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

Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

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

  • #46
    Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

    Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
    with Jeff putting up more than twice as many points, WAY more rebounds, more offensive rebounds, more steals, more assists... pretty much superior in every category other than FG%, since Miles had the good sense to not bother shooting what he could not dunk, because otherwise he would be benched
    Look at the numbers Orlando Johnson put up at U.C. Santa Barbara, numbers better than pretty much every SG drafted ahead of him. Now, ask yourself why those numbers aren't taken at face-value, and why such a productive player would slip to the second round.

    Small school. Inferior teammates. Small conference. Inferior quality of opposition. Inflated stats.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

      Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
      and playing in the Southland Conference. Jus'sayin.
      Miles Stifflee did shine in Duke's cupcake games vs. Belmont, UNC-Greensboro, Western Michigan, and Lehigh, with 4, 0, 7, and 4 points.
      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

        Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
        Miles Stifflee did shine in Duke's cupcake games vs. Belmont, UNC-Greensboro, Western Michigan, and Lehigh, with 4, 0, 7, and 4 points.
        Belmont was a solid squad.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

          Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
          Miles Stifflee did shine in Duke's cupcake games vs. Belmont, UNC-Greensboro, Western Michigan, and Lehigh, with 4, 0, 7, and 4 points.
          ... and Plumlee scored 16 against Zeller and UNC... Does Zeller suck b/c he allow Plumlee to score??

          You are grasping at straws. Coach K even said his role wasn't to score.
          "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

            Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
            Miles Stifflee did shine in Duke's cupcake games vs. Belmont, UNC-Greensboro, Western Michigan, and Lehigh, with 4, 0, 7, and 4 points.
            Well shoot, I wonder what the Pacers, bulls, heat, bobcats, hawks, and several other teams must have been watching all this time? Because if he can only score that much against those teams, he'll never play a minute in the NBA. At least according to the resident scout, Slick Pinkham...

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

              I didn't like the pick, but I will give him a chance. I think it is a bit premature to want to chop his head off without him playing a minute of NBA basketball.
              DG for 3

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

                Originally posted by ColeTheMole View Post
                I didn't like the pick, but I will give him a chance. I think it is a bit premature to want to chop his head off without him playing a minute of NBA basketball.
                but what if we chop it off and it becomes his little brother?

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

                  Originally posted by bunt View Post
                  Well shoot, I wonder what the Pacers, bulls, heat, bobcats, hawks, and several other teams must have been watching all this time? Because if he can only score that much against those teams, he'll never play a minute in the NBA. At least according to the resident scout, Slick Pinkham...
                  The previous poster cited quality of competition as being a stat-inflator for Jeff Foster in college and a stat-suppressor for Miles Stifflee. I merely cited evidence to the contrary, performances against lesser competition. Miles did get 22 rebounds vs. Maryland, so maybe we got us the next Kevin Love.
                  The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

                    Originally posted by GrangerRanger View Post
                    This team needs to add depth down low. We added a guy who knows how to win, has a decent motor, is athletic, and comes from a winning background. He's an NBA ready back up whose 7 foot and can jump out of the gym.

                    At pick 26, how can you hate this move? This automatically makes our front court depth stronger.
                    See, I don't really buy that bolded crap. Do we not forget that Hansbrough was supposed to know how to win? He didn't seem to have any bright, glowing moments of winningness that really stand out in my mind. For a guy who kicked a bunch of *** in 4 years of college, and to be hyped as a guy who "knows how to win" and "has championship experience", he didn't really bring enough to the table when it came to our lack of a championship run.

                    I'm not trying to burn on you directly, but I hate when people use those kinds of clichés as "heavy points" to describe players. If that was the case, there would have been more people rooting for the trade-up for Austin Rivers, because THAT kid knows how to win games (with his own buzzer-beating 3-point shots), and definitely has an "NBA winner's mentality" (oh, thanks, Dad). I don't know if that was just a fault on Hansbrough's part, by drinking so many 40's (IN A BAG, IN A BAR) that he drowned "Psycho T", or if he just didn't translate to the NBA, like I said he wouldn't.

                    Regardless, I'm not as down on the Plumlee pick as I was, because he's a legit 7-footer, he's incredibly athletic, and he can do some things. And some stuff. He'll be a good addition. But don't think for a second that, just because he "knows how to win", he'll be an instant 10+ games won strictly on what he does. However (and I'll be saying this for a while), there is NO way he's worse than Hansbrough, so any positive is a positive.

                    However, Orlando Johnson has the potential to be THAT guy. He might NOT know how to win (20-11 for UCSB isn't bad), so I'm sure he's got a craving to learn what it feels like to win more than 20 games (or go better than .550) in one season.

                    Only moderately disappointing draft night. I can't wait to see how these guys perform. And I'm really wondering what's going to happen with Lance Stephenson. Can he, Hill, OJ, and Paul play in the same rotation? Can Lance play his position, except... at... PG?
                    witters: @imbtyler, @postgameonline

                    Originally posted by Day-V
                    In conclusion, Paul George is awesome.
                    Originally posted by Slick Pinkham
                    Our arena, their arena, Rucker park, it just doesn't matter. We're bigger, longer, younger, faster, and hungrier.


                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

                      I've been saying plenty of harsh things about Plumlee, but I'm willing to give him a shot. He put on these workout wonder displays to impress everybody and work his way up in the draft to this spot, so at the very least I expect a very strong work ethic from him to try to live up to what he convinced Bird and others he could become. He has a lot to prove in my view.

                      I could see him contributing as a backup at PF and C as a homeless man's Zeller at the very least. I hope the Pacers work hard to speed up his skill development. Hibbert needs to toughen him up with his MMA training.

                      This is one of the only Bird picks that I really disliked, but he usually has pretty good instincts outside of a few guys who turned out to have character issues. I don't expect that type of problem out of Plumlee, so I'll give him a chance. I really think he should be busting his behind during the offseasons if he's going to ever learn how to use those incredible physical gifts. He should be Hibbert's shadow, trying to learn everything he can. Thank goodness Plumlee actually has a skilled center on this team to learn from. If he can't learn something from guarding an All-Star center every day in practice, he's hopeless.

                      Acquiring that 2nd rounder for Orlando Johnson softened the blow of getting Plumlee over Jones, Taylor, or Moultrie. I wouldn't have complained much if Johnson was our pick at 26, so the overall outcome of our draft wasn't bad. I actually like Johnson quite a bit. He's a terrific shooter, is extremely athletic, and has great defensive potential. I'm very happy with this pick.

                      Before I try to sleep off my frustrations, I'll end on a positive note. I will present you with the stat of the night.

                      Average vertical leap of our 2012 draft picks: 39.75 inches. How often does that happen?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

                        Originally posted by IndyPacer View Post
                        Average vertical leap of our 2012 draft picks: 39.75 inches. How often does that happen?
                        I mean, if NOTHING else, we did get a lot more athletic tonight

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

                          I never watched a Duke game and though he was a freak athlete or even remotely close to being one of the best players on the court. Maybe he'll be a better pro though. He deserves a chance, and he'll get it. I just hope he proves everyone wrong for the team's sake.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

                            Originally posted by IndyPacer View Post
                            I've been saying plenty of harsh things about Plumlee, but I'm willing to give him a shot. He put on these workout wonder displays to impress everybody and work his way up in the draft to this spot, so at the very least I expect a very strong work ethic from him to try to live up to what he convinced Bird and others he could become. He has a lot to prove in my view.

                            I could see him contributing as a backup at PF and C as a homeless man's Zeller at the very least. I hope the Pacers work hard to speed up his skill development. Hibbert needs to toughen him up with his MMA training.

                            This is one of the only Bird picks that I really disliked, but he usually has pretty good instincts outside of a few guys who turned out to have character issues. I don't expect that type of problem out of Plumlee, so I'll give him a chance. I really think he should be busting his behind during the offseasons if he's going to ever learn how to use those incredible physical gifts. He should be Hibbert's shadow, trying to learn everything he can. Thank goodness Plumlee actually has a skilled center on this team to learn from. If he can't learn something from guarding an All-Star center every day in practice, he's hopeless.

                            Acquiring that 2nd rounder for Orlando Johnson softened the blow of getting Plumlee over Jones, Taylor, or Moultrie. I wouldn't have complained much if Johnson was our pick at 26, so the overall outcome of our draft wasn't bad. I actually like Johnson quite a bit. He's a terrific shooter, is extremely athletic, and has great defensive potential. I'm very happy with this pick.

                            Before I try to sleep off my frustrations, I'll end on a positive note. I will present you with the stat of the night.

                            Average vertical leap of our 2012 draft picks: 39.75 inches. How often does that happen?
                            Good Lord people he played at DUKE with a bunch of "shooting G's" and NO PG's.......


                            He did what coach K wanted him to do. He was NOT asked to score. At 26 did any of you really expect to get the next David Robinson?

                            chill folks...

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

                              For me, Plumlee deserves a chance simply because Bird has a solid drafting history and has earned the benefit of the doubt. I still think we reached, but if Bird felt he was our guy, and didn't want to risk another team drafting him, well he's the best judge of the situation.

                              Reading his DX profile, I'm mildly encouraged by his rebounding rate and by his screening ability, enough that I see where the Jeff Foster comparisons are coming from. So I think we can count on at least these 2 skills translating. But it's worth remembering that it took Jeff Foster a few years to become, well, Jeff Foster, so I think we'll have to expect Plumlee to be terrible his first couple of seasons.

                              Regarding his combine measurements, well Joe Alexander looked awesome in workouts too. I don't think we should give much weight to that.

                              And on players we passed on, I'm not upset about passing on Perry Jones, who I think has a lot of bust potential in his own right. Not going to angst about passing on a guy like Jeff Taylor either, since we apparently liked Orlando Johnson as the wing option better or at least as much anyway. I think we may regret passing on Quincy Miller though, who I think could be a stud scorer down the road. Obviously our FO feels differently.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Why Miles Plumlee deserves a chance

                                Why can't we move on from players. Foster was nice, Dale Davis was a beast, etc. How about actually reach for something new/better instead of something that is similar, cause ultimately, that player will NEVER live up to the original.

                                You can't tell me Plumlee is better than Moultrie and a hobbled PJIII? I don't see it. Yeah, it's the 26th pick, so you don't expect a starter, but Moultrie and PJIII have the upside to be starters in this league, so you should just take the best player available. That should be a gimmie.

                                I'm pissed, but I'll get over it. I was pissed when the Pacers passed on Jrue Holiday and took Hans. I was mildly upset when the Pacers traded a first, second and filler for Hill (who may still walk), when I thought the Pacers should have traded down to take MarShon Brooks. Probably could have had another first this year had the Pacers traded down.

                                I like Bird and what he's done to a degree. So his 3 year plan was more like 4. He didn't make decisions that crippled the franchise. However, in the draft, he puts blinders on for one person.

                                Orlando Johnson was a solid pick, but I still question if it was the right one. While solid, the Pacers have Lance Stephenson and DJ at sg, yet no backup for Granger and Quincy Miller was still on the board. Maybe Miller won't amount to much, but he's got more upside than Johnson, he's 6'10 at the SF spot and only 19. He's going to get better; the dude put up 11pts 5boards, 2dimes, and just under 1steal/block per game...coming off ACL surgery. He's going to get better.

                                Pacers drafting Moultrie/PJIII along with Quincy Miller would have been an A draft.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X