ATL did in the 1st half isn't sustainable...I also have to say IND's approach (in the context of the overall game) isn't either.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
      Defense was the key for us though.

      But I figure the more often West touches the ball the better off we are. Good things happen when he gets it. He's by far IMO our best decision maker. I don't care where he gets it, just get it to him and good things happen. If I were coaching against the Pacers we would spend a lot of our preparation time and on floor effort in keeping the ball away from West inside the three point line. I would deny him the ball. Make someone else make a decision with the ball
      I agree that he is the best...but when his head is on straight. I've noticed West is just as whiney about calls as Paul George, just doesn't quite have the same stigma attached. I think he can lose focus and focus on officiating too much. I might even argue that's a top-down thing that starts with Vogel and bleeds into the players. But West hasn't been the best leader over the last 30 games, and gets caught up in the small stuff and taken out of his game a bit too much (at least recently).

      When he just accepts the game is what it is, he's a general in the post.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        Defense was the key for us though.

        But I figure the more often West touches the ball the better off we are. Good things happen when he gets it. He's by far IMO our best decision maker. I don't care where he gets it, just get it to him and good things happen. If I were coaching against the Pacers we would spend a lot of our preparation time and on floor effort in keeping the ball away from West inside the three point line. I would deny him the ball. Make someone else make a decision with the ball
        I've been saying it for the past two months, it's much much much easier to play defense off of made buckets than it is live turnovers and horrible, long shots. I'm 100% belief that their defensive problems stem from their inability to play good offense. Last year the difference was where they were taking their shots. They were pounding the ball inside, which allows them to battle with their big bodies for the offensive rebounds. It makes a mosh pit under the goal, and you've got the tallest guy on the floor, and the biggest BAMF carving out space.

        Now they're longer shots, with longer rebounds. Roy isn't a Foster type of offensive rebounder, where he tracks the ball and just out hustles his opponent. He's a (mentally soft) bruiser. So is DWest. That's why smashmouth works so well with this club.

        They are their worst enemies pounding the ball up top looking for jumpshots. It removes their post players from the game, and it relies on two 23-24y/o's that aren't polished offensively. Sometimes, you just need to defer to your Daddy, and that's David BAMF West.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
          I agree, Scola's jumper was the difference. Problem is, live by the J, die by the J.

          Past history tells us he won't keep it up every game.
          Past history says he's going to play above his head the higher the stakes get. That's just what he does. He got that from Manu.

          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

            Atlanta's best defensive adjustment of the game was Frank Vogel taking Scola out when he was hot and getting us back in the game...
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

            -John Wooden

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

              Originally posted by Peck View Post
              Why must we be cursed with players who can score but refuse to do so?
              Couldn't you say that some of that blame goes to coaching? If you know what the strengths of the players are you have to take advantage of it. Tony Parker is a damn good scorer at the PG position, and Pop uses him that way to allow him to drive and score/dish. I don't see any reason Hill shouldn't be doing the same thing, especially since that's what he's really good at. The dude can score, and on a team where scoring comes at a premium, why shouldn't he be more aggressive? (PS this is a reason why I don't think Lance is particularly necessary, but that's another story)
              Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                I think that's a good point. I would only counter by saying that the long jump shot should generally only be taken near the end of the shot clock. Until then, we should be working an offense that tries to create a better percentage shot, even with the defense packed in the paint. If I saw that happening, I wouldn't complain when a jumper is taken with 5 seconds on the clock and the opponent has packed the paint.
                I agree - I'd like an offense whose purpose is to try to create an open passing or driving lane or at least lead to a closer jumper. Unless you are wide-open from 3 in a shooting position and (IMPORTANT) your teammates are positioned for a rebound, there should not be an early long jumper.

                One of the biggest problems we have had is that we are in very poor position for rebounds when those long jumpers go up. It's almost as if we miss so seldom in practice that guys never develop a feel for where the ball is going to go
                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


                • #23
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

                  Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                  Past history says he's going to play above his head the higher the stakes get. That's just what he does. He got that from Manu.
                  I hope you're right, that would be a huge asset for us.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

                    Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
                    While I totally agree on Scola, and how huge he was for keeping the Pacers in the game, my biggest next-morning thought:

                    For as much as I whined all game about how unsustainable Atlanta's offensive approach is, Indiana's (general) approach last night sure as hell isn't sustainable either...so they still have a lot of work to do.

                    Not exactly solving for x there. And what I mean: Indiana can't assume it can just take its time deciding if/when it wants to get in a game, relying on long Scola jumpers to sustain them until the lightbulb clicks. The only sustainable approach for this team is ferocious defense from the tip, which serves to fuel the offense from there.

                    Again, I know that's hardly a revolutionary thought. But if I'm going to say what ATL did in the 1st half isn't sustainable...I also have to say IND's approach (in the context of the overall game) isn't either.
                    I think it's somewhat sustainable because Atlanta's defense isn't that great.

                    I do want us to go the the hoop more, though. They should have no answer for us inside. That's where West should have a field day (if he stops missing those bunnies).

                    It's too bad Bynum is out for this series. He would average 30 points in 16 minutes against the Hawks.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

                      I just want aggressive defense, I think that is the biggest thing, I think our good defense was our driving force early in the season, I think that even helps energize us on the offensive end.
                      Why so SERIOUS

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

                        I think we figured out how to play defense against the Hawks. For the most part the wings switched everything last night, and when they turned up the intensity in the 2nd half the Hawks just didn't have an answer. I'm not worried about last night's offense being unsustainable. With the defense we were playing we could have shot 40%, and would still have kicked the Hawks *** in the 2nd half. The defense is replicable, there will be times where the Hawks will throw up junk and it will go in a lot, but as long as we continue to play great defense that won't last for very long. At that point we just need an offense shooting 44ish% to dominate.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

                          Our team got "real" once Paul George asked for Teague. His defensive intensity fired himself up and the rest of the team, offensively too. It starts with defense for us because that's our identity. When we are pressuring and suffocating opposing players, it makes our intensity and offense so much better.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

                            Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                            Great post, Peck. I absolutely agree with what you said about Ian and Hoop touched on this in the post-game thread as well. This was probably one of the best 1 point and 0 rebounds performances ever. His defense was that good tonight.

                            I only disagree with that you said about Lance being taken out of the whole game for this play. This is the play that you're mentioning, by the way:

                            http://stats.nba.com/cvp.html?GameID...ameEventID=196

                            The play happened in the way that you mentioned (although it was Paul George that was boxing out DeMarre Carroll but that doesn't really matter). The only difference is that this play happened in the second quarter. It's true that Lance was removed from the game in the next opportunity but he played the second half normally.

                            I can accept that Frank decided to "punish" Lance for this in the end of the first half but he returned to his usual rotation in the second half. The only reason why Lance, David and Roy played around 24-25 minutes tonight was because the CJ, Hill, PG, Scola and Ian line-up kicked some major *** and blew the game open.
                            You are absolutely correct. I got confused on my time line. I apologize everyone, what I said about the two things were individually correct but they did not connect together at all.

                            However I do still state that Lance smacked the scorers table when he came out and Frank did give him a dirty look and he did not come back into the game.

                            That's what I get for trying to do this off the top of my head, while still reading about the Stephenson-Turner stuff from Woj.


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

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              Defense was the key for us though.

                              But I figure the more often West touches the ball the better off we are. Good things happen when he gets it. He's by far IMO our best decision maker. I don't care where he gets it, just get it to him and good things happen. If I were coaching against the Pacers we would spend a lot of our preparation time and on floor effort in keeping the ball away from West inside the three point line. I would deny him the ball. Make someone else make a decision with the ball
                              Since86 has already touched on it but I have to reiterate what he said, making baskets often times is the start of a good defense. Also making baskets puts pressure on the other team to continue making baskets and when you up the defensive pressure they often time rush their shots, which I think happened several times last night.

                              I'm a defense first guy as well but I just know that eventually any NBA team is going to score no matter how good your defense is because they are that good. You just have to make them pay on the other end as well.


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

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 game 2 2014 playoffs redemption

                                Just tell George Hill he's the shooting guard if it's going to help that much.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X