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

Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

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

  • Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

    Team and league sources confirmed Tuesday that the Warriors have included Anthony Randolph's name in trade discussions.

    The Warriors aren't necessarily eager to trade Randolph, but are exploring all options.

    Randolph was deemed the starting power forward in the offseason and was invited to participate in Team USA's training camp in Las Vegas after a dominant summer league.

    But one Eastern Conference executive said Randolph's stock is down around the league.

    A team source said the Warriors don't want to trade guards Monta Ellis, Stephen Curry and Anthony Morrow but aren't in a position to overlook any option.
    By Marcus Thompson II
    http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-...nclick_check=1
    Mercury News




    On a talent level, this is a guy I want in Indy...I dont know if he has any character issues, but the kid can definitely play ball. I agree that he needs to bulk up a bit. He reminds of me of how Bosh was when he first entered the league.
    "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.



  • #2
    Re: Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

    July 23, 2009

    In terms of raw talent, no player displayed more glimpses of potential than Golden State Warrior Anthony Randolph. Leading the summer league at 27 points per game in just 33 minutes, Randolph was simply a scoring machine all week long. Besides putting the ball in the net with the greatest of ease, though, Randolph also contributed in other areas, with 8.5 rebounds, 3 blocks and 2.2 steals.

    Randolph’s physical gifts are impossible to ignore, and are clearly a huge part in what makes him such a special talent. 6-10, with a pterodactyl wingspan and freakish athleticism, there are very few players in the NBA he can be compared to. He used his athleticism to make a number of unbelievable plays throughout the week, particularly utilizing his length around the rim.

    What makes Randolph unique is his ability to create his own shot from the perimeter at his size, or operate as a super fluid one-man fast break. He possesses a devastating first step and excellent ball-handling skills, to go along with great coordination and extremely advanced footwork. It’s not rare to see him tap-dancing his way to the basket with the greatest of ease, often throwing in lightning quick spin-moves along the way, only to stop on a dime and then pivot in the opposite direction for an effortless finish.

    Randolph got to the free throw line like an absolute machine in Vegas—21 times in a single game in fact (!)—and although he was getting calls at times as if he were a 10-year summer league vet, it wasn’t hard to see how tough a cover he is for almost any player to guard. Randolph also didn’t shy away from taking his man down to the paint and showing his post repertoire. This is an interesting part of his game that can still be developed into a terrific weapon, as his excellent combination of quickness and footwork really makes him a big mismatch against small forwards and power forwards alike, despite his lack of strength.

    Thanks to his size, Randolph also has the ability to rise up and get his shot off almost whenever he pleases, and he indeed showed a very nice turnaround jumper he can use to bail himself out when he gets himself into trouble.

    Despite all the positives, there are still a number of glaring holes to Randolph’s game that he must iron out if he wants to reach his incredibly high ceiling. Considering that he’s still only 20 years old, this might not come as all that much of a surprise.

    For one, Randolph’s jump-shot is still very much a work in progress. He didn’t hit a single 3-pointer in Las Vegas, and was fairly streaky from mid-range as well. His shooting mechanics remain poor, and he still seems to settle for difficult shots off the dribble, which his matchup in the NBA would gladly give him almost anytime. Randolph has a bad habit of kicking his legs out, fading away excessively and even falling down on his jump-shot attempts, likely in an attempt to draw calls from the referees. Not only is he bailing the other team out with these bad shots, he’s also giving them an easy opportunity to score in transition while he collects himself off the floor.

    Randolph’s lack of strength makes it difficult for him to finish his moves around the basket at times, especially when going up against long, athletic NBA caliber big men who can deny him the space he needs to get his shot off—of which they were few of here at this summer league. He also still heavily favors his left hand almost exclusively on his finishes around the rim. While here in Vegas that would never be an issue, an NBA advanced scout would absolutely make that a focal point of an opposing team’s scouting report.

    Defensively, there are still plenty of question marks that need to be answered about Randolph’s position in the NBA. He is almost certainly too frail and weak to guard most NBA power forwards without emerging as a liability, and just isn’t fundamentally sound, experienced or intense enough to guard most small forwards at this point either. Randolph’s incredible combination of quickness, footwork and length should allow all the potential in the world to develop into an above average defender at the very least, but he must be willing to put the time in both on and off the court if he wants to develop this part of his game. Considering the teams he’s played for, though, and the message that was likely sent on a nightly basis by those around him, it’s tough to fault him for not showing much in this area.

    Randolph’s talent in this setting was truly mesmerizing to watch at times, and you really wonder just how good of a player he could develop into over the next few years if he continues to improve his game. He’s still a long ways away from being a consistently productive, efficient all-around basketball player who helps his team win games on a nightly basis, though, meaning the jury is still very much out on him.
    http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/...Randolph-1069/
    "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

      I would be in to going after him. I have watched him play for the Warriors a lot and this kid has mad upside still. He is a bit emotional and tends to get down on himself if is not playing well. He needs a lot of work on his jumper, but he can improve that...rebounding is something he is good at and finishing at the rim. I believe he is still only 20 years old, so sky is the limit. Let's get him!

      The only thing is, I don't think we have anything they would want (Warriors). We would have to take on Magette's contract probably and that is also something that probably wouldn't work.

      What do you guys think?
      Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

        They would probably want a big man. I'd give them anything they want outside of Granger, Hibbert, and Hans.
        Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

          I heard one of the Warriors beat writers discussing Randolph and from what he said, I want no part of him. He is not a hard worker and his BB IQ is horrible. No thanks

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            I heard one of the Warriors beat writers discussing Randolph and from what he said, I want no part of him. He is not a hard worker and his BB IQ is horrible. No thanks
            I have heard that too, but watching him play is quite the opposite. I wonder if he doesn't like practice. I just haven't seen that on the court. If you watch he is flying all over the court, diving for lose balls etc...

            If it the beat writer is for the San Jose Mercury, he never has anything good to say about any of the Warriors.

            I still say we do it. He would bring a great dimension to our team, but if he is not a hard worker than I would agree. But I have never seen that on the court ever. I would say the only knock on him his he is still so young, and his prone to be emotional.
            Last edited by odeez; 12-16-2009, 01:21 PM.
            Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

              I'd like to get Morrow. This pacers team could use a forward that shoots lights out like he is capable of doing.
              "man, PG has been really good."

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph



                here is a preview of his work >>>
                Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

                  Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
                  I'd like to get Morrow. This pacers team could use a forward that shoots lights out like he is capable of doing.
                  no doubt, he is lights out from the three!
                  Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

                    Zach Randolph can be a cancer to a team. I say no no no no no no no
                    Larry Bird and Ryan Grigson- wasting the talents of Paul George and Andrew Luck

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

                      Originally posted by Mr_Smith View Post
                      Zach Randolph can be a cancer to a team. I say no no no no no no no
                      No Anthony Randolph, see youtube video above.
                      Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

                        my bad...saw Randolph and immediately thought Zach
                        Larry Bird and Ryan Grigson- wasting the talents of Paul George and Andrew Luck

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

                          FWIW, Randolph is a good kid and he works hard. He put in a lot of work in the offseason. His problem is that he just thinks he's better than he really is at this point. He thinks he knows how to play the game, but he doesn't.

                          If the Warriors wanted to trade Randolph, the would have a lot of offers. He's got a ton of a talent and has a rookie contract. So it's not like they have to "get rid" of him the same way you look to "get rid" of someone like Stephen Jackson. He's easily tradeable.

                          He's simply gone from untradeable to "yeah, we'll trade him in the right deal." This past summer, they wouldn't have been willing to include him in a package for Chris Bosh. Now they probably would.

                          The Warriors ownership and management, with all there wisdom, have finally started to panic in the face of dwindling ticket sales. Through all their stupid decisions, ineptitude and persistent losing, they've have always gotten great fan support. And they made a lot of money off of it. They could put out a bad product and still expect the faithful to follow the team.

                          Now with the economy and the fans becoming tired of their act, the foundation (loyal fanbase) that this poorly run franchise has relied upon is starting to show cracks, at long last. So now they've gone from being unwilling to trade Randolph to "exploring all options".

                          I don't expect Randolph to be traded, but this rumor does say something about what the Warriors front office is currently thinking.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

                            Randolph is the proven out version of Earl Clark (Louisville, rookie this year). Tall, lanky SF/PF player with a good jumper (even if unorthodox) and lots of defensive and general awareness questions.

                            Randolph might improve, but he also NEEDS to improve. I think he's interesting and worth a look, but defintely involves a lot of risk too.

                            GS wouldn't take TJ, Dun or Troy back for him (with other parts in place to make that work), so it's a moot point in a 2 team deal.
                            Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 12-16-2009, 01:47 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Warriors Willing To Trade Randolph

                              I don't want him or his attitude on this Pacers team.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X