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

Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

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

  • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

    no way in hell we get a shot at drafting rose or beasley. we probably won't even be picking top 8. it sucks being stuck in no mans land.

    honestly i'm on the Danilo Gallinari bandwagon

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

      Danilo ! Danilo ! Danilo !

      Hey, if we take him, at least maybe they'll upgrade the conscession
      stand pizza down at Conseco !

      Seriously though, isn't he probably just another SF (who, being a
      Euro dude, probably can't defend to save his life) ?

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

        Lots of love for Love recently on the board. I don't see him as a top 10 choice for us, maybe someone else. I do like his game as he reminds me of a young version of Bill Laimbeer. Can pass, shoot, rebound and is a smart player, but I don't think we need him and Murph both. Dissimilar yet too similar game styles.

        IMO we need to:
        1) make a few major trades on draft day to get multiple 1st round picks before #15 and one needs to be top 3 with the ultimate goal of it being top 2
        2) with those major moves, no one and I mean no one on our current roster should be exempt
        3) Rose is our #1 priority in the top 2 scenario
        4) we clean up the logjam at SF with these moves
        5) we give whatever new players we bring in the playing time to mature. I don't care if they are rookies and we lose 65 games, I want to see development of our future.

        Lets face it, if JO/Quis/Tinman/Murph stay for next season, they'll get significant playing time so that the Pacers can have the "best" team on the floor. Well it's time for the "best" team to take a backseat for our future imo. Look at how Philly and Portland's young players have responded to getting minutes. How do we accomplish this? We need to move those 4 or significant parts of those 4 along with anyone else necessary to facilitate starting a new team direction.

        Thoughts?

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

          Originally posted by Ballerzfan View Post
          Lots of love for Love recently on the board. I don't see him as a top 10 choice for us, maybe someone else. I do like his game as he reminds me of a young version of Bill Laimbeer. Can pass, shoot, rebound and is a smart player, but I don't think we need him and Murph both. Dissimilar yet too similar game styles.

          IMO we need to:
          1) make a few major trades on draft day to get multiple 1st round picks before #15 and one needs to be top 3 with the ultimate goal of it being top 2
          2) with those major moves, no one and I mean no one on our current roster should be exempt
          3) Rose is our #1 priority in the top 2 scenario
          4) we clean up the logjam at SF with these moves
          5) we give whatever new players we bring in the playing time to mature. I don't care if they are rookies and we lose 65 games, I want to see development of our future.

          Lets face it, if JO/Quis/Tinman/Murph stay for next season, they'll get significant playing time so that the Pacers can have the "best" team on the floor. Well it's time for the "best" team to take a backseat for our future imo. Look at how Philly and Portland's young players have responded to getting minutes. How do we accomplish this? We need to move those 4 or significant parts of those 4 along with anyone else necessary to facilitate starting a new team direction.

          Thoughts?
          I completely agree, but do they have the assets to move up that far. If you can move into the top two, but you have to trade Granger, is that a step forward.

          Concept wise I think you are right, but I just don't know if they have the juice to pull it off.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

            Originally posted by Ballerzfan View Post
            Lots of love for Love recently on the board. I don't see him as a top 10 choice for us, maybe someone else. I do like his game as he reminds me of a young version of Bill Laimbeer. Can pass, shoot, rebound and is a smart player, but I don't think we need him and Murph both. Dissimilar yet too similar game styles.

            IMO we need to:
            1) make a few major trades on draft day to get multiple 1st round picks before #15 and one needs to be top 3 with the ultimate goal of it being top 2
            2) with those major moves, no one and I mean no one on our current roster should be exempt
            3) Rose is our #1 priority in the top 2 scenario
            4) we clean up the logjam at SF with these moves
            5) we give whatever new players we bring in the playing time to mature. I don't care if they are rookies and we lose 65 games, I want to see development of our future.

            Lets face it, if JO/Quis/Tinman/Murph stay for next season, they'll get significant playing time so that the Pacers can have the "best" team on the floor. Well it's time for the "best" team to take a backseat for our future imo. Look at how Philly and Portland's young players have responded to getting minutes. How do we accomplish this? We need to move those 4 or significant parts of those 4 along with anyone else necessary to facilitate starting a new team direction.

            Thoughts?
            I agree with this post 100%. I love danny granger but if he has to be one of the ones to go, so be it. Our team is not constructed to win the way we are now.

            tim
            Good is the enemy of Great


            We're changing the identity of our basketball team -- dramatically. We're a power post team -- a blood-and-guts, old-school, smash-mouth team that plays with size, strength, speed and athleticism. We attack the basket. . . . This is the new identity of our team. It was a great effort. I'm very proud of our guys."
            -- Frank Vogel.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

              Speed-

              It's worth it to net Rose. Otherwise, no. DG is all we have that anyone
              up in the top-2-3 might theoretically want. But even those teams
              surely wouldn't part with a top-2 pick for DG. We'd have to cough
              up SG + a future 1st and even then, given that SF's like DG can be
              had every year in the draft, it likely wouldn't get it done.

              Bottom line, we can forget Rose.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                Originally posted by Speed View Post
                I completely agree, but do they have the assets to move up that far. If you can move into the top two, but you have to trade Granger, is that a step forward.

                Concept wise I think you are right, but I just don't know if they have the juice to pull it off.

                I agree that we need to get a quality PG like Rose. He is showing that he is a guarantee Starter at the minimum. To move up there would have to be a three way deal sending JO to a team and taking poor contracts and sending a prospect to MINN for example. Then we would have to send our pick and a player like Shawne. Depending how good the prospect sent by the third team we might be able to send Foster or Diogu.

                Or maybe sending Foster and Daniels to a third team and taking back a poor contract and sending a prospect to a Minn.

                Or maybe sending Shawne this years pick and next years 1st pick top 5 protected.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                  Originally posted by Speed View Post

                  Concept wise I think you are right, but I just don't know if they have the juice to pull it off.

                  That would depend on who gets the top two picks. For instant if Portland got really lucky, and they have less of a change than we currently would, they would probably deal. Other teams there would be nothing we could offer them.

                  Another thing we should root for is Dallas making the playoffs. New Jersey has their pick as long as it's not lottery. If NJ has two picks we might me able to get one via trade, but it would be much harder if they have only their own.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                    The only way we have a top three pick is if the Lottery Balls bounce our way. I have faith; but believe If we did land in the top three Stern would call the New York Knicks as our ball much like the coin toss with Jerome Bettis on Thanksgiving Day.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                      Originally posted by johnnybegood View Post
                      I hope not, but you're probably right. Rose is an awesome PG, and I hold steadfast to the belief that a franchise PG is much harder to come by than another wing player.
                      I agree with this. But it's not relevant. We're not going to have the chance to choose.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                        Okay. Say we have about the #12 pick.

                        I'd say my choice would be Westbrook if he's there. Move up a bit to take him if it won't cost too much. He did a fine job for UCLA at the point when Collison was out. He's also great size and perimeter defense.

                        If he's not, I am really perplexed what to do at 12. I could see a project C like McGee or project combo F/PF in LSU's Randolph, but at this stage my first choice is not a 2-3 year project.

                        I think Mayo will be gone by #6, so I'm not even thinking about him at #12. If he was, I wouldn't even hesitate.

                        Someone I like is Douglas-Roberts but #12 is too high. He's a slasher and able to create offense. Consistent outside shooter.

                        Could see dealing with the Knicks and Bulls to move up or picking up Phoenix's, Portlands, or NJ's lower first round picks in trades.


                        Dream draft that doesn't involve winning the lottery in regards to players chosen -

                        PG - Westbrook
                        SG - Douglas-Roberts
                        PF - Hendrix (2nd rounder)

                        2nd round: Lots of players intrigue me that could be available in the 2nd round. At PF, I would love see Hendrix, a high IQ, strong Millsap-type player. Other players that I like would be Courtney Lee, Rush, and Roby.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                          Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                          I hadn't realized how little he was until I saw him playing against all those Memphis guys who all have 19-foot wingspans. DJ looked outclassed out there. Couldn't find anyway to score. Couldn't finish at the rim. Couldn't even really blow by anyone. Tough to judge him on one game, but I didn't see much Big 12 this year so....
                          It was a great game to demostrate my main knock on him...he forces his own action way too much. Abrams was much better about trying to get others involved whereas DJ just keeps butting his head into the wall.

                          Collison is the same way, but instead of a sprint drive into trouble or lots of mid jumpers, he just pounds the shot clock down to 6 and then finally realizes something else has to happen. At that point he sometimes bails himself out with a nice layup drive, but often puts it in a teammates hands with no time to do anything.

                          Now with Augustin you see that the talent around him is more limited. Collison has no excuse with the kind of teammates he has. But both need to grow out of that if they want to stick in the NBA.


                          Again, I like both players, but this is why they are below Rose and Bayless by a fair margin. That also showed why I still prefer Love if he's on the board at that point.


                          Rush showed his game perfectly too. He impacts off the ball, he's the go-to defender and after he got up to speed on Curry he did a much better job on him which helped down the stretch. He's very versitile. Despite his shooting slump he found his way in the 2nd.

                          But he's also prone to being very passive. I suspect he shrinks from big time plays where he's the man. He likes the tension, but not as the focus it seems. He's not a pure anything, he's a handyman SG. Love him at 25 if you can get back in there.


                          Chalmers is less refined at this point, more prone to silly mistakes. I'd like to see him go another year before coming out. But he's a strong PG that can both score for himself and keeps working his teammates into plays. He does a much better job of involving others than Collison and Augustin. Doesn't yet quite have the full range of handles though.


                          Curry I mentioned in the Curry thread. I'm impressed.


                          Arthur has GREAT offensive post footwork. He can spin either way to get the little banker or semi-hook. He's like Harrison except without the bulk game, more speed game. This means that while you could work him for 10 points he's going to make other mistakes that keeps him from having the full impact you'd like.

                          Still he's clearly a superior prospect to Hibbert at this point, and I'd say Thabeet as well though it depends on what you want from a C.

                          One promising play by Arthur - Curry was tearing up the court on a transition and Arthur poked the ball away from him from behind for the steal. You have to like that from your big.

                          Rose is going #1 or #2, nothing else to say there.

                          Dorsey has Dale Davis/Ben Wallace written all over him. Too bad about his attitude history. It makes him too much of a risk IMO.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                            Redd - big 12 was strong, nearly pac 10 strong IMO.

                            But this is not the only bad game DJ has had either, don't let people fool you. I've said many times in this thread that you ASSUME Augustin stops forcing his own offense when he gets to the NBA and has teammates, but you do not know he will (or can).

                            Travis Best never learned how to do this like a true PG.

                            There were times vs Memphis that DJ had the chance to involve other guys, times when it was the smart thing to try, but instead he forced things along. Now last I checked that was Mayo's problem. The difference is Mayo is bigger and a much better defender.

                            Another thing we should root for is Dallas making the playoffs. New Jersey has their pick as long as it's not lottery. If NJ has two picks we might me able to get one via trade, but it would be much harder if they have only their own.
                            I agree.
                            Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 03-31-2008, 04:55 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                              Hey Seth what do you think of DeAndre JOrdan? I haven't seen much of him but it seems that he has the frame and potential for the Pacers to consider drafting. For Kevin Love I just think he is maxed out on potential. He looks like a guy that is going to have a hard time translating his game on the pro level just because he is a short slow white guy.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                                I appreciate your discussion on the various players naptown. I just have the feeling based
                                on where the Pacers pick and what is available that it will be Love, Thabeet or Westbrook.
                                I just am not that enamored with Augustin. One other possibilty is McGhee.
                                {o,o}
                                |)__)
                                -"-"-

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X