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

Westbrook or Augustin

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

  • #16
    Re: Westbrook or Augustin

    A repeat of stuff I've already said.
    1) This team is not "one PG away". This is a rebuild with plenty of holes to patch.

    2) DJ doesn't appear to be much of a step up from Diener to me. Calls his own number too much and he's not a great defender.

    3) Westbrook is not a PG solution. That's not why I take him. He's a defensive SG that will be forced to drive more than spot up. You have a lanky SF who likes to spot up so you don't really need your SG to be the same. Let Westbrook be the off-the-dribble threat and the break out on a steal threat. Let Danny be the bomber. Then go fix the PG, PF, C and contract issues that are still on the board.

    Unless someone can distinguish what Westbrook would bring versus Quis,
    Other than much better hops, quickness, speed, defense and nose for the ball, not much.


    BTW, I don't dislike DJ or Quis. And Kofi spent months ticked off that I wasn't lapping up W'brook as a PG solution. But I've seen these guys play enough to know that W'Brook isn't just flukey, he's got insane physical talent and does apply it in a scrappy jack-of-all-trades way. The Pacers can certainly use a bit of that, even if its nowhere near solving all their problems or even a good chunk of them.

    Don't expect this pick to be the new star and it shouldn't be a problem. Barring Bease-Rose falling to 11.


    How long has it been since the fastest man on the floor was in a Pacer uniform?
    Travis Best? Mike Williams? Dudley Bradley? Not sure if that was true on a regular basis in any of those cases even.
    Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 05-22-2008, 11:20 AM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Westbrook or Augustin

      Westbrook reminds me too much of Antonio Daniels and Keyon Dooling. I'm not too high on Augustin either. He'll be a Travis Best-type: too good to be a backup but not quite good enough to start. But the thought of Diener playing 40 mins a night next year while Tins nurses another random injury makes me slightly nauseous.
      basketbawful.com- The best of the worst of professional basketball. And there's a lot of it.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Westbrook or Augustin

        Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
        That said, I think the Pacers should find a way to trade either up to the top 5 or down to about 20. I'm not sold on either of these guys. The top 5 are the monster talents while I think you can get someone at around 20 who'll help you as much as picking at 11.
        pretty much spot on...i'd rather have one of the players available at 20, than reaching for westbrook or augustin. neither of those two will amount to much at the nba level.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Westbrook or Augustin

          I put Westbrook and other. If I had to choose between the 2, then I'd go with Westbrook. I think he could compliment Dunleavy well in our starting lineup.

          I put other because I'd rather see us trade up or trade down or even take a big rather than either of those guards.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Westbrook or Augustin

            I'm starting to think I'd rather see us take Love than either of these PG's.

            I'd rather trade down into the 20's and see what kind of guard we could scoop up there.
            You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Westbrook or Augustin

              Originally posted by SoupIsGood View Post
              I'm starting to think I'd rather see us take Love than either of these PG's.

              I'd rather trade down into the 20's and see what kind of guard we could scoop up there.
              I still think CDR will be a very effective NBA SG - and I'm gonna stick with that until he proves me wrong.
              The poster formerly known as Rimfire

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Westbrook or Augustin

                Originally posted by SoupIsGood View Post
                I'm starting to think I'd rather see us take Love than either of these PG's.

                I'd rather trade down into the 20's and see what kind of guard we could scoop up there.
                Oh, I think we'd take Love easy, but he'd have to fall to us first.

                And I've gotten to the point where I just don't believe these mock drafts. We'd trade down into the mid-20s and Rush and CDR would have been taken 15-20.
                Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Westbrook or Augustin

                  I went with Westbrook. His upside is just too high to pass up. Chad Ford compared him to Rajon Rondo, but Westbrook is bigger, stronger, and a better shooter than Rondo. Westbrook has 20 ppg, 6 apg, 4 rpg potential to go along with some top-tier defense. That's too good to pass up. Of course other teams realize how good Westbrook is, so there's no way he's still there at #11, but we can dream, can't we?


                  Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                  How long has it been since the fastest man on the floor was in a Pacer uniform?
                  Last edited by Jared Jammer; 05-22-2008, 12:24 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Westbrook or Augustin

                    I hope we just choose the best talent available and then hit the trade market if necessary.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Westbrook or Augustin

                      IMO, who the Pacers draft will depend greatly on three primary factors:

                      1) who Bird/O'Brien views as the core players. (We'll get to that in a moment);

                      2) what position they feel is in need of an upgrade; and,

                      3) whether they feel a desperate need to upgrade said position now or if they believe they can afford to wait a year or 2 for the draftee to develop.

                      Of course, there is a forth option if you will:

                      4) picking the best players available @ #11 and trading him to get the more experienced player(s) you want.

                      Now, let's talk about each of the above factors.

                      1. Both Bird and coach O'Brien agree that Granger, Dunleavy and JO make up the core players. (For Bird's assessment of the core players, see the question from the linked article herein that inquires about the nucleus of the team right above JO's picture; for Jim O'Brien's perspective, listen to his last radio show; link provided below.)

                      Key reserves: Diener, Graham (recently signed new contract w/the Pacers), Shawn Williams and Jeff Foster

                      Looking at this list of seven players, the one position that cannot easily be changed by one of the inner-changeable players is PG.

                      2. In an April 17th interview w/Conrad Brunner, as well as coach O'Brien's last radio show of the season, coach was very specific about the need to "shore up the PG position" with "defensive toughness". The question then becomes how desperate are they to upgrade this position? Which leads us to item #3.

                      3. The Pacers used five different players at the Point last year: Tinsley, Diener, Flip Murray, Quis and Owens. It's clear that neither Owens nor Murray will be back next year - Owens moreso because he lacks overall skill at the Point, and Murray because he's not a true PG and because the Pacers already have a unique "combo-Guard" in Quis, but in truth he didn't run the Point very well either. That leaves Tinsley and Diener as the Pacers only two viable PGs. Odds are Tinsley won't be back next year (per the radio show link above), but if he does return, it's likely he'll lose his starting role because of his lack of dependability (health wise, but there are obviously other factors that go along with his dependability issues). So, how desperate are the Pacers to upgrade at the Point? I'd say very, but they're not in panic mode just yet. Which leads me to item #4 - picking the best player available and trading him to get a more experienced player (or players). I doubt that will happen, but it remains a plausable option.

                      Admittedly, the Pacers haven't faired very well when trying to pick up a PG through FA. They had a solid backup in Darrel Armstrong, but let him go due to his age and lack of quickness (though you had to admire the defensive effort he put forth, as well as his seemingly tireless energy; I'd have kept him myself, but I'm not the team's decision maker...). Over the years, they've played "patch-work" at the Point continuously seeking out a viable backup for Tinsley. But in recent years, it's become more and more apparent that despite Tinsley's talents at running the offense, he's not very durable and, thus, can't be relied on for extended play throughout any given season. So, now TPTB are re-thinking their approach to the PG position. Instead of finding "patches" to fill the reserve PG spot in case Tinsley goes down, they want to find a reliable PG for the near future who can defend, score and create shots for himself. And that leds us to where we are now trying to guess who the Pacers might take in the draft.

                      Among the three leading candidates, D. J. Augustin, Russell Westbrook and Eric Gordon, it is my opinion based on details as outlined above that the Pacers will select Westbrook. NBADraft.net describes Westbrook as follows:

                      "Attacks the basket with a lethal first step and crossover ability … Can handle the rock well and gets into the lane effortlessly … Huge wingspan allows him to play much bigger than his 6-3 height … Solid passer with unselfishness, always looks for the open man … Has an excellent mid-range game … A gym rat, really works hard to improve … Has a great attitude, extremely coachable … Has the potential to be a big-time scorer when given the chance … Really excels defensively and has a chance to develop into a great defender …Must become better at handling ball pressure at the point guard position."

                      The only negative on this guy seems to be that he gets alittle rattled when pressed hard (either in the half-court or when doubled). In time, this is something that he can overcome. The key selling point, obviously, is his ability to play solid defense which is what Bird and JOB have both stressed as vital from this position. Now, I'd love to get Augustin because this guy he's a bonafied play maker (based on the scouting report and what I've seen of him), but we've got Granger, Graham and to a limited degree Dunleavy and Quis for that. What the Pacers need is a solid, all-around PG who can pass, shot well from the field, has the ability to finish at the rim AND defend well. Westbrook seems to have all those traits. Of course, the debate will continue until draft night. So, let the debates go on...
                      Last edited by NuffSaid; 05-22-2008, 02:37 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Westbrook or Augustin

                        Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                        Augustin. Westbrook is more versatile but he isn't a real good SG or a real good PG - he's sort of a morph between the two and typically those aren't as successful in the NBA as players who are a "pure" one or the other.

                        Augustin is a pure PG.

                        That said, I think the Pacers should find a way to trade either up to the top 5 or down to about 20. I'm not sold on either of these guys. The top 5 are the monster talents while I think you can get someone at around 20 who'll help you as much as picking at 11.
                        What he said. Though picking at 6 could also still yield you some of the very nice talents.

                        Btw Rim who would you rank 1-5?

                        Regards,

                        Mourning
                        2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                        2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                        2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Westbrook or Augustin

                          I guess another reason I like Westbrook better because I think next year he's a rotation player who could be the first guard off the bench, just based on his ability to defend and 5 years down the road, if he truely is a gym rat, then you have something maybe special.

                          Anytime I hear gym rat, I'm interested.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Westbrook or Augustin

                            Originally posted by jcouts View Post
                            Neither of these players are going to excel at the NBA level. They will both be career backups. The temptation for Bird to draft another 6'7 guy who can play multiple positions (Brandon Rush) will prove too tempting.
                            Are you kidding me? Augustin has so much potential and Westbrook is just one helluva finisher. He plays more like a PF than a Guard.

                            Pacers can't lose with selecting either. My hope is that they select Augustin, but my gut tells me they'll choose Westbrook.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Westbrook or Augustin

                              Originally posted by Speed View Post
                              I guess another reason I like Westbrook better because I think next year he's a rotation player who could be the first guard off the bench, just based on his ability to defend and 5 years down the road, if he truely is a gym rat, then you have something maybe special.

                              Anytime I hear gym rat, I'm interested.
                              Great point. Westbrook went from not on the NBA radar to likely top-10 pick in a single season. That type of improvement takes a serious work ethic. That work ethic, combined with his physical gifts, is a recipe for major success.

                              He's our man if he's there at #11.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Westbrook or Augustin

                                Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                                What he said. Though picking at 6 could also still yield you some of the very nice talents.

                                Btw Rim who would you rank 1-5?

                                Regards,

                                Mourning
                                In terms of pure talent I think the top five are Beasley, Rose, Bayless, Mayo and Randolph.

                                But we've all heard that Lopez will go early and nobody projects Randolph that high.

                                I'm still hoping for Mayo but if he's not there I'd like DW to go for Randolph. We can wait a couple of years - we'll suck for at least that long anyway. There will be surer bets at 6 but nobody, except maybe Jordan, with as much upside.
                                The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X