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

Marc Stein's All-NBA ballot

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

  • Marc Stein's All-NBA ballot

    Without looking at the overall #s, I would have probably put Yao as my first team Center. But thats about the only beef I have..oh..maybe Elton Brand over TD for 2nd team and Arenas over VC for 3rd team.
    ----------
    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dailydime

    First Team
    F Dirk Nowitzki (Dallas)
    F LeBron James (Cleveland)
    C Shaquille O'Neal (Miami)
    G Steve Nash (Phoenix)
    G Kobe Bryant (Los Angeles Lakers)

    Second Team
    F Shawn Marion (Phoenix)
    F Tim Duncan (San Antonio)
    C Ben Wallace (Detroit)
    G Chauncey Billups (Detroit)
    G Dwyane Wade (Miami)
    Third Team
    F Carmelo Anthony (Denver)
    F Elton Brand (Los Angeles Clippers)
    C Yao Ming (Houston)
    G Tony Parker (San Antonio)
    G Vince Carter (New Jersey)
    Toughest omissions: Pau Gasol (Memphis), Gilbert Arenas (Washington) and Jason Kidd (New Jersey)
    Voters are instructed on the All-NBA ballot to "vote for the player at the position that he plays regularly."
    This ballot would have looked different if voters were given a little more latitude.
    I wanted to name Duncan and Gasol as centers because A) Shaq and Yao both played less than 60 games because of injuries and B) Duncan and Gasol play enough in the post to justify billing them as centers.
    In that scenario, Duncan would have been my first-teamer largely because he grinded through a nagging case of plantar fasciitis to appear in 80 games and help the Spurs secure the West's No. 1 overall seed. Gasol would have been my second-team center and Shaq would shift to the third team, enabling me to move Carter to third-team forward and thus make room for Arenas.
    But there wasn't room for Gasol (eclipsed by Anthony since the All-Star break) and Arenas (his Wiz didn't quite win enough) because the league wants us picking "real" centers. Yao had the best individual season of the three, but the Rockets' disastrous season as a team relegated him to third on this scorecard behind Shaq and Big Ben.
    Kevin Garnett, Allen Iverson and Paul Pierce didn't get serious third-team consideration from me because none of their teams reached the playoffs. The tougher call on the third team was trying to figure out which Net to choose: Carter or Kidd. -- Marc Stein

  • #2
    Re: Marc Stein's All-NBA ballot

    All,

    For what it's worth, here's how I voted:

    First Team
    G Steve Nash, Phoenix
    G Dwyane Wade, Miami
    C Yao Ming, Houston
    F LeBron James, Cleveland
    F Dirk Nowitzki, Dallas

    Second Team
    G Chauncey Billups, Detroit
    G Kobe Bryant, LA Lakers
    C Shaquille O'Neal, Miami
    F Shawn Marion, Phoenix
    F Elton Brand, LA Clippers

    Third Team
    G Gilbert Arenas, Washington
    G Allen Iverson, Philadelphia
    C Ben Wallace, Detroit
    F Kevin Garnett, Minnesota
    F Carmelo Anthony, Denver

    MJB

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Marc Stein's All-NBA ballot

      I have to admit Mr. Boyle, your choice of Dwayne Wade over Kobe Bryant for the first team surprises me.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Marc Stein's All-NBA ballot

        Originally posted by mboyle1313
        All,

        For what it's worth, here's how I voted:

        First Team
        G Steve Nash, Phoenix
        G Dwyane Wade, Miami
        C Yao Ming, Houston
        F LeBron James, Cleveland
        F Dirk Nowitzki, Dallas

        Second Team
        G Chauncey Billups, Detroit
        G Kobe Bryant, LA Lakers
        C Shaquille O'Neal, Miami
        F Shawn Marion, Phoenix
        F Elton Brand, LA Clippers

        Third Team
        G Gilbert Arenas, Washington
        G Allen Iverson, Philadelphia
        C Ben Wallace, Detroit
        F Kevin Garnett, Minnesota
        F Carmelo Anthony, Denver

        MJB
        Just curious, but how could one NOT vote for placement of Kobe Bryant on the All NBA First Team?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Marc Stein's All-NBA ballot

          Mordecaii/Stryder,

          Legitimate question. I suspect Mr. Bryant will make the first team, and I have no real quarrel with that.

          I simply believe Wade and Nash did more to contribute to the success of their respective teams, which is why they got my vote. From a statistical standpoint (not the sole basis for my judgments, but a place to start), Bryant averaged slightly less than 8 more points per game this season than he did last, taking 7 1/2 more shots per game. In other words, more shots = more points (he shot 45% this season, 43% last).

          You could argue that he had to take more shots because he had better support a year ago, and you might be correct. The other way to look at it is to conclude that his propensity to shoot the ball retarded the development of his teammates. I can't say I necessarily see it that way; I think you'd have to see the Lakers play on a nightly basis to draw a fair conclusion on that issue.

          In the end, I thought Bryant had a superb season and voted him second team. I just thought Wade (playing without Shaquille for a long stretch) and Nash (playing an entire season without Amare) had seasons that, on balance, were slightly better.

          MJB

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Marc Stein's All-NBA ballot

            Originally posted by mboyle1313
            Mordecaii/Stryder,

            Legitimate question. I suspect Mr. Bryant will make the first team, and I have no real quarrel with that.

            I simply believe Wade and Nash did more to contribute to the success of their respective teams, which is why they got my vote. From a statistical standpoint (not the sole basis for my judgments, but a place to start), Bryant averaged slightly less than 8 more points per game this season than he did last, taking 7 1/2 more shots per game. In other words, more shots = more points (he shot 45% this season, 43% last).

            You could argue that he had to take more shots because he had better support a year ago, and you might be correct. The other way to look at it is to conclude that his propensity to shoot the ball retarded the development of his teammates. I can't say I necessarily see it that way; I think you'd have to see the Lakers play on a nightly basis to draw a fair conclusion on that issue.

            In the end, I thought Bryant had a superb season and voted him second team. I just thought Wade (playing without Shaquille for a long stretch) and Nash (playing an entire season without Amare) had seasons that, on balance, were slightly better.

            MJB
            Cool. Thanks for the response. Keep on rocking, Mr. Boyle.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Marc Stein's All-NBA ballot

              While I understand where MJB is coming from on that, Kobe played the entire season without a team.

              I suppose, there's the "he doesn't pass argument, which I generally agree with, but, who exactly would he pass to? Odom is good, but he creates more than finishes, and that makes is tough to work with someone in Kobe who creates AND finishes. Being the league's top scorer and shooting his team into the playoffs, not to mention dropping 81 in a game, 60 in another and 40 and 50 as a common thing, he simply has to be first team.

              That's really saying something, because I do not like Kobe, not one iota.
              It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Marc Stein's All-NBA ballot

                It's really a tough call now that Mr. Boyle has brought it up.

                Nash is playing alongside Shawn Marion - one of the most versatile players in the league, but the rest of the guys were previously little-known bench players who all had career years. So Mr. Boyle is right - Nash did it all for those guys...contributing to the success of that team.

                As for Wade VS. Kobe - this is where it gets difficult. I consider Lamar Odom maybe the second most versatile player in the league for that matter! I think he's real good - but sometimes this year he just seemed to disappear in games because of Kobe's tendency to take so many shots. Seeing as though Wade did not get to play with Shaq for half the season, he never really had a guy with Lamar's skill to work alongside of, yet he still made it work.

                But then again, Wade also had Shaq to play alongside of for the other half of the season! It's really a tough call.

                In the end though, I'd probably give the nod to Kobe. I think Wade probably had more to work with than Kobe when you add it all up.

                Thanks for sharing your ballot, Mr. Boyle. Very cool!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Marc Stein's All-NBA ballot

                  Down with Shaq!!! GO ZO!!! haha, never will happen, but I just like Alonzo more than I ever will Shaq.
                  Life without water is tough, life without air is hard,life with one leg only is wobbly, Life without Reggie Miller, is impossible.

                  Do Not Trade Austin

                  Originally posted by Conrad Brunner
                  Veteran Austin Croshere, the longest-tenured Pacers player on the roster, has proven reliable when called upon, invariably ready to step in regardless of the circumstance.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Marc Stein's All-NBA ballot

                    Originally posted by mboyle1313
                    All,

                    For what it's worth, here's how I voted:

                    First Team
                    G Steve Nash, Phoenix
                    G Dwyane Wade, Miami
                    C Yao Ming, Houston
                    F LeBron James, Cleveland
                    F Dirk Nowitzki, Dallas

                    Second Team
                    G Chauncey Billups, Detroit
                    G Kobe Bryant, LA Lakers
                    C Shaquille O'Neal, Miami
                    F Shawn Marion, Phoenix
                    F Elton Brand, LA Clippers

                    Third Team
                    G Gilbert Arenas, Washington
                    G Allen Iverson, Philadelphia
                    C Ben Wallace, Detroit
                    F Kevin Garnett, Minnesota
                    F Carmelo Anthony, Denver

                    MJB
                    MB, being a diehard Laker fan, I'll obviously disagree with the Bryant/Wade decision, but I want to point out one thing to everyone else that I really respect about what you did on your ballot.

                    You rewarded the guys that actually had the best years THIS year, not this year plus their reputation from the past. On the surface, leaving Tim Duncan off seems like heresy, but he didn't have a Tim Duncan kind of year. Although he had a solid year, a lot of other forwards had great years.

                    Well done, I say.

                    P.S. Kobe>>>>Wade

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Marc Stein's All-NBA ballot

                      Honestly, I can't argue with Wade being first team, and I can't argue with Kobe being first team... Both are outstanding players, and both deserve to be recognized. I like Wade better than I do Kobe, so obviously I'd love it if he was on the first team, but I wouldn't be upset if Kobe was since he had such a great year as well.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Marc Stein's All-NBA ballot

                        Mordecaii,

                        Do I correctly infer that you don't consider Nash worthy of first team status? If not, why not?

                        MJB

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Marc Stein's All-NBA ballot

                          Oh no, I just wasn't addressing that because I didn't mention it in my original post! I completely agree that Nash SHOULD be first team, and I personally believe that unless there is an unusual circumstance, there should be a PG and SG represented on the first team instead of two SG's or two PG's. So Nash is without question on the first team in my personal opinion, I just think it's a tough decision between Kobe and Wade.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X