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

Stein's Power rankings

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

  • Stein's Power rankings

    as if some of you care

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/powerr...on=2008&week=0

    RANK (LAST WK) TEAM REC. COMMENT
    1 (1) Spurs 58-24 Is the committee (of one) somewhat alarmed that we came to the same conclusion as Simmons about the best case you can muster against the Spurs repeating is that they've never done it? Not in the slightest.
    2 (3) Suns 61-21 How did they move up a spot already? Marion's September trade demand was quickly overshadowed by Grant Hill's promising start in orange and yet another impressive comeback from a knee surgery by Amare.
    3 (2) Celtics 24-58 Every vet free agent or buyout recipient (like Juwan Howard) has interest in joining the Celts because they have an opening or two in their rotation. So you watch: Boston's bench won't look so bad by season's end.
    4 (6) Mavericks 67-15 We even got a call from a colleague in San Antonio insisting that our pre-camp ranking of No. 6 was too low for the Mavs, in spite of Dallas' playoff unravelings in each of the last two springs. So we bumped them up a bit.
    5 (4) Rockets 52-30 The Rockets' official team marketing slogan this season: 'It's Time.' After 10 seasons without winning a playoff series -- for Houston as a franchise and T-Mac individually -- I'd say it's a unanimous sentiment.
    6 (5) Pistons 53-29 Boston is just getting started with an all-new team, Chicago is still growing up, Miami is aging and Cleveland is not exactly getting deeper around LeBron James. So here's our advice, Pistons: Capitalize while you can.
    7 (8) Jazz 51-31 The Cinderella feel of Utah's playoff run didn't quite make it to training camp, but there's still plenty of talent here to offset any turbulence. Even in the face of expectations that some fear are too high now.
    8 (10) Bulls 49-33 Think Deng will feel extra pressure if Kobe doesn't wind up in the Windy City? Good news: Kobe chatter shouldn't distract Chicago's kids as much as you'd expect; they've been playing through trade rumors for years.
    9 (9) Warriors 42-40 Can Golden State play at last spring's high level for an entire season? Can't wait to evaluate the Dubyas' counter claim that they'd have been seeded higher than eighth if they were healthy for the entire season.
    10 (7) Cavaliers 50-32 The committee likes this Bucher line, so we're stealing it: Cleveland will miss that red-carpet bracket path it had to the Finals even more than Varejao or Pavlovic, since you figure one (or both) will re-sign eventually.
    11 (13) Magic 40-42 No one should get carried away with the Magic's 6-1 record in the preseason, especially given Rashard's ankle trouble. But I have a nagging feeling 'Shard and SVG will help Dwight win their division in Year 1.
    12 (11) Nuggets 45-37 Allen Iverson says his Nuggets are capable of winning 60 games. I can't go that high, but the only record that really matters is significantly sprucing up their 3-12 playoff mark in the George Karl era.
    13 (20) Heat 44-38 Wade and Shaq can still be a playoff factor if they're ever healthy again at the same time. But Miami has to get to the playoffs first and that looked dicey until Riles manufactured last week's clutch trade boost.
    14 (12) Raptors 47-35 Bosh is one of the committee's favorites -- surely not a shocker since we're talking about a lefty franchise player -- but I'm afraid we're officially panicky about his knee, knowing that our Raps have a slim margin for error.
    15 (14) Nets 41-41 Good enough to climb back into the East's elite? Hard question to answer when we don't even know if the Nets -- with Krstic and Jefferson on the comeback trail and Kidd missing camp time -- will be healthy enough.
    16 (16) Hornets 39-43 Remember when they were rookies and D-Will watched CP3 get all the good pub? Entering Year 3, I can't wait to see Paul's response and what that means for the Hornets, because last season was Deron's turn.
    17 (15) Wizards 41-41 Our pal Sam Smith of the Chicago Trib lists the Wiz as a dark-horse threat in the Kobe Sweepstakes with an Arenas-for-Kobe offer. Is it too soon to wonder if the nation's capital is big enough for No. 24 and the president?
    18 (17) Bucks 28-54 At least a dozen teams have legit hope of securing an East playoff spot. How they hold up health-wise and up front with Bogut, Yi and Villanueva will determine whether the Bucks finish closer to No. 8 or No. 12.
    19 (21) Grizzlies 22-60 So what's it like sharing divisional space with the Texas trio? It's like this: Memphis might have a promising new look . . . but might also have a better shot making the playoffs than avoiding last place in the Southwest.
    20 (19) Lakers 42-40 The sad reality, after all the chaos of the summer and October, is that this team is in for a real drop if Kobe leaves and a ride of countless bumps and ceaseless speculation just to grab a playoff spot if he stays.
    21 (24) Knicks 33-49 Even if we ignore all the off-court sideshows, plenty of on-court uncertainty remains. Chemistry, leadership and defense are all in question, as well as the compatibility of Curry, Randolph and fan-favorite D-Lee.
    22 (26) Hawks 30-52 No misprint: Atlanta is your preseason champion after going 7-1 in exhibition play. What does that mean in real life? Losing has become such a habit here that, sorry, we are still required to advise extreme caution.
    23 (29) Pacers 35-47 The Pacers, last season's worst-shooting team, made minimal personnel changes and hired a coach who has always relied heavily on shooters. So we'll need to see more than a 6-2 preseason for a lasting jump.
    24 (28) Clippers 40-42 Losing Elton in the summer theoretically ended the season before it started, which is why the Clips were so low in the camp edition. But there could actually be a handful of West teams in worse shape roster-wise.
    25 (18) Bobcats 33-49 Our growing reservations about the Bobs are only partly tied to the double blow of losing May and Morrison. Even with those guys healthy and its offseason upgrades, Charlotte lacks size and experience.
    26 (23) Trail Blazers 32-50 Even with Aldridge and Roy playing through early injury scares, we can't shake this recent Sam Bowie quote about curses: 'I've never been one to believe in things of that nature . . . [but Oden's injury] might convert me.'
    27 (22) SuperSonics 31-51 We repeat: Forget wins and losses. This season? You need only keep track of two things when it comes to the Sonics: Durant's health/status in the rookie of the year race and where the team plans to play next season.
    28 (27) 76ers 35-47 You can make the case, in Philly's first full season AAI (After Allen Iverson), that this is the only team in the East with zero hope of reaching the playoffs. Even if Larry Brown ends up taking this job back from Mo Cheeks.
    29 (25) Kings 33-49 Artest is suspended for the first seven games. Bibby is out for up to 10 weeks after thumb surgery. Theus? The only relief for the rookie coach is that he needn't worry now about living up to high expectations.
    30 (30) Timberwolves 32-50 Jefferson had a nice preseason, but let's be real. If the first Wolves team without KG since 1994-95 would have stayed in Turkey for another month or two, would anyone back in Minneapolis have minded?

  • #2
    Re: Stein's Power rankings

    Honestly I don't see why everyone is down on the Wolves. Those former Celtics on that team have a fair amount of in game experience now with the injuries that ravaged that team last year. Plus, the young core has had time to develop a fair amount of chemistry relative to their times in the league. I don't see them making the playoffs next year by any stretch, but I think they'll be better than at least Philly, Sacto, the Clipps, and the Sonics.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Stein's Power rankings

      Hawks, Knicks, Grizzlies, Bucks, Hornets. Those are the teams that the Pacers can compete with and best in the inter-conference standings.
      “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

      “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Stein's Power rankings

        I think Detroit is better than the Rockets, Bulls, and maybe the Mavs. It seems the East is deeper than the West, but the West still has the top two teams.

        He also has high hopes for the Magic. Which may not even make the playoffs if they don't find another PF and solid SG play.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Stein's Power rankings

          Without Varejao and Pavlovic, the Cavs are nowhere near a Top 10 team.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Stein's Power rankings

            ESPN the Magazine has us 15th in the East, or dead last for those not keeping score at home.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Stein's Power rankings

              I can't believe the Celtics are ahead of the Mavs.


              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Stein's Power rankings

                Here's how I see it:

                1)
                2)
                3) :mavericks
                4)
                5)
                6)
                7) :thepiston
                8)
                9)
                10)
                11)
                12) :thepacers
                13)
                14)
                15)
                16)
                17)
                18)
                19) :cavaliers
                20)
                21) :sixers:
                22)
                23)
                24) :timberwol
                25)
                26) :grizzlies
                27)
                28) :blazers:
                29) :sonics:
                30)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Stein's Power rankings

                  Fascinating to read the Wiz would offer my boy Arenas for Kobe. It would certainly bring me out to games.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Stein's Power rankings

                    My rough list, though I haven't put enough though into it to feel good about it. I'd like to look at schedules for example.

                    1)
                    2)
                    3) :mavericks
                    4)
                    5) :thepiston
                    6)
                    7)
                    8)
                    9)
                    10)
                    11)
                    12) :cavaliers
                    13)
                    14)
                    15)
                    16)
                    17)
                    18)
                    19) :sixers:
                    20)
                    21)
                    22)
                    23) :thepacers
                    24)
                    25) :grizzlies
                    26)
                    27) :timberwol
                    28) :sonics:
                    29) :blazers:
                    30)



                    People are sleeping on the Sixers I think (obviously). Andre Miller is IMO equal to AI due to his playmaking ability (for others) and much higher efficiency with the ball, shooting or otherwise. That team really improved post-trade and have a decent mix of talent to move up another notch.

                    Bobcats just have the May and Morrison setbacks and seem stuck. Portland minus Oden hurts.

                    I do like Jefferson at Minny, but despite having some nice young talent that team doesn't seem poised to make a big breakthrough this season. That roster needs to learn how to play still.

                    I don't buy into Boston totally, KG had talent around him before that people just wrote off as not being there when the team didn't win. But Cassell went to LA and repeated his winning ways from Minny after they took a big step back, for example. Spreewell has been on more Finals teams than KG. At some point you have to wonder if it's just the guys around him. Ultimately isn't this Boston team really just 3 guys that could never quite get it done? They might do it, but I think they have something left to prove before we hand them an ECF crown.


                    Stien makes a great point, Pacers did go 6-2 but the Hawks went 7-1, so who here is putting the Hawks ahead of the Pacers and into the playoffs with them?


                    Wild card in the mix to me - Houston. Plenty of reason to win but to me they are in an odd limbo, shy of being WCF caliber. Do they continue to ride this out, how do they make a move forward in all of this? Maybe they are ready to step up right now, thus the wildcard aspect to me.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Stein's Power rankings

                      So he's got us at #13 in the East, ahead of the 76ers and the Hawks?

                      Makes my #12 look like an optimist.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Stein's Power rankings

                        The toronto Sun has us 15th in the East!!! I couldn't believe wat I was readin'
                        R.I.P. Bernic Mac & Isaac Hayes

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Stein's Power rankings

                          Well... I buy the most into Seth's list at this point in time. Think we might go a little above on Atlanta maybe, purely based on veteran experience, MAYBE the Bucks too, but I'm not too sure about that yet.
                          2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                          2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                          2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X