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

Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft

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

  • Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft

    Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft
    http://www.nba.com/2010/news/05/11/d...s=iref:nbahpt2





    Posted May 11 2010 9:56PM

    NEW YORK -- The players listed below from U.S. colleges and institutions have notified us that they wish to be removed from the list of "early entry" players eligible for selection in the 2010 NBA Draft.

    Lavoy Allen, Temple

    Kevin Anderson, Richmond

    Talor Battle, Penn State

    Keith Benson, Oakland

    Anatoly Bose, Nicholls State

    Carlon Brown, Utah

    Mike Davis, Illinois

    Paul Davis, Winston-Salem State

    Malcolm Delaney, Virginia Tech

    Kenneth Faried, Morehead State

    Jimmer Fredette, BYU

    Anthony Gurley, Massachusetts

    Jeremy Hazell, Seton Hall

    Adnan Hodzic, Lipscomb

    JaJuan Johnson, Purdue

    Ravern Johnson, Mississippi State

    Cameron Jones, Northern Arizona

    Kenny Lawson, Creighton

    Demetri McCamey, Illinois

    E'Twaun Moore, Purdue

    Arnett Moultrie, UTEP

    Rico Pickett, Manhattan

    Eniel Polynice, Mississippi

    Herb Pope, Seton Hall

    Jeff Robinson, Seton Hall

    Tracy Smith, North Carolina State

    Alex Tyus, Florida

    Quinton Watkins, San Diego State

    Chris Wright, Dayton

    Following the NBA's early entry withdrawal deadline of 5:00 PM (EDT) on June 14, 2010, a full listing of players will be released who provided us with timely notice that they wish to be removed from the list of "early entry" players eligible for selection in the 2010 NBA Draft.

    The 2010 NBA Draft will be held on Thursday, June 24 at the Theater at Madison Square Garden.













    .
    "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

  • #2
    Re: Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft

    irrelevent
    Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft

      LOL ya , seeing as how the only name I really recognize on that list is JuJuan Johnson from Purdue ..

      I am not really big into college basketball , like I am the NBA , but it seems that everyone on that list is late 2nd round material or even further back ... to undrafted status ..

      So it was more than likely wise of them to withdraw and try and play better to boost their stock next season ..




      .
      .
      "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft

        Jimmer Fredette is a baller.
        2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft

          I was intrigued by Demetri McCamey in the limited time I saw him.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft

            Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
            Jimmer Fredette is a baller.

            I peeped some vids of him and done a little reading up..

            Yes I agree , he is intriguing , I will give him that..
























            NCAA Weekly Performers, 3/25/10
            March 25, 2010
            Matthew Kamalsky

            http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/...Fredette-5810/


            One of most pleasant surprises in college basketball this season, Jimmer Fredette was nothing short of spectacular all season long. Though he couldn’t save the Cougars against Kansas State last week, no one can question his ability to put his team on his back and carry them to victories. With his season coming to a close, Fredette now faces his impending draft decision.

            A controversial prospect, Fredette has one of the most impressive offensive packages in college basketball, but may lack the athleticism needed to translate his skill-set seamlessly to the next level. Throughout the season, and especially during MWC play, Fredette was able to consistently and efficiently compensate for his lack of elite explosiveness and leaping ability with excellent body control, a great understanding of how to subtly change speeds and directions to lull his defender to sleep, and a crafty array of shots around the basket.

            To a much greater extent than the average slow-footed, undersized scorer, Fredette is comfortable in his own skin. A quarter of his offense was comprised of one-on-one situations according to Synergy Sports Technology, and he finishes at a near-50% clip at the rim –a testament to his ability to overcome his weaknesses. Exceptionally good at not only finding creases to beat his own man, Fredette does a great job reading help side defenders and attacking his man in a way that shields him from weak-side roations. Whether he can make a comparable impact at the next level is something that teams will likely want to study in private workouts against more physically gifted guard prospects.

            Posessing a strong frame and the ability to surprise defenders with his agility and balance when changing directions in the lane, Fredette’s athleticism isn’t as much of a concern on the offensive end as it is defensively. With no shortage of toughness or aggressiveness, Fredette plays a sound brand of defense, but his limited physical tools hurt him considerably and would likely make him a significant target to isolate against on the perimeter at the NBA level.

            Appearing a step slow closing out, not possessing the size and length to bother shooters or be a factor in the passing lanes, and lacking any real lateral quickness, Fredette was able to get by in BYU’s zone and play effective man defense on occasion. However, with the NBA handcheck rules neutralizing whatever strength advantage he could potentially try and use over his matchups on the next level, he projects as a defensive liability at the next level, any way you slice it. Should he keep his name in this draft, his ability to defend is likely the facet of his game that team’s will attempt to evaluate most thoroughly in private settings.

            Though there are aspects of his game that remain question marks from an NBA perspective, there are others that have talent-evaluators enamored with his game. Fredette has improved his jump shooting ability markedly since his freshman year, and now sits as one of the best shooters in our database. A tremendous catch and shoot threat who has also improved his ability to hit shots off the dribble, Fredette can certainly help a team on any level with his ability to stretch the floor. His efficiency from the line is a bonus as well, as he’s a valuable asset in late game situations.

            Aside from his merits as a shooter, Fredette has improved his efficiency as a passer as well. Though his usage has risen markedly from last season, Fredette’s assist to turnover ratio has grown from 1.59 last season to 1.84 this season. Given his tremendous basketball IQ, it will be interesting to see how Fredette responds to a diminished role on the next level. He’s a solid passer, but his ability to set his teammates up and play low-mistake basketball will only help his cause as he carves out a niche for himself early in his career.

            Considering what he’s accomplished this season and the struggles he will face in terms of improving upon his weaknesses, Fredette faces a difficult decision on whether to leave his name in the upcoming draft. It’s difficult to see how much better of a year he could have (even though he was diagnosed with mononucleosis midway through the season), and he’s unlikely to get significantly more athletic over the offseason. With a lot to gain from performing well in private workouts in a weak year for point guards—but very limited amount of time to actually test the waters due to new rules the NCAA implemented-- Fredette is a name to keep an eye on in the draft process.





            .
            Last edited by Kemo; 05-12-2010, 02:04 AM.
            "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft

              Yeah, you could definitely do a lot worse than Jimmer Fredette in the second round, that's for sure. I think he could fill a J.J. Redick/Kyle Korver role and really find a niche for himself in the NBA.

              It looks like our pal Donnie Walsh liked him quite a bit too.

              http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_ar...#ixzz0nhFcpOaN

              Jimmer Fredette worked out for the Knicks and Nets, but neither will get a chance to draft him.

              Fredette was seen as a potential second-round target for both teams before deciding to withdraw from the draft and return to BYU for his senior season. Fredette declared early, but did not hire an agent.

              "I had a great experience going through the whole process," Fredette, who averaged 22 points a game for the Cougars, told the Deseret News. "I met some great people and learned a lot. I was able to impress a lot of people and I think they will be interested to see how I do this coming season. I hope to play extremely well my senior year and achieve our team goals and my personal goals and get drafted next year."

              Jonathan Givony of DraftExpress reported that the Knicks considered giving Fredette a second round guarantee.
              2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft

                Kenneth Faried I think led the country in rebounds and was projected late 1st, early second in some mock drafts, IIRC.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft

                  Taylor Battle - top 20 pick next year I think

                  Ultra quick PG that gave Evan Turner trouble this year. The two are friends since AAU era I guess. Strong handles, elite rebounder from the PG spot, quick, solid in-traffic scorer. Penn St is a one-man team and he's it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    Taylor Battle - top 20 pick next year I think

                    Ultra quick PG that gave Evan Turner trouble this year. The two are friends since AAU era I guess. Strong handles, elite rebounder from the PG spot, quick, solid in-traffic scorer. Penn St is a one-man team and he's it.
                    It's hard to tell with Battle since the quality of his teammates is so subpar. He really struggled in a couple of the games I watched him, especially when he was matched up against a bigger, aggressive defender (Purdue's guards).

                    I see Battle as a TJ Ford type with a better outside shot. Not quite as creative at getting his own shot as TJ, though. He's no more of a true PG than TJ is, and he seems just as comfortable to play off the ball running off screens.

                    I like McCamey better as a PG prospect in the Big 10. He's bigger and stronger, very similar to Deron Williams in body type. He's also a better facilitator than Battle.

                    McCamey 7.1 apg; Battle 4.2 apg
                    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                    - Salman Rushdie

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft

                      Good for Purdue this year

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft

                        Originally posted by Kemo View Post
                        Fredette can certainly help a team on any level with his ability to stretch the floor.
                        JOB got mildly aroused when he read that.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Twenty-nine early entry candidates withdraw from Draft

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          Taylor Battle - top 20 pick next year I think

                          Ultra quick PG that gave Evan Turner trouble this year. The two are friends since AAU era I guess. Strong handles, elite rebounder from the PG spot, quick, solid in-traffic scorer. Penn St is a one-man team and he's it.
                          I was very happy that he is coming back. If we lost him, I don't want to think about it. This year we really were a one man team, until the end of the season when Babb stepped up and Andrew Jones. But Babb is transfering. Shouldn't be to big of a loss because Battle's half brother, Taran Buie, is coming here and he is the highest ranked recruit we have ever gotten. I am looking forward to seeing him on the court with Battle.

                          Also the one man team thing, well I think Dechellis deserves a lot of the blame. Didn't use Andrew Jones enough this year. He is a good post presence, hopefully that changes next year.

                          It's hard to tell with Battle since the quality of his teammates is so subpar. He really struggled in a couple of the games I watched him, especially when he was matched up against a bigger, aggressive defender (Purdue's guards).

                          I see Battle as a TJ Ford type with a better outside shot. Not quite as creative at getting his own shot as TJ, though. He's no more of a true PG than TJ is, and he seems just as comfortable to play off the ball running off screens.
                          I think Battle is more the player you saw two seasons ago. This year teams just swarmed him and well the players around him weren't able to do anything. This year really bothered Talor with how badly things went. The losing definitely affected his play.

                          Bigger guards will give him problems cause he isn't too big, but the kid is fast. And he's very scrappy. Putting an aggressive guard on him is a must and because the team didn't step up, it shut everything down. If he had just one consistent teammate he would have been much better this year. Look at when he had Pringle and Cornley to distribute the ball to. He had an amazing year, was second in votes for Big Ten player of the year.

                          He definitely can create his own shot too. Especially at the end of games. The kid is clutch. This year he had a few rim out at the end and I couldn't believe that they didn't go in because I was so used to seeing them fall. Look up his buzzer beater against George Mason in the NIT to send it to OT. Simply amazing. He has hit some very big shots in his career. He can use his speed to get by you if your too close and if you back off he will hit the three. Is he a true PG? Probably not, but it doesn't help that all the scoring load has been put on him. Honestly he reminds me of an Allen Iverson type player. Not saying he will be anywhere as good as AI, but their game is similar. Has a knack to getting to the rim, can shoot the three, scrappy on defense, undersized but not afraid to go against the big guys.

                          If Talor plays like he did the NIT season, he very well could be a top 20 pick. And that would mean PSU would be in the NCAA Tournament too.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X