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

Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

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

  • Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

    Here's another on the Bender Bandwagon... From sports.yahoo.com/nba. Not that Tinsley and Harrington are also on the list. I don't know how to bold or I would.

    All-Breakout team

    John Hollinger, SI.com

    Faster than you can say Nikoloz Tskitishvili, a new NBA campaign is upon us. As always, one of the big questions heading into the season is "which little-known players are going to become household names?" I'm here to help.

    This is easier to divine in some years than others. Last season, for instance, there were at least three players who were obvious candidates to have All-Star caliber years based on their track records and a likely increase in playing time. The top player on my list a year ago, Zach Randolph, won the Most Improved Player, and the next two guys, Michael Redd and Andrei Kirilenko, made the All-Star team.

    I bring those up not just as a cheap way to toot my own horn, but to point out the lack of no-brainer breakout picks in this year's crop. I don't expect anyone in this year's list to approach the numbers that Randolph, Redd and Kirilenko put up a year ago. Still, 10 players come to mind who figure to get a lot more ink this year.

    Before we start, here are some ground rules. First, I left out the obvious three guys -- LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony and Dwyane Wade -- because a) everybody knows about them and b) they don't have much breaking out left to do.

    ADVERTISEMENT


    Second, I also left out Marquis Daniels, Mehmet Okur, Jamal Crawford and anyone else who got more than $40 million this summer. If somebody's going to throw that much money in your direction, I'd say the secret's out.

    With that in mind, here's the second annual edition of my top breakout players. After each, I included the player's production per 40 minutes last season. Since a lot of them didn't play that much, it provides a quick indicator of what they're capable of producing if they become full-time starters:

    10. Drew Gooden, Cavaliers (17.1 pts., 9.7 reb.)

    Merely escaping the mess in Orlando has to be a boost for Gooden, who was relegated to the bench almost immediately last season and kept shuttling between the two forward spots. In Cleveland he'll play about 10 minutes more a game than he did last season, and with passers like James and Eric Snow he should get plenty of chances to finish around the rim. Although he's on his third team, he's only 23 and is still developing his perimeter game.

    9. Brendan Haywood, Wizards (14.5 pts., 10.4 reb., 51.5 FG%)

    Haywood only played 19.3 minutes a game last year -- I guess Eddie Jordan felt like he just had to get Christian Laettner on the floor -- but Haywood figures to get a lot more burn this year. Kwame Brown's foot injury should leave the door open at the start of the year, and if Haywood does as well as I expect, the rest should take care of itself.

    8. Michael Sweetney, Knicks (14.5 pts., 12.7 reb., 49.3 FG%)

    A nightly double-double threat who would rank higher if it was certain that the Knicks will move him ahead of Kurt Thomas, Sweetney is most easily compared to a right-handed version of Randolph. His numbers in his sophomore season should be a big step forward from his rookie performance, especially since he spent most of last year nailed to the bench while lesser talents like Othella Harrington and Clarence Weatherspoon stole his minutes.

    7. Jamaal Tinsley, Pacers (12.5 pts, 8.8 ast, 3.4 reb)

    Tinsley played 26.5 minutes a game last year because it took him half the year to take over the starting job. There's no such debate in Indiana this season, so Tinsley's minutes should move up into the mid-30s. As a result, he should finish in the top five in the NBA in assists and average double figures in scoring.

    6. Al Harrington, Hawks (17.2 pts, 8.3 reb, 46.3 FG%)

    Harrington's a tough case. On the one hand, he figures to do much more statistically because he'll be playing 40 minutes a night and should be the No. 2 option on a Hawks team that's devoid of talent. On the other hand, he's not nearly as good as people imagine. I wouldn't be surprised if he averaged more than 20 points a night, but he might shoot less than 40 percent in the process.

    5. Chris Bosh, Raptors (13.7 pts, 8.9 reb, 45.9 FG%)

    Lost in all the hubbub over James/Anthony/Wade was the fact that at the grizzled age of 19, Bosh played out of position all season, gave up 30 pounds every night, and not only survived but was among the better players at his position. Rafael Araujo's arrival moves Bosh to his natural power forward spot, where he should put up much better numbers in his sophomore season.

    4. Dan Gadzuric, Bucks (13.5 pts, 11.0 reb, 52.4%)

    The Bucks big man is a human pogo stick who blocked more than three shots per 40 minutes last season and was effective on the glass despite being weaker than Scott Peterson's alibi. The big difference, though, is that Gadzuric has become more efficient on the offensive end, running the floor for dunks and hitting short jumpers in the halfcourt. With Brian Skinner gone, the minutes at center in Milwaukee are his to lose, so his numbers should shoot up accordingly.

    3. Larry Hughes, Wizards (22.3 pts, 6.3 reb)

    Hughes' 40-minute scoring average is going to surprise a lot of people -- it ranked right between Amar? Stoudemire's and Randolph's. In other words, he actually broke out last year, but since nobody's gotten the news release yet, I figured it would be OK to list him here again. Hughes is one of the best rebounding guards in the game, he's still only 25, and he's entering a contract year. If the Wizards are as good as I think they'll be this year, Hughes could end up making the All-Star team.

    2. Tyson Chandler, Bulls (10.9 pts, 13.8 reb)

    For all the talk about Eddy Curry, Chandler was much more impressive in the early part of last season until a back injury derailed his progress. Even with the injuries, his rebound rate of 13.8 per 40 minutes was awesome, so if he stays in one piece this year, his size and energy could put him in the league's top five in rebounding.

    1. Jonathan Bender, Pacers (21.8 pts, 5.9 reb, 47.2 FG%)

    If I had to bet on one guy to win the "Most Improved Player" award (a misnomer which should be renamed "most invisible to beat writers before the season"), this is the one. Bender's sore knee is a concern, but his per-minute numbers from a year ago are so overwhelming that he easily tops this list anyway. Now that Harrington's gone, Bender figures to get close to 30 minutes a night in Indiana. The only thing holding him back is the fact that two All-Stars are playing at forward ahead of him, but if Ron Artest goes fruit loops, look for Bender to explode. Worst case, he'll have a hard time not winning the Sixth Man award.

  • #2
    Re: Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

    I wouldn't expect 21 pts out of Bender.But what I do expect is for him to be healthy and to at least make up for Harrington being gone.I think he can get 13-16 ppg.And I liked the Tinsley love too it would be nice if he could step up and score a lot along with Foster.
    Super Bowl XLI Champions
    2000 Eastern Conference Champions




    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

      It's also misleading because we have a better chance of seeing Santa Claus streak across a soccer field than see Bender play without getting hurt.
      Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

        Originally posted by Millerartest
        but if Ron Artest goes fruit loops...


        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

          Originally posted by pacerfan2425
          I wouldn't expect 21 pts out of Bender.
          Note, the statistics listed after a player's name is not the writer's prediction for what they'll produce, but their statistics last year extrapolated to 40 minutes per.

          I think it's asking a lot for Bender to contend for 6th man when Sax will be coming off the bench, as well. MIP would be nice, though.
          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

            Originally posted by rcarey
            Originally posted by Millerartest
            but if Ron Artest goes fruit loops...

            As long as he doesn't go coo coo for cocopuffs, we're all good....I haven't come up with a cereal for Bender, but I'm thinking "Stickman Cereal"
            Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

              Originally posted by Suaveness
              Originally posted by rcarey
              Originally posted by Millerartest
              but if Ron Artest goes fruit loops...

              As long as he doesn't go coo coo for cocopuffs, we're all good....I haven't come up with a cereal for Bender, but I'm thinking "Stickman Cereal"
              Gotta be something with marshmellows.
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

                Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                Originally posted by Suaveness
                Originally posted by rcarey
                Originally posted by Millerartest
                but if Ron Artest goes fruit loops...

                As long as he doesn't go coo coo for cocopuffs, we're all good....I haven't come up with a cereal for Bender, but I'm thinking "Stickman Cereal"
                Gotta be something with marshmellows.

                Look at them....plottin' ....

                "We attack tomorrow"
                "Yes"
                "I mean it this time"
                Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

                  I didn't realize the IR had an award like that.
                  The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

                    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    I'm amazed that the writer would think that trading Harrington would give Bender 30 min. per game. I can't see Bender getting more pt then Jackson. Sure Reggie's going to losing another 5-8 min., but I'll bet Jackson gets at least 25 min., which means Bender, and Artest won't be given any time at the 2 like they did last year. Best case, I see Bender getting 20 min, and that's if he can produce at the 4 some. I would think Jackson would stand a much better chance at the 6th. man award.
                    Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

                      Originally posted by btowncolt
                      Originally posted by Suaveness
                      Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                      Originally posted by Suaveness
                      Originally posted by rcarey
                      Originally posted by Millerartest
                      but if Ron Artest goes fruit loops...

                      As long as he doesn't go coo coo for cocopuffs, we're all good....I haven't come up with a cereal for Bender, but I'm thinking "Stickman Cereal"
                      Gotta be something with marshmellows.

                      Look at them....plottin' ....

                      "We attack tomorrow"
                      "Yes"
                      "I mean it this time"
                      Clouds aren't the same thing as marshmellows........
                      Yeah, and Bender isn't a stick

                      Clouds, marshmellows, its all good
                      Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

                        Originally posted by Pacerized
                        --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        I'm amazed that the writer would think that trading Harrington would give Bender 30 min. per game. I can't see Bender getting more pt then Jackson. Sure Reggie's going to losing another 5-8 min., but I'll bet Jackson gets at least 25 min., which means Bender, and Artest won't be given any time at the 2 like they did last year. Best case, I see Bender getting 20 min, and that's if he can produce at the 4 some. I would think Jackson would stand a much better chance at the 6th. man award.

                        I think I agree...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

                          What were Bender's per minute numbers like last year?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

                            Originally posted by Suaveness
                            It's also misleading because we have a better chance of seeing Santa Claus streak across a soccer field than see Bender play without getting hurt.



                            Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Bender Favorite For Sixth Man of the Year - Yahoo/SI

                              Thats why I hate per minute or per 48 minute stats. If a guy comes in for 4 minutes and they run 4 plays for him in those three minutes and he scores six points off those 4 plays he is averaging more than a point a minute. (This isn't necessarily aimed at Bender).

                              If a guy is brought in for a quick scoring boost off the bench it doesn't mean he can continue that kind of output if he were playing starter minutes or if he wasn't used situationally. I realize that there are cases were all-stars ride the pine till someone gives them a chance, but that doesn't make everyone on the bench an all-star.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X