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

  • #46
    Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

    Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
    The way Blair is playing, ACLs appear to be overrated
    He sure looks quite nimble on the court.

    So say Blair's career is cut short by knee issues, we have already lost a whole year of Hansbrough. So Blair already has a 1 year advantage in the logevity category over Hans.

    There is another aspect to this comparison as well, that being Blair appears to be a much better NBA player.
    For now. Ask Tiger how important ACL's are.

    Honestly, I give Blair 5 years tops. That's not very much.
    I think Tyler will be around for much longer.

    Is Blair better, possibly. Seems like it right now. But I'd rather have someone that's a little less good, but around much longer for a rebuilding team.
    Blair's perfect for the Lakers, the Spurs, Cavs ect..teams that are looking to win now. Indiana's rebuilding. Tyler will be a good player, probably a good sixth man. He was the safe pick, and I think it was the right choice.

    However, if they hadn't gotten Price, a pretty good PG, then that pick would have been a poor decision as this draft was Blake Griffen, Hasheem Thabeet...and the 57 midgets. You needed a point guard, and got lucky that someone like Price was able to be drafted. Because it would be pretty bad with no PG and Tyler being out.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

      Or ask Heinz Ward. He had quite a good and long career.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
        All the non-draft followers have talked themselves into other teams fighting to get to him, but that is total Pacers PR BS. The Bulls DID NOT TRADE UP to get him, they let the Pacers take him and settled for SF/PF Johnson. The Bulls wanted to trade up for HENDERSON.

        He tracked at 20-22 for 3 years, then suddenly on draft night he was a 13th pick? Come on.
        Where was TWill picked again?
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          All the non-draft followers have talked themselves into other teams fighting to get to him, but that is total Pacers PR BS. The Bulls DID NOT TRADE UP to get him, they let the Pacers take him and settled for SF/PF Johnson. The Bulls wanted to trade up for HENDERSON.

          He tracked at 20-22 for 3 years, then suddenly on draft night he was a 13th pick? Come on.
          That's just plain wrong. The Bulls offered both of their 1st round draft picks for Tyler on draft night. You are correct in saying he was INITIALLY tracked as a 20ish pick, BUT after the pre-draft works (particularly the private ones) his stock improved significantly, evidenced partly by the Bulls offer (which the Pacers in my opinion should have taken and I am as big of fan as Tyler as they come, but I think that was a horrible move on their part). The Nets looked at him seriously. Toronto was VERY interested in him as well, but on the advice of his agent he did not work out for them. A team is less inclined to pursue someone who has made it clear he would rather not play for him.

          I'm not disagreeing with any of your evaluations, but the subtle statement that Indy was the only team interested in him is wrong. If anything Indy made less of a reach for him than the Bulls or Toronto attempted to do.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            Where was TWill picked again?

            Not sure I understand the direction you are going here.

            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.

            DraftExpress has Hans as NEVER going above 20th the entire 2008-09 season, including having him at 22nd in their final mock.

            2) He was a worse option than Blair for the Nets? Not sure about that. Maybe.

            3) He's a bust? Disagree completely. He's been a very good passer, rebounder and defender which is why I liked him and why any team should like him. The concern was his shooting which is why you had many people suggesting the Point Forward role for him instead.

            I would have loved for the Pacers to get him, but he would have been a huge disaster in this system because his outside shooting hasn't been there yet.

            His per36 for the last 4 games is at 7 assists, 5 rebounds. Still poor shooting but it's up to 40%. That's likely to be his make or break factor, can he get his FG% to 45. If so then he makes it, if not then probably not.
            Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 02-07-2010, 03:04 PM.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

              Originally posted by JohnWild View Post
              That's just plain wrong. The Bulls offered both of their 1st round draft picks for Tyler on draft night. You are correct in saying he was INITIALLY tracked as a 20ish pick, BUT after the pre-draft works (particularly the private ones) his stock improved significantly, evidenced partly by the Bulls offer (which the Pacers in my opinion should have taken and I am as big of fan as Tyler as they come, but I think that was a horrible move on their part). The Nets looked at him seriously. Toronto was VERY interested in him as well, but on the advice of his agent he did not work out for them. A team is less inclined to pursue someone who has made it clear he would rather not play for him.

              I'm not disagreeing with any of your evaluations, but the subtle statement that Indy was the only team interested in him is wrong. If anything Indy made less of a reach for him than the Bulls or Toronto attempted to do.
              No they didn't. They did not make that offer, unless you have some inside GM info that we do not. They made an offer for HENDERSON. If he was there then they wanted to trade up for him and the Pacers seemed interested. When Henderson got picked that trade up offer was pulled.

              His stock improved? For the loss, here you go.
              http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/...draft-history/
              Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 02-07-2010, 03:05 PM.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                No they didn't. They did not make that offer, unless you have some inside GM info that we do not. They made an offer for HENDERSON. If he was there then they wanted to trade up for him and the Pacers seemed interested. When Henderson got picked that trade up offer was pulled.

                His stock improved? For the loss, here you go.
                http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/...draft-history/
                just because Hans was expected to be pick in the 20th does not mean anything, all the mock drafts had Blair at 11th and he when all the way down to the second round.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                  Originally posted by Kemo View Post
                  I agree with this part...

                  I really would like to see McRoberts forced into the situation of having to step up and be the man..

                  It makes me sad, because if McBob actually got decent PT , we would probably have a chance at seeing him in the dunk contest during all star break..
                  I'd MUCH rather see him compete than Shannon Brown .

                  McBob would do very well in the dunk contest in my opinion ..
                  I'd LOVE to see McBob and Birdman have a go at it in the dunk competition ..




                  .
                  I can't help but disagree with this entire post

                  Shannon Brown is one of the most explosive dunkers in the league. Last time birdman was in the dunk contest he ruined the entire event. who really cares if he is in the dunk contest or not.

                  yes troy gets traded and Mcbob comes in and is our first option. Makes a ton of sense to me

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                    I'm not sure if I understand what you were trying to say in the first place. I thought you were insinuating that Indy made some type of reach for Tyler. I was simply stating that Tyler would have been gone 3 picks later (I think Chicago was at 16) and that it wasn't inconceivable that he'd have been gone before Indy even picked. As I stated his stock went up (from the 20s you mentioned) when the workouts started; very similar to Blair when teams realized exactly how serious the ACL issues were. DraftExpress and sites like that become less accurate when workouts start as they don't know what teams are thinking after the private workouts about every player. I'm not validating any draft choices only pointing out that Indy was not alone in their interest and belief in Tyler. I'm not heading in any direction, its to early to do so; especially because of Tyler's unfortunate injuries.

                    Just for the hell of it if I was Indy I would have traded Tyler to Chicago. Then you could have drafted some nice combination such as Lawson and Blair.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                      I thought there was news coverage on the Bulls offer, but either way rest assurred their was an offer made. I have no knowledge on the Henderson matter, but the Bulls did offer their 2 picks for Tyler on draft night (literally during the Pacers five minute period). If you watch draft night background you can actually see his agent Jeff Schwartz stand up and field some cell phone calls related to the matter during the few minutes before Tyler was chosen. Just because a draft website didn't predict these types of things happening doesn't make it a reality. They make plenty of mistakes and they don't have all the information. I don't see why you are arguing this point, I'm not disagreeing with anything but the simple fact that Indy was not alone in being interested in Tyler. In fact, teams like Chicago and Toronto appeared more interested in him and were willing to "give up more".

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        All the non-draft followers have talked themselves into other teams fighting to get to him, but that is total Pacers PR BS.
                        Rather or not teams were fighting for Legend, I don't know. What I do know is that reports said Hansbrough blew scout's minds in workouts and that the Nets were contemplating taking him at #11. Perhaps it's all one big conspiracy and Chad Ford is a part of the Pacer's P.R. team. Or perhaps Tyler Hansbrough really did kick *** in workouts and really did impress his way into the lottery.

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        He tracked at 20-22 for 3 years, then suddenly on draft night he was a 13th pick? Come on.
                        Hansbrough was never going in the 20s regardless of when he entered the draft. That's because he's much more impressive physically than people (including draft mockers) give him credit for, and which was proven with his (relative to expectations) fantastic pre-draft combine. He came out better than expected in nearly every area, including being over 6'9" in shoes (haters were claiming 6'7"). Combine this with his aforementioned mind-blowing workouts and the fact that he's proven to be productive and a winner, and the intelligent basketball fan understands why Hansbrough was a lottery pick.


                        As for Gerald Henderson... no idea. He wasn't that impressive at Duke and as we all know, he lead them nowhere. I had him tracked as a late 1st rounder. Looks like Larry Brown may have too.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                          Sheesh. Blair vs. Hansbrough again?

                          Haven't we covered this one roughly 100,000 times?
                          You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
                          All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

                          - Jimmy Buffett

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                            Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                            Rather or not teams were fighting for Legend, I don't know.
                            Whether or not you're being serious whenever you use the word Legend, I don't know.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                              Any talk about Blair on the Pacers is pure folly as long as Jim O'Brien is the coach.

                              I liked Blair coming in from what I read on here about him but I knew he would never see the floor for other than a few token min. that O'Brien felt forced to use him.

                              He is NOT a Jim O'Brien type player.


                              Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Rookie Hansbrough's health problem worsens

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post

                                3) He's a bust? Disagree completely. He's been a very good passer, rebounder and defender which is why I liked him and why any team should like him. The concern was his shooting which is why you had many people suggesting the Point Forward role for him instead.
                                This is why this conversation is a joke. TWill isn't a bust because he can get his shooting % up and his per36 numbers look good. Hans is awful because despite actual production, his shooting % is poor and apparently will never go anywhere.

                                You look at the kid with turd covered lenses. You trivialize his intangibles, fail to notice the fact that outside of his horrible shooting %, he is making plays and producing in other areas like rebounding. For Tyler, its all about his shooting %, with no room for improvement, no mitigation for the health issues and the lack of training camp. I don't think you can find a thread on this forum that has 3 posts about Hans without you ****ting on him.

                                Compare your analysis to Josh, who does less every time he hits the floor, has bad rebounding numbers at his position, has been in the league for two more years,and for everyone who isn't a homer, is barely a blip on the radar. But you praise his good dimensions, focus on intangibles, and point out how he can make it big if he fixes a few things.

                                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?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X