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 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

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

  • #91
    Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

    Originally posted by croz24 View Post
    you continue to be wrong on curry...
    Everyone has their opinions and they are free to voice them however they please. Maybe you should provide your OPINION as to why you don't feel Curry will be a great player. Constantly telling people they are wrong on a subject while failing to provide evidence to back up your claim will garner you no respect here.

    In my opinion, I think Curry will be a very good player in this league. True, he may be undersized, but he's got such a high IQ, I feel he'll make up for his other deficiencies. I can see him being a 18ppg player in his prime and a great role player on a championship team.

    The guy I'm really hoping we can come away with is Greg Monroe. The sky is the limit with this kid and if he actually decides to come out this year, we might have a shot. If he isn't available, I like Patterson as well. While there may not be a high number of star players coming out this year, we'll still have a handful of guys that can be great contributers to pick from.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      Originally posted by HeartlandFan View Post
      Everyone has their opinions and they are free to voice them however they please. Maybe you should provide your OPINION as to why you don't feel Curry will be a great player. Constantly telling people they are wrong on a subject while failing to provide evidence to back up your claim will garner you no respect here.
      first off, when you're picking in the lottery, you need better than "role" players. and if you'll notice the thread i replied to, naptown provided no opinions as to why he feels curry will be a superstar...but the fact is curry is too short, too thin, not quick nor athletic enough offensively and defensively, and not a good enough ball handler or passer to do much in the nba. yes, curry can get his shot off against quicker guards, but as you saw against purdue, when he's bumped and played physically with bigger and stronger guards on him, he just can't operate. yes, he has a quick release, but he gets absolutely zero elevation on his jumpshot.

      just because a player can put up huge numbers in college, doesn't mean his game will translate to the nba. tyler hansbrough and stephen curry are two players who's games just won't translate.

      now you tell me why you think curry will be something special in the nba...because of a high basketball iq? you seriously think curry can compete against the man pressure guys like rondo, billups, paul, etc will place on him?

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Originally posted by croz24 View Post
        now you tell me why you think curry will be something special in the nba...because of a high basketball iq? you seriously think curry can compete against the man pressure guys like rondo, billups, paul, etc will place on him?
        First off, Billups is ****-poor at defense. Just because he played for Detroit doesn't mean he's suddenly an elite 1-on-1 defender. But anyways, Unless Curry is the #1 option on those teams, guys like Rondo won't be guarding him. Even if they were, how many great defensive PG's do we have in the league right now? 2? 3? I wouldn't be too concerned with facing those guys night in and night out just because there aren't that many of them around. Curry is quick enough to create against NBA players, and his handle is definitely good enough to play the point. He's been playing the point all year for Davidson while dealing with intense pressure and double teams. So far, he's done pretty good. Yes, he's turned it over more than one would like to see, but it's his first year playing PG. Over time, he should gain experience and make smarter decisions with the ball. He's 6'3", which is definitely not short for an NBA PG and there are plenty of thin PG's in the league that have excelled. Just because a guy isn't the fastest, or can't jump 40 inches doesn't mean they can't be successful. Steve Nash is short and thin but he seems to have done pretty well for himself. Sure, Nash has better court vision and better ball-handling, but it's not as if Curry is completely inadequate in that facet of the game. He's averaging 7apg on a team that doesn't have a lot of big time talent other than himself. At the same time, Curry is a very good team defender. He stays in front of his man and is very good at rotating for help. He plays smart.

        You can't take one game (vs. Purdue) and formulate an opinion on why someone won't be successful. That game was basically his only bad game of the year (still had 8rbs, 6asts, 3stls). Outside of the game against Loyola, in which he didnt even try to score, he hadn't scored under 27 points. You might say it's because he wasn't facing the type of athletes and defenders that he will see at the next level, and that is mostly true. The only other game in which he faced an NBA quality backcourt was against Oklahoma, who has Willie Warren (also known for being a great defender). He managed to put up 44 points in that game, so your theory of him not being able to operate against bigger guards seems to contradict itself. In all reality, we can't accurately predict how he will fare in the pros. We especially can't judge one performance and form a conclusion from it because as you see, those conclusions can be easily contradicted with other performances.

        first off, when you're picking in the lottery, you need better than "role" players
        Wrong. Not every draft is going to have 14 star players in it. Unless you're in the top 6-8 picks every year, you can't expect to always come away with something better than a role player. Would I choose Curry at #5? No, probably not. I would definitely have to take a hard look if I'm at 10-12 though. He's a well-rounded player that has a lot of strengths. He may not be the flashy superstar everyone wants out of the lottery, but he will be very servicable on a good to great team.
        Last edited by Coop; 12-21-2008, 04:19 PM.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          ^
          lol purdue was merely an example...and purdue does not have an nba quality backcourt. but what about west virginia? and even against oklahoma his shooting performance was lacking. you have to remember, curry plays for davidson. before this year and last years tounament, he didn't face any stiff competition to put up the numbers he was. curry is a high volume shooter. it's not rare for him to take 27 shots in order to score 27 points...yes, he is still a great college guard, but please watch this kid more often. his handles are not that good, nor is his quickness as it translates to the nba. and curry is a turnover machine. but honestly, do you want your pg taking 20+ shots per game? that's what curry is. again, i'm not sure where you're getting this idea of me basing an opinion of curry off of one game. using his most recent game against a physical defense i would think would be a good way to help prove a point. i've probably watched curry too many times.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Originally posted by croz24 View Post
            ^
            but what about west virginia?
            What about WVU? He still had 27 and 10. His percentage wasn't good but he made huge shots at the end of the game to get the W.

            curry is a high volume shooter. it's not rare for him to take 27 shots in order to score 27 points...
            He averages 38ppg this year when he shoots 27 shots or more.

            yes, he is still a great college guard, but please watch this kid more often. his handles are not that good, nor is his quickness as it translates to the nba. and curry is a turnover machine.
            I have watched him. His handles are good enough to create and you have to remember he didn't run the point at all last year. From just last year to this year, he has made huge improvements with his ball-handling. No reason to believe he couldn't improve more. And I've already covered the turnovers so I won't repeat myself.

            His quickness is one of his strengths so I don't know why you keep criticizing it. One of his best strengths is using his quickness to curl off screens for jump shots. He has even been compared to Reggie in that regard. Being too slow is definitely not one of his problems.

            but honestly, do you want your pg taking 20+ shots per game? that's what curry is. again, i'm not sure where you're getting this idea of me basing an opinion of curry off of one game. using his most recent game against a physical defense i would think would be a good way to help prove a point. i've probably watched curry too many times.
            He would never take 20+ shots a game in the NBA. He takes 20+ shots to score 30ppg. Once he is drafted, he won't need to take more than 15 shots a game while running the point. He has already shown he can distribute the ball so there is no doubt he can keep others involved. I know you were just trying to use the Purdue game as an example, but I was trying to show you that using that one game to support your claim doesn't make it valid. Show me repeated instances of Curry struggling against physical defenses and I might rethink my opinion.
            Last edited by Coop; 12-21-2008, 07:05 PM.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              the problem is, because he plays for davidson, he's hardly faced any stiff competion with the exception some of last year's tourney teams and wvu, pu, and ok this year. curry has actually shot 32% if you combine those three games from this year.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                the problem is, because he plays for davidson, he's hardly faced any stiff competion with the exception some of last year's tourney teams and wvu, pu, and ok this year. curry has actually shot 32% if you combine those three games from this year.
                True. I don't think we're that far off in our evaluation of Curry. We have some differing opinions, but overall we both realize that he isn't going to be a star player. I think he will be a very solid role player for years to come. Should he be drafted in the top 10? I don't know. Anything higher than #8 is too high though IMO. All of this is just opinion anyways. I personally would be much happier with Monroe or Patterson.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  Any word on how Derozan is looking? He's not averaging a lot of points, (10.6) but he's not taking a lot of shots per game either.

                  "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                    ^
                    lol purdue was merely an example...and purdue does not have an nba quality backcourt.
                    As far as overall talent, then I would agree with you, BUT.........

                    Purdue might have the best defensive team in the nation, and it starts in the backcourt.

                    Chris Kramer will never see an NBA floor, but he would be one of the best defensive guards in the NBA from day one. His lateral quickness is out of this world good. Combine that with how strong he is up top, and he's just built for defense.

                    Grant with his long arms and Jackson with his speed and lack of size, being able to get under the dribbler just gives them so many options to defend players. Purdue was able to give multiple looks at Curry to get him knocked off his shot.

                    There is no way you can use that game as a negative for Curry, or any guard in the nation for that matter. I always say good offense will always beat good defense, but Purdue might be the exception on that one.

                    Bigger guards (6'6") with strong upper bodies that like contact would be the situation that makes them struggle. In college, there aren't too many of those playing up top, and even then they can go with a taller player on him that hustles his *** off in Hummel.

                    It just sucks for them they ran into Duke and Oklahoma so early in the season. There aren't many teams in the nation that can offer more than what PU could handle. (I'm not a Boiler fan either BTW)



                    I agree that Curry won't be a star player, but he can be on that next tier. He's a much better verison of a DJ Augustine.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      Originally posted by HeartlandFan View Post
                      True. I don't think we're that far off in our evaluation of Curry. We have some differing opinions, but overall we both realize that he isn't going to be a star player. I think he will be a very solid role player for years to come. Should he be drafted in the top 10? I don't know. Anything higher than #8 is too high though IMO. All of this is just opinion anyways. I personally would be much happier with Monroe or Patterson.
                      i hear you on patterson

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        I think Curry is the next Derek Fisher. He needs to bulk up a bit more, but I see him in that mold in the NBA. I think he can have a long productive career and I think the guy will be a winner. I don't think I want the basketball player that blows the doors off the measurements. I think Curry is a very good basketball player.

                        Gani Lawal is the next Ike Diogu. Long wingspan, 6'8" tall PF, big frame but must add weight, not especially dominant on the boards. Hmmmm.... Doesn't sound too appealing to a Pacers fan.

                        DeJuan Blair is a PF I really think is a player who's game could translate well to the NBA. He is a sophomore. He is listed at 6'7" 265, but I think he is a player who plays much bigger than that. I think he would be more of the Boozer/Millsap/Haslem mold and be a terrific value as a second rounder in the next year or two.

                        Taj Gibson at USC, Jordan Hill at Arizona, Micheal Washington at Arkansas, and Arinze Onuaku at Syracuse are a couple of PF's I think could make an impact on teams over the next draft or two. None of them are high-lottery types, but might make a roster and contribute from the bench, until they can develop.
                        "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          If anyone is interested, the Arizona-Kansas game is on Fox Ohio right now. Jordan Hill is the big guy for Arizona who is expected to go in the top 10 next year. I just started watching but he seems real athletic and aggressive. Really gets up and down the floor well.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            I can't see the game, but his production looks very promosing.

                            There's an article on him on the front page of NBADraft.net, and he's moved up to #5 in their mock.

                            http://www.nbadraft.net/




                            Marquis Daniels, is that you?

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              He seems to be everything the Pacers need at the 4. Great size, athleticism, loves to dunk the ball, doesn't back down. He even broke down Aldrich on the dribble one time. He's compared to Bosh on NBADraft. I would say thats a pretty accurate comparison.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                I hope you guys are watching Gtown v Uconn right now on ESPN2. Greg Monroe looks legit. Great passing and vision, he stole the ball from a guard on the perimeter and ran it down and finished with an and 1, had a nice hook shot over Thabeet, and even dropped a three so he has range for our offense. He's dominating UConn right now.
                                2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X