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

Ultimate fantasy draft. What if every current NBA player was available?

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

  • Ultimate fantasy draft. What if every current NBA player was available?

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...aft/index.html


    Ultimate fantasy draft
    What if every current NBA player was available?
    Posted: Tuesday June 21, 2005 2:14PM;

    On June 28, we'll find out whether the Bucks go with Utah's Andrew Bogut or Marvin Williams from North Carolina (the smart money's on the former, though the smarter pick is the latter) as the top pick in this year's NBA Draft, just how far Chris Taft has plummeted, and which teams are wowed by individual workouts (the Raymond Felton indicator) or the traditional currency of the NBA -- potential.

    But what if teams weren't drafting just from this year's crop but from every roster in the NBA? Who would go first, and who would be overlooked (hi, Paul Pierce)?

    This is the scenario the SI.com editors presented to me, stealing shamelessly from a column estimable NFL scribe Michael Silver wrote a while back. Draw up the mock draft of all mock drafts, they said.

    So here's how I see it unfolding in this fantasy world where all teams have had their traded picks reinstated, so as to give each franchise a first round pick. (Disagree? Of course you do. That's what the mailbag is for.) Without further ado, then, here comes David Stern to the podium.

    Ultimate Mock Draft
    Pick Team Pos. Player

    1 PF Tim Duncan
    It's not the sexiest choice, but the Bucks make the smart one, passing on LeBron James to build around a true center (no matter what he says) who's selfless, experienced and savvy. Though 29, Duncan's never relied on his athleticism, so he has a good six or seven dominant years left. Build around him and they -- fans, free agents, playoff berths -- will come.

    2 SF LeBron James
    Continuing a trend -- fetish? -- for small forwards, Billy Knight grabs LeBron, who he can now surround with an assortment of tweeners. Even Atlanta can't screw up this pick. Now all the Hawks need is a new coach, some serviceable players and, oh yeah, fans.

    3 PF Kevin Garnett
    John Nash will be rolling fatties (at least figuratively) over the chance to shed this franchise's Jail Blazer image and start new. Garnett is the type of dominating, passionate, felony-free player who will bring back the Portland faithful and anchor the team, regardless of who ends up as his coach.

    4 SG Kobe Bryant
    Yeah, he's selfish, and yeah, he comes with just a wee bit of baggage, but he's perfect for a city like New Orleans. He can create his own fiefdom in the Southeast -- that is, after he runs Byron Scott out of town.

    5 SG Tracy McGrady
    The Bobcats briefly consider UNC alum Larry Brown until they remember that they're building for the long term, not two years. McGrady is 26 years old, versatile and went to high school in Durham. He'll score a zillion points a game under coach Bernie Bickerstaff.

    6 PF Dirk Nowitzki
    GM Kevin O'Connor's has a thing for foreign players, and Dirk's the best of the bunch. Now all supercoach Jerry Sloan needs is four dudes from the noon run at the Salt Lake City Y to have a playoff team. If Steve Nash were younger, he might have gotten the call to play John Stockton incarnate.

    7 SG Dwyane Wade
    GM Rob Babcock thinks long and hard about drafting Nash and bringing home Canada's hero, but Wade is too good to pass up. He'll fill the post-Vince void well, seeing as he can do nearly everything Carter can, plus he actually plays defense.

    8 C Shaquille O'Neal
    Isiah Thomas could grab Amare Stoudemire, Dwight Howard or some other promising young big man but, of course, he's not going to. It comes down to Allen Iverson (another scoring PG, like the GM himself) or Shaq, both of whom fit perfectly into the Knicks' strategy of selling tickets while selling out the team's future. Thomas takes Shaq, who takes Manhattan (or, as O'Neal dubs it now that he's there, "Man-happenin'") by storm.

    9 C Amare Stoudemire
    The Warriors search long and hard for a big, unknown foreign power forward to take at the nine spot, just for tradition's sake. Instead, VP Chris Mullin settles on Stoudemire, the big man the franchise has never had.

    10 SG Allen Iverson
    Before the draft, Jerry Buss tries like mad to trade up so that the Lakers can pick Kobe, but since this is the first round of a mock draft -- and ergo Los Angeles has no players under contract -- it has no tradeable assets. Instead, GM Mitch Kupchak goes for the best Kobe clone, Iverson, even though he seems a poor fit for the triangle offense.

    11 PF Dwight Howard
    They took him once, they'll take him again, even if GM John Weisbrod is long gone. A 19-year-old budding center with all kinds of upside, he'll be an All-Star within two years.

    12 SG Vince Carter
    Certainly, there are better choices here -- Jermaine O'Neal, for one -- but Vince just says Clippers. Owner Donald Sterling had to think about OKing the move, considering the contract Carter will no doubt demand, but Sterling can always underpay Carter and allow him to walk come free agency.

    13 C Yao Ming
    New owner Dan Gilbert wants to make a splash and create buzz so, without even consulting with the GM he doesn't have yet, he picks Yao. In Ming he gets not only a center to construct a team around but an international media draw and fan bait.

    14 PF Jermaine O'Neal
    He's not Kevin Garnett, but he's pretty close (and younger) and, as it turns out, his game is even more similar to that of GM Kevin McHale, who can't wait to head out on the practice court and start honing O'Neal's jump hook.

    15 SF Carmelo Anthony
    Needing someone to draw fans prior to the big Brooklyn move, Bruce Ratner gives Rod Thorn the directive to grab the biggest star available. Even if questions remain about his desire, Anthony fits the bill. Fans immediately redub the homecourt "Carmelo Airlines Arena."

    16 PG Gilbert Arenas
    Mo Cheeks came in to coach Allen Iverson and, by God, he's going to coach a point guard. The mercurial, eccentric Arenas is capable of carrying a team on his back and plays with a fury. Philly fans will love him. At least, that is, until they hate him.

    17 SG Manu Ginobili
    Donnie Walsh and Larry Bird both know that every great team must have a go-to guy. As he's shown in these playoffs, and during the world championships, Ginobili isn't afraid of anyone, or anything (or histrionics, for that matter). Indy will embrace him as it did Reggie Miller, just switching the two-syllable chant to "Ma-nu, Ma-nu."

    18 PG Stephon Marbury
    Danny Ainge wants his team to run and has shown he's not afraid of players with questionable pasts. Marbury will run all right, though it might be Doc Rivers right out of town.

    19 SF Marvin Williams (UNC)
    Jerry West has never been afraid to take a chance. In Williams, he sees a future perennial All-Star who can play either the 3 or the 4, has great character and is fan-friendly.

    20 PG Steve Nash
    Ever since his days in Jersey with Jason Kidd, coach Eddie Jordan has coveted a savvy, pass-first point guard. Nash may be older (31) and prone to injury, but president Ernie Grunfeld is willing to take the gamble that his presence can help attract top-tier free agents who want to play a Phoenix-East type of game. Being a reigning MVP and international star in a city bristling with international types doesn't hurt.

    21 C Andrew Bogut (Utah)
    GM John Paxson and coach Scott Skiles argue late into the night about whether they should re-draft Kirk Hinrich, who so perfectly exemplifies their cumulative ethos, then decide they can't pass up a big man to build around. Bogut can pass, rebound and shoot, and has the right temperament to play for the hard-driving Skiles.

    22 SG Ray Allen
    He's mid-career, but Allen is the best shooter in the league, a model citizen and a clutch playoff performer. Kiki Vandeweghe can construct a team around him -- unless of course, he bolts to Cleveland to construct around Yao -- and George Karl can enjoy the reunion.

    23 SF Peja Stojakovic
    With both Peja and Brad Miller available, Geoff Petrie has a hard time choosing between his former players. The way he sees it, he guessed right on both players the first time, so there's no reason to look elsewhere now. Eventually, he chooses Peja, who has a bigger upside than the solid, if unspectacular, Miller.

    24 SG Ron Artest
    Steve Francis is available but coach Jeff Van Gundy wants no part of him and, after having his request to draft "a young Patrick Ewing" denied (Van Gundy argues that fantasy drafts should allow real "fantasy" picks), lobbies Rockets brass to grab Ron Artest, who personifies the hard-nosed style of D he loves. A big gamble, but it could pay off.

    25 PG Tony Parker
    Coach Nate McMillan's system is predicated on a tempo-pushing point guard, on both offense and defense, and Parker fits the bill. Plus, he's young, has playoff experience and fan-friendly (especially as a Frenchman in Seattle, not far from the Canadian border).

    26 C Darko Milicic
    Just kidding, though if Joe Dumars believes in him as much as he claims, he might grab him in the second round. Rather, Dumars thinks long and hard about the 30-year-old Ben Wallace but goes with a younger, more offensive-minded big man in Chris Bosh, who'll be a foundation in the paint for years to come.

    27 SF Andrei Kirilenko
    Coach Avery Johnson loves defense, and Kirilenko affects the game as much as any player in the league. Ben Wallace was a consideration here, but, again, Kirilenko is younger and more offensive-minded, and Mavs owner Mark Cuban loves his international appeal.

    28 PF Emeka Okafor
    It's been a long time -- 1988 -- since the Spurs didn't have a dominant big man anchoring the lineup. The best available choices at this spot are Zydrunas Ilgauskas (too old, injury-prone), Zach Randolph (not the team player Pop loves), Brad Miller and Pau Gasol. But Okafor provides the intimidating defensive presence, is more physical than Gasol, is younger than Miller and is the type of hard-working character guy who fits with the Spurs' legacy.

    29 PF Kenyon Martin
    Pat Riley loves the big guys and Gasol is tempting, but Martin sets the defensive tone coach Stan Van Gundy is looking for and plays with the passion Riley loves.

    30 SF Shawn Marion
    GM Bryan Colangelo gives coach Mike D'Antoni free reign to continue his run-and-gun ways. Jason Kidd (too old) was tempting, as was Rashard Lewis (big man who can shoot and run) and Kirk Hinrich (a point guard to direct the show), but who better to continue the tradition than the guy they already had, Marion, the do-it-all forward?
    ------------

    I guess I'm a homer. I don't agree with where either JO or Ron is picked, both should be lower.

  • #2
    Re: Ultimate fantasy draft. What if every current NBA player was available?

    How do you even begin to understand that article?

    Is he talking the rough equivalent of a fantasy draft without the only requirement being stats?

    Much crazyness in that list.

    Not a single Piston in the Top 30, except for Darko ?!?
    Williams and Bogut in there, maybe in a few years but before they have played a single NBA game?
    Melo, Marbury and Martin aswell, wtf?!?1
    If we're not focused solely on stats then how on earth can Dirk land at #6?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Ultimate fantasy draft. What if every current NBA player was available?

      wow mom, look I wrote a column, stole the idea, but they cant call it stealing cause I mentioned it and then asked my wife to do the picking, added some dumb comments in less then 5 mintues and made myself another $ 1,500.00

      what a life I'm having and nobody knows I know nothing about basketball




      So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

      If you've done 6 impossible things today?
      Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

      Comment

      Working...
      X