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

Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...607080420/1088

    July 8, 2006

    Hidden gems are keys for Pacers
    Team's resurgence may hinge on deals for underused players with big potential
    By Mark Montieth

    mark.montieth@indystar.com

    Steve Nash was once a two-year NBA veteran who had started all of 11 games. He was so ordinary that he was traded for guys named Bubba Wells and Martin Muursepp, the draft rights to Pat Garrity and a future first-round draft pick.

    It seemed illogical then that he would become a two-time Most Valuable Player, as he is today. It seems illogical today that he was once so expendable.

    Nash represents a breed of player who always exists somewhere within the recesses of the NBA: the hidden gem. He's the player who hasn't accomplished much, and might even be regarded as a disappointment, but will sparkle under the lights of more experience and playing time.

    Such players represent the best hope for the Indiana Pacers to make a major advancement from the mediocrity of last season's 41-41 record. They aren't bad enough to get a high draft pick. They don't have room under the salary cap to sign a major free agent. Blockbuster trades that bring an established star are always difficult to execute.

    So, their best opportunities to improve will be to find Nash-like players who don't command high trade value now but could become valuable commodities.
    "They're always out there," Pacers CEO Donnie Walsh said. "Always."

    Walsh has experience in this commodity, trading for it frequently during his tenure as the team's primary deal-maker. He sent a solid role player, Dale Davis, to Portland for an unproven Jermaine O'Neal in the summer of 2000. O'Neal had never averaged more than 4.5 points in four seasons but has become a five-time All-Star with the Pacers.

    Walsh also traded for Ron Artest and Brad Miller when they were in an emerging stage of their careers. Both became All-Stars as Pacers, although both were later traded -- Miller because his contract negotiation spiraled beyond what the Pacers were willing to pay and Artest because he demanded a trade.

    Walsh also once traded an established but past-his-prime forward, Herb Williams, to Dallas for unproven Detlef Schrempf and came out ahead.
    The Pacers were on the short side of such deals with Primoz Brezec, a first-round draft pick who got minimal playing time during his first three seasons because he was stuck behind more-experienced centers. Charlotte took him in the expansion draft and his scoring average immediately jumped from 1.6 points to 13 as a full-time starter.

    Tricky business

    Young, talented players who are on winning teams and stuck behind veterans are most likely to become the future Nashes and O'Neals. Finding them, however, isn't a simple process. Some young players can become much better, some can not.

    Walsh often performed his scouting duties in early pre-game warm-ups, when a player was on the court working by himself or with an assistant coach.
    That's how Walsh became convinced of O'Neal's potential.

    "You can tell their skills, you can tell if they're quick, you can tell what their shooting's like," Walsh said. "You can tell the basics.

    "It's also a matter of watching how they go about it. You can tell if a guy's working at it or not. Players don't know if you're watching them in an environment like that. If the player's out there alone, you see if the guy's really working or going through the motions."

    Some players get adequate playing time but are held back because they don't fit a coach's system. The Pacers hope Marquis Daniels, whom they will officially acquire in a trade for Austin Croshere next week after the NBA's transaction moratorium passes, will fit that description.

    Daniels flourished as a favorite of former Dallas coach Don Nelson but fell out of favor with Nelson's replacement, Avery Johnson.

    The Pacers can only hope that trade works out as well as their last deal with Dallas. In 1989 they sent an eight-year veteran in Williams to the Mavericks for Schrempf, who, like Daniels, showed promise but was stuck in a reserve role.

    Schrempf averaged 8.5 points his third season in Dallas. In 41/2 seasons with the Pacers, he twice was named Sixth Man of the Year and then averaged 19.1 points while starting 60 games in 1992-93.

    "I remember going to see him play once and he had a great game," Walsh said. "I thought, 'My God, this guy's coming off the bench. He'd be starting for us.' Instead of being a 12-point scorer I knew he could be 20."

    The Pacers wouldn't mind trading for more Schrempfs and O'Neals but aren't counting on it. They'll settle for players who bring solid improvement.

    "I don't know if you can depend on getting a J.O., but you can get players who can play for you for a long time and fill an important role," Walsh said.


    Five who flourished

    A look at five NBA players who started slowly but made dramatic improvement after finding a new opportunity with another team.

    • Boris Diaw: First-round draft pick averaged 4.6 points over two seasons for bad Atlanta teams, but 13.3 for very good Phoenix team last season after trade.

    • Steve Nash: Two-time league MVP averaged 3.3 points as a rookie and then 9.1 before he was traded to Dallas. Played four seasons before his scoring average cracked double figures.

    • Jermaine O'Neal: Rode Portland's bench for four seasons, never averaging more than 4.5 points, before trade to Pacers gave him new life. Voted Most Improved Player in 2002 and has been named to five All-Star teams.

    • Ben Wallace: Undrafted out of Division II college, was a throw-in to two trades before landing in Detroit in his fifth season. Went on to become four-time Defensive Player of the Year and recently signed four-year, $60 million contract with Chicago.

    • Gerald Wallace: Averaged just 2.0 points in his third NBA season, but got a fresh start with Charlotte's expansion team. Averaged 15.2 points last season, ranking first in steals and fourth in field goal percentage.

    Five who could break out

    A look at players who haven't done much in their careers so far, but appear to have the potential to break out given the opportunity.

    • Andris Biedrins: The 6-11 Latvian forward has averaged 3.7 points over first two seasons. Entered NBA too soon at 18, but at 20 still has plenty of upside. Produced double-double in first start as a rookie. Was 11th pick in 2004 draft.

    • Monta Ellis: Point guard was member of last class of high school kids able to jump to the NBA. Averaged 6.8 points in 49 games for Golden State, and scored 27 in season finale against Utah. Warriors will trade Derek Fisher to Utah and appear willing to trade Baron Davis to open more playing time for Ellis.

    • Luke Jackson: Forward has barely played for Cleveland because of a back injury his rookie year and a broken wrist this past season. Averaging just 2.7 points after two seasons, but there are reasons he was the 10th pick in the 2004 draft.

    • Yaroslav Korolev: Nineteen-year-old Russian forward played just 24 games for Clippers as a rookie, scoring all of 27 points. Not likely to get much playing time behind strong frontline, but might live up to draft position (12th overall) somewhere else.

    • Darko Milicic: Considered a bust after two seasons in Detroit when he averaged less than two points a game, but forward showed promise by averaging 7.6 points over 30 games after trade to Orlando last season. Further breakouts could come for second pick in 2003 draft.

    -- Mark Montieth
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

    Sounds like what I wrote about 2 weeks ago when I made the case for wanting Marquis Daniels. Why doesn't Montieth have Daniels on the list as a player who could break out

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

      Originally posted by Unclebuck
      Sounds like what I wrote about 2 weeks ago when I made the case for wanting Marquis Daniels. Why doesn't Montieth have Daniels on the list as a player who could break out
      Because he doesn't wanna be viewed as a "homer"?
      Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

        Originally posted by Unclebuck
        Sounds like what I wrote about 2 weeks ago when I made the case for wanting Marquis Daniels. Why doesn't Montieth have Daniels on the list as a player who could break out
        I think the whole premise of the article is Marquis Daniels, and the thought that we are hopeful he represents one of these types of players --- regardless of whether he was on the list or not, I think that the association is there for the making. Just as its stated in there that we can only hope this trade is as fruitful for us as the last Dallas trade that we consummated (Detlef Schrempf).
        "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

          YA know tho, it kinda reminds me of the old hidden pea game. Trying to find the pea hidden under the shell.

          Or perhaps trying to find the needle in the haystack.

          You better be dern good at your scouting.


          Another analogy strikes me. You ever been fishing and noticed the guy on the bank opposite you trying to cast his bait over to your side to catch fish...while you were trying to cast YOUR bait over to his side to catch fish. Perhaps the fish are already on our side of the pond and we should be looking here.
          Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

            Geez, haven't you heard? The grass is always greener on the other side.
            "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

              Originally posted by Montieth
              • Darko Milicic: Considered a bust after two seasons in Detroit when he averaged less than two points a game, but forward showed promise by averaging 7.6 points over 30 games after trade to Orlando last season. Further breakouts could come for second pick in 2003 draft.
              QFT
              STARBURY

              08 and Beyond

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

                Originally posted by Robertmto
                QFT
                Can't wait for the Darko 15/8 Era to begin next year so everyone can start talking about Carmelo as the "bust" of the 2003 Draft and start questioning his max extension.
                Read my Pacers blog:
                8points9seconds.com

                Follow my twitter:
                @8pts9secs

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

                  Originally posted by Kaufman
                  I think the whole premise of the article is Marquis Daniels, and the thought that we are hopeful he represents one of these types of players --- regardless of whether he was on the list or not, I think that the association is there for the making. Just as its stated in there that we can only hope this trade is as fruitful for us as the last Dallas trade that we consummated (Detlef Schrempf).
                  I think Andy has his decoder ring all powered up with fresh batteries and it's given him the proper answer. Makes total sense to me.

                  -Bball
                  Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                  ------

                  "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                  -John Wooden

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

                    Originally posted by JayRedd
                    Can't wait for the Darko 15/8 Era to begin next year so everyone can start talking about Carmelo as the "bust" of the 2003 Draft and start questioning his max extension.
                    Even if ur being sarcastic...

                    QFT
                    STARBURY

                    08 and Beyond

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

                      Yes, I think that Darko may still get the last laugh. Also, I think that Montieth does not mention Quis becuase the whole article is about him. It would seem redundant as he made a good case for him in the main body of his article. FWIW, I would not mind seeing Jackson or Biedrins in the blue and gold.
                      Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
                      http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

                        Originally posted by Robertmto
                        Even if ur being sarcastic...

                        QFT
                        Wasn't being sarcastic. Also doubt Darko will be better than Melo, but I'm just sick and tired of hearing Melo mentioned in the "Big Three" with Wade and Bron Bron, when I think both Bosh and Howard will end up having better careers.
                        Read my Pacers blog:
                        8points9seconds.com

                        Follow my twitter:
                        @8pts9secs

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

                          Darko will be worthy of that #2 selection.
                          STARBURY

                          08 and Beyond

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

                            Originally posted by Robertmto
                            Darko will be worthy of that #2 selection.
                            Better than Wade, LaBron, or Bosh?

                            That's a pretty tall order.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Star} Hidden gems are keys for Pacers

                              Darko will end up a nice role player, but he'll never be anywhere near worthy of the #2 pick, especially in that rediculous draft.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X