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

Draft puts a number of veterans on notice

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

  • Draft puts a number of veterans on notice

    http://nba-point-forward.si.com/2011...sct=nba_t12_a1

    After the trade deadline in February, I put together a list of guys who were “on notice” given the moves their teams made. The idea was to pinpoint guys who had either been thrust into larger roles or found themselves with increased competition for minutes. The following is a list of players who might be considered “on notice” given their teams’ picks in the draft last week. With an exception or two, I focused on players who are not set to be free agents this summer.

    EASTERN CONFERENCE


    Last season was a major disappointment for Bucks guard Brandon Jennings. (Jeff Hanisch-US PRESSWIRE)

    • Brandon Jennings, PG, Bucks

    It might be a bit much to put Jennings here, considering he’s only 21 and a cornerstone of the Bucks franchise. But last season was a disappointment for him, as he shot just 39 percent overall, took a major step back from three-point range and did not advance as much as hoped as a pick-and-roll attacker. Like a lot of little guys, Jennings struggles to finish at the rim and to consistently get below the foul line on pick-and-rolls.



    His only competition last season was Keyon Dooling, but that will change now that Milwaukee has added both Shaun Livingston and Beno Udrih. Scott Skiles will likely play both guys with Jennings at times, so this is not strictly an either/or situation. Livingston brings a post presence, and Udrih has shot around 50 percent for two straight seasons. He doesn’t defend much, but he’s an efficient shooter from inside the three-point line, and Milwaukee’s back-line defense might be able to mask some of Udrih’s weaknesses.

    Jennings will start and play heavy minutes, but Skiles can make the hook a bit quicker next season.

    • Andray Blatche, F, Wizards

    The young-ish veteran in his prime will always get the benefit of the doubt over rookies and over-the-hill types, so Blatche (like Jennings) is basically guaranteed to start and see heavy minutes in Washington next season. He’s also guaranteed $29.8 million over the next four years, a deal that is pricey and yet moderate enough (at least by current standards) to make Blatche movable if it comes to that.

    The Wizards’ forward rotation got lot more crowded on Thursday, when they snagged Jan Vesely and Chris Singleton in the first round of the draft. Vesely is 6-foot-11 and comfortable working in the post, and Singleton might — might – be able to work as a small-ish power forward in the NBA.

    Blatche played much of last season (and prior seasons, really) like an entitled pseudo-star, hogging the ball on offense, taking awful shots and playing some of the least-inspired defense you’ll ever see. Injuries may have contributed to all of this, but Blatche could feel confident the Wizards didn’t really have anyone else to take his minutes. That’s still true … for now.

    • Rodney Stuckey, G, Pistons

    Stuckey will merit his own post at some point, since there may not be a more intriguing potential free agent outside of Greg Oden. The Pistons’ decision to draft Kentucky product Brandon Knight doesn’t necessarily signal anything big about Stuckey’s future, but it does accelerate the dialogue over what position he should play, whether he can work well off the ball and how central he is to the Pistons’ future.

    • Baron Davis/Ramon Sessions, G, Cavaliers

    This is old news, since it was clear from the moment Cleveland landed the No. 1 pick that the Cavs would have one too many point guards deserving of serious minutes. Sessions, due $4.26 million next season and $4.55 million in 2012-13 (via a player option), will obviously be easier to move, though the Cavaliers would love to unload Davis and his hefty deal if they can find a taker. Either figures to be available in exchange for a draft pick or cap relief.

    • D.J. Augustin, G, Bobcats

    Augustin is a nice player with a long-range stroke that did not hold up last season when the Bobcats handed him twice as many minutes per game as he got in 2009-10. He’s only 23, but he hasn’t emerged as the sort of point guard you’d be thrilled to have as your long-term starter. And with Kemba Walker now on board, Augustin faces some serious pressure again.

    Augustin is a low-turnover player who can clearly serve as a caretaker point guard, but he hasn’t developed as a pick-and-roll threat who can break down a defense consistently. He’s one of the worst finishers at the rim among all league point guards, and his passing numbers are on par with so-so distributors, like Mike Conley and Stephen Curry; his passes do not lead to as many shots at the rim or three-pointers as you’d like. His height (6-foot) will always make it tough for him to finish in the lane, and it also makes him a liability on defense. Playing Augustin and Walker together for long stretches is probably unrealistic.

    • Brandon Rush, G, Pacers

    Rush turns 26 next week, so it’s reasonable to assume we’ve seen his NBA ceiling as a low-usage jump shooter who loves long twos, struggles to create his own shot and contributes inconsistently on both ends. After a hot start last season in which he shot more often and more accurately than usual, Rush’s play settled back to his career norm. With George Hill in town and Paul George flashing a versatile two-way game, Rush might be fighting for crumbs off the bench next season unless he can show Indiana a bit more.


    • Spencer Hawes, C, 76ers

    It’s tough to project how much a rookie big like Nikola Vucevic will actually play, but he should get a shot at stealing some of Hawes’ minutes in Philly’s big-man rotation. The Sixers played better on both ends last season with Hawes on the bench, but when he’s on, his combination of passing and shooting from the center spot can grease his team’s creaky offense. His defensive rebounding improved last season, and having skilled 7-footers in the paint is generally a good thing.

    But Hawes was never able to gain Doug Collins’ unwavering confidence, establish himself as a league-average defender or score in the paint consistently. The Sixers have tendered Hawes his $4.05 million qualifying offer, so they are at least interested in bringing him back at that moderate price.

    WESTERN CONFERENCE


    Anthony Randolph and Michael Beasley have even more competition at power forward. (AP)

    • Michael Beasley and Anthony Randolph, F, Timberwolves

    Another obvious one, given all the attention on Minnesota’s crowded power-forward rotation now that Derrick Williams has arrived. Beasley is a gunner who needs to improve his all-around game, on both ends, to approach the hype his scoring creates. Randolph, only 21, is stocked with potential, but he has often looked overwhelmed on the court. He improved when he was sent to Minnesota in the Carmelo Anthony trade, but he still has a ways to go in fulfilling some of that potential.

    • Goran Dragic/Jonny Flynn, G, Rockets

    It’s tempting to list Houston’s power forward collective here as one big “on notice” player, but the reality is that all the young guys behind Luis Scola will probably get chances to prove themselves. Things get trickier at point guard, which will be a three-person job unless the Rockets decline their team option on Dragic or move one of these guys before next season starts.

    After Flynn’s disastrous (and short) second season in Minnesota, it’s fashionable to list Dragic as the no-brainer No. 2 guy here behind Kyle Lowry. But last season represented a significant step back for Dragic, as well. He has been a high-turnover player since entering the league, but his shooting dropped off in 2010-11 to the point that he was more of a liability than asset in Phoenix. He played better after the Suns dealt him to Houston, but this should be a legit competition.

    • Greivis Vasquez, G, Grizzlies

    Vasquez had his moments in the playoffs, but he also looked overwhelmed at times and shot just 40.8 percent for the season — and just 29 percent from three. He’ll be 25 when next season starts, so he’s not young. He is a first-round pick due guaranteed money next season, and he’s competing for Conley’s backup minutes with Josh Selby, an ultra-talented guard out of Kansas who slipped all the way to No. 49 in the draft because of questions surrounding his attitude, position and ability to play point guard in the NBA. Even still, he has the athleticism to eventually push Vasquez if things go right.

    • Hakim Warrick, F, Suns

    The Suns are set at center, a bit crowded on the wing and confident (for now) with Channing Frye as their starting power forward. They also just drafted Markieff Morris in the lottery, meaning Warrick – so enticing and yet so unsatisfying – has some new competition on hand.

    Warrick looks the part of an ideal pick-and-roll partner for Steve Nash, with explosive finishing skills, an ability to get to the line and a usable mid-range jumper. But he has never been able to defend or rebound well enough to stay on the floor as much as he might otherwise. Will he figure it out after his 29th birthday in a couple of weeks?

    • Richard Jefferson, F, Spurs

    He’s been on notice since he arrived in San Antonio. But now the Spurs have a rookie small forward in Kawhi Leonard, whom they liked enough to give up George Hill, one of Gregg Popovich’s all-time favorites. Finally, some legit competition for Jefferson on the wing
    .
    Sittin on top of the world!

  • #2
    Re: Draft puts a number of veterans on notice

    Haha not on notice, Rush is nothing but an expendable 12th man

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Draft puts a number of veterans on notice

      He's still a useful player, and nice depth to have in case of injury. He could use a fresh start though, would be a much better fit somewhere where he could play off of a superstar and do his thing... spread the floor, play D, be a glue guy.
      "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

      - ilive4sports

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Draft puts a number of veterans on notice

        His defense is probably a little overrated on this site though. I mean we like to give him credit for playing good D because we see play pretty strong on the ball D. But it's amazing how many times he falls asleep off the ball.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Draft puts a number of veterans on notice

          Brandon is going to have a breakout year... on some other team. If anyone in the league needs a change of scenery, he is at the top of the list.

          I want to keep him. I think he is good basketball player and he still has potential, but there probably isn't enough minutes to go around. He is probably the best defender of big SGs and SFs on the team.

          I really hope we don't just trade him for nothing or a 2nd round draft pick or something.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Draft puts a number of veterans on notice

            Brandon Rush...that guy is in it for the money and the spotlight...not for the basketball. Get him out of here.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Draft puts a number of veterans on notice

              Basically, he doesn't care and to be honest with you, I don't care about him.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Draft puts a number of veterans on notice

                Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
                Brandon is going to have a breakout year... on some other team. If anyone in the league needs a change of scenery, he is at the top of the list.

                I want to keep him. I think he is good basketball player and he still has potential, but there probably isn't enough minutes to go around. He is probably the best defender of big SGs and SFs on the team.

                I really hope we don't just trade him for nothing or a 2nd round draft pick or something.
                Uhhh...why? It's not like he hasn't gotten plenty of chances to succeed here. We threw minutes at him. We let him play through his growing pains. We gave him every opportunity to succeed. What am I missing here? The way I see it is that he has the tools to be a very, very good player, but he doesn't have the head/heart for it. He dabbles in drugs and has constant concentration lapses on the court.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Draft puts a number of veterans on notice

                  We really should be moving on from Brandon Rush. He's had more than enough time to show what he can do...and it's not enough...not only to start but to be a backup if we plan to contend. GH is a year younger and averages more points on a much, much better team...along with taking care of the ball much better and being capable of running the offense. Obviously, Brandon just moved a notch back on the depth chart. I hope to see him on our bench though because he makes a solid 11th man...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Draft puts a number of veterans on notice

                    Wouldn't be surprised if BRush is a throw in on a trade. I like his D when he's focused, and he's somewhat efficient, but he's usually invisible. And PG took his role.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Draft puts a number of veterans on notice

                      Rush has been on notice for a while, but the problem is the rest of the league knows it and he has low trade value.

                      "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Draft puts a number of veterans on notice

                        Originally posted by cdash View Post
                        Uhhh...why? It's not like he hasn't gotten plenty of chances to succeed here. We threw minutes at him. We let him play through his growing pains. We gave him every opportunity to succeed. What am I missing here? The way I see it is that he has the tools to be a very, very good player, but he doesn't have the head/heart for it. He dabbles in drugs and has constant concentration lapses on the court.
                        No one on this team had a chance to succeed while JOB was here. JOB was probably the worst thing to ever happen to Rush.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Draft puts a number of veterans on notice

                          Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                          No one on this team had a chance to succeed while JOB was here. JOB was probably the worst thing to ever happen to Rush.
                          Didnt Jim O'Brien give Rush significant time his rookie year ? Made him a starter his second year

                          You can blame a lot on Obie, but Rush's lack of success is clearly not one of them
                          Sittin on top of the world!

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X