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

EARL CLARK

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

  • #61
    Re: EARL CLARK

    Originally posted by Anthem View Post
    I don't get the "tweener" thing, honestly. The issue is that he's got the skills of a SF and the body of a PF? Because 6'10" doesn't sounds "tweener" to me. Sure, he's light, but he'll add weight as he adds years. 20 pounds doesn't sound unreasonable, which would make him 6'10", 245. That's plenty.
    Doesn't anybody else remember JO's body going down the tubes as he "bulked up"? When you add 20 lbs to your frame in basketball it adds tremendous amount of torque on your joints. Basketball is murder on your knees as it is. Now imagine carrying around a couple sacks of potatoes while your playing. Noone can predict how someones body can handle that. We've seen it with countless players throughout time, and we're seeing it with Greg Oden right now, JMO. If a guy adds weight it should be natural weight as his body matures.

    It's not his size that makes me doubt his ability to play PF anyway, it's his game that makes me doubt his ability to improve our teams weaknesses. And truth is we don't have Dwight Howard in the paint to compensate. We need someone to help Hibbert down low. And not by spreading the floor on offense.
    "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: EARL CLARK

      Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
      Doesn't anybody else remember JO's body going down the tubes as he "bulked up"? When you add 20 lbs to your frame in basketball it adds tremendous amount of torque on your joints.
      Actually Jermaine started out in the 220s and bulked up to the 270s. He added 50 pounds, not 20.

      If Jermaine had stayed in the 240s, I believe he'd be a different player today.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: EARL CLARK

        There are plenty of 6'10" guys in the NBA right now that have NO business playing PF.


        Comment


        • #64
          Re: EARL CLARK

          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
          Damn....that was a really good pass.
          I'm not sure any current Pacer could make that pass successfully on a consistent basis.
          "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

          - Salman Rushdie

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: EARL CLARK

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            Actually Jermaine started out in the 220s and bulked up to the 270s. He added 50 pounds, not 20.

            If Jermaine had stayed in the 240s, I believe he'd be a different player today.
            Just the point I tried to make in a reply, but got a d*** error message & lost it!!!
            Anyway, I tried to say how it was not the 1st 20# that hurt JO - in fact that got him off the bench - but the later 20#+ that hurt him. I also mentioned Karl Malone & Dwight Howard as two others that have/had the frame & added much more then 20# & it helped them, not hurt them.
            As a young man matures, & a college player grows into an NBA body, 10-20# is natural, it is beyond that where I think you need to be careful.
            "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
            (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: EARL CLARK

              You know, a point that may be worth making is that everyone is
              viewing our need at PF and the req'd skill-set with the assumption
              that whomever fills that slot needs to complement Hibbert as ideally
              as possible.

              Who says that Hibbert is definitely our C of the future and a guy who
              will man that spot for the next 8-10 years ? I like what I've seen from
              the kid so far too both on and off the court. But we are talking about
              a kid with some limitations on a team that won 35 games. How do we
              know that an opportunity to upgrade 'that' spot won't present itself
              in the next 2-3 years ? Or, if for whatever reason Bird and O'Brien
              are history a couple years from now, how do we know that a new
              regime won't want a different skill-set in that spot ?

              The bottom line is that we don't. The Pacers are still in a rebuilding
              phase and are a long way from where they want and need to go.

              Wether it's Clark or whomever else at PF or any spot other than SF,
              it's premature to be locking guys into positions on paper for the
              long haul.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: EARL CLARK

                Originally posted by Indy View Post
                There are plenty of 6'10" guys in the NBA right now that have NO business playing PF.
                Earl Clark is a shot blocker. He will be able to guard most PF's in the NBA. Dude has the best wingspan in the draft(height to standing length ratio).

                Here's all the PF's I can think of that are worth remembering:

                KG, Elton Brand, David West, Amare, Bosh, Gasol, Boozer, Artest, Dirk, Marion, Aldrige, Lewis, Camby, Jamison, Mcdyess, Maxiell, Lee , Gooden, Bass, B Wallace, Scola, MIlsap, Najera, Randolph, Joe Smith, Kmart, and Collison.

                With exception to guys like Brand, Randolph, Gasol, Boozer. Big guys with offense. Many BIG guys in the NBA can't score, so why couldn't Clark guard PF? Especially of the bench. In two more years and 20 lbs later, he could guard all fo the above. All Clark needs is some coaching.

                Beautiful bonus. He can also play SF defensively. With some coaching, I could see this guy posting up smaller guys and creating match up problems. As a PF he could bring other bigs of the block with his mid-range shot. He has solid handles for PF. Some of the turnover problems could decrease with slower guys guarding him. We as a team need interior defense and Clark is the best thing we can get. I hope and pray TPTB understand what I am talking about.

                Also, I have friends at work who have nothing but good things to say about him. The love the way he approaches the game. The way he runs the floor. He's a awesome shot blocker and has great hands. His focus on defense. Even after a dunk or a three pointer he'll just run back down the floor to play defense. They do say, however, he disappeares offensively, but they also say that Pitino's offense was bad for him and made him stagnant when his shot wasn't falling. Was too structured for him. They think he should have played in the post more, and claimed that when he did post good things happened. I like this guy and feel bad I didn't get to chime in earlier. Sorry Indy, this was more than a reply.
                Last edited by Noodle; 06-04-2009, 11:01 AM.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: EARL CLARK

                  Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                  Actually Jermaine started out in the 220s and bulked up to the 270s. He added 50 pounds, not 20.

                  If Jermaine had stayed in the 240s, I believe he'd be a different player today.
                  Jermaine entered the NBA as a freshly turned 18 year old at 220 lbs. Clark is already what 20-21? He has probably already added 20 lbs since high school. And I don't remember Jermaine ever weighing as much as 270 lbs, 260 maybe. Clark definitely has the frame to add weight, but to me not only are you diminishing his strengths by doing so, you are putting his knees at risk.

                  I agree Jermaine would've never had those knee problems if he had stayed at a more natural weight. That's my point. Lets not try to make someone something they are not.
                  "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: EARL CLARK

                    Originally posted by Tiny Archibald View Post
                    You know, a point that may be worth making is that everyone is
                    viewing our need at PF and the req'd skill-set with the assumption
                    that whomever fills that slot needs to complement Hibbert as ideally
                    as possible.

                    Who says that Hibbert is definitely our C of the future and a guy who
                    will man that spot for the next 8-10 years ? I like what I've seen from
                    the kid so far too both on and off the court. But we are talking about
                    a kid with some limitations on a team that won 35 games. How do we
                    know that an opportunity to upgrade 'that' spot won't present itself
                    in the next 2-3 years ? Or, if for whatever reason Bird and O'Brien
                    are history a couple years from now, how do we know that a new
                    regime won't want a different skill-set in that spot ?

                    The bottom line is that we don't. The Pacers are still in a rebuilding
                    phase and are a long way from where they want and need to go.

                    Wether it's Clark or whomever else at PF or any spot other than SF,
                    it's premature to be locking guys into positions on paper for the
                    long haul.
                    Because a descent center is probably the hardest thing to find. And we found one, IMO. Barring injury problems I can't see the Pacers in a position to find a better young prospect than Hibbert. When you rebuild you don't look to replace your few true assets, you add to them.
                    "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: EARL CLARK

                      The player the Pacers draft is not going to get them into the playoffs next year or even get a lot of minutes out of the gate even if we trade up in this years draft. JOB is our head coach rookies earn their minutes. Our potential draftee must have good work ethic & attitude.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: EARL CLARK

                        Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                        Because a descent center is probably the hardest thing to find. And we found one, IMO. Barring injury problems I can't see the Pacers in a position to find a better young prospect than Hibbert. When you rebuild you don't look to replace your few true assets, you add to them.
                        I agree with this statement. It is very hard to get a Center to actually play back to the basket basketball anymore. You see more and more centers that play like PF and PF that play like SF.

                        I think in most offensive systems you need one dominate post player and the second big on team being a PF or C should be able to play further away. In the pacers case we have the center but not the future PF.

                        I should mention that I would prefer a PF that is able to atleast stay in front of man. IF Clark is that guy in the future then great.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: EARL CLARK

                          For those talking about Clark adding weight, he said in a DX interview that he was looking to add 5-10 lbs. That may be enough. He weighs 228 now (for reference Rashard Lewis and Lamar Odom stand 6'10" and weigh 230).

                          I think a key part of the debate here is just what kind of PF you like. Some want the traditional back to the basket PF. Others want the versatile perimeter oriented PF. And that's why there seems to be mixed opinions on Clark. In today's NBA the more versatile PF is preferable IMO. The NBA doesn't let you play as physical now as they did in the 90s, and the game is becoming more oriented on drive and kick offenses, motions, and fluid guard-like players. Post players aren't allowed to "bang" as much as they used to. But having someone with good size that can play some in the post and have a good mid-range game like Odom and Lewis is an advantage because they can shoot, drive past big guys or post up small guys. In time, Clark has the potential to develop into this more than anyone we could get at 13 IMO. So, if we are looking to go for a 4, he'd be our best choice. But I'm skeptical about some of these PGs so that is why I'm liking Clark right now.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: EARL CLARK

                            He has the potential of being a Tayshaun Prince for us, but its going to depend on how committed he is to Defense. He just has times of inconsistency.
                            Last edited by JaimeKoeppe; 06-04-2009, 01:00 PM.
                            http://twitter.com/JaimeKoeppereal
                            http://www.myspace.com/heartistkingofthenorth

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: EARL CLARK

                              I really believe a very promosing player will slip to the Pacers @ 13 and my guess right now (3 weeks till the draft day) is Brandon Jennings will be available @ 13.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: EARL CLARK

                                Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                                I don't get the "tweener" thing, honestly. The issue is that he's got the skills of a SF and the body of a PF? Because 6'10" doesn't sounds "tweener" to me. Sure, he's light, but he'll add weight as he adds years. 20 pounds doesn't sound unreasonable, which would make him 6'10", 245. That's plenty.
                                ZERO PF SKILLS. None. Not any, not a post game, not a quality rebounding game. So a heavier, tall pure SF that earlier in the year was even out at SG for Pitino.

                                Awesome.

                                Size is not the issue, motivation is not the issue. Between the ears is the issue. I simply think he is going to be really lost on most plays and it's going to drag down the rest of the team on both ends, and I don't just mean in his rookie year.

                                Look, you watch the games off ball and this is what you see - TWill and he go to opposite wings on zone defense. TWill then has to constantly yell over to Clark to keep him in position and aware of zone overloads, backcuts, etc. TWill is running his floor spot AND Clark's.

                                This happens EVERY GAME, not just sometimes. Clark is not a freshman at this point either, nor is Pitino new or is this early in the year.

                                On top of this you also see him burned by these same cuts and overloads.


                                At the other end he was great at being a one on one guy, the person you cleared out for. At his size he could pull up (silky) or drive for lane runners pretty well. He wasn't really Mr. Post though and at his size that's odd.

                                Again these are all the factors that drew me to TWill so much, he does all of those things except shoot the consistant jumper. I do think NBA guys need to be able to hit a jump shot and Clark having that is a good first step. My concern is that he won't add to this once he gets to the NBA.

                                He didn't make big strides in college so I don't see reason to expect that to suddenly change. Again counter with TWill who drastically improved his mental game. So the opportunity was there, he just failed to get it. I don't question his work ethic or desire one bit however. He never played lazy, just lost.

                                All Clark needs is some coaching.
                                Yes, if only he'd played for a coach that knew something about the game or had any history of winning. I mean being at USC with Tim Floyd really held him back....errr, wait a sec...




                                Jennings falling to 13. Good luck on that. I'd be thrilled. Pass happy PG with about 30 different passes in his bag of tricks and a lump of humility from his Euro attempt. Sounds good to me.
                                Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 06-04-2009, 01:59 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X