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

Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

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

  • #46
    Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    He's not a point guard. Just because we have a glaring hole at a position doesn't mean we have to try to jam a square peg into a round hole.
    Who said he was a point guard? I was simply posing a question. You disagree and that's cool, but at least give it a chance. Also where do you get that anyone is jamming him into the position? I just don't get that. The Pacers are going to try and see if he can play the one, and I think it is worth a look. I don't know if it will work, chances are it won't, but it is worth a try. Why don't you tune into NBATV on Monday if you can get the channel and report back what you see. We should all know a little more then.
    Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

      Originally posted by Pacers2012 View Post
      At 6'5 he should clearly not be playin PF. The average PF is easily 6'9. I mean reggie was 6'9 and a SG. It about how the player performs in a posistion that determines where he should play. Like Dirk, the dude is 7'0 and a guard. If he was in the post he would suck

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

        Originally posted by odeez View Post
        Who said he was a point guard? I was simply posing a question. You disagree and that's cool, but at least give it a chance. Also where do you get that anyone is jamming him into the position? I just don't get that. The Pacers are going to try and see if he can play the one, and I think it is worth a look. I don't know if it will work, chances are it won't, but it is worth a try. Why don't you tune into NBATV on Monday if you can get the channel and report back what you see. We should all know a little more then.
        Isn't the title of this thread, "Lance Stephenson being our point guard of the future?" Doesn't that kind of imply that you think he is a point guard?

        About jamming him into a position: The guy is a wing player. He seems like a very, very natural 2 guard to me. Trying to make him into a point guard just because we need one seems like you would be attempting to force him into being something that he's not. We've seen this experiment time and time again in the NBA, and it never, ever works. Exhibit A: Larry Hughes.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

          Originally posted by cdash View Post
          Isn't the title of this thread, "Lance Stephenson being our point guard of the future?" Doesn't that kind of imply that you think he is a point guard?

          About jamming him into a position: The guy is a wing player. He seems like a very, very natural 2 guard to me. Trying to make him into a point guard just because we need one seems like you would be attempting to force him into being something that he's not. We've seen this experiment time and time again in the NBA, and it never, ever works. Exhibit A: Larry Hughes.
          I would have titled the thread "Lance Stephenson is our point guard of the future!" I wouldn't have placed question mark in there if I wasn't asking if folks here what they thought about him playing the position. Yes, it most likely won't work, but if he can be interchangeable btw 1 & 2 now and then that would be nice. I am not for making or forcing him into the position at all. The Pacers are already having him trying to run the offense in the first rookie practice. I get you don't like the idea, cool. I am open to seeing what he can do at the 1, that's all...
          Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

            Originally posted by odeez View Post
            I would have titled the thread "Lance Stephenson is our point guard of the future!" I wouldn't have placed question mark in there if I wasn't asking if folks here what they thought about him playing the position. Yes, it most likely won't work, but if he can be interchangeable btw 1 & 2 now and then that would be nice. I am not for making or forcing him into the position at all. The Pacers are already having him trying to run the offense in the first rookie practice. I get you don't like the idea, cool. I am open to seeing what he can do at the 1, that's all...
            Alright, my fault then, sorry man. I just took it different than you intended.

            I think he could actually play some spot minutes at the 1 if we were in a pinch, but his NBA future is at the 2 I think. Like you said, we wait and see.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

              the only difference between tyreke evans and lance stephenson is mentality...you teach lance how to become a team player without the enormous ego, then there's no reason he can't become a similar player. he sure as hell has the talent for it...

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                Mark Patrick and Conrad Brunner discuss Lance at the 7 min mark

                http://www.wnde.com/mediaplayer/?sta..._name=mpos.xml

                Mark Patrick and Lance

                http://www.wnde.com/mediaplayer/?sta..._name=mpos.xml

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                  Hey, why the hell not? If he could develop into a PG you'll have one hell of a player. He has a lot of growing to do and I think a huge reason he dropped is that Cincy leaned on him a little too much, too early. If that kid goes to Duke or Michigan State he is brought along more slowly and his mistakes aren't so glaring. So I really don't see why we wouldn't give it a shot.

                  I think the biggest thing with Lance is he wants the ball in his hands. Last year at Cincy he averaged less than 11 shots a game in just under 30 minutes. He also had 8 games with 4+ assists, which for a freshman 2 guard is pretty impressive, and his college coach on the radio the other day said he was a great passer. So I think his rep as a gun is a little unwarranted.
                  "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                    Didn't the Pacers once have a big strong point guard who liked to post up his verticially challenged peers? I think his name was Mark Jackson. Was he a decent player?

                    I also love this kid's attituede. The Pacers are in desperate need of a player with the confidence to take the ball inside. Your never going to be the best at anything unless you think you can be. Give him a chance.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                      Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                      Hey, why the hell not? If he could develop into a PG you'll have one hell of a player. He has a lot of growing to do and I think a huge reason he dropped is that Cincy leaned on him a little too much, too early. If that kid goes to Duke or Michigan State he is brought along more slowly and his mistakes aren't so glaring. So I really don't see why we wouldn't give it a shot.

                      I think the biggest thing with Lance is he wants the ball in his hands. Last year at Cincy he averaged less than 11 shots a game in just under 30 minutes. He also had 8 games with 4+ assists, which for a freshman 2 guard is pretty impressive, and his college coach on the radio the other day said he was a great passer. So I think his rep as a gun is a little unwarranted.
                      He was also dumped from Team USA's 18 and under team because he was such a ball hog. I hope he's learned from his past mistakes because I get some bad Steve "Franchise" Francis vibes from reading about the problems he's had. "Starbury" is another guy who had talent but couldn't get past personality issues. I don't think Stephenson is as much of a risk as those guys, but let's not ignore red flags completely just because he was drafted by our team. I think he'll be OK if he humbles himself a bit. A good torching by an elite NBA player would probably help him get his priorities in gear so he stops thinking he's going to be the All-Stars East starting PG and begin thinking about how he can earn a chance to come off the bench for the Pacers.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                        Did you like Flip at Point? Do you want a slower more inexperienced Flip?

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                          Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                          Did you like Flip at Point? Do you want a slower more inexperienced Flip?
                          Actually, yes. I preferred Flip to TJ.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                            Originally posted by KingGeorge24 View Post
                            The problem he's had his entire life is he's too ball dominant. He's a shoot first, pass second type of player, or at least he was at Cincy.

                            Larry seems to think his attitude has changed though, and if he wants to be a team player, there's no reason why he can't be a dominant point guard.

                            If you heard OB's recent comments before and after the first Summer League practice, he WANTS his starting PG to look for his shot FIRST and then PASS second. This comment took me by surprise since most posters (myself included) thought he pulled TJ Ford for this exact reason. But, in OBIE's offense, it makes sense. If you PG is running and get to the rim, he SHOULD take it to the rim hard. Lance has these exact qualities. He's a dominant, physical, freak, who will take it hard to the hole and get the foul. He's a good free throw shooter so he'll score 20pts plus (high percentage) each night because there aren't many BIG point guards in this league. He'll also match up with Derrick Rose and Rajon Rando but they may be a little quicker than him. That's okay because they'll have to deal with his size and strength on the opposite end. This should make for EXCITING basketball if it plays out that Lance is INSTINCTIVE (as he thinks he is) in making the right play at the right time on 95% of each possession. Defensively, he'll be a nightmare to opposing PGs and SGs with his size and strength. He'll UPGRADE our defensive presence and will be able to get strips and steals against opposing SF and PF when he's close enough to help out on defense. Hibbert and Murph will love his size and tenacity and help ability. I'm amazed at his superb confidence and instinctiveness for the game thus far. Lance has played against the BEST high schoolers who are NOW in the NBA (when he was a young as 8th Grade, i.e. OJ Mayo) so he knows that he's got a much game as they do. As the negative press is a joke. There are too many HATERS who are just jealous of his skill level and nitpick his game to death. Lance will be a STEAL of this DRAFT and may be an ALL-STAR before Paul George.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                              Originally posted by millertime90 View Post
                              the only difference between tyreke evans and lance stephenson is mentality...you teach lance how to become a team player without the enormous ego, then there's no reason he can't become a similar player. he sure as hell has the talent for it...
                              You cannot teach that. Either a player gets or he does not get. That is the big worry about Stephenson and that is why I do not have high hopes for him. Hopefully he gets his head straight and is not a problem, but I am not going to hold my breath.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Lance Stephenson being our Point Guard of the future?

                                Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                                Did you like Flip at Point? Do you want a slower more inexperienced Flip?
                                If this works you have something special. If it does not you have lost nothing. Mark Jackson was not exactly fleet of foot or a great defender but he sure could play the point at his size.
                                {o,o}
                                |)__)
                                -"-"-

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X