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

2013 NCAA Tournament Thread

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

  • Re: 2013 NCAA Tournament Thread

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    Syracuse's transition defense looked pretty good against Indiana...
    ...because Indiana played with no urgency to get the ball down the floor. I'm not even sure what they were trying to accomplish on offense.

    That's not just symptomatic of Indiana. 90% of the NCAA tournament is polluted by micro-managing. The one thing you don't do against any zone is hesitate.

    Michigan is nothing if not aggressive. If we lose to Syracuse, it'll be because we couldn't defend them well enough. It won't be because we couldn't generate enough offense.
    Last edited by Kstat; 04-01-2013, 07:44 PM.

    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


    • Re: 2013 NCAA Tournament Thread



      Louisville's Kevin Ware resting after surgery
      Posted: Apr 01, 2013 3:04 PM EDT Updated: Apr 01, 2013 3:04 PM EDT
      By Charles Gazaway - email

      Kevin Ware walking on crutches in his Indianapolis hopsital room (Source; Kenny Klein, UofL Sports Information) Kevin Ware walking on crutches in his Indianapolis hopsital room (Source; Kenny Klein, UofL Sports Information)

      INDIANAPOLIS (AP) - Louisville guard Kevin Ware was up and walking on crutches Monday morning, and coach Rick Pitino said his player's spirits have been boosted by the outpouring of support from friends and fans.

      Ware isn't in any pain after a 2-hour surgery Sunday night to repair a horrifying fracture in his right leg. Doctors reset the bone and inserted a rod, and are monitoring him to make sure there's no infection, Pitino said.

      "He's doing terrific, in great spirits," Pitino, who visited Ware on Sunday night and again Monday morning, said on a conference call. "He'll be with us in Atlanta."

      Ware broke his leg in the first half of Sunday's Midwest Regional final when he landed awkwardly after trying to contest a 3-point shot, breaking his leg in two places. He was taken off the court on a stretcher as his stunned teammates openly wept.

      Before he left, Ware urged his teammates to "just win the game," and all said afterward there was no way they could have let him down. The Cardinals beat Duke 85-63 to reach their second straight Final Four.

      "That was the first time he just broke down and cried, when he heard the players talking about him," Pitino said. "Now he's in very good spirits and anxious to get out of the hospital and get back with the guys."

      They're anxious to have him back, too. He has the regional championship trophy, which Pitino brought him Sunday night.

      "I said, 'All right, just make sure you don't lose it,'" Pitino said.

      Ware's girlfriend stayed at the hospital overnight, and Pitino said Ware's mother arrived Monday morning.

      As long as there are no complications, Pitino said Ware should return to Louisville on Tuesday. The Cardinals travel to Atlanta on Wednesday night, and Pitino said they expect to have Ware with them.

      "As you know, Kevin is from Atlanta," Pitino said. "He gets to go home, be with his family and be with us on the bench."

      Ware has played a key role in the Cardinals' second straight Final Four run, scoring 11 points on 5-for-7 shooting in 25 minutes in the regional semifinal win over Oregon, and on Sunday he was the primary motivator. Before leaving the court, he called his teammates over to prod them to win the game and not worry about him, a message he continued to express at halftime. And he was eager to return to Atlanta, where he played high school basketball.

      For television viewers, it was a gruesome sight that prompted many to express their sentiments on social media sites. CBS even stopped showing the replay, which was not seen inside Lucas Oil Stadium.

      For Louisville players and coaches, it was far worse. Guard Russ Smith said he didn't see the play but he heard the bone snap. And forward Chane Behanan, Ware's closest friend, said the sight was almost unimaginable.

      Pitino, one of college basketball's top winners, thought he had seen just about everything in the sport until Ware's injury.

      "I went over and I was going to help him up and then all of a sudden, I saw what it was and I almost literally threw up," Pitino said.

      Ware's teammates were overcome with emotion, too.

      Luke Hancock patted Ware on the chest after Ware rolled himself to the sideline and right in front of the Louisville bench. Behanan and several other players sat on the floor as Ware was treated and some, including Behanan, cried. Duke guard Tyler Thornton covered his eyes when he realized what had happened, and Blue Devils coach Mike Krzyzewski even told Pitino that he would agree to let the teams warm up again if they wanted.

      They didn't, though Pitino did summon Ware's teammates so he could speak to them. His message was simple: Win the game.

      "I said, 'We're going to dig in. We're going to play this game to the end. We're going to play this game to get him back home,'" Pitino said, explaining his halftime speech. "We'll get him back home, nurse him to good health and we're going to get him to Atlanta."

      Louisville trainer Fred Hina told Pitino it was the same injury that derailed the Heisman Trophy hopes of running back Michael Bush, who also played at Louisville. Bush recovered from the injury and has had a productive NFL career with Oakland and Chicago.

      As it turned out, he was watching.

      "I just cried," he wrote on Twitter. "I feel so bad. Flashback of myself. Anyone if he needs anything please let me know."

      The reaction was the same everywhere.

      Louisville forward Wayne Blackshear fell to the floor, crying, and Behanan looked as if he was going to be sick on the court, kneeling on his hands and feet. Peyton Siva sat a few feet away, a hand covering his mouth.

      Someone finally pulled Behanan to his feet, but he doubled over and needed a few seconds to gather himself.

      Condolences poured in on social media, too. Former Washington Redskins quarterback Joe Theismann, who famously sustained a broken leg on Monday Night Football in a game against the New York Giants, tweeted that "Watching Duke/ Louisville my heart goes out to Kevin Ware." Pitino said Theismann had called Ware to wish him well.

      Two doctors speculated Ware might have had stress fractures that predisposed him to such a break.

      Dr. Reed Estes, assistant professor of orthopedic surgery at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, and team physician for the UAB football team, said basketball players are prone to stress fractures in the tibia, the larger of the two bones in the lower leg, and that can weaken them.

      "If these are not detected they can result in a full fracture, particularly if the landing mechanics are just right" after a jump, Estes said. Surgery to stabilize the bones is usually successful, and Ware should be fine to play next season, he said.

      Dr. Frederick Azar, head of the Campbell Clinic in Memphis, Tenn., and a spokesman for the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, said Ware "jumped pretty far horizontally and vertically, and he landed with a twist," which puts so much torsion and stress on the bones they could have just snapped. He agreed with Estes' assessment that a stress fracture could have made Ware more prone to such an injury.

      Louisville, the top overall seed in the tourney, missed four of its next five shots after the injury but regained its composure to take a 35-32 halftime lead and went on to an 85-63 victory.

      "We won this for him," Pitino said. "We were all choked up with emotion for him. We'll get him back to normal. We've got great doctors, great trainers. We talked about it every timeout, 'Get Kevin home.'"
      http://www.wave3.com/story/21846416/...-after-surgery
      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


      • Re: 2013 NCAA Tournament Thread

        Originally posted by Kstat View Post
        ...because Indiana played with no urgency to get the ball down the floor. I'm not even sure what they were trying to accomplish on offense.

        That's not just symptomatic of Indiana. 90% of the NCAA tournament is polluted by micro-managing. The one thing you don't do against any zone is hesitate.

        Michigan is nothing if not aggressive. If we lose to Syracuse, it'll be because we couldn't defend them well enough. It won't be because we couldn't generate enough offense.
        Sure they did, they just didn't get any good opportunities because Syracuse was making a concerted effort to limit their transition game. Your fast pace isn't special. Efficiency wise I'm not sure it was better than Indiana's. You are acting invincible right now. Lest we remind you that your boys have **** the bed plenty of times this season.

        Comment


        • Re: 2013 NCAA Tournament Thread

          Originally posted by cdash View Post
          Sure they did, they just didn't get any good opportunities because Syracuse was making a concerted effort to limit their transition game. Your fast pace isn't special. Efficiency wise I'm not sure it was better than Indiana's. You are acting invincible right now. Lest we remind you that your boys have **** the bed plenty of times this season.
          Efficiency-wise, it's not even close. Best A/TO in the country. Fewest turnovers in the country. 6th in FG%. And this was a team that was very incomplete offensively without a post threat.

          Talent was never the issue, though. Size and experience was. Michigan is loaded with NBA talent. Their problem was one guy was out of shape and unable to play, and their five best players are three freshmen, a sophmore and a junior.

          It's not the same team with McGary actually being able to run instead of plod. It's just not. He fixes the issues they had offensively, and they were the most efficient offensive team in the country without him.

          Again, we're not unbeatable. We're far from unbeatable. But if we lose, it'll be because we got beat defensively, or ran into a team that was good at chewing up the clock and getting offensive rebounds.

          Kansas was really that team. They were the big, athletic bunch that could match up with us. We would have lost that game by 25 two months ago.

          The difference was McGary beating up the top defensive center in the country (who saw that coming???), and keeping it just close enough so Trey Burke could become Trey Burke at the end.
          Last edited by Kstat; 04-01-2013, 08:19 PM.

          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


          • Re: 2013 NCAA Tournament Thread

            What makes the Syracuse zone so effective is that even when it gets out of position the length and speed on that team allows for very quick recovery and any advantage the other team might get on offense is quickly eliminated.

            There were several occasions when IU was able to move the ball and get an open three point shot only for a Syracuse player to rotate quickly and block and challenge it.

            Comment


            • Re: 2013 NCAA Tournament Thread

              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
              The difference was McGary beating up the top defensive center in the country (who saw that coming???), and keeping it just close enough so Trey Burke could become Trey Burke at the end.
              McGary is the absolute worst matchup for Withey. He's big and thick and strong. Withey is more of a finesse shot blocker. If you pound him, he loses his effectiveness mighty quickly. McGary's rise is and has been the difference for you guys. It was always going to decide whether you were a Final Four team or a first/second round loser.

              Comment


              • Re: 2013 NCAA Tournament Thread

                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                McGary is the absolute worst matchup for Withey. He's big and thick and strong. Withey is more of a finesse shot blocker. If you pound him, he loses his effectiveness mighty quickly. McGary's rise is and has been the difference for you guys. It was always going to decide whether you were a Final Four team or a first/second round loser.
                McGary is a bad matchup but not for the reason you gave IMO. The reason Whithey vs McGary was a mismatch is Trey Burke and the guards. When they get into the lane and draw attention that is when McGary does his work. When Whithey was forced to help that is when McGary went all garbage man on the boards. But 1v1 Whithey could handle McGary easily. McGary did a hell of a job picking a school he couldn't of picked a better fit for his skill set.

                Comment


                • Re: 2013 NCAA Tournament Thread

                  Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                  McGary is a bad matchup but not for the reason you gave IMO. The reason Whithey vs McGary was a mismatch is Trey Burke and the guards. When they get into the lane and draw attention that is when McGary does his work. When Whithey was forced to help that is when McGary went all garbage man on the boards. But 1v1 Whithey could handle McGary easily. McGary did a hell of a job picking a school he couldn't of picked a better fit for his skill set.
                  Ah, yes. Must defer to the expert on everything.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2013 NCAA Tournament Thread

                    Originally posted by cdash View Post
                    I like Dakich.
                    I like some of the stuff he says and appreciate the quality of guests that come on his show, but he can be a big tool at times.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2013 NCAA Tournament Thread

                      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                      I like some of the stuff he says and appreciate the quality of guests that come on his show, but he can be a big tool at times.
                      I like that he's frank and honest, but he's never wrong

                      Comment


                      • I will take the length of Syracuse versus Michigan.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2013 NCAA Tournament Thread

                          I think Michigan wins a close game. Their just playing too good right now. Burke will just will them to win. He wants it bad.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2013 NCAA Tournament Thread

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            Ah, yes. Must defer to the expert on everything.
                            Yep having an opinion automatically makes me an expert

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Miller_time04 View Post
                              I think Michigan wins a close game. Their just playing too good right now. Burke will just will them to win. He wants it bad.
                              I just don't see how Burke finds a way to beat that Syracuse zone. Styles make fights and it's a bad matchup.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2013 NCAA Tournament Thread

                                Michael Carter Williams is going to be a really good point guard in the NBA. He's 6'6" with great court vision and possesses good defensive attributes. His RSB40 is around 10(which is dominant for a point guard) and 2pnt FG% is over 50. I would love for the Pacers to get him. Hopefully other teams overlook him due to his poor outside shooting.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X