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

Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

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

  • Re: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

    My only guess is that Larry owed Coach K a favor for letting Granger be on the USA basketball team...I will bet you all the money I have that Simmons has a field day with this on his recount of the draft and his ongoing pursuit of how much Larry loves drafting big white guys.

    Comment


    • Re: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

      Originally posted by Shabazz View Post
      I watched him play a lot during his college career. I honestly don't understand this pick. He had a mediocre college career. He was constantly yanked in and out of the Duke starting lineup along with Mason Plumlee and Ryan Kelly. He doesn't have much offense. He can't hit jumpshots. He doesn't have the size to guard NBA centers, so I guess he's going to the end of the PF depth chart. His best game of the past season was on senior night, where he played well in the first half while his team got blown out by UNC in a game that decided the ACC regular season.

      Here is an awesome pic of how he attempted the patented Duke flop to take a charge, but instead was called for a foul while John Henson put his junk on his shoulder.




      Can ANYONE explain why a 1st round draft pick was used on Miles Plumlee? Did the Pacers think they were drafting Mason Plumlee?

      He is very much like McRoberts. I like his athleticism. He has a 40" verticle and he is built strong. He will be an excellent backup to Hibbert and will play some PF too. I don't see why everyone is so down on him. Bird was going to go for a big man. He doesn't buy into the notion that we have a PG problem and never has......

      Comment


      • Re: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

        Originally posted by TheDon View Post
        My only guess is that Larry owed Coach K a favor for letting Granger be on the USA basketball team...I will bet you all the money I have that Simmons has a field day with this on his recount of the draft and his ongoing pursuit of how much Larry loves drafting big white guys.
        The favor would not be owned by Larry. Management doesn't want their players to participate in those games and possibly get hurt. If anything, Coach K would owe Larry a favor.....

        Comment


        • Re: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

          Simple I am a Duke fan and am not a big fan of this pick, and here are some of the reasons:

          I do not think Plumlee is horrible, but he has a lot to work on to become a good NBA player, for the level that he is at and his potential he could have easily been a late 2nd round pick. If he would not have posted a 40inch vertical he may have went undrafted.

          When our selection came there was more quality guys out there that we could have invested in, I firmly believe we could have gambled on our first pick and took less of a gamble on our 2nd, I feel what this team needs to contend is not just a back up center but a lot more, and we could have taken a chance at filling that need by gambling on some of the players that were still available and had tons of potential.

          I would like to add Jeff Foster is cool, but to me he is not a necessity for a championship winning team, as posted somewhere else the Playoffs are more about your starters play than having a good bench, this move did not get us any closer to put our selves in a position to significantly improve our starting line up in coming years.

          One last thing, something that really disappointed me was the heat traded their pick for #45 and a future 1st, I feel we could have did that and still grabbed Plumlee if we wanted to go that route and in the process set ourselves up better for the future, and worst come to worst and Plumlee is gone just grab Kyle O'Quinn, just as much potential and more versatility.

          That is all I have to say about this selection, I have made my peace and am ready to move on towards free agency.
          Why so SERIOUS

          Comment


          • Re: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

            Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
            He is very much like McRoberts. I like his athleticism. He has a 40" verticle and he is built strong. He will be an excellent backup to Hibbert and will play some PF too. I don't see why everyone is so down on him. Bird was going to go for a big man. He doesn't buy into the notion that we have a PG problem and never has......
            Not like Josh, not the passer he was, not as fluent athletically, and not the same basketball IQ, and Josh had a better shot. As far as the pick it is not just "not liking plumlee" it is also over picking him by a large margin that upset most fans, see my post below for more insight.
            Why so SERIOUS

            Comment


            • Re: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee
              This quote from Frank Vogel explains a lot

              http://www.indystar.com/article/20120629/SPORTS15/206290324/Bob-Kravitz-Pacers-Miles-Plumlee-not-last-memory-Larry-Bird-most-expected


              Our first scouting meeting, I jokingly asked, 'Are there any Jeff Fosters in the draft?' and four of our scouts said simultaneously, 'Miles Plumlee.' We've had our eye on him ever since. I know he's been a personal favorite of Larry Bird. We had a hunch about him. And his personal workout blew us away.''

              Comment


              • Re: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                This quote from Frank Vogel explains a lot

                http://www.indystar.com/article/20120629/SPORTS15/206290324/Bob-Kravitz-Pacers-Miles-Plumlee-not-last-memory-Larry-Bird-most-expected


                Our first scouting meeting, I jokingly asked, 'Are there any Jeff Fosters in the draft?' and four of our scouts said simultaneously, 'Miles Plumlee.' We've had our eye on him ever since. I know he's been a personal favorite of Larry Bird. We had a hunch about him. And his personal workout blew us away.''
                That form of decision making sounds completely silly, just saying, they got in love with a player we used to have that was by no means a star but a fan favorite role player. They did not take into account people slipping, and they did not look at what his draft value would be and where they would need to be to guarantee they got him, or maybe they did and there were many teams that were planning on taking him in the next upcoming picks, but I highly doubt that.
                Why so SERIOUS

                Comment


                • Re: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

                  Originally posted by Really? View Post
                  That form of decision making sounds completely silly, just saying, they got in love with a player we used to have that was by no means a star but a fan favorite role player. They did not take into account people slipping, and they did not look at what his draft value would be and where they would need to be to guarantee they got him, or maybe they did and there were many teams that were planning on taking him in the next upcoming picks, but I highly doubt that.
                  So much this. Bird is just fixated on Foster. You don't find a carbon copy, cause Plumlee isn't Foster and will never be. Foster was a nice player and he's retired. let's move on.
                  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: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

                    First of all let's see him play with the Pacers before throwing him under the bus. Bird and Vogel see something there and they know the team better than anyone.

                    Bird says he defends the pick and roll very well and if anyone watched the Pacers last year every team pick and rolled the living s*** out of us because Roy moves laterally like the Jolly Green Giant.

                    If he can help to stop us from getting abused on the one play teams killed us with consistently he is well worth the pick.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

                      Originally posted by Really? View Post
                      That form of decision making sounds completely silly, just saying, they got in love with a player we used to have that was by no means a star but a fan favorite role player. They did not take into account people slipping, and they did not look at what his draft value would be and where they would need to be to guarantee they got him, or maybe they did and there were many teams that were planning on taking him in the next upcoming picks, but I highly doubt that.

                      No, if you read other quotes from Frank, yeah they were looking at the players slipping and still decided to draft Plum.

                      I mean really? do you think they wouldn't look at the players slipping. Really?

                      Comment


                      • Re: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        No, if you read other quotes from Frank, yeah they were looking at the players slipping and still decided to draft Plum.

                        I mean really? do you think they wouldn't look at the players slipping. Really?
                        No I really be leave they would but going off of what you put and what they did it seems like they did not really value it heavily or just did not like the guys, but again that is the least of my worries, I do not feel they accessed the value of Plumlee correctly, the over pick him, and that was the biggest problem that I had. You have to try to get the most value out of where you are picking, whether that is trading or taking someone at that spot, I do not feel they did a good job at that.

                        Also Bird thinks he can play right away, and Vogel said rebounding and defense were his thing, I do not think either of these is true, he was a late bloomer and is more of a aggressive defender, not necessarily a good one, and his rebounding is not that stellar; I can see him being in foul trouble all the time, he is not a smart defender and that will really hurt him in the league.
                        Why so SERIOUS

                        Comment


                        • Re: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

                          I actually liked the pick. Jones III doesn't seem to have the mindset of the guys we're building around. Not a knock against him, the Pacers just seem to be trying to build a slightly older, effort based team. I think he'll fit in great with the Thunder. None of the other guys interested me all that much. I really was hoping Wroten fell to us but when the Grizz picked him I was happy with whatever Bird and Pritchard and Walsh decided on.

                          Judging by his age and what I've read about him, Plumlee seems like a good fit for this team. Wouldn't be at all surprised to see Collison and Hansbrough moved and Plumlee picking up those back up power forward minutes without much of a difference.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

                            Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                            I actually liked the pick. Jones III doesn't seem to have the mindset of the guys we're building around. Not a knock against him, the Pacers just seem to be trying to build a slightly older, effort based team. I think he'll fit in great with the Thunder. None of the other guys interested me all that much. I really was hoping Wroten fell to us but when the Grizz picked him I was happy with whatever Bird and Pritchard and Walsh decided on.

                            Judging by his age and what I've read about him, Plumlee seems like a good fit for this team. Wouldn't be at all surprised to see Collison and Hansbrough moved and Plumlee picking up those back up power forward minutes without much of a difference.
                            Except that Plumlee is Center. He wont' be playing PF.
                            You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

                              We've tried replacing Foster not once (Hansbrough) but twice now (Plumlee). Hopefully, we can nail it once. However, as far as I've known, there's only been one Jeff Foster and player like him.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Let's talk about Miles Plumlee

                                God, you would think Reggie Miller died or we traded Paul George for Steve Novak by reading Pacers Digest today.

                                Give the kid a chance, it's not often a 7' dude has a 40inch vert. His stat numbers aren't bad for a guy playing 20 mpg. I hope this guy makes you all eat serious crow.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X