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

IND vs Suns *Post* thread

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

  • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

    Originally posted by mattie View Post
    Hey, I know i'm going on a limb here. about 6 7 days before the draft I fell in love with Bookers game. I love it. I love everything he brings to the table. I'm a fanboy.

    So I'm not exactly being fair. I get it. I could be wrong. I love his game. I see a future allstar.
    See, I am perfectly fine with this. We have all fallen in love with a players game. I quite like Bookers game myself.

    I just think its silly to bring up Bookers age as a reason he will be better than Turner, when they are the same age. I also think its silly to assume Turner will never develop into an All-Star. This is the same guy that was widely looked at as a top 3 pick until he was misused at Texas. The same guy, who many draft experts said had the most potential out of anyone not named KAT in the draft. To assume Turner is just going to be an average player is where you are losing me.

    Comment


    • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

      Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
      Towns - Yes
      Porzingis - No
      Okafor - No
      Russell - Maybe
      Booker - Maybe
      Winslow - No

      Rookies you'd at least have to think about:

      S. Johnson - No
      Lyles - No
      Mudiay - No
      Portis - No
      Jokic - No
      Have you watched Porzingis? He's very good. If they re-did the draft he would assuredly go number 2, with a chance of going number 1. That's how good he's been this year.

      Comment


      • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

        There's probably nothing more frustrating than people constantly misreading your posts. Reading comprehension isn't hard.

        I never used Booker's age as a reason he would be better than Turner. Ever. Never suggested it. Never hinted it. Obviously they're the same age so why would I do that? Yet Dr Awesome insisted I did. Why? Learn to read.

        Anyhow, I have no problem with everything else you wrote. Believe what you will.

        Comment


        • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

          Originally posted by mattie View Post
          YUP. I screamed like a little girl when Booker was available. Predictably, Larry Bird decided not to draft him. I was bartending at the time, i shut it off, told my guests I needed a minute and walked out the back. I was furious.

          Outside of Paul George I'd trade any Pacer for him easily. And you're insane if you wouldn't. He's 19. He's got a great career ahead of him.

          Outside of PG and Hill, Booker is better than every other player on the Pacers RIGHT NOW. And Hill? He's 30.

          Since we aren't going to use Hill anyways why don't we trade him for Booker?? He's a guaranteed perenial allstar. We should have drafted him.
          Maybe "insane" is the wrong word to use here.......but I don't think that one can necessarily say it's a total no-brainer that Bird should trade Myles for Booker.

          Anyone outside of PG13 and Myles? sure....no brainer. But we don't fully know what we have with Myles yet ( as Trader Joe suggests ).

          I guess what we are saying is that Booker could turn out to be what you said.....we're just saying that Myles has as much chance to turn out to be a very solid Player as well and even an All-Star one day?
          Last edited by CableKC; 01-21-2016, 04:01 PM.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            Obviously our rookies have been great, but man Booker looked good too. Nice scouting job by TBird there.
            I think he's going to be a really good shooter. Normally I only take pointguards in fantasy hoops, but I made an exception for him and traded for him in our keeperleague during the draft. Picked him up at #17. Especially with Bledsoe beying pretty injury prone, Booker has allready gotten a lot of opportunities and will get much more the coming years. He's only just turned 19...
            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


            • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

              Oh and by the way, the shooting guard position is NOT stacked. The guard position is however, so if you want to make the all-star game, you could be arguably the second best shooting guard in the NBA (klay thompson) and not make the all-star game.

              Comment


              • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

                Originally posted by mattie View Post
                I'd be completely ok if Myles was a super athletic center, that can defend, but he'll never be that guy. He can shoot pretty well which is exciting, but I'm not sure that makes up for the negatives. I'd rather have a guy at center the only plays good defense and can dive to the basket on PnR's... I'd fill the other positions up with shooters.
                As someone who scoffed at Larry's statement that Tuner is the best shooter on the team, still do btw, he's a much better shooter than "pretty well." The guy is currently shooting 53% on jumpers 16ft-24ft. 53%!!! He's shooting 51% on all catch and shoot situations. I think the craziest thing is he's shooting 60% on shots when taking 1 dribble. So even when defenders close him out, he can put the ball on the floor to get some space and still get a great shot off.

                I think it's unlikely he'd keep this shooting percentages up, but the guy's shooting has been flat out amazing so far.

                It's hard to get on the Booker > Turner bandwagon when Booker's strength is also Turner's. Myles not be the 3pt threat that Booker is, but it's looking like he'll be absolutely deadly in PnP situations.

                It's much harder to find big men with his skill set than it is 3pt shooting.

                And all of that is with, IMHO, too quick of a release. Sometimes I feel like he just catches the ball and whips it at the rim. It's kind of scary to think he's shooting that well, when he's pretty much lost on the court most of the time. Once he understands what's going on and the game slows down a bit..... Goodness.
                Last edited by Since86; 01-21-2016, 04:02 PM.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

                  The Pacers can start running sets they ran for David West with Myles if he keeps this up. Which would help about 100% in late game situations as the Pacers ran that **** all the time for David to great success.


                  Comment


                  • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

                    Originally posted by mattie View Post
                    There's probably nothing more frustrating than people constantly misreading your posts. Reading comprehension isn't hard.

                    I never used Booker's age as a reason he would be better than Turner. Ever. Never suggested it. Never hinted it. Obviously they're the same age so why would I do that? Yet Dr Awesome insisted I did. Why? Learn to read.

                    Anyhow, I have no problem with everything else you wrote. Believe what you will.
                    Lets see..

                    Originally posted by mattie View Post
                    Outside of Paul George I'd trade any Pacer for him easily. And you're insane if you wouldn't. He's 19. He's got a great career ahead of him.
                    By saying this, you are completely ignoring the fact that Turner, who is the one we were all debating anyway, is also 19. He also likely has a great career ahead of him. I clearly was not the only one who read it that way based on other comments, so maybe you should actually just learn to be more clear with your thoughts before posting.

                    Comment


                    • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      As someone who scoffed at Larry's statement that Tuner is the best shooter on the team, still do btw, he's a much better shooter than "pretty well." The guy is currently shooting 53% on jumpers 16ft-24ft. 53%!!! He's shooting 51% on all catch and shoot situations. I think the craziest thing is he's shooting 60% on shots when taking 1 dribble. So even when defenders close him out, he can put the ball on the floor to get some space and still get a great shot off.

                      I think it's unlikely he'd keep this shooting percentages up, but the guy's shooting has been flat out amazing so far.

                      It's hard to get on the Booker > Turner bandwagon when Booker's strength is also Turner's. Myles not be the 3pt threat that Booker is, but it's looking like he'll be absolutely deadly in PnP situations.

                      It's much harder to find big men with his skill set than it is 3pt shooting.
                      I'm not sure it is necessarily harder. Good shooters that can defend and play within the offense are hard to come by. They're out there for sure but they're expensive. Booker is oging to make a lot of money in his career.

                      Meanwhile Turner's skill set now is similar to David Wests. And towards the end of West's time here I still remember thinking- wow what a great jumpshot, but if he ahd three point range he would be far more deadly.

                      Draymond Green is merely average as a three point shooter, yet he brings an element to that offense that allows them to be deadly.

                      Put it this way- I'd rather have Booker and if we really wanted a center who could shoot? We could go after Meyers Leanard. He's no star, but he could be a part of an absolutely deadly offense.

                      Myers may turn into a really good player, but not the type of player that helps the team win.

                      I mean look at David West's PnR, his mean PnR helped the Pacers be a 20th in the league offense... Is that 20 foot midrange even worth it anymore?

                      Comment


                      • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

                        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                        Have you watched Porzingis? He's very good. If they re-did the draft he would assuredly go number 2, with a chance of going number 1. That's how good he's been this year.
                        Yes, I have watched him. Its a silly thing to assume, but the way he is built and the way he plays, I have a feeling he is going to have a lot of injuries. I hope I am wrong, but I just don't know that he will hold up. I am also still very high on Turner, who again was pegged as the guy with the most potential outside of KAT and has thus far lived up to it in my mind. I do believe he can become a great post defender - again, he is only 19.

                        Comment


                        • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

                          Draymond Green is shooting like 43% from 3 this season and is probably a top 10 player right now. I'm not really sure what he brings to the conversation.

                          I mean Booker and Myles are already apples and oranges. Green just seems like throwing a random player into the debate for fun.

                          What if David West had been 27 when he arrived to the Pacers instead of 31? I think his impact would have been even larger on our offense. It's not hard to imagine Turner's offensive peak being comparable to David West while also having a defensive peak that is similar to Roy Hibbert. That is a pretty tremendous player right there.


                          Comment


                          • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

                            Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                            Lets see..



                            By saying this, you are completely ignoring the fact that Turner, who is the one we were all debating anyway, is also 19. He also likely has a great career ahead of him. I clearly was not the only one who read it that way based on other comments, so maybe you should actually just learn to be more clear with your thoughts before posting.
                            See that's awful reading comprehension. No where did I suggest he's better than Turner because he's 19. Again. Learn to understand what you're reading.

                            Comment


                            • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

                              The fact is all positive speculation on Myles or Booker is just that...speculation. Neither one has really proven dick.


                              Comment


                              • Re: IND vs Suns *Post* thread

                                I'll give this one a go too...

                                Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                                Rookies I'd trade Turner for right now:

                                Towns - yes
                                Porzingis - yes
                                Okafor - yes
                                Russell - yes
                                Booker - maybe
                                Winslow - no

                                Rookies you'd at least have to think about:

                                S. Johnson - no
                                Lyles - no
                                Mudiay - no
                                Portis - maybe
                                Jokic - no
                                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