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

Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

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

  • Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

    My friend and I were having this discussion. He insists that right now Kendrick Perkins is better than Andrew Bynum. He says he would take Kendrick Perkins in a draft over Andrew Bynum. I say he's crazy. Bynum has been hurt, so he hasn't been playing well, and yes, maybe that makes him the dreaded "injury-prone".

    But when he's been healthy, he's shown he can be an excellent offensive big man. Perkins is no different than Reggie Evans, in my opinion, and just as ugly by the way, lol.

    So I thought I would bring it to outside sources (since I think he's afraid to).

    You're on the clock, and you need a big man this season. Only 2 bigs out there: Perkins and Bynum. Who do you take?
    34
    Perkins
    58.82%
    20
    Bynum
    41.18%
    14

  • #2
    Re: Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

    At their current salaries? Perkins.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

      Just skill. Not salaries.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

        Even then it's not that big of a difference. Bynum is more skilled, or maybe refined is a better word, but Perkins is much stronger and I would say has more of a presence and effect on the outcome of games.


        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

          So who would you take then? If you were starting a team right now, from scratch (since the Pacers will be gone soon, lol. Joke, let's not derail this convo into that topic please). You're on the clock and Stern needs your pick.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

            Bynum is the more talented player, but it depends on what a team needs.

            As of this moment I think Perkins would be better for the Lakers and Bynum would be better for the Celtics since Garnett is hurt. With a healthy Garnett, I would go with Perkins for both teams.

            For the Pacers I would pick Bynum since we need a post presence.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

              I mean it's a silly question to ask because neither of these guys are worthy of being the corner stone of a franchise. Who I would choose is dependent on what other players I have on my roster.


              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

                I said Perkins, I like his toughness both mentally and physically and I really like his defense. Bynum still seems like a kid and a bit overwhelmed. I'm not in the group that sees Bynum as a star someday.

                Bynum probably has the better potential and physical ability to be better, but I voted for Perkins workman like role player mentality.

                Bynum seems soft to me.
                Last edited by Speed; 06-12-2009, 11:31 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

                  Originally posted by Indy View Post
                  I mean it's a silly question to ask because neither of these guys are worthy of being the corner stone of a franchise. Who I would choose is dependent on what other players I have on my roster.
                  It's a silly question to compare players now?

                  It just comes down to what you rate as more important. Would you rather have a team that has a 7'-er with offensive post skills or a guy who plays tough D and can be physical?

                  It's just an opinion, I'm not gonna make you actually stick with it, lol. Personally, I'll take a guy who can score in the post (when healthy) to build around. Esp since he can be a defensive presence just by his height alone, and I can get him in the gym to make him stronger.

                  How about this. Would you rather have Rik Smits or Kendrick Perkins as your pick? Or someone comparable to Perkins from the early 90s, can't think of anyone right now. I think we can all agree Smits wasn't a great rebounder or defender, but he could definitely score.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

                    You're missing my point. It's fine to compare two players, but you're saying you have to pick one to start your team around. Well, who in their right mind would pick either one of these guys to start their team around? It's not like we're talking Lebron and Kobe here, then a poll like this makes sense.

                    About all that Perkins and Bynum have in common is the fact that they are both centers. Otherwise their games are incredibly different. I cannot choose between the two without knowing what the rest of the team looks like. For the Pacers, I'd probably take Bynum to get his low post scoring, but if I'm a team who already has low post scoring and could use some toughness and defense inside, then take Perkins. Neither one is so overwhelmingly talented that I would take him over the other 10 times out of 10.

                    Perkins is a bit of a throwback to the 90's big men, I think he compares with a lot of them. I'd say he's sort of a hybrid of the Davises.


                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

                      I like Perkins because you can use him to build an Orlando-esque team. Perkins does your dirty work and you can play a guy like Granger at the 4 and, say, Dunleavy at the 3. You'd get some low post play from Perkins, just enough to keep their defenders honest, but your main scoring could come from the mismatches from your 3 and 4.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

                        Perkins.

                        He's more polished, has a definate impact on both ends of the floor and stays healthier.

                        Right now, I'd say Perkins is the better player. So, based on what they've contributed in their respective series throughout the post season, I'd draft Perkis today over Andrew Bynum.

                        Now, this question, of course, is far different from who is the more talented player or which player has the better upside (i.e., potential). But that's NOT the question that was asked.

                        So, sticking straight to the point of the thread, I'd draft Perkins over Bynum TODAY based soley on their respective post-season performances.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

                          Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                          Perkins.

                          He's more polished, has a definate impact on both ends of the floor and stays healthier.

                          Right now, I'd say Perkins is the better player. So, based on what they've contributed in their respective series throughout the post season, I'd draft Perkis today over Andrew Bynum.

                          Now, this question, of course, is far different from who is the more talented player or which player has the better upside (i.e., potential). But that's NOT the question that was asked.

                          So, sticking straight to the point of the thread, I'd draft Perkins over Bynum TODAY based soley on their respective post-season performances.
                          Great last two posts. Take a position and defend it with thoughtful insight. Thanks!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

                            Oh...the question is who'd I want now? My mistake.....Perkins...he's more polished and fills a specific role that he is very good at....especially on the defensive end. As for the future...I'd go with Bynum's upside.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Andrew Bynum or Kendrick Perkins right now?

                              Perkins also defends Howard better than anyone I have seen. And in the eastern conference over the next 10 years being able to defend him is going to be extremely important. But Bynum has much better star potential. Keep in mind how little Bynum has actually played.


                              I'm being very careful what I post in this thread because in two years Bynum could be a star player and this thread might make some of the Perkins supporters look foolish. You can call me a coward
                              Last edited by Unclebuck; 06-12-2009, 01:44 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X