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

Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

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

  • #61
    Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
    1) Picked higher than expected? No, he tracked up quickly as the Big East wrapped up and in the conference tourney. He tracked 17th his JR year, dropped his SR year till he played up to the 13-14 range in April and May, slipped a bit in June, then projected back up to 11-12 in the 4-5 days leading up to the draft.
    Yep. We heard plenty of chatter about Tyler moving up the board from multiple sources on the run up to the draft. If DraftExpress missed it, that's their bad.

    Look, he wasn't my pick either (I wanted us to trade out of the draft entirely). But talking about where DraftExpress had him ranked is just silly. It's not a meaningful criteria, especially when the guy you were jocking all last season (TWill) also was picked well ahead of where he was projected for most of the previous season.

    TWill didn't move up DE's board 10 spots because he became a different player, he moved up because they heard who was scouting him and who looked like they might pick him. Same thing happened with Tyler, but they missed it. That's their problem, not his.

    And I say this as somebody who didn't (and still doesn't) like the pick.
    This space for rent.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

      Originally posted by judicata View Post
      You are not objective, you did not want Blair, and the guys you did want are remarkably bigger disappointments than Hans. Why are you so fixated on this issue?
      THIS.

      http://www.pacersdigest.com/showpost...0&postcount=45

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
        PS - Blair is on a rookie deal. Year 2 his knees go out. WHO GIVES A S***. Rookie deal ends and you are done with him. Tyler was not projected to be a major factor, 1 year in or 10. He was bench fodder.

        I said this pre-draft, take Blair, get your 2-3 years of strong inside rebounding and force and then his career ends when the knees go. That's still the better choice, and that's worst case scenario.

        Gotta think full picture on these things. It was very low-risk at 13th in that draft, at least if you were going to take a PF no matter what. There were no other big time PF prospects, as in starter possible.
        If it doesn't matter if either player doesn't make it past year 2, then why the **** do you keep bashing this stupid topic every chance you get.

        You've not said anything new on the situation for 4 months. GET OVER IT.
        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

          Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
          The way Blair is playing, ACLs appear to be overrated

          Darn right. I've only got one, and some of my posts are excellent!



          EDIT:
          Though not nearly as excellent as Mr. Sobchak's stroll down memory lane:

          http://www.pacersdigest.com/showpost...3&postcount=62


          .
          Last edited by Putnam; 02-08-2010, 02:52 PM.
          And I won't be here to see the day
          It all dries up and blows away
          I'd hang around just to see
          But they never had much use for me
          In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
            If it doesn't matter if either player doesn't make it past year 2, then why the **** do you keep bashing this stupid topic every chance you get.

            You've not said anything new on the situation for 4 months. GET OVER IT.
            WORST CASE. WORST. Why take a guy with blah upside instead of a guy who proved he could POWER rebound at a starter caliber level when the WORST thing that can happen is you only get the power guy for a couple of cheap years?

            It does matter. It's called spending money wisely and adding talent that can significantly improve a key area of need.




            KNOCKING BLAIR
            As for my knocks on Blair as linked above - CONTEXT, and you damn sure know it too. I was going up against people that were flipping out about how perfectly wonderful Blair was, not trying to say don't take him at all.

            And if you follow it to the conclusion you see me changing my view on him as I get more familiar with him and begin to consider that he's "plays off" might have as much to do with his need to avoid foul trouble.

            Plus, I'm not saying now he's Mr. Perfect. I'm saying he's doing what the Pacers needed, not that he ends every freaking need the team has. He's not Griffin, or what Griffin is supposed to be. He's a SOLID, but not spectacular pick at 13 for one of the 3 teams most in search of a power rebounder.

            Blair did take plays off, for rest, foul worries, whatever. But he also had a skill that was 100% applicable to the NBA and I believe I said that as well.




            TWILL - NOT A DOUBLE STANDARD. I didn't say Tyler was a flop already, I said that taking him instead of Blair was a big mistake. I also said that if TWill FG% is going to be a make or break for him as a pro. That means that I see his FG% as a dealbreaker and that if it continues he most certainly is a flop.

            You guys think you're mad, look at it from my side. I'm not in here every other day posting threads like "Is TWill a shoe-in for the rookie game" or "Is TWill one of the draft steals" or anything remotely close to suggesting that somehow TWill is working out pretty well.

            Why? Because so far TWill's FG% is keeping him from working out!!!

            The minute I suggest TWill is playing great then you can tell me to STFU. Until then why don't you guys try toning down the "Hans is so wonderful" crap UNLESS YOU THINK TWILL IS ALSO GREAT.

            I liked Twill as a PROSPECT. He's struggled as a pro player so far because of his shooting. Man up and say the same thing about Tyler and then we have no more threads with me complaining about his game.

            Let's argue the same points.

            Hans as great player so far, TWill as great player so far. No.
            Hans as flop, Twill as flop. No.
            Me starting threads or injecting into threads how strong TWill has been? Nope. People celebrating how good Tyler has been? Happens often.

            Would I argue if someone said that Chase or Sam Young were better SG/SF picks than TWill so far, of course not.
            I'm not making that case, which is why someone like me isn't on the other side losing his s*** about it. The equivilant of me saying "they should have taken Blair" is someone saying the Next should have taken Young or Chase. I won't disagree with that right now.

            TWill is literally considered the worst shooter in this rookie class, and he's outshooting Hans. And if you add in the factor of shooting relative to position, Hans is a disaster by PF FG% standards while TWill is just lagging. SF's can linger in the 42-43 range and stick around, that's about the same as a PF going at 48-49%.



            OTHER PICKS
            I liked Chase as a pick, especially on a trade down. He's doing fine. I also liked Sam Young, another PIT player that inititally I was concerned with on effort but ultimately I was convinced that he was a really nice sleeper to go after. He's also doing well.





            HENDERSON and Larry Brown
            I liked Henderson as a pick. We literally have no idea because Brown refuses to play him. If you want to stand by Larry Brown's choices on PT for rookies, or really any young players, then let's start the list up of other terrible players according to Larry Brown.
            Here's three:

            1) Jalen Rose
            2) DJ Augustin
            3) Raymond Felton

            Of course since you see Brown's lack of playing time for Henderson as justification then by all means join me on the Stephen Jackson parade since Brown is given him MORE PLAYING TIME than Rick "love him no matter what" Carlisle. It's the first time in Jack's career that he's hit the 40 mpg mark (Rick gave him 35-36)

            What's that? Oh, you don't like that Brown opinion so much any more. No kidding.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

              Originally posted by Putnam View Post
              Darn right. I've only got one, and some of my posts are excellent!
              LOL, I've only got one too. Can't play hoops without it hurting like hell though.
              Chicago Bears lineman Roberto Garza has played 3 seasons for the Bears without discernable ACL's. (ouch)
              Betcha Blair has a short career though. (hope not)

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                The Pacers were really not in the position to take Blair.

                They had to pick the safe choice. They took the non injury prone (oops) guy, the guy with ACLs, the guy who is quite possibly one of the best college basketball players ever. They took the marketable player.

                Tyler has some things to work on, but he'll end up..at worst a good sixth man with a long career. I mean, to be fair, there is no way to really "know" that, but at the same time the odds are much greater Tyler has a long career than Blair.

                I really think, despite what's happened to Tyler, the Pacers made a good decision. And that in the long run the Tyler/AJ picks will end up better than the possible combo of Ty/Blair.

                Blair was a fantasitc pick for the Spurs..who are trying to win a few more championships while they still can. He's not a good pick for a rebuilding team.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                  Due to a recommendation from a poster I really respect, I'm done with repeating points on this debate. I'd delete my last post but I feel like it's addressing multiple issues of misrepresentation of the core argument, and I'll let it sit as the final point.

                  This, like Jackson prior, are points that I'm not nearly as concerned with as the posting makes it seem. It's far more driven by posts that I see as either inappropriately too positive about the pick or too dismissive of the options that were there prior to the draft.

                  I guess it doesn't really matter. Let's let the players resolve the debate over the next 2 months and 2 seasons after. Then either I or someone else can bump this thread.




                  I will say that my early read on potential misses by me are TWill and Henderson, and to a lesser extent Lawson and Collison. I'm not hiding that fact, though just as it's true for Tyler or any other pick, it's going to take a couple of years to be sure, especially given some of the situations these guys are in.
                  Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 02-08-2010, 02:47 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                    Originally posted by Psycho T View Post
                    Sinus Infections can turn into Ear Infections.. Its my guess.
                    OH golly!!! DON'T EVER MENTION SINUS INFECTIONS AROUND THIS TEAM!!!
                    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                      Wow. You all are really fighting this battle between Blair and Hansbrough.


                      Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                        Why does Blair even get mentioned here? And why does Seth dislike Tyler so much and have unconditional love for McRoberts?

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                          There's just no way I would have taken Blair as a lottery pick and guaranteed contract with no ACLs. It's nice to be able to play hindsight genius on an internet discussion board when you risk nothing, but it's quite another to be in Bird's position. There's no way of knowing how long Blair's legs will hold up because there's not much precedent for this type of condition in pro basketball. It's premature to discuss Tyler's long-term value because no one could have predicted his current health problems and he clearly hasn't had a chance to play much at this point. I am happy with Bird's selection an believe Tyler will eventually be a productive member of the team.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                            Originally posted by IndyPacer View Post
                            There's just no way I would have taken Blair as a lottery pick and guaranteed contract with no ACLs.
                            Since Seth has decided to leave the conversation alone, I'll just pitch in for him here and point out that nobody has suggested the Pacers should have taken Blair with their lotto pick.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                              I've learned that with the Pacers, you have to expect everything to go wrong and stretch out longer than it should. Whether with injuries, games, or trades. You kind of have to expect injuries to last the rest of the season, trades to never happen, and expect to see something awful every single game.
                              Last edited by Thesterovic; 02-09-2010, 10:19 AM. Reason: typo
                              "I keep wondering the same thing. Last week they had the 4th worst record in the league, had an 11.9 percent chance of winning the lottery and were in line to land a franchise type player like Derrick Favors or DeMarcus Cousins. This week? They have a 1.7 percent chance of winning the lottery, have the 8th worst record and are in line to draft Cole Aldrich or Greg Monroe. Way to go Jim O'Brien. Rest Danny Granger the rest of the season (if it isn't too late) and give Josh McRoberts lots of minutes. That ought to do it." - Chad Ford on winning meaningless games

                              Way to go Jim, you may have just put our franchise back another 4+ years.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                                After getting blocked 8 times in his 2 game stay in LA, DeJuan Blair now has been blocked 36 times in his last 36 games, but all we ever heard from Seth was Tyler having block against a game average, and now on the season they have basically the same Block per shot average but one player missed camp.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X