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

Favors or Cousins?

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

  • #46
    Re: Favors or Cousins?

    Monroe has a nice over his shoulder post move, too, I'm not sure how he translate to the NBA. He looks the part to me. Patterson I think is a safe pick and probably doesn't get the sizzle he should cuz he's playing with Wall and Cousins and he's been draft vetted before. I like both players, quite a bit. I thought Patterson was the way for the Pacers to go, last year.

    I don't know if I'm imaging this or what, but didn't the NBA/NCAA change when you had to declare for the draft or decide not to. Didn't they move it way up? The reason I ask is if it's in May instead of June then you have a much better picture of who will truely be available to draft, much earlier.

    I think Harangody was at all of the draft camps last year, but I think the rule change makes them pull their name out much sooner now? Am I right on this?
    Last edited by Speed; 03-15-2010, 01:01 PM.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Favors or Cousins?

      In this day and age you need a PF who can shoot from outside atleast 10 feet so I say Favors. Cousin's game is that of a Center not a PF.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Favors or Cousins?

        Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
        Just a few particulars I noticed when comparing Favors vs. Cousins. Favors is 6-9 - 215lbs.

        Cousins is 6-11 - 250LBS.
        Those are old (as in highschool junior-senior) measurements. Favors is currently listed at 6-9 (some list him at 6-10) 246 lbs while Cousins is listed currently at 6-11 280
        Last edited by Merz; 03-15-2010, 01:27 PM.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Favors or Cousins?

          [QUOTE=Merz;973705]
          Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
          Just a few particulars I noticed when comparing Favors vs. Cousins. Favors is 6-9 - 215lbs.

          Cousins is 6-11 - 250LBS. QUOTE]

          Those are old (as in highschool junior-senior) measurements. Favors is currently listed at 6-9 (some list him at 6-10) 246 lbs while Cousins is listed currently at 6-11 280
          If he is a legit 6-10 240, then I'd take him I guess. I just seen so many Young PF's coming out of the draft in recent years who are light weights and they hardly ever put on the muscle mass needed to play the position in the NBA.
          You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Favors or Cousins?

            Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
            This team needs a "bad guy". Not necessarily a player who will frequent the clubs, but someone with that "me against the world" mentality. Someone who can bust his way through the lane with little regard.

            Swagger, Cousins has that. I don't want a team full of "nice guys". We need attitude.
            I got to disagree with you on this one Dukie. I think the attitude we need on this team is the type of attitude a player would give to opposing players (kind of how Ben Wallace was). But the kind of attitude that Cousins brings is direct attitude to his coaches and players; thats not what we want on this team.

            I wouldnt mind a player that has attitude towards opposing players, but count me out if the players is bringing attitude towards his own coaches/players
            "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Favors or Cousins?

              Hansbrough showed some of the attitude, I want, I just don't know where this sustained injury leaves him.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Favors or Cousins?

                Originally posted by Speed View Post
                Cole is by far my biggest fear for the draft.
                It would be a waste to take him. We don't need another young center who will battle time with Roy.

                We're better off signing a veteran center to play backup time behind Roy.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Favors or Cousins?

                  Originally posted by cordobes View Post
                  I haven't seen enough of any of them to give an opinion on who's better, but I'm almost 100% sure that if the Pacers draft Cousins they'll trade Hibbert right after. That's just too much slowness for today's game (even though Cousins isn't a slow player for a center at all - but to play at the PF, he probably needs to be paired with a center like Thabeet, not Hibbert). Favors seems to be a much more natural fit.
                  This is what no one is talking about. Cousins is almost certainly a full-time center in the NBA, and I'm really skeptical of a Hibbert/Cousins pairing in the frontcourt, for the reasons that you mentioned.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Favors or Cousins?

                    Originally posted by Roaming Gnome
                    I'm not speaking of Cousins or a "bad boy" specifically, but we do need a player with some swagger and fire in a leadership position on the team. You can have great locker room guys be role players, but we need some aggressiveness out of the core.
                    I agree we need a guy like that, but IMO Cousins isn't that guy. He seems closer to Ron Artest than he does Mark Jackson. Pass!

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Favors or Cousins?

                      On Cousins, is there anything documented on his attitude/work ethic? I need to watch him more closely to see if I see some Hulk tendencies or not. I just wonder since, I'd hate to dismiss this guy, if its not really a true concern. I have no horse in this race, other than the Pacers drafting the most bestest possible player.

                      I'd assume it's not other teams who want him to fall to them, this early in the process.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Favors or Cousins?

                        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                        I agree we need a guy like that, but IMO Cousins isn't that guy. He seems closer to Ron Artest than he does Mark Jackson. Pass!
                        It's college and he doesn't frequently get in trouble.

                        Like AJ, he had an issue in college and he wasn't getting in trouble frequently.

                        I'm sure if the Pacers take him, he'd stay out of trouble based on the team we have and that he'd mature.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Favors or Cousins?

                          Originally posted by duke dynamite View Post
                          There is nothing wrong with putting a little whiskey in your milk.
                          Until it curdles. Bleaaaaagh.
                          BillS

                          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Favors or Cousins?

                            I've watched them both a lot. I've been down on Favors for being so raw (he is) and down on Cousins for being so combustable (he is), but neither issue is a dealbreaker for me anymore.

                            Cousins' behavior has the makings of just being really young. And frankly the team needs some fire. Favors has made great strides in his game already and is a monster himself.

                            Getting the #3 or #4 pick is a homerun either way, I'm 100% neutral and pleased with either of them as a pick. It would almost (but not quite) be enough to make me renew with JOB still here as the coach.


                            BTW, let's say that either of them don't pan out, I don't fault the team for taking them. Right now without a crystal ball I think there is way too much guesswork or assumption to assume that either won't make it. They have NBA bodies, strength, hops and speed for a frontline guy.


                            Having said all that, it sure was intriguing to see the passion and big time playmaking from Cousins the other day...

                            Cousins reminds me of a hard working Derrick Coleman.
                            Fixed

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Favors or Cousins?

                              If Favors and Cousins switched teams I don't think this would even be a discussion. Cousins benefits from having Wall, Patterson and Bledsoe, where as Favors is somewhat hindered by playing next to Lawal. Put Cousins next to Lawal and you would see a drop in his rebounds and points as well since Lawal doesn't space the floor and is a very good on the boards. (better than Cousins imo) I have to give my vote to Favors since I think he is more talented and a better fit with Hibbert than Cousins.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Favors or Cousins?

                                This is the textbook "Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it" type of situation.

                                Well before the game as the teams were leaving the floor, a Vandy fan's son booed (Wow - A boo. How awful!) Cousins as he was leaving the floor. Cousins flipped him a bird for all to see and held it there for a good 5 to 10 seconds. The father of the kid was shocked and yelled "c'mon man no need for that. Just watch those elbows tonight". Cousins walked over to the two and from two feet away said "Fu%$ You and Fu%$ you too, kid". This happened near section D where UK comes out of the tunnel near the front row and was confirmed by a VU police officer who saw the whole thing.
                                Link

                                Thats not being a "firey competitor" or an "enforcer", that is called being a classless jerk.

                                "We did a live shot right after the game. I see many fans swarming the court. One in particular looked like he was trying to duck the security guards. While he was still bent over, DeMarcus threw what I saw was two little uppercuts. A big fellow like that can throw a much bigger punch than he did. But he definitely swung twice. Somebody from the Kentucky bench, somebody in a suit, grabbed DeMarcus as quickly as it happened and the kids after he got hit."

                                Of course, without actual video evidence or any corroborating witnesses, it's pretty tough to start wagging fingers at Cousins. Unfortunately for the Kentucky star, though, someone's coming forward and he just so happens to be the guy Cousins punched (he's going by "Stephen" in an attempt to maintain his anonymity).

                                Here's what "Stephen" had to say on Columbia radio:
                                "I had my head down, just kind of plowing through crowd, just because you want to get past the girls in the yellow coats. So as I'm doing that, my heads down and I bump into this big body. And, of course, I look up and it's none other than Cousins. I'm like, great, biggest guy in the whole Coliseum right now. First he gives me a little chicken wing and then I get like a cold **** in my right cheek, and man it knocked me for a loop. He gave me at least two good licks."
                                Link.

                                Ah a guy who punches fans, fits right in with the pacers and our history right? One thing we know about Ron Artest though, he WAS a firey competitor and a defensive enforcer. Unfortunatly, thats not who I think of when I think of Cousins... Who does this quote remind you of?

                                Cousins is not the most fundamentally sound player you’ll find, which combined with his below average lateral quickness causes him to get exposed from time to time when being attacked off the dribble by quicker players he’s forced to switch onto. He looks a bit lazy and/or not focused getting back on defense sometimes, something that caused him and Kentucky coach John Calipari to butt heads over on occasion early on in the season.
                                Link.

                                If you said "Zach Randolph" ....ding ding ding.

                                A guy like this? Yeah lets all hope and pray he just magically "matures" when he gets handed a boatload of money upon entering the NBA. And as has already been stated in this thread, bringing in cousins is saying goodbye to Hibbert, because they cannot co-exist. He is a low post scoring center with defensive questions, a complete duplicate... minus the passing.

                                Cousins may be more talented than Hibbert, but this is about more than that. You are waving goodbye to an extremily likeable, hard working, and also pretty talented in his own right young prospect for a guy with a ton of baggage and question marks. A high IQ good teammate good passing big man for a more talented, me-first, lazy malcontent.

                                While Cousins is without a doubt a precocious talent with the type of physical tools and scoring instincts that you rarely see at the college level, there are many question marks revolving around whether he has the intangibles needed to reach his extremely high potential. His body language and overall temperament on the floor is often very poor, looking somewhat lazy and disinterested and at times downright selfish. He’s clearly not the smartest guy you’ll find on or off the court, and he already tends to react very poorly to different situations on the floor and lose his temper in concerning fashion.
                                Link.

                                Cousin's is going to be a 20/10 guy easily, but so was Zach Randolph. He looks to me like a malcontent player who will put up big numbers and get a big contract, but he won't help you win. No way this organization takes a risk on him after what they have been through recently, unless you really want to see the pacers move to another city. The guy is clearly a ticking time bomb. It would only take one incident to undo all the good will this team is trying to rebuild with the city of Indianapolis.

                                If Cousins is the best player available (and we would pick Favors lightyears before Cousins) then there is a very simple solution. TRADE TRADE TRADE!!!!! That pick is going to be very valuable to a lot of teams and we can certainly get back some very nice assets that don't involve getting rid of Hibbert and actually fit the type of team we are trying to construct.

                                This team DOES need players who play with fire, but this team does NOT need Cousins. He's just an *******.
                                Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 03-15-2010, 03:16 PM.
                                "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                                - ilive4sports

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X