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

Patterson or Monroe

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

  • #31
    Re: Patterson or Monroe

    Patterson - Up until this year, he was a back-to-the-basket oriented player. That was his predominant role. Cousins came in and was the bigger player, so Patterson adapted his game to the mid-range more and added an outside shot. He is a good all-around player and has more bulk and strength than he gets credit for. I think he compares favorably to Landry, except he is bigger and not as quick as Landry IMO. He is a good rebounder and getting better defensively. I think some of his defensive lapses have been the cause of guarding the post previously and now trying to figure out how to guard the perimeter. I don't see Patterson as a perimeter player, but I think he is the perfect guy who does everything well. Fundamentally sound. Very good athleticism and strength, but not great. Good basketball IQ. Great ball player to have on your team, but not a HOF player. I could see him being an Armen Gilliam type of player, just not quite as brutish and with a little more range. He will be very good in the pick and roll IMO. Very much a 15 and 8 guy.

    Monroe - Monroe is asked to be the only big on the court. This makes his job very difficult. He plays with three guards and a SF typically. So as for the toughness thing, I discredit some of that when you actually see some of the rebounds he does make. The one thing I will say about Monroe is that he has a bigger frame than what he is filling right now. I think his strength as he gets older will improve dramatically, which will help him significantly. I think Monroe is perfect for what we need. He is big enough to be a center. He is versatile enough to play PF. He will struggle trying to matchup against a guy like Nowitzki though. Monroe is not unathletic as some here are portraying him to be. He is actually quite a bit quicker than most big men. I have seen him drive on players smaller than him and be successful. Monroe has a back-to-the-basket offensive game. A lot of the games people have watched on national TV have him going up against zone defenses, which he is still effective because he plays the high post so well and passes through the zone. He won't face a zone in the NBA, which I think will help people in evaluating his capabilities. He is long and blocks shots. He could work a little on his weakside shot blocking, but usually dribble penetration against Georgetown happens on the side Monroe isn't. He has great touch and is a great ball handler for a big. I think he has a lot of fire as a competitor, but that is debateable by many on here.

    I think Monroe is clearly the better prospect because his upside is so much more than Patterson's. I LOVE BOTH of these players and will be very happy if the Pacers land one of them. There is no way we are drafting at 4. The likelihood is that we will be 6-8, which would be appropriate for either of these players IMO.
    Last edited by pacergod2; 03-17-2010, 03:25 PM.
    "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Patterson or Monroe

      Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
      I think Monroe is clearly the better prospect because his upside is so much more than Patterson's. I LOVE BOTH of these players and will be very happy if the Pacers land one of them. There is no way we are drafting at 4. The likelihood is that we will be 6-8, which would be appropriate for either of these players IMO.
      I'd guess that one would have to go back to the tapes from 2 seasons ago when Hibbert was with Georgetown, but I wonder how the both of them do when they were playing together at the same time.

      Defensively, knowing our deficiencies with Hibbert's lack of speed...mobility...athleticsm....**pretty much everything under the sun**.....which Player better complements Hibbert and/or Hansborough more in the Frontcourt?
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Patterson or Monroe

        I was in Lexington all weekend, and the buzz was that Paterson might stick around for another year. He's got eligibility left and could stick around if he doesn't like his draft position or if KY doesn't go far in the tourney. At least that's the word in Lexington.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Patterson or Monroe

          [QUOTE=d_c;974663]

          Patterson just doesn't have that kind of offensive arsenal. /QUOTE]


          WHAT? He's got a mid-range game AND developed a 3pt game this year!

          I'm one of the biggest advocates of getting Carl Landry in a Pacers uni on this board, and Patterson has more range than Landry does. Patterson has a total package offense type game where he can play in the paint or outside.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Patterson or Monroe

            Paterson clearly compliments Roy more. He is a better rebounder and team defender.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Patterson or Monroe

              [QUOTE=Justin Tyme;974796]
              Originally posted by d_c View Post

              Patterson just doesn't have that kind of offensive arsenal. /QUOTE]


              WHAT? He's got a mid-range game AND developed a 3pt game this year!

              I'm one of the biggest advocates of getting Carl Landry in a Pacers uni on this board, and Patterson has more range than Landry does. Patterson has a total package offense type game where he can play in the paint or outside.
              Landry this season has been one of the better 4th quarter scorers in the league (at least when he was a 6th man for Houston). His team would throw him the ball in crunchtime and say "Score for us. make something happen." And amazingly, he would.

              I just don't know if Patterson is that type of offensive player. Yeah, he's worked on his game and added to it, but I don't see him as the same kind of offensive threat at the next level. I don't ever see him as the type of a guy his team is going to go to when they need a bucket; not in the same way Landry has performed anyways.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Patterson or Monroe

                Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                Paterson clearly compliments Roy more. He is a better rebounder and team defender.
                I agree with this.

                I don't like the comparison of Monroe to Webber or Howard. He's more athletic than Howard and smarter than CWebb... but then again, isn't everybody?


                Monroe can shoot and drive... plays out of the high post well and has decent back-to-the-basket moves (albeit, they need some work). Greg is crafty and finesse... very heady.

                Patterson is speed and power and plays d well, particularly against the pick n' roll.

                I also agree that Monroe has the potential to slide to the 5 spot and play alongside Tyler, where PP won't be able to as easily... unless PP is the next Chuck Hayes... the dude is ripped, but I'm not sure he's that blessed.

                I'd like to see Monroe more against PnRs and see PP's post offense, which I don't think he has much.

                I'm leaning on Monroe based on his talent at age 19 and potential to play the 5 and be a compliment to Tyler... If we didn't have Tyler, I'd go PP....

                Needless to say, I would prefer Favors...

                I like all 3 and wouldn't burn anything if we choose any.... Cousins on the other hand...

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Patterson or Monroe

                  Originally posted by d_c View Post
                  I just don't know if Patterson is that type of offensive player. Yeah, he's worked on his game and added to it, but I don't see him as the same kind of offensive threat at the next level. I don't ever see him as the type of a guy his team is going to go to when they need a bucket; not in the same way Landry has performed anyways.
                  Did you see Landry as that kind of offensive threat at the next level?
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Patterson or Monroe

                    Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                    Did you see Landry as that kind of offensive threat at the next level?
                    For every Landry, there are 15 Diogu's. I've never understood when people bring up examples like that when they realize they are the exception, not the rule.

                    If we draft Patterson I'm not sure I'll be able to watch another Pacer's game until Bird is gone. I love Bird and outside O'Brien and Hansbrough, have agreed with just about every move he's made, but if he drafts Patterson, I will have lost all faith in a future for this team.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Patterson or Monroe

                      Originally posted by iPACER View Post
                      I agree with this.

                      I don't like the comparison of Monroe to Webber or Howard. He's more athletic than Howard and smarter than CWebb... but then again, isn't everybody?
                      Like Howard, Monroe is basically nailed to the floor. Guy has almost no vert to speak of.

                      Webber was one of the more gifted offensive PFs to play in the last 20 years or so. And he was a very smart player on that end of the floor. His passing ability along with his overall offensive prowess were probably the most important things during that stretch with the Kings from 99'-2003'. He and Malone were the two best passing PFs of their time. Webber's problem was that he missed about 75% of his career games.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Patterson or Monroe

                        Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                        For every Landry, there are 15 Diogu's. I've never understood when people bring up examples like that when they realize they are the exception, not the rule.

                        If we draft Patterson I'm not sure I'll be able to watch another Pacer's game until Bird is gone. I love Bird and outside O'Brien and Hansbrough, have agreed with just about every move he's made, but if he drafts Patterson, I will have lost all faith in a future for this team.
                        Yeah, Landry is pretty unique. Been awhile since I've seen a guy like that play so effectively. How often is it that the undersized, backup PF is the go to scorer in the 4th quarter (on a decent team)? I don't see that too often.

                        All that being said, he really is more effective as a guy off the bench (that's how Houston used him all year long) than as a starter. Also, no way teams would've considered drafting him in the lottery.

                        I don't dislike Patrick Patterson, I'm just not that excited about him. He'll be an NBA player. I just don't have any fear of regret if I pass on him, much the same way that I wasn't very worried that Jordan Hill would make anyone regret passing on him (and I think Patterson will be better than that).

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Patterson or Monroe

                          I think Patterson can come in right now and play. I think he'll have immediate NBA skills in the pick and pop or even the pick and roll with the ability to finish at the rim fairly well. I think Patterson will be able to guard today's NBA PF, much better than basically anyone on the team. Meaning he's versatile enough to guard on the perimeter and not get backed down and completely muscled in the post.

                          I used Landry as a comparison, not because he's an exception/acheiving PF example. Moreso, because I think what Landry gives you right now, is basically what Patterson can project to give you at a similar size. I wouldn't project Patterson to be Ike because I think Patterson is much smarter Bball IQ wise, so is Landry.

                          I've seen so little of Monroe, but I don't see the Odom comparison, at all. Odom is fluid, smooth with exceptional handles for a big guy, as much on the perimeter as the down low. The little I saw of Monroe he was much more of a closer to the basket guy, but if he's playing in college as the lone big guy on the team, it just may be the system he's in. Also, the wide shoulder girdle to me, says he will be able to put on more muscle as he matures and maybe even more gravitate towards being a big. I am interested to see Georgetown play in the tourney, for sure.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Patterson or Monroe

                            I am leaning toward Monroe right now. I am worried Patterson will come into the draft camp and measure 6' 7". I think Patterson is a lot tougher no doubt than Monroe, but Monroe has showed latley that he can do alot of different things form the PF position. He sees the floor really well and is a great passer for a PF. But, do we really want that in a PF? Patterson would be more of the prototypical PF. I also think Patterson has been overshadowed by Wall and Cousins. He might have had a break out year if not for them. His points per game went down from 17 last year to 14 this year.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Patterson or Monroe

                              Honestly if the Pacers fall as low to have to pick one of these guys, then it won't matter anyway. JOB isn't going to play them over Murphy or Handsbrough. They'll be warming the bench. How many top 10 picks spend their rookie years riding the pine.
                              You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Patterson or Monroe

                                From what video I've seen of him, if Roy Hibbert were a PF instead of a C, he'd probably look a lot like Greg Monroe. Very good passer, very skilled, tall/long, but slow and unathletic for his position.

                                Not the worst thing in the world to have by any means, but for us I think Patterson makes more sense. Our next PF needs to be more athletic than Roy, better at defense, and better at rebounding.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X