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...

    Originally posted by d_c View Post
    Love physically has a very different build. He's able to hold position. He's got a strong lower body. Murphy has what a Warrior fan called a long time ago a "skinny-fat" body. He's 240+ Lbs, but just not that strong despite the fact.

    And that's to say nothing about how much better a passer he is than Murphy.

    I'm not saying Love is the next great thing or that the Pacers absolutely should draft the guy if he's available. If he and Westbrook were both there for the Pacers, Westbrook would probably be a better pick. I'm just saying that he's absolutely nothing like Troy Murphy. They're both tall and white and that's about the only things they have in common. Totally different types of games.

    I know this because I actually watch games and how invididual players play in the context of those games. I don't just go by stat lines and reports from NBADraft.net, who once made Dale Ellis the NBA comparison for Monta Ellis.

    http://www.nbadraft.net/profiles/montaellis.asp

    If you were around to watch Dale Ellis, you'd know that Dale and Monta weren't even close to being close to being the same type of player.
    People make mistakes. Why should your opinion hold any more weight than those that dedicate most of their life to scouting?

    Love is undersized and overweight. Not a recipe for success in the NBA, especially not for low-post players. He may be forced to rely on jump shots. Sounds familiar.
    Last edited by Kofi; 04-23-2008, 07:09 PM.

    Comment


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

      Originally posted by Kofi View Post
      People make mistakes. Why should your opinion hold any more weight than those that dedicate most of their life to scouting?

      Love is undersized and overweight. Not a recipe for success in the NBA, especially not for low-post players.
      Most guys from NBAdraft don't scout for a living. They're fans like us. They do these reports for fun. The aren't pro scouts. Now if you still put all kinds of stock into their reporting, see which NBA player they compared Love to. Hint: it's not Troy Murphy.

      Love is probably going to measure out at somewhere between 6'8" and 6'9" without shoes. If that happens, he' not undersized. That's right in the range of what guys like Amare, Drew Gooden, Al Horford and Brandan Wright measured out at. If Love measures out at under 6'8" without shoes, then I'd call him undersized, but I don't thik that's going to be the case.

      Comment


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

        Hmmm. Every heard of a bank shot or a hook shot to get an edge.

        Look! Tim Freaking Duncan uses his jump shot to get by.

        ITs funny becuase those scouts you just talked about have a good impression of Love that is why he is going early in the draft.

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by d_c View Post
          Most guys from NBAdraft don't scout for a living. They're fans like us. They do these reports for fun. The aren't pro scouts. Now if you still put all kinds of stock into their reporting, see which NBA player they compared Love to. Hint: it's not Troy Murphy.

          Love is probably going to measure out at somewhere between 6'8" and 6'9" without shoes. If that happens, he' not undersized. That's right in the range of what guys like Amare, Drew Gooden, Al Horford and Brandan Wright measured out at. If Love measures out at under 6'8" without shoes, then I'd call him undersized, but I don't thik that's going to be the case.
          And who did those same scouts compare Troy Murphy to? Hint: it's not Stan Love.

          I'll believe the height when the measurements are done in June. Until then, I'm predicting just over 6'7" barefoot, 6'8.5" in shoes.

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by Kofi View Post
            And who did those same scouts compare Troy Murphy to? Hint: it's not Stan Love.

            I'll believe the height when the measurements are done in June. Until then, I'm predicting just over 6'7" barefoot, 6'8.5" in shoes.
            So far, you and maybe somebody else in this thread have compared Love to Murphy and that's it. Neither NBADraft or Draftexpress or any other publication has made that comparison. That's all I'm saying, not that I would take any of NBADraft's player comparisons seriously, because a lot of them are just plain garbage.

            And again, I'm not saying Love is some surefire prospect that is guaranteed to succeed in the NBA, just that his style of play and approach to the game are completely different from Murphy's. They play absolutely nothing alike.

            Kyle Singler (Love's HS rival) measured out last year at 6'9" in shoes at last year's Nike hoop summitt according to draftexpress.

            http://www.draftexpress.com/article/...2007-Analysis/

            In all the pictures of them next to eachother, Love is taller than Singler, like this one for example




            Now if that Singler measurement was accurate, that would probably make Love about 6'10" in shoes, which means somewhere close to 6'9" without shoes. Whatever Love's problems will be in the NBA, height won't be one of them.
            Last edited by d_c; 04-23-2008, 08:36 PM.

            Comment


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

              Kofi-

              Love is 19. That's 1-9, as in still a kid. Murphy will be 28 in a
              couple weeks. He's a fully mature adult.

              I suppose it's possible that Love will always be 'fat'. But given
              that he's got another several years to physically mature, it's
              more likely that he won't.

              Comment


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

                Originally posted by Rajah Brown View Post
                Kofi-

                Love is 19. That's 1-9, as in still a kid. Murphy will be 28 in a
                couple weeks. He's a fully mature adult.

                I suppose it's possible that Love will always be 'fat'. But given
                that he's got another several years to physically mature, it's
                more likely that he won't.
                Why make excuses for him? He shouldn't be "fat" in the first place. He needs to show some dedication and self-discipline.

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by d_c View Post
                  So far, you and maybe somebody else in this thread have compared Love to Murphy and that's it. Neither NBADraft or Draftexpress or any other publication has made that comparison. That's all I'm saying, not that I would take any of NBADraft's player comparisons seriously, because a lot of them are just plain garbage.

                  And again, I'm not saying Love is some surefire prospect that is guaranteed to succeed in the NBA, just that his style of play and approach to the game are completely different from Murphy's. They play absolutely nothing alike.

                  Kyle Singler (Love's HS rival) measured out last year at 6'9" in shoes at last year's Nike hoop summitt according to draftexpress.

                  http://www.draftexpress.com/article/...2007-Analysis/

                  In all the pictures of them next to eachother, Love is taller than Singler, like this one for example



                  Now if that Singler measurement was accurate, that would probably make Love about 6'10" in shoes, which means somewhere close to 6'9" without shoes. Whatever Love's problems will be in the NBA, height won't be one of them.
                  You're problem is you're comparing NCAA Love to NBA Murphy. You're forgetting that Murphy spent plenty of time in the paint at Notre Dame, and only became the soft jump shooter he is now once it became clear that he couldn't hack it down low in the NBA. I have a sneaking suspicion the same will be true of Kevin Love.

                  As for his size - I'll believe it when I see it. I actually watch the games, so pictures aren't enough evidence for me.

                  Comment


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

                    Kofi-

                    Ok, I hear ya. What was I thinking. Kids who are chunky at 19
                    like say, a kid named Barkley never amount to anything in the NBA !

                    Byw, I'm not lobbying for Love. I don't really think he'd be all
                    that good a fit in O'B's system. Just trying to provide a rational
                    counter-balance to your commentary.

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by Rajah Brown View Post
                      Kofi-

                      Ok, I hear ya. What was I thinking. Kids who are chunky at 19
                      like say, a kid named Barkley never amount to anything in the NBA !

                      Byw, I'm not lobbying for Love. I don't really think he'd be all
                      that good a fit in O'B's system. Just trying to provide a rational
                      counter-balance to your commentary.
                      Barkley was a freak athlete, even with an excess 25 pounds. If Barkley had the self-discipline of Karl Malone, he might have a championship ring today. Think about how good Barkley could've been with a better body (no homo). How much quicker, stronger, and more agile he could've been with 25 less pounds of fat and say, 10 more pounds of muscle.

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by Kofi View Post
                        As for his size - I'll believe it when I see it. I actually watch the games, so pictures aren't enough evidence for me.
                        .....

                        Comment


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

                          Going by pictures...



                          There's Derrick Rose, who measured in at 6'3.5" in shoes. Going by this photo, Gordon is a legit 6'5", thus I'd be all for taking him if he's available, or even moving up to land him.

                          Comment


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

                            jason thompson > kevin love ;-)

                            Comment


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

                              If Kevin Love is available I think they should take him.
                              {o,o}
                              |)__)
                              -"-"-

                              Comment


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

                                One other thing it occurred to me that you guys could be missing. We're talking about 19 and 20 year olds, we know they will fill out but they could see grow taller too.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X