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

CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

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

  • CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report



    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200.../10/14/pacers/

    "The pressure is on a quiet 7-footer to make some long-awaited noise

    On the rare occasions when Jonathan Bender speaks, his voice is so soft that the listener must lean in to hear him. So while it may not be the best choice of phrase to call this a put-up-or-shut-up season for the 23-year-old forward, there's a pervasive sense in Indiana that Bender will either have a breakout year or be tagged a bust. "It's time for me to deliver," he says. "Actually it's past time."

    Since he was plucked out of Picayune (Miss.) Memorial High with the fifth pick in the 1999 draft, Bender has displayed a rare blend of height (7 feet), athleticism (a 39-inch vertical leap) and touch. (His shooting percentage has risen every year.) Says All-Star forward Jermaine O'Neal flatly, "JB is the most talented player on this team." But Bender has been injured for much of his career; he missed all but 21 games in 2003-04 after surgery on his left knee. When he has played, he has at times been tentative and unable to hold position in the low post.

    Still, his flashes of brilliance were frequent enough that the Pacers felt comfortable dealing 6'9" sixth man Al Harrington to the Hawks for swingman Stephen Jackson, a move that will free up considerable minutes at power forward. Asked by reporters whether the trade will upgrade Bender's role, team president Larry Bird smirked and said, "It better!"

    Hoping to seize the opportunity, Bender worked out daily over the summer with trainer Macki Shillstone in New Orleans. He reported to training camp conspicuously stronger at 235 pounds -- up 15 from a year ago -- and spent early sessions firmly planted in the interior. "The trade meant that a good friend won't be around," he says of Harrington. "But I'm trying to see it as a blessing in disguise. I'm finally healthy, and I just need to deliver." -- L. Jon Wertheim


    FAST FACTS
    Record: 61-21 (1st in East)
    Points Scored: 91.4 (20th in NBA)
    Points Allowed: 85.6 (3rd)
    Coach: Rick Carlisle
    (second season with the Pacers)
    2004 Schedule | 2004 Draft Picks | 2003 Stats
    Rick Carlisle became the second coach to win 50 games and a division championship in each of his first three seasons. Pat Riley was the first to do it.

    PROJECTED STARTING LINEUP
    With 2003-04 statistics

    JEFF FOSTER
    POS. PVR PPG RPG APG BPG SPG FG% FT%
    C 182 6.1 7.4 0.8 0.33 0.87 54.4 66.9

    JERMAINE O'NEAL
    POS. PVR PPG RPG APG BPG SPG FG% FT%
    PF 10 20.1 10.0 2.1 2.55 0.76 43.4 75.7

    REGGIE MILLER
    POS. PVR PPG RPG APG SPG FG% 3FG% FT%
    SG 126 10.0 2.4 3.1 0.81 43.8 40.1 88.5

    JAMAAL TINSLEY
    POS. PVR PPG RPG APG SPG FG% 3FG% FT%
    PG 93 8.3 2.6 5.8 1.62 41.4 37.2 73.1

    RON ARTEST
    POS. PVR PPG RPG APG SPG FG% 3FG% FT%
    SF 26 18.3 5.3 3.7 2.08 42.1 31.0 73.3


    BENCH PVR 2003-04 Stats

    G-F STEPHEN JACKSON 70 18.1 ppg 4.6 rpg 1.78 spg 42.5 FG% 34.0 3FG%

    F AUSTIN CROSHERE 147 5.0 ppg 3.2 rpg 38.8 FG% 38.9 3FG% 89.4 FT%

    F JONATHAN BENDER 199 7.0 ppg 1.9 rpg 0.52 bpg 47.2 FG% 40.9 3FG%

    G ANTHONY JOHNSON 246 6.2 ppg 1.8 rpg 2.8 apg 0.88 spg 40.6 FG%

    F-C SCOT POLLARD 274 1.7 ppg 2.7 rpg 0.43 bpg 41.2 FG% 57.1 FT


    Issue date: October 25, 2004"

    Regards,

    Mourning
    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

  • #2
    Re: CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

    I rec'd Sports Illustrated in the mail yesterday. They are picking the Pacers 2nd in the east. There were some interesting comments from an NBA scout, I'll dig those out, don't see them on the website

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

      That would be great UB! And, yeah, CNNSI has an SI members exclusive part. So, looking forward to your next post on this.

      Regards,

      Mourning
      2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

      2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

      2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

        The NBA scout made it sound like JO is a wissy little girl, or something I thought. "He needs to play more like a big man" was the theme. He played center most the year, I'd don't think he could do that if he only had the "skills of a guard", as they say.
        You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

          Speaking of Centers ... IF, I know its still a big "if" becuasue its still so early, BUT if Pollard keep playing the way like he has so far in the preseason and can translate into being decent and Jeff keeps it up aswell ... would that logically lead to JO seriously reducing his minutes at Center and getting more minutes at his natural PF position? I would hope so, anyone up here have an idea on what Rick might think about that

          Regards,

          Mourning
          2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

          2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

          2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

            Paraphrasing: here is what an opposing team's scout had to say

            Of the top three teams in the East, they're are suddenly the smallest after trading Al harrington to Atlanta. Now their 6th man is going to be Austin croshere, Bender, jackson or even Fred Jones, none of whom can help J.O inside against the Pistons or the Heat.

            Scot Pollard is a duplication of jeff Foster. You have 2 offensive liabilities when thy're on the floor together.

            Over the summer Artest said that he was the best player on the team - and I agree. In a tight game he's more of a go-to-guy in the post than O'Neal. If you're physical with J.O. and get him off the block, he will settle for the 10-15 ft turnaround. It's not that he isn't tough; it's that he wants to prove he is skilled enough to make difficult shots.

            Artest is 25 years old with a fundamental game of a veteran, only problem is he doesn't have a veterans head. So they can't count on him under pressure. but they have to stick with him or risk seeing him mature with another team.

            Tinsley had a pretty good year, though Bird's talk that he'll become an allstar is an exaggeration. In the transition game he's excellent, but in the half court, coach Carlisle takes the ball out of his hands. Tinsley makes the pass then cuts to the corner to spot up, which limits the chances for mistakes.

            This is Reggie's final year and Carlisle has made it clear that he'll bench Reggie if he isn't producing . Eevn if Reggie stars , he won't get starter's minutes - That's why they got Jackson, though I'm not a big fan. He tends to get carried away offensively because he thinks he is better than he really is.
            [edit=24=1098497468][/edit]

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

              Thx UB!

              This is a scouting report I could live with, certainly compared with the one NBA.com produced. I don't necessarily aggree with everything, but I do aggree with a lot of this one.

              Regards,

              Mourning
              2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

              2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

              2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

                The only part of the article that I thought was "wrong" was the part about Foster and Pollard when they are on the floor together. I don't think they were on the floor at the same time at all last year.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

                  Yeah, which leads me to a question I asked earlier:

                  "Speaking of Centers ... IF, I know its still a big "if" because its still so early, BUT if Pollard keep playing the way like he has so far in the preseason and can translate into being decent and Jeff keeps it up aswell ... would that logically lead to JO seriously reducing his minutes at Center and getting more minutes at his natural PF position? I would hope so, anyone up here have an idea on what Rick might think about that"

                  Regards,

                  Mourning
                  2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                  2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                  2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

                    It seems to me that any minutes Pollard would steal would come directly from all the minutes that Cro is supposed to rake in this year. JO, Foster, and Bender will get all the minutes they can make use of. Those two are going to be left with the scraps.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

                      Ideally, Bender would get absolutely no minutes at SF this year. Anything that Artest doesn't take, Jax should (leaving backcourt minutes for Freddy). EDIT: Meaning he should get as many minutes as possible at PF.

                      I still don't like our rotations.... this team is still put together piecemeal. I'd still trade most of our frontcourt players 2-for-1 for an upgrade. I love Freddy, but I'd trade Fred/Cro/Pollard for Dale/Cliffy/pick in a heartbeat.
                      [edit=39=1098560157][/edit]
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

                        In the same Sports Illustrated there was a very interesting interview with Bird, Ainge, Dumars, McHale, and Isiah on the state of the game. Worth buying the magazine.

                        This is the NBA preview issue with Shaq on the cover

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

                          I do wonder about our bench, especially since I am not convinced on Bender. When he doesn't play, who do they count on for offense other than Jackson?
                          Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

                            Well, I guess it depends on what you think of Freddy. The trade is clearly biased in our favor, though. Hard to see us NOT doing that deal.

                            I do think the warriors are a natural trading partner for us, though.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: CNNSI.com Pacers, ehh... Bender Scouting report

                              Ehh, they'd still have one left....
                              This space for rent.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X