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

Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

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

  • #31
    Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

    What about Tony Parker? Isn't he a free agent after next season when the pacers may actually have a little cap room?

    I know it's doubtful he would come here, but with Duncan almost done and Manu hurt all the time he could possibly look to jump ship there. If the pacers have a promising next season and make some good off season moves....

    It's a long shot, but i guess I can dream

    On the top 10, I'll give you a quick 5
    D Williams
    Paul
    Rose
    Parker
    Rondo

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

      Originally posted by rexnom View Post
      We really, really should have come out of this draft with a PG. Gotta hope Price becomes something special.
      At our current standing, Wall is out of the picture. The only PG around where the Pacers are drafting is possibly Bledsoe, and that's far from a sure thing. And we can't be certain he's actually a great floor general anyway.

      I think Price will eventually be a quality starter at best or terrific 6th man at worst at PG but is unlikely to become a star. It would be a good idea to continue to hunt for a high quality PG, but our chances of doing that this year dropped off the map with our draft position following this peculiarly timed win streak.

      Our best chance at getting a star PG might be by trading for Rubio and waiting for him, although that seems unlikely and risky. But I seriously don't see the Pacers acquiring Paul, Rose, or D. Williams.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

        Originally posted by IndyPacer View Post
        At our current standing, Wall is out of the picture. The only PG around where the Pacers are drafting is possibly Bledsoe, and that's far from a sure thing. And we can't be certain he's actually a great floor general anyway.

        I think Price will eventually be a quality starter at best or terrific 6th man at worst at PG but is unlikely to become a star. It would be a good idea to continue to hunt for a high quality PG, but our chances of doing that this year dropped off the map with our draft position following this peculiarly timed win streak.

        Our best chance at getting a star PG might be by trading for Rubio and waiting for him, although that seems unlikely and risky. But I seriously don't see the Pacers acquiring Paul, Rose, or D. Williams.
        That's my thinking too.

        The question comes whether you still focus on looking for a star at PG, which is much harder to find..or look for one at the PF or SG spot (SG being absolute easiest to find) Although part of me thinks Rush has the ability to be a star SG, and that's not hype..He's got the talent, he just needs to develope some skills..(finishing at the rim, midrange jumper, assertiveness) It's his mentality thats the biggest bridge to cross.

        That said, as much as it's easier to find an all star shooting guard, your team gets better with a star PG rather than an All star SG would. So it's a give and take. (With PF being easier to find than a PG, but harder than SG..and making your team better than an SG but not as good as a PG.)

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
          10rpg PF with an expiring contract, scoring PG with an expiring contract, lotto pick.
          But which Team would be willing to give up a Starting quality PG for that package?

          I'm not saying that the package itself isn't decent....I'm asking which Team that has the type of PG that you want would be willing to give up the type of PG that every Team wants to keep?
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

            I'm comfortable with my prediction of Collison's future value awhile ago:

            http://www.pacersdigest.com/showpost...8&postcount=14
            Originally posted by cordobes
            He's a solid starter, but with so much talent at the PG position, he very probably will never sniff an All-Star game or be a top-10 player at his position. From his draft alone:

            Top Tier
            1. Evans
            2. Rubio
            3. Jennings
            3. Curry

            Second tier
            5. Beaubois

            Third tier
            6. Collison
            6. Holiday

            Fourth tier
            9.Lawson
            10.Teague

            11.Maynor
            12. Douglas
            13. Flynn

            Then you have already in the league the following PGs who are 25 years old or less:
            Deron Williams, Chris Paul, Derrick Rose, Russell Westbrook, Rajon Rondo. I think all of them are clearly better than Collison. I think OJ Mayo natural and best position is PG and if he plays there he'll be better than Collison.

            Then you have guys like Raymond Felton who have similar value.

            Plus one could add young players like Augustin, Bayless or Conley who have potential to be better than Collison (a player with a very limited potential due to his lack of elite physical and athletic traits + age).

            And on the top of all that, you still have players who will be around for a few years like Tony Parker (better than Collison) and Calderon (whom Collison will probably surpass but it's not a given).

            Now, add John Wall and the immediate future John Walls and it's very arguable that Collison will never be an above-average PG in the NBA.
            So, putting it all together:

            1. Deron Williams
            2. Chris Paul

            3. Rose, Rondo, Westbrook

            6. Jennings, Curry, Parker

            9. Beaubois

            10. Felton

            Obviously, the younger guys have a good chance of climbing the ranks in the next 2 seasons.

            I'm fairly sure Rubio and Wall will be top-10 PGs. If Mayo switches positions, he'll also be a very good one. And who knows how good will Billups be in 2 years.

            Ah, and you have very mediocre PGs like Monta Ellis or Mo Williams (or Bayless, or Ramon Sessions, or Devin Harris) who can be above average players in the right situation.

            It's too difficult to predict who will be available. Williams and Paul I dont' see being moved in the foreseeable future; more or less the same applies to Rose & Westbrook.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

              FWIW, I think a winning team needs a quality PG, but you don't necessarily have to have a "great one". IMO, I think the PG position is essential but overrated (by fans) at the same time. There weren't exactly any great PGs between the 2 teams in the Finals last season. The most successful coach in NBA history has never really employed anything resembling a PG (except for maybe 1 year of a past his prime Payton).

              Just by nature of the position, there is a limiting factor to how much a PG can improve his team. A really good one can obviously improve a bad team by a good margin but then they're going to hit a ceiling of how much they can carry the team. They are essential, but at the same time you don't really want the PG to be the best player on the team. You want him to be able to get the ball to the best player on the team.

              Hard to exactly pinpoint what I'm saying, but I think this is it: I think Derrick Rose is a better individual player than guys like Parker and Rondo. But I think there is a limiting factor too how much a PG can affect the game and ultimately, I think the impact in how much they can help their teams win is about the same, or at least the difference in that impact is ultimately smaller than the difference of their individual talent.

              With all that said, John Wall still > Evan Turner. He's the safe pick and the best talent in the draft.
              Last edited by d_c; 03-28-2010, 01:33 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

                Originally posted by cordobes View Post
                10. Felton
                Really? You're that high on Felton?

                I'm not saying you're wrong; I don't have an opinion. That just seems really high.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

                  Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                  Really? You're that high on Felton?

                  I'm not saying you're wrong; I don't have an opinion. That just seems really high.
                  Yeah. I thought about Nelson or Davis, but I picked Felton due to his superior defence + game management.

                  It could have gone either way and it's not that important because right now guys like Billups and Nash are still superior and in the future I expect players like Rubio, Wall, Mayo, probably Holiday to become better or at least more or less at his level and I didn't even include Arenas, so I suppose this is a very circumstantial ranking.

                  In any case, I think his defence is a very valuable asset. Defence at the point of attack is something that changes the completion of games and it becomes even more valuable considering the talent that exists at the position. I mean, if you can't have a Deron Williams or a John Wall, at least you have someone to throw at them that will keep their influence more or less contained.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

                    Originally posted by CooperManning View Post
                    Rose, Westbrook, Rondo, and Jennings are unattainable for the Pacers.
                    D. Williams and Harris are only attainable if their team lands Wall.
                    Paul is probably unattainable.

                    Ellis is probably attainable at the right price (not that I necessarily want him).
                    Collison is probably attainable.
                    Theoretically, either Flynn or Rubio is attainable.
                    Felton is attainable.

                    Can't think of anyone else it would make sense to trade for at PG unless we're talking complete sleepers here.
                    According to their fan site Paul is actually more available. He's not happy and has been moping most of the year (I'm told, I don't watch them). Has the big contract and could bring them more pieces. Most of them think Collison is every bit the player, or will be in time.

                    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...ined-by-a-king
                    Last edited by MLB007; 03-28-2010, 05:12 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

                      Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                      1. Westbrook
                      2. Paul
                      3. Williams
                      4. Rose
                      5. Wall
                      6. Felton
                      7. Curry
                      8. Lawson
                      9. Collison
                      10. Rondo

                      I think Rondo won't be as effective once he loses his go to guys on the Celtics and I think Felton will become a Billups like player in the sense he will take off in a new system. Harris has taken a few steps back with me and Jennings seems overhyped and not ultimately effective(as flashy as he may be).
                      Agreed about Rondo. He's got 3 HOF scorers to mask his inability to shoot. When the big 3 are gone, he will be an average pg. Allbeit, one I'd like to have.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

                        I think there's a good chance Price will be in the top 10, I seriously do. He just needs more experience and a better opportunity, that's for sure. We certainly need to get rid of O'Brien, though.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

                          Originally posted by ChristianDudley View Post
                          I think there's a good chance Price will be in the top 10, I seriously do. He just needs more experience and a better opportunity, that's for sure. We certainly need to get rid of O'Brien, though.
                          Price will be as good as the Lawson, Collison, Flynn crowd. He was as good as them in college without being able to improve his game much during college, why would that change? (Although it does depend on all of those guys' coaches..I'm really starting to think JOB has gotten to AJ..)

                          I don't know that those guys are in your top ten. I think those guys are all going to be in the range of "solid to very good" starting point guards.

                          But I agree with whoever said, top 10 will be "Paul, Deron, Rondo, Rose, probably Wall, possibly Nash and with the rest of the top ten determined by who you ask"

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

                            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                            I'm less interested in ranking them, and more interested in figuring out if there are any point guards the Pacers could legitimately target this summer.
                            Maybe we could trade Ford and our pick to Charlotte for Felton and their pick? If they draft Udoh, then we have a PF and PG who could be our starters down the road...2 birds 1 stone

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

                              Out of the top tier PG's right now there is just about no chance we will end up with any of them. It's really no different than the PF's, SG's, C's and SF's. We really need to get our players out of the draft. TPTB did a great job finding Granger and it looks like they found a quality center. That's only two positions locked down. We still need a starting PF, a starting PG, and we can only hope Rush is turning into a quality starting SG. If we don't draft a PG (Bledsoe) then just about the only trade bait we have is the lottery pick. Trade for Collison, or Lawson maybe, one of the young unproven PG's. We have to take a chance like we did when we traded for O'neal, but we don't have a Dale Davis to trade do we.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Two years from now: Top 10 point guards in the NBA?

                                What if you have a good playmaking wing, a Manu Ginobili, or strong playmaking from the rest of the team, and you can get away with a below average passing/playmaking/floor general 1-guard?

                                George Hill - I think the Spurs should try to improve their team by shopping Tony Parker around and go with a Hill/Ginobili backcourt. Hill is a very good defender - Westbrook, Felton, Rondo... maybe not yet as good as them, but has the advantage of being able to crossmatch and defend 2-guards, a la Westbrook. Above average rebounder. Prolific and very versatile scorer - outside game, midrange game, can get to the rim. Steady and safe ball-handler. Moves well off the ball.

                                Monta Ellis - the best option if you need a marquee scorer/shot-maker. Needs lots of touches to affect a game.

                                Devin Harris - will he go back to his defensive prowess of old with a change of scenario?

                                Ramon Sessions - ball-dominance, lack of shooting and defence are big problems. I actually liked his development this season, diversified his game.

                                Jerryd Bayless - Similar to Sessions, except with less passing ability/creativity and less safe/heady with the ball. Potential to get better, but needs to start showing improvement.

                                Randy Foye - Never learned how to play defence or how to effect a game outside of scoring. Poor man's Ellis. Not a starter. Not even a good backup at this point of his career.

                                OJ Mayo - the best prospect of the group if he switches positions and proves he belongs to this group.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X