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

Pacers Fantasy Preview from 82games.com

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Pacers Fantasy Preview from 82games.com

    http://www.82games.com/fantasy/team_preview_pacers.htm

    Some mildly interesting stuff that hasn't been posted yet.

    Team Preview #20: Indiana Pacers

    by Eric Wong AKA Roto Evil

    August 30th, 2008


    LAST SEASON

    The Pacers won 36 games under new Coach Jim O'Brien, a year after winning 35 games under Rick Carlisle. The difference?

    In '06-07, they had a 92.4 pace factor (10th), made 5.9 threes (17th), dished out 20.5 assists (19th), and scored 95.6 points (24th) per game.

    In '07-08, they had a 97.7 pace factor (3rd), made 9.2 threes (3rd), dished out 22.7 assists (7th), and scored 104.0 points (7th) per game. The result? A more exciting squad and much better fantasy stats.
    OFFSEASON MOVES

    Key Additions: TJ Ford, Jarrett Jack, Nesterovic, Brandon Rush, R. Hibbert, J. McRoberts, M. Baston
    Key Losses: Jermaine O'Neal, Flip Murray, Diogu, Kareem Rush, Jamaal Tinsley?, Shawne Williams?

    Jermaine O'Neal's wish was finally granted, as he got traded to Toronto over the summer for TJ Ford, Nesterovic, and Maceo Baston. I remember Baston throwing down a lot of dunks as a Michigan Wolverine, and thought he had potential as the Bulls' very last pick (#58) in 1998. While he helped turn Maccabi Tel Aviv into a Euroleague powerhouse, he's played just 614 total minutes in the NBA. What's odd however, is that he played in 16 games for Toronto in '02-03, 47 games for Indiana in '06-07, back to Toronto for 15 games last season, and now he's back in Indiana. At 33 years old, is this the year that he finally gets some serious playing time? With Ike Diogu also gone (sent to Portland for Jack & McRoberts), perhaps.

    The Pacers also received two 1st round picks in their trades, netting swingman Brandon Rush (to replace his brother Kareem!) and 7-foot-2 center Roy Hibbert. TJ Ford will basically replace Jamaal Tinsley, whom the Pacers are actively shopping. Don't be surprised if Shawne Williams is sent packing as well, as Indy is trying to cleanse itself from any troublemakers. Perhaps their most unheralded yet most intriguing pickup was the 21-year old McRoberts, who was born & raised in Indiana before starring at Duke.
    ROTATION / PLAYING TIME

    It sounds like Tinsley's days in a Pacers uniform are over, so T.J. is now running the show. While Tinsley always flashed potential, Ford will be much more dependable. If healthy, I project he'll start and play around 30 minutes per game. It took 6 years, but Mike Dunleavy, Jr. finally showed why he was the #3 overall pick in '02. He set career-highs in nearly every single category and shot the ball way better than he ever did before. He's found a home in Indiana, so he's a lock to duplicate the 36 mpg that he averaged last season. Backing up both guys will be Jarrett Jack, who performed fairly well as Portland's 3rd guard. I'll project 22-24 mpg for him off the bench, which means much fewer minutes for both Marquis Daniels & Travis Diener.

    At small forward, Danny Granger is one of the most underrated young players in the league and is only going to get better. He saw nearly 38 minutes of action after the break, so expect the same for '08-09. I think Brandon Rush is a much better defender and athlete than his brother Kareem, so I'm expecting him to play a key role as a rookie. He'll get at least 10 minutes per game, and perhaps up to 20 if Williams is traded and they give Granger a chunk of minutes at power forward. Like Dunleavy, Troy Murphy has never sniffed the postseason. The Notre Dame grad hasn't been that spectacular since signing a lucrative 6-year deal for $58 million in 2005, but his minutes should go up this year with Jermaine & Ike now out of the picture. I'm projecting 32-33 minutes for Murph and a solid bounceback campaign. At center, Jeff Foster will likely start and pull down mad rebounds as always. He averaged 24.5 mpg last season, but that number may fall to 22-23 with Nesterovic around. Rasho should get 18-20 minutes at center, which leaves some garbage time for Hibbert until he proves himself. Baston & McRoberts will battle for the remaining big man minutes, and could even play a key role if someone gets hurt.
    DON'T SLEEP ON: Troy Murphy

    Looking at his recent stats, it's hard to believe that Murphy was one of just 5 players to average 15+ points and 10+ rebounds per game in '04-05. Since then, his role on the Warriors declined, he was traded to the Pacers, and he's had to battle for minutes ever since. But it's time for Troy to step up. And based on his Post All-Star numbers, I think he's ready. After the break, his minutes rose to 31.8 and he put up 14.8 points, 7.7 boards, 2.4 assists, .7 steals, .5 blocks, and 1.4 threes while shooting a rock solid 50.5% FG and 42.2% 3P.

    OK, so those shooting %'s are sure to decline a bit, but the rest of his numbers could easily rise with a few more minutes. I'm going to project around 15 points, 9 boards, .5 blocks, and 1.5 threes per game. The blocks are weak, but the threes are money for a center-eligible player. Did you know? Only 4 players have ever been named Big East Player of the Year TWICE: Chris Mullin (St. Johns), Patrick Ewing (Georgetown), Richard Hamilton (UConn), and Troy Murphy (Notre Dame).
    BE CAREFUL OF: Mike Dunleavy

    As I said before, Lil Dun had a career-year in '07-08. His 17.3 PER blew away his previous high of 15.1 (set in '03-04), and the green light from Jim O'Brien helped him finish 12th in 3P% (42.4%) and 17th in threes per game (2.0). And he was surprisingly consistent, shooting 48% FG or better in 4 of the 6 months. Mike D. turns 28 next month, so he's in his prime, but I'm doubtful that he can duplicate last season's stats.

    For starters, I think the Pacers will have a more balanced scoring attack this season, as Murphy will get more shots and Ford is a better scorer than the Tinsley/Diener/Andre Owens PG trio. I also like Jack & Rush off the bench. They're not going to steal any minutes away from Dunleavy, but they could steal a few rebounds & assists. And lastly, I'd estimate that the chances of him shooting better than 42.4% from beyond the arc are about 12%. He's still a Top 50 fantasy player, but you need to be careful.
    ROUND BY ROUND TARGETS

    (Where you should draft these guys in an 8-cat Roto league with 12 teams and 14 man rosters)

    Granger: 2nd - 3rd
    Dunleavy: 4th - 5th
    Ford: 7th - 8th
    Murphy: 7th - 8th
    Jack & Rush: Don't draft (but watch closely)
    Tinsley: Don't draft (but watch where he gets traded)
    Foster, Nesterovic, Hibbert: Don't draft (but watch if you need a center)
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Pacers Fantasy Preview from 82games.com

    I like his all-white American born team.

    Link
    I'm in these bands
    The Humans
    Dr. Goldfoot
    The Bar Brawlers
    ME

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Pacers Fantasy Preview from 82games.com

      Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
      I like his all-white American born team.

      Link
      I like that Matt Bonner is apparently better than Troy Murphy. You can not like Troy all you want, but that's a bit silly.
      "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

      - Salman Rushdie

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Pacers Fantasy Preview from 82games.com

        Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
        I like his all-white American born team.

        Link

        its pretty interesting how many current and former pacers were in the discussion. Including even Diener in the comments section, as many were suggesting he should be third PG over quinn.

        Dunleavy and Brad Miller were on the team, but Murphy, Foster, Croshere, Josh Mcroberts, and Diener were all involved in the discussion.
        "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

        - ilive4sports

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Pacers Fantasy Preview from 82games.com

          All-white Pacers vs. the All-white field?
          "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Pacers Fantasy Preview from 82games.com

            oh cool, I can post here now. I wrote the articles below and am very interested in hearing from you guys further regarding my All-White team piece.

            I just introduced myself here:
            http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-...d.php?p=779960

            My main reason for registering and posting:

            Infinite_MAN_force made an observation that I was hoping someone would make when I originally wrote the article back in January.

            In response, I just added the following comment on my site:
            But forget about which players I picked and how many games this theoretical team would win for a second…

            Don’t any of you feel like digging deeper?

            Then let’s talk about those Indiana Pacers…

            -About 12% of the NBA’s current players are white Americans.
            -The Pacers currently have 5 white Americans on their team: Diener, Dunleavy, McRoberts, Murphy, Foster.
            -If they get rid of troublemakers Tinsley & Williams, 35.7% of their roster will be white.
            -86% of the people in Indiana are white, which is well above the U.S. average.
            http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet...t=fph&pgsl=010

            -White Americans playing for the Pacers isn’t a new occurrence, as there are plenty of active guys on other teams who used to play for Indiana (Austin Croshere, Brad Miller, Scot Pollard) as well as former players such as Chris Mullin, Fred Hoiberg, and Reggie Miller (I kid).

            Sooo….

            -Does the Pacers’ management place an emphasis on bringing in white Americans?
            -Does their high proportion of white players lead to higher ticket sales?
            -Has their focus on white players ever resulted in them having a weaker team?
            -If you’re a Pacers fan and you said yes to the last question, does that bother you?
            I would be very interested in hearing your opinions on this topic, so if you have something to say, please comment on the original article (so non-Pacer fans can see the responses as well), which can be accessed here:
            http://www.rotoevil.com/nba/all-white-team

            I look forward to any responses...

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Pacers Fantasy Preview from 82games.com

              In this day & age I find this topic next to replusive.

              I had a lot more to say but I think I had just better keep my mouth shut on this one.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Pacers Fantasy Preview from 82games.com

                Originally posted by Jose Slaughter View Post
                In this day & age I find this topic next to replusive.

                I had a lot more to say but I think I had just better keep my mouth shut on this one.
                I'm not sure what's so repulsive about it. Speak away.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Pacers Fantasy Preview from 82games.com

                  Can an admin split this stuff off into a new thread? It's not related to the 82games preview.
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers Fantasy Preview from 82games.com

                    I think it needs to just get dropped here. Racial debates do not belong on Pacers Digest anyway. If anyone picks up where it left off, I'm deleting it all to avoid a mess.

                    Comment

                    Previous template Next
                    Working...
                    X