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 offense Seth, but I'll take the multiple draft experts opinions over your very amateur opinion.

    If Chad Ford and Draft Express say Russell Westbrook is a point guard, then Russell Westbrook is a point guard, end of discussion.

    And if he's not a point guard (experts say he is), yet is still picking up 5 apg with a decent a/to ratio at a very young 19, then the potential to be a point guard is there no question about it. He's being compared to Monta Ellis - sounds about right to me. Sign me up, and keep the one-dimensional, chubby, undersized turnover machine Eric Gordon as far away from the blue & gold as possible.

    Comment


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

      Originally posted by Kofi View Post
      For those saying a pick in the 11-15 range is just as good as a top-10 pick, can you answer this question? In the past 15 drafts, 93-07, how many players drafted between 11-15 (75 players total) have made at least one All-Star team?

      If you don't feel like looking it up, just give it your best guess.
      Wait a second, aren't we talking about who the Pacers COULD have at 11-15? So what about the all-stars that went past 15 too? I mean so JO doesn't count simply because the top 10 teams also passed over Nash, Kobe and Peja and they got taken first?

      Gee, poor Pacers at 12 have to choose between Kobe, Nash, Peja or JO. I sure wish they'd tanked to get up to Kerry Kittles.

      The amount of all-stars in the Pacers best range 7-10 isn't all that impressive either, and in all cases a lot depends on the depth of the draft. This year appears to have decent depth. And the depth last year was slightly hyped due to Durant/Oden.

      I mean Acie Law was the 2nd PG off the board?

      (rant about last year's draft hype)
      Everyone wanted to say it was a double class but of course that's not true. No one extra was in the draft because NO HIGH SCHOOL players were there. The "bonus" class won't happen till they undo the rule and you get both the 1 year college kids AND the newly allowed HS players in the same class.

      The bad side of the bonus was the year they didn't let HS kids in for the first time, cutting out a chunk of players that would have just come straight out. After that the cycle was back on normal and will be till they undo it as I mentioned. People turned "normal" into "bonus".

      The only bonus players last year were the FLA kids who decided to stay for a 2nd run at the title. They were the guys that normally wouldn't have been there, not Oden/Durant.

      Having said all that, the draft THIS year could get shallow if some guys choose to stay. Keep guys like Rush, Chalmers, Westbrook, Thabeet, Love and even Beasley in for another year and the draft gets thin in a hurry.

      Comment


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

        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
        Wait a second, aren't we talking about who the Pacers COULD have at 11-15? So what about the all-stars that went past 15 too? I mean so JO doesn't count simply because the top 10 teams also passed over Nash, Kobe and Peja and they got taken first?
        And yet the combined talent of the first 10 picks in the average draft dwarfs the combined talent of the next 50 selections.

        Sure it's possible to find talent outside of the top-10, but with 50 non-top-10 picks per draft, someone good is bound to slip through the cracks. But good luck finding that diamond in the rough. I'll take my choice of top-tier talent via a top-10 pick.

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by Kofi View Post
          No offense Seth, but I'll take the multiple draft experts opinions over your very amateur opinion.

          If Chad Ford and Draft Express say Russell Westbrook is a point guard, then Russell Westbrook is a point guard, end of discussion.

          And if he's not a point guard (experts say he is), yet is still picking up 5 apg with a decent a/to ratio at a very young 19, then the potential to be a point guard is there no question about it. He's being compared to Monta Ellis - sounds about right to me. Sign me up, and keep the one-dimensional, chubby, undersized turnover machine Eric Gordon as far away from the blue & gold as possible.
          Yea I wouldn't take Westbrook over EJ as a future PG ever. EJ just needs to work on his ball handling skills a little and he will be fine because his ability to create is very good. You obviously haven't watched many IU OR UCLA games this year. Kofi I have always respected your posts and generally agree with you on most things (tanking, roster management, etc.) but I have to disagree on this Westbrook thing good sir.

          ...oh yea..and chubby? That's just a cheap shot with no merit. Your buddy Chad Ford thinks he is all muscle...I thought you took his word over god
          Last edited by jmoney2584; 03-01-2008, 03:04 PM.
          Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by Kofi View Post
            No offense Seth, but I'll take the multiple draft experts opinions over your very amateur opinion.

            If Chad Ford and Draft Express say Russell Westbrook is a point guard, then Russell Westbrook is a point guard, end of discussion.

            And if he's not a point guard (experts say he is), yet is still picking up 5 apg with a decent a/to ratio at a very young 19, then the potential to be a point guard is there no question about it. He's being compared to Monta Ellis - sounds about right to me. Sign me up, and keep the one-dimensional, chubby, undersized turnover machine Eric Gordon as far away from the blue & gold as possible.
            Yes, let's listen to the experts...

            Originally posted by draft expres
            In addition to his poor ball-handling skills, his mid-range game is fairly poor, and he avoids using his left hand as much as possible.
            ...
            His court vision isn’t spectacular by any stretch...

            The explosiveness that he possesses directly translates into his ability to get to the rim, where he has shown no problem converting in transition when presented with the opportunity. In traffic he seems to struggle a bit, though, as he’s often out of control by the time he reaches the basket

            He could certainly use another year (or even two) of college basketball to gain more experience at the point guard position
            Because that in no way matches the parts where any of us have said "PG like Fred Jones was a PG", right down to the going left aspect. He never "runs point". They will two man game him and especially like him in an iso to get his own shot, but as we've said he gets a lot of assists in the break/open court.

            His issue is that UCLA's recruit class features some strong PG prospects. Now isn't it funny that a stud "PG" would have to worry about some incoming talent bumping him out of PG playing time? I mean this is the scouts saying this and I heard a similar comment a few weeks ago while watching a UCLA game.

            He's not ahead of Collison AT UCLA for PG, and Collison is not a top 10 PG pick. When you see him play then you get a different interpretation of what the experts are saying, which is why you think that they are on your side and not ours.

            Comment


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

              Those are common issues with young point guards, especially those in the process of converting to the position full-time. Given his age and experience level, I'm not too concerned about it. His assist-to-turnover ratio is the most important thing to me, and I'm satisfied with it, and scouts seem to be as well as he's moving into the top-10 in a lot of mock drafts.

              Comment


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

                Originally posted by Kofi View Post
                Those are common issues with young point guards, especially those in the process of converting to the position full-time. Given his age and experience level, I'm not too concerned about it. His assist-to-turnover ratio is the most important thing to me, and I'm satisfied with it, and scouts seem to be as well as he's moving into the top-10 in a lot of mock drafts.
                Well Troy Murphy has the same, even slightly better, assist-turnover ratio as Westbrook. Why don't we just save ourselves the pick for someone more talented and run Murphy at the point...I mean..stats are all that matters right? Not watching the games or anything...
                Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

                Comment


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

                  I asked about Westbrook over at the Real GM draft board. There are people there that eat, sleep, and breath college basketball, and have for years, so there should be some interesting takes on his game. LINK

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by Kofi View Post
                    And yet the combined talent of the first 10 picks in the average draft dwarfs the combined talent of the next 50 selections.

                    Sure it's possible to find talent outside of the top-10, but with 50 non-top-10 picks per draft, someone good is bound to slip through the cracks. But good luck finding that diamond in the rough. I'll take my choice of top-tier talent via a top-10 pick.
                    Yet the combined talent of the first 5 picks dwarfs the combined talent of the next 50 as well.

                    But 6-10 does NOT dwarf the rest of the draft. I already went down this road with Jose and put together an all-star team of just single picks from post 15 the last 12 years in contrast to taking them from 7-14. If you are changing that to 6-10 vs everyone else it's not nearly as good as you are suggesting.

                    Without posting them all, a quick look at 7-10 picks the last 15 years shows you have maybe a 1 in 4 chance of getting a quality player that lasts a few years, and far less than that are all-star talent.

                    Just about as many future all-stars or starters are on the board still at 15 than were taken at 7-10, let alone adding in the guys at 11-14 as well.

                    The fact is that outside of the top 5-6 it's pretty spotty. Is your pick the next Tmac or the next Danny Fortson? Odds say Fortson, despite having a top 10 pick.


                    I mean even the guys some of us are hyping are going to be those busts. I understand that. I'm not sure you do when you talk up the #8 pick as a "top 10" with all the success rates that come with "top 10". Westbrook, Augustin, Thabeet - these are the future draft busts, or so the odds say.

                    Comment


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

                      Poor ball-handling skills are a problem for good point guard prospects?

                      Yikes. Not a point guard I want on my team.

                      Comment


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

                        OK you said "Real GM" ...stop right there...no credibility.Everone on this board lives and breathes the game just as much as those chubs and we do it classier. Real GM has no clout.
                        Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

                        Comment


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

                          Originally posted by Kofi View Post
                          Those are common issues with young point guards, especially those in the process of converting to the position full-time. Given his age and experience level, I'm not too concerned about it. His assist-to-turnover ratio is the most important thing to me, and I'm satisfied with it, and scouts seem to be as well as he's moving into the top-10 in a lot of mock drafts.
                          Why are you converting him when Augustin and Bayless and Collison already do these things?

                          His assist to TO ratio is a product of when and what he's asked to do with the ball. He's NOT the main ball handler. Do the stats show you minutes per game he's dribbling vs other players? No. WATCHING does.

                          As was pointed out, Troy has a nice A/TO...because he either drives for his own bucket occasionally or just passes the ball on. He is not asked to create offense for other players and he is NOT the focal point on their offense, Love and Collison are.

                          And I LIKE Westbrook's game even. I just have yet to see a single moment where I thought anything other than quick SG that's a strong athlete. And that does describe Fred Jones too. And Fred wasn't exactly a bust, just not a PG like was envisioned BY THE EXPERTS in his scouting report.

                          Could he be a PG? Perhaps, but he's already a dribble-drive SG that defends well and likes to run. It's like hoping Thabeet will become Hakeem in the post. Hey, they are both athletic and big right?
                          Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 03-01-2008, 03:34 PM.

                          Comment


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

                            BC vs. UNC - number 2 in the country - right now on ABC.

                            Tyrese Rice already has 14 points on 5 of 5 shooting.

                            Comment


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

                              real gm is nothing but 10-16yr olds...but tyrese rice is putting on a SHOW right now against unc...think he's at 22pts with 12min left in the 1ST HALF!!!

                              Comment


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

                                We'll probably lose because Hansborough is like the Dwayne Wade of the NCAA, but he's got 23 points right now - almost nine minutes into the game.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X