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

Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

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

  • #16
    Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

    I think defensive wings are easier to come by but if he is the BPA then I am fine with drafting him. I highly doubt he will be the BPA though at 15.

    Personally I would much rather sign the third wing off the bench than draft one. I would also rather have also a consisitent scorer off the bench as well which I doubt Singleton will ever be. Dunleavy may have sucked on the defensive side one on one but the Pacers will need to replace the offensive hole that he left behind. This is why I think it doesn't make sense to draft Singelton.

    I still think Jason Richardson makes a lot of sense for the Pacers as well and if we sign a wing this summer then drafting one is redundant IMO.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

      Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
      I think defensive wings are easier to come by but if he is the BPA then I am fine with drafting him. I highly doubt he will be the BPA though at 15.

      Personally I would much rather sign the third wing off the bench than draft one. I would also rather have also a consisitent scorer off the bench as well which I doubt Singleton will ever be. Dunleavy may have sucked on the defensive side one on one but the Pacers will need to replace the offensive hole that he left behind. This is why I think it doesn't make sense to draft Singelton.
      I think you draft Singleton if you think he has the offensive upside to be more than a defensive wing. But otherwise, yeah, you might as well try to sign someone like Luc Mbah a Moute who'd give you the same sort of versatile defense.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

        Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post

        I still think Jason Richardson makes a lot of sense for the Pacers as well and if we sign a wing this summer then drafting one is redundant IMO.
        Thanking this part. JR fits what they need right now. I wouldn't over pay or get in a bidding war, but if he's right priced, he would be perfect, imo.

        As for Singleton, you can't have too many big wing defenders in the East. I see Paul George and BRush as guarding 2/3s mostly, Singleton sounds like he can help Danny with 3/4s that are all over the league now. If he's as good as advertised, to me, you take him.

        Again, if a guy can do one special thing, it really increases his value, especially if its defense. He seems to love defense, how many guys in the game can you say that about. It can be contagious and great defense can erase mistakes for the team.

        He doesn't fit the most glaring specific needs, but he for sure is a guy you can build with.

        Tony Allen, Shane Battier, Bruce Bowen types are huge to the W/L column. I'd take him and not look back.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

          Originally posted by wintermute View Post
          I think you draft Singleton if you think he has the offensive upside to be more than a defensive wing. But otherwise, yeah, you might as well try to sign someone like Luc Mbah a Moute who'd give you the same sort of versatile defense.
          Guys like that rarely become available because that type of player is so valueable, thats an argument to take Singleton, to me.

          Similar guy is Batum, who every team was trying to get from Portland, but they wouldn't trade him unless it was uneven for them. Although, I saw speculation today, that they might at least listen now, so thats maybe someone to look at.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

            Originally posted by Speed View Post
            Guys like that rarely become available because that type of player is so valueable, thats an argument to take Singleton, to me.

            Similar guy is Batum, who every team was trying to get from Portland, but they wouldn't trade him unless it was uneven for them. Although, I saw speculation today, that they might at least listen now, so thats maybe someone to look at.
            We can get LRMB he is a Free agent and if we over pay a little we can get him. Guys who can guard all 5 positions like him are so valuable.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

              Originally posted by Speed View Post
              Thanking this part. JR fits what they need right now. I wouldn't over pay or get in a bidding war, but if he's right priced, he would be perfect, imo.

              As for Singleton, you can't have too many big wing defenders in the East. I see Paul George and BRush as guarding 2/3s mostly, Singleton sounds like he can help Danny with 3/4s that are all over the league now. If he's as good as advertised, to me, you take him.

              Again, if a guy can do one special thing, it really increases his value, especially if its defense. He seems to love defense, how many guys in the game can you say that about. It can be contagious and great defense can erase mistakes for the team.

              He doesn't fit the most glaring specific needs, but he for sure is a guy you can build with.

              Tony Allen, Shane Battier, Bruce Bowen types are huge to the W/L column. I'd take him and not look back.
              If we already didn't have Djones, PG, and Brush I would agree to this. The fact is we have enough defense in the future and guys like Singleton are in every draft. I mean thats thing defensive wings are a dime a dozen. Tony Allen was drafted in the late first and Bowen wasn't drafted at all. Battier is the exception here but I think he has underperformed as a lotto selection much like Dun has.

              I don't think we have the luxury to pick a guy like him and I don't think he is one of Birds 4 guys that he thinks will drop.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

                Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                We can get LRMB he is a Free agent and if we over pay a little we can get him. Guys who can guard all 5 positions like him are so valuable.
                Isn't he a restricted free agent? Wouldn't that mean the Bucks could match anything?

                I'm with you, though, if you could get him by overpaying a little or even slightly marginally, I'd do it. I just don't know if the Bucks wouldn't just match it, unless its outrageous. And you couldn't afford to pay him like that, or shouldn't.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

                  Sounds like he is exactly what the Pacers need the most in a relatively weak draft if defense is being focused on.

                  Dahntay is expendable, Rush basically has had his chance and can be included in a trade, Granger is a scorer but could also give the Pacers a chance to truly capitalize on whatever cap space they have if he is packaged in a trade for missing pieces (plural), and George is the best potential defender currently on the team and could be as good a scorer as Danny if he gets playing time and confidence in his jumper (the form is there, he just needs to keep shooting and see some go in consistently).

                  In my opinion, adding a player like Singleton, as he has been described, would be key to continuing the trend toward more physical and defensively oriented play that is key to both long term and playoff success. Yes, if he is available, he seems like he would be a no-brainer pick, and he is the first player reviewed by T-Bird that I have felt this way about so far this year.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

                    Every year, I had hopes that the Pacers would draft a defensive specialist ( like Singleton ) but we have always bypassed those types of players in favor of others.

                    Unless Singleton wows the Scouting Team and FO on the offensive end....my guess is that Singleton won't be drafted by the Pacers. Despite what many think of Inferno....IMHO....Bird brought him in as the perimeter defender role player that would hound the opposing Teams Guards ( not SFs ). The way I look at it....the role that Singleton would fill here has already been filled.

                    I don't mind his potential and would be thrilled IF the Pacers FO drafted a defensive specialist...but I just don't see that happening.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

                      Reminds me of Luol Deng.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

                        Originally posted by Speed View Post
                        Guys like that rarely become available because that type of player is so valueable, thats an argument to take Singleton, to me.
                        I agree that a versatile wing defender is a valuable sort of role player. But rebounding/hustle big men (Faried) and scorers who can get their own shot (Burks, Fredette) are also valuable players. I think if we're picking among role players, then fit and need have to be big considerations, and wing defender is just not a strong need for us.

                        I think what tbird is getting at though is that Singleton could be more than a great role player if his offensive game develops. If he can give you 15-18 ppg while playing shutdown defense, he could become a key cog of a contending team, like Artest did. And like Artest, his hope for offensive improvement would seem to come from his post game.

                        If he really has non-crazy Artest potential, he really should be going a lot earlier than 15, so you can maybe argue that he'd still be good value at 15 even if his offense never develops. But if that's the case though I'd rather take a look at other options that might also be good value at 15.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

                          I could see Singleton as Granger's future replacement as Granger was Artest's future replacement. I'd have no issue with Bird drafting Singleton, but my preference, if staying in the draft, is still a a "big" PG.

                          A big PG who can play "D" matched up with George would be awesome. The Pacers would finally have some backcourt "D". It would take pressure, off the BIGS especially Hibbert.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

                            I'd love to have Chris Singleton on this team.

                            You need to have quality perimeter defenders. We are seeing that with the current Heat team. Not only do you need to be able to guard Wade and Lebron but their perimeter defense is the best in the league. We see what that does for team.

                            I really want to see players known for their defense added to this team.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

                              A more accurate comparison is AK-47 or Josh Smith.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Tbird 2011 NBA draft analysis #4: Chris Singleton

                                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                                I could see Singleton as Granger's future replacement as Granger was Artest's future replacement. I'd have no issue with Bird drafting Singleton, but my preference, if staying in the draft, is still a a "big" PG.

                                A big PG who can play "D" matched up with George would be awesome. The Pacers would finally have some backcourt "D". It would take pressure, off the BIGS especially Hibbert.
                                Perhaps, with Darius Morris and Reggie Jackson slipping in the draft, we could draft Singleton at 15 and make a trade for a late first round pick to get both Singleton and a big point guard prospect? I would cry tears of joy if we pulled that off.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X