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...

    Did you see what Weaver and Josh Shipp just did last night? Two more great games from both of them.

    Shipp went 5-8 from 3 for UCLA in a big win, and Weaver showed strong offense for a defensive specialist as perhaps the only bright spot in WashSt's loss.


    Gordon and Lopez both had nights roughly on par with their draft status.

    Comment


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

      I thought we could post some of our mock drafts in this thread. Here's mine..

      http://mrmock.wordpress.com

      Comment


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

        austin daye is another name to watch out for...he'll probably stay another year with the zags but this kid is about 6'10 with a reggie-like frame and game. seems to have all the offensive moves either on the blocks or on the perimeter to go with a very high basketball iq at such a young age. solid passer and ball handler as well. has a ton of room to grow and a ton of maturing to do physically but should be a top 5-10 pick NEXT YEAR and if he came out this year is a guy that could be available for us if we have a late lotto pick...

        Comment


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



          NBADraft.net has him going #16 this year while Draft Express has him going #4 next year. Looking at his size, age, and his amazing production in limited minutes, I'd have to side with Draft Express. Still, if he were to come out this year and be available in the 8-12 range, he'd be my #1 guy.

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by Kofi View Post
            NBADraft.net has him going #16 this year while Draft Express has him going #4 next year. Looking at his size, age, and his amazing production in limited minutes, I'd have to side with Draft Express. Still, if he were to come out this year and be available in the 8-12 range, he'd be my #1 guy.
            People will probably give him the nickname, 'Sprights Heights.'

            Comment


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

              Originally posted by Peskoe97 View Post
              I thought we could post some of our mock drafts in this thread. Here's mine..

              http://mrmock.wordpress.com
              There are a lotof picks I agree with on your mock. The one I question early in the draft is the Timberwolves. With Foye I think they go for Jordan since they may not payout to Jefferson. But a back court of Foye and Rose would be tight.

              Comment


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

                My Mock draft.

                1. Miami------------->Beasley
                2. Wolves------->Jordan (Jefferson may sign else where)
                3. Supersonics-->Rose (Rose and Durant)
                4. Memphis----->Lopez (Gordon there but they need size so it is tough call)
                5. Knicks-------->Gordon(I just threw up in my mouth)
                6. Clippers------>Green(can you say goodbye Maggette)
                7. Bobcats------>Bayless(Felton can not lead them far)
                8. Bucks-------->Mayo(They will lose out to get Bayless but if mayo is here...)
                9. 76ers-------->Thabeet(He is a project whether you like it or not)
                10.Pacers--------->Batum(hate this range, Batum could be something, we will drop farther)
                11.Bulls---------->Love(we will see a trend of Bulls drafting bigs like the hawks with swing men)
                12.Kings---------->Collinson(Bibby will be trade for a 1st so we could see a mid to late pick for the Kings)
                13.Rockets------>Hibbert(no idea why but Hibbert does not have the conditioning to be a starter in the NBA so it really does not matter)
                14.Portland----->Gillarani (I see this guy dropping Belinelli style)
                15.New Jersey-->Speights(talent alone this kid be a steal)

                Rankings will change a lot. Most mock drafts had the top 3 right last year. I do not see the same for this year. I really think Gordon drops if IU continues to struggle in the Big Ten. If he gets a second win look for him to push up. The tourney can break some of these picks. Rose comes to mind. If Zona goes far in the tourney and Bayless turns it up....look out. Beasley is a sure pick but I am not convinced that Miami will be there. Wolves need to tank to get him. Sonics need to consider who will work best with a player like Durant and not just draft on talent alone.

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by intridcold View Post
                  There are a lotof picks I agree with on your mock. The one I question early in the draft is the Timberwolves. With Foye I think they go for Jordan since they may not payout to Jefferson. But a back court of Foye and Rose would be tight.

                  I thought about puttting Jordan there but I'm not so sure that they'd pick him. I think the Timberwolves would want to go with the bpa plus Jordan has been slippng as of late. A backcourt rotation of Rose, McCants, and Foye could be lethal.

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by intridcold View Post
                    There are a lotof picks I agree with on your mock. The one I question early in the draft is the Timberwolves. With Foye I think they go for Jordan since they may not payout to Jefferson. But a back court of Foye and Rose would be tight.
                    the only problem with that of course is that jefferson already agreed to a new deal with the wolves.

                    Wolves, Jefferson agree to extension

                    By Jerry Zgoda, Star Tribune
                    October 31, 2007

                    The Timberwolves beat a late-night deadline Wednesday and signed promising Al Jefferson to a five-year, $65 million contract extension that keeps the centerpiece of last summer's Kevin Garnett trade with the franchise through 2013.

                    The Wolves had until 11 p.m. Wednesday to sign Jefferson, a 6-10 forward/center selected 15th overall by Boston in the 2004 NBA draft, to an extension and reached an agreement with Jefferson's agent, Jeff Schwartz, just before the deadline.



                    http://www.startribune.com/sports/wolves/11688571.html
                    This is the darkest timeline.

                    Comment


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

                      I finally got to finish the UConn/Louisville game from a few weeks back, and watched the first half of UCLA/AZ.

                      Okay, Thabeet scares me a bit. He's a big time project. The only part of his game that is NBA caliber right now is shot blocking. No post offense at all and probably never will be, not a great post defender, not a great rebounder. He gets beat out on spacing quite a bit. Frankly I would hate to see Indy risk a pick on him.

                      AJ Price on the other hand is really making an impression. He's got pretty solid ball control, solid deep range, pretty strong passing though not star quality, decent defense. I like Price more than Collison right now, and at times more than Bayless even though he's not the athlete either of them are.

                      Earl Clark - he's not anywhere close to ready and at this point doesn't stand out as a top pick from what I've seen. He does seem to have potential, but Draft Express has him higher than Westbrook (UCLA) and it's not even close IMO.


                      Collison underwhelms me at times. He's got the speed/quickness and defends well, but he's not a show running PG IMO. And why that's a problem is that UCLA is one of the most talented teams out there. A stud PG could be running up huge assist numbers with that team.

                      Collison to me has a top-end of Armstrong, and I don't think he hits that level at this point.

                      Bayless is bigger and looks stronger going to the rim. I don't think he runs the show like a true PG still, certainly not like Price sets people up. He's not a star defender and in the UCLA game he seemed more likely to take advantage of UCLA's weaker players than he did vs their top guys. He did beat Westbrook once on a pretty strong move.

                      Budinger - no thanks. Dunleavy with less overall talent IMO. He rarely creates for himself and is even more prone to racking up numbers on the bench guys than to take over against other stars.


                      Now UCLA, they are loaded. Collison might not be as great as projected at times, but he's still first round material. Add to this Shipp who has impressed me as perhaps a late first round SG and Westbrook who is UCLA's top athlete and something of a sleeper right now. Not sure when he plans to come out, but I'd tell him to stay and let Collison, Shipp and Love come out ahead of him so he can shine on his own and move up the draft board for more money. He absolutely torched Budinger right in his face most of the game and actually outplayed Shipp by a fair margin. Great athlete.


                      Then there is Love who just has to be a top 8 in my book. This kid is McHale I think. At first you think he will have trouble with size in the NBA but the thing is that he doesn't really rely on size to have success at UCLA. He's crafty and like Foster or McHale uses effort and savvy to sneak into rebounds on guys. And on offense the McHale similarity really comes out. He's not posting in the traditional back-down and shoot over style, nor is he using a quick first step. He truly works guys with every trick in the book and gets really easy looks out of it.

                      Oh, and on top of all this he's got an outlet passing game on par with Rodman, but in his case it also translates to some amazing halfcourt passing. In the AZ game he had a couple of MADE BASKET outlets past half court that resulted in quick baskets the other way. You want to run, this guy gets you started as well as anyone could. Running isn't just about getting yourself up court, you also need to get the ball there and he does that well.



                      I know the Pacers need a PG, but if the choice is Augustin, Collison, etc vs Love I think you have to go with Love and then use some of your other bigs to get into a PG, either a vet or trading for a 2nd pick.

                      Love on the board does make it reasonable to trade Foster for a PG/SG or decent pick.
                      Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 02-05-2008, 10:55 AM.

                      Comment


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

                        Some people think that All You Need is Love, but taking Love Hurts our real needs - getting a backcourt star. Our frontcourt is dangerously weak, especially with Jermaine, who continues to Hold on Loosely to his hopes of returning to an MVP level. Are we Ready for Love? Maybe. We certainly can't Run with the Pack in the East for much longer. I don't think We Can Work it Out and Get Back to where we once belonged - not with this group. Clearly, The Times They Are A-Changin', but I have a feeling, no, it's More Than a Feeling, that this Love character is not Born to Run in O'Bs system. For What it's Worth, I want to Shake it Up, get a good player who can Drive and maybe a perimeter stopper who won't Surrender so many easy layups. Changes are on the horizon, but the Heart of the Matter remains that no post guy will give us a Free Ride back to the playoffs. We all need a little Patience, see where the lotto balls fall, and see how the college season ends, before we make any quick decisions. No sense in continuing to Ramble On here. Just remember, in the NBA draft, You Can't Always Get What you Want, though you might get what you need.

                        Two questions you have to ask yourself:
                        1. Do You Believe in Love?
                        2. And really, what's the Power of Love?

                        Comment


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

                          Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                          Some people think that All You Need is Love, but taking Love Hurts our real needs - getting a backcourt star. Our frontcourt is dangerously weak, especially with Jermaine, who continues to Hold on Loosely to his hopes of returning to an MVP level. Are we Ready for Love? Maybe. We certainly can't Run with the Pack in the East for much longer. I don't think We Can Work it Out and Get Back to where we once belonged - not with this group. Clearly, The Times They Are A-Changin', but I have a feeling, no, it's More Than a Feeling, that this Love character is not Born to Run in O'Bs system. For What it's Worth, I want to Shake it Up, get a good player who can Drive and maybe a perimeter stopper who won't Surrender so many easy layups. Changes are on the horizon, but the Heart of the Matter remains that no post guy will give us a Free Ride back to the playoffs. We all need a little Patience, see where the lotto balls fall, and see how the college season ends, before we make any quick decisions. No sense in continuing to Ramble On here. Just remember, in the NBA draft, You Can't Always Get What you Want, though you might get what you need.

                          Two questions you have to ask yourself:
                          1. Do You Believe in Love?
                          2. And really, what's the Power of Love?
                          But all you need is love...
                          I think KP is a Captain Planet fan. He believes that the collective will of five decent starters can outweigh the power of top-level talent. Too bad Herb won't cut the check for their Planeteer rings.

                          Comment


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

                            Watched the USC/Arizona game...

                            Mayo looked good. Similar to Brandon Roy. Good outside shooter. Smooth. Excellent ball handling skills. Very good penetrator.

                            Bayless.... was said to be very comparable to Billups at his current stage. Was used as a small SG... thus, was matched on Mayo. Did decently but USC was running Mayo off screens a lot and there were a lot of switch outs. Bayless looked athletic, able to handle contact, go penetrator, decent shooter.

                            Taj Gibson of USC might be someone to consider in the second round. Compared to Vin Baker - - - big PF that can shoot from outside. Excellent rebounder and explosive.

                            Budinger did remind me of Dun - took what was given too him --- excellent shooter - - - poor ball handler, does not create, not very athletic, excellent size.

                            Comment


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

                              Am I the only who thinks Mayo in the 8-12 range is a HUGE steal reeking of Caron Butler who dropped because of "character issues"?

                              Comment


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

                                mayo between 8-12 would indeed be a HUGE steel...mayo is essentially in the same category as gordon, beasley, and rose...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X