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

Off season Rumors and Speculation

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

  • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

    Originally posted by Hypnotiq View Post
    @chadfordinsider: More on Royce White. Now hearing more definitely promise is from Celtics at 21.

    Damn i was hoping we had a chance at this guy
    Great job by Boston if they land him. Talk about fitting Doc's system perfectly Royce does just that. I had concerns about Royce but if he goes into Doc's system that negates a lot of my concerns because Celtic style of play is perfect for him.

    Comment


    • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

      Originally posted by Hypnotiq View Post
      @chadfordinsider: More on Royce White. Now hearing more definitely promise is from Celtics at 21.

      Damn i was hoping we had a chance at this guy
      Yeah, Royce is still a player I very much want.

      Royce and either Marquis Teaque or Tony Wroten could be a good draft for us. Nicholson could be another option.

      With teams going small in the playoffs, I don't think having a slow footed backup C is ideal, so I don't want Fab. We need an athletic PF/C.
      First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

      Comment


      • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

        Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
        Yeah, Royce is still a player I very much want.

        Royce and either Marquis Teaque or Tony Wroten could be a good draft for us. Nicholson could be another option.

        With teams going small in the playoffs, I don't think having a slow footed backup C is ideal, so I don't want Fab. We need an athletic PF/C.
        so you dont want Melo who is athletic and very quick for his size but you want Nicholson who is not athletic who actually moves a lot like Troy Murphy actually I would say Murph moves better on D (yes Nicholsons defense was awful at the college level at the NBA level it will be really hard to hide

        because you want an athletic guy??


        Nicholson is about as slow footed as Perkins.

        Comment


        • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

          Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
          so you dont want Melo who is athletic and very quick for his size but you want Nicholson who is not athletic who actually moves a lot like Troy Murphy actually I would say Murph moves better on D (yes Nicholsons defense was awful at the college level at the NBA level it will be really hard to hide

          because you want an athletic guy??


          Nicholson is about as slow footed as Perkins.
          I can only go by what I read. DraftExpress says Nicholson is fluid and mobile. Fab maybe faster than Hibbs, but he just looks awkward and slow footed. Maybe he's deceptive that way, but I don't care for Melo much.
          First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

          Comment


          • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

            Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
            I can only go by what I read. DraftExpress says Nicholson is fluid and mobile. Fab maybe faster than Hibbs, but he just looks awkward and slow footed. Maybe he's deceptive that way, but I don't care for Melo much.
            When I watch tape of Nicholson he looks awful moving on defense. You should watch some games of the guy before you call him athletic and perfect as a bu 4/5 he isn't any in form of the word athletic. Troy Murphy is probably a good comp for Nick IMO solid on offense but a black hole and lacks a motor and the ability to defend.


            he is mobile (different than athletic IMO) and can play both the 4 and the 5 but IMO Troy Murphy level of defense(nick can block shots though but overall defense wont be that good IMO) is what you will get and similar on offense JMO. Solid role player but I dont really want or like that kind of player on my team.

            I dont want Fab Melo but what you are saying about the 2 are inaccurate IMO.

            Comment


            • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

              And the offseason begins. What is the date of the draft and the date that free agency starts?

              Comment


              • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                And the offseason begins. What is the date of the draft and the date that free agency starts?
                Thursday is the draft and july 1st at mid night for free agency and summer league is right after free agency.

                Comment


                • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                  Ford Draft Tiers are out, always one of my favorite articles, let you get an idea of who you may have a shot at, imo. Anyone care to share?

                  http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft...prospects-tier

                  Comment


                  • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                    Originally posted by Speed View Post
                    Ford Draft Tiers are out, always one of my favorite articles, let you get an idea of who you may have a shot at, imo. Anyone care to share?

                    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft...prospects-tier
                    K.

                    By Chad Ford

                    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft...prospects-tier

                    Every time I put up a new mock draft (Mock Draft 8.2 was updated on Thursday), I get a lot of feedback from readers who wonder how I put it together and how it differs from the Top 100.

                    This is how it works: Both pieces are reported. In other words, I talk with NBA scouts and executives to get a sense of:

                    A. Which teams like which players (mock draft).

                    B. What the consensus is among all 30 NBA teams about who the best players in the draft are (Top 100).

                    I use the word "consensus" lightly. Often, even GMs and scouts employed by the same team can't agree on rankings of players. As hard as it is for NBA draftniks to believe, there is very little consensus within teams, let alone between them, on draft night.

                    Obviously, the draft is an inexact science. NBA teams watch prospects play thousands of hours of games. They go to practice. They go to camps. They work out players, give them psychological tests, do background checks and conduct personal interviews. All of this factors into the process and can change opinions.

                    Factor in the ranking wars with another age-old debate -- do you draft for need or for the best player available? -- and it's no surprise the draft can be so volatile. Many teams take into account holes at certain positions (i.e., the team has no small forward) or coaching/system preferences (i.e., the Spurs draft players who can fit into coach Gregg Popovich's system) when making their decisions.

                    To make sense of disparate rankings and debates over team needs, the past few years I've chronicled a draft ranking system employed by several teams that have been very successful in the draft, what I call a tier system. Instead of developing an exact order from one to 60 of the best players in the draft, these teams group players, based on overall talent, into tiers. Then, the teams rank the players in each tier based on team need.

                    This system allows teams to draft not only the best player available, but also the player who best fits a team's individual needs.

                    So what do the tiers look like this year? After talking to several GMs and scouts whose teams employ this system, I put together these tiers. (Because the teams do not want to divulge their draft rankings publicly, the teams will remain anonymous.)


                    (Note: Players are listed alphabetically in each tier.)

                    Tier 1
                    Anthony Davis
                    Note: This category is usually reserved for guys who are sure-fire All-Stars/franchise players. Last year, we didn't have anyone here. In 2010, John Wall was the only guy in this tier. In 2009, Blake Griffin was the only one. This year Davis is the only player in the draft to get the nod.

                    Tier 2
                    Harrison Barnes
                    Bradley Beal
                    Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
                    Thomas Robinson
                    Note: Tier 2 is reserved for players who are likely locks for the top half of the lottery and are projected as either very good starters or potential All-Stars by scouts. Robinson, Beal and Kidd-Gilchrist got the nod for Tier 2 from every GM I spoke with. Barnes, who has been rising on draft boards the past few weeks after some stellar athletic testing numbers at the NBA combine, was on 75 percent of the lists.

                    Tier 3
                    Andre Drummond
                    Damian Lillard
                    Dion Waiters
                    Note: This is a smaller than usual Tier 3. These are the only three players (outside of the five mentioned already) that were consensus top-10 picks among the GMs I spoke with. Of the group, Drummond and Lillard had every vote. Waiters was on most of the ballots. Drummond is the toughest guy to peg. One team has him No. 2 on their draft board. Others are much more nervous about him and see a high bust potential. He barely missed the Tier 2 cut. Interestingly, a few teams had Waiters in Tier 2, while a few teams had him in Tier 4. That's a pretty big spread.


                    Mark Dolejs/US Presswire
                    Teams disagree on where Austin Rivers should be taken in the draft.
                    Tier 4
                    John Henson
                    Perry Jones III
                    Terrence Jones
                    Jeremy Lamb
                    Meyers Leonard
                    Kendall Marshall
                    Austin Rivers
                    Terrence Ross
                    Jared Sullinger
                    Tyler Zeller
                    Note: After Tier 3, it's very difficult to find a real consensus here. There are 10 players here for a total of five spots left in the lottery. A few players, like Jeremy Lamb and Austin Rivers, got a few votes in Tier 3. A few others, like Kendall Marshall, got some Tier 5 votes. But in general, this group makes up the 10-20 range of the draft. (We should note that I received some of these responses before GMs had a chance to review Sullinger's physical. He is in Tier 5 on some teams' boards now.)

                    Tier 5
                    Moe Harkless
                    Fab Melo
                    Quincy Miller
                    Arnett Moultrie
                    Andrew Nicholson
                    Marquis Teague
                    Royce White
                    Tony Wroten Jr.
                    Note: This next group looks like locks for the first round, but most likely won't make the lottery. A few teams had Harkless, Melo and Moultrie in Tier 4, but not quite enough for them to make the cut. Wroten and Miller were borderline picks here. Both players dropped out of the top 30 on at least one NBA team's draft board.

                    Tier 6
                    Furkan Aldemir
                    Will Barton
                    Jared Cunningham
                    Festus Ezeli
                    Evan Fournier
                    Draymond Green
                    John Jenkins
                    Orlando Johnson
                    Doron Lamb
                    Kyle O'Quinn
                    Kostas Papanikolaou
                    Miles Plumlee
                    Jeff Taylor
                    Tyshawn Taylor
                    Note: This is what I would call the first-round bubble group and where the consensus really started to break down. A few teams had Fournier, Green, Jeff Taylor and Barton in Tier 5, but many did not. Overall there are just four spaces left in the first round ... so most of the players on this list are falling to the second round.

                    So how does the tier system work?

                    A team ranks players in each tier according to team need. So, in Tier 3, if shooting guard is the biggest need, a player like Rivers or Ross is ranked No. 1. If center is the biggest need, Leonard or Zeller is ranked No. 1.

                    The rules are pretty simple. You always draft the highest-ranked player in a given tier. Also, you never take a player from a lower tier if one from a higher tier is available. So, for example, if the Pistons are drafting No. 9 (Tier 3 territory) and Damian Lillard (a Tier 3 player) is on the board, they take him regardless of positional need. If they have Meyers Leonard ranked No. 1 in Tier 4, they still take Lillard even though center is a more pressing need.

                    This system protects teams from overreaching based on team need. The Pistons won't pass on a clearly superior player like Waiters to fill a need with Perry Jones. However, the system also protects a team from passing on a player who fits a need just because he might be ranked one or two spots lower overall.

                    The Pistons actually followed this model last year at the draft. While the consensus was they needed a big, when Brandon Knight, who they had ranked in a higher tier fell, they took him anyway.

                    My all-time favorite historical example is from the Atlanta Hawks. GM Billy Knight took Marvin Williams ahead of Chris Paul and Deron Williams in 2005, and Shelden Williams ahead of a guards such as Brandon Roy and Rajon Rondo in 2006 because of positional needs.

                    Like every draft system, the tier system isn't perfect. But the teams that run it have found success with it. It has allowed them to get help through the draft without overreaching. Compared to traditional top-30 lists or mock drafts, it seems like a much more precise tool of gauging which players a team should draft.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                      Tiers 1-5 have 26 players listed by my count, so we're guaranteed a shot at one of them.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                        Originally posted by Karlton View Post
                        Tiers 1-5 have 26 players listed by my count, so we're guaranteed a shot at one of them.
                        I'm glad you pointed that out. Somehow, I miscounted and thought we were choosing from tier 6. Other than a couple guys, tier five looks a lot better to me.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                          Some guys from the tier 6 that wouldn't shock me either...

                          Evan Fournier
                          Draymond Green
                          John Jenkins
                          Doron Lamb
                          Jeff Taylor

                          Theres a pretty decent group to pick from when its laid out like this. I, also, wouldn't be surprised to see them trade out and maybe pick up a 2nd rounder to get a solid vet type in a trade. Especially if one of the guys they like at 26 isn't there, like a Fournier or Fab Melo (yes, both could be smokescreens, but you get the idea of what I mean)


                          The other side of the coin is how far do you have to trade up to get a potentially better player, maybe someone in Tier 4? Do you want to get to 16 in that scenario, maybe?

                          16 gets you one of these Tier 4 players

                          John Henson
                          Perry Jones III
                          Terrence Jones
                          Jeremy Lamb
                          Kendall Marshall
                          Austin Rivers
                          Terrence Ross
                          Jared Sullinger

                          I left these two out of the top 16 from Tier 4 (I like Zeller, but if DC is the price to move up, I've come around to the group that thinks it not worth it, I'd guess Larry disagrees, though.)

                          Tyler Zeller
                          Meyers Leonard

                          I think trading up is unlikely, but you never know with a Pritchard involved draft. I could get excited about really anybody I listed in that viable Tier 4 group.

                          Side Note, are we doing a mock draft this year on PD? I'd like to be the first to put in for the Pacers pick, if so.
                          Last edited by Speed; 06-22-2012, 01:36 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                            I would say based on who the Pacers have had in for workouts, their tiers look very similar to Chad's. The question then becomes what does Larry perceive to be our positional needs. It should be a very active and interesting draft.
                            A healthy man takes a crap every day. A smart man does it on company time.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                              For some reason, I feel Draymond Green will be the guy come next Thursday (if we still have the 26th pick), and I have no problem with that.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                                For some reason, I feel Draymond Green will be the guy come next Thursday (if we still have the 26th pick), and I have no problem with that.
                                That would absolutely make my day.
                                Stop quoting people I have on ignore!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X