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

2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

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

  • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

    Originally posted by CableKC View Post
    Damn..no Dieng yet or any PGs?
    I don't know if that's actually all-inclusive, Jordan Hulls worked out and I remember seeing somewhere on Twitter that Canaan did too.

    Comment


    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

      Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
      I don't know if that's actually all-inclusive, Jordan Hulls worked out and I remember seeing somewhere on Twitter that Canaan did too.

      A Rice article from nbadraft.net

      http://mdjonline.com/bookmark/229165...n-in-NBA-draft


      INDIANAPOLIS — Former Walton High School standout Glen Rice Jr. already knows what to expect in his next job.

      After spending last season competing against bigger bodies, more refined shooters and quicker guards than he ever faced in college, the 6-foot-6 shooting guard is now on the verge of becoming the first player to go from D-League star to NBA first-round draft pick.

      “I think the D-League competition is a little better than people think and most of the guys have already been here (team workouts),” Rice said after his latest stop Monday at Indiana. “I think that was one of the biggest helps. All of my teammates have been through this and played in the summer league and they were able to tell me what I needed to work on last season.”

      It made an impact, too.

      Even Rice admits he’s a different player and a different person than the guy who finished his college career by getting booted out of Georgia Tech for too many off-the-court incidents 15 months ago.

      Clearly, it’s not the traditional path to the NBA. Most top players hone their skills in American colleges or work their way up the ranks overseas and if that doesn’t work, they often return to international competition like San Antonio’s Gary Neal or work their way back through the D-League like the Spurs’ Danny Green and Miami’s Chris Andersen.

      More than 130 players who appeared on NBA rosters this season spent some time in the D-League though virtually all of them waited until after the NBA draft to sign up. Rice couldn’t afford to wait because he had to prove he could play right away.

      After getting benched at the end of his sophomore season in college and being suspended twice as a junior, Rice was kicked off the team in March 2012 following a shooting incident. He left school with career averages of 9.9 points, 4.8 rebounds and 2.1 assists.

      Initially, it looked like he might be making a mistake. Rice played only 10.4 minutes through the first 16 regular-season D-League games, then finished the regular season by scoring 17.2 points over the final 26 games and dominated in the playoffs with averages of averages of 25.0 points, 9.5 rebounds and 4.3 assists, leading Rio Grande Valley to the league championship.

      What changed? NBA director of scouting operations Ryan Blake believes Rice has matured from being a kid that “enjoyed school too much” by buckling down and focusing on basketball.

      The challenge for Rice now is proving his fast finish was no fluke.

      “I think when you’ve got size and can play on the perimeter, it really helps,” Blake said. “He’s not a great creator, but he improved his scoring from his days at Georgia Tech just tremendously. He’s become a better defender, but he could be even better. I think the size and athleticism is the key and knowing that system really helps.”

      Rice also has something else working in his favor: Bloodlines.

      His father led Michigan to the 1989 NCAA championship, was the fourth overall pick in the NBA draft that year and went on to make three All-Star Games and win one NBA title, with the Lakers in 2000. But Rice’s pursuit of an NBA career has never been about following in his father’s famous footsteps.

      “I’ve seen him play, but that’s the biggest question, do I remember it? Not really. I’ve seen some of his tapes, but he doesn’t really have a lot of tapes around because his mom has most of them,” Rice Jr. said. “There might be a little added pressure, but that comes with the territory. I don’t really put any added pressure on myself.”

      Rice wouldn’t be the first player drafted out of the D-League. League spokesman Tim Frank said there have been several players chosen in the second round.

      The question is where does Rice fit exactly in a draft rife with tall, talented shooting guards?

      “It’s one of the toughest questions because it’s also one of the deepest drafts,” Blake said. “For certain he’s going to be on someone’s summer league team, there’s no doubt about it. Could he be drafted in the first round? Absolutely. Could he be drafted in the second round? Absolutely. Could he not be drafted? He could be.”

      Should Rice go in the first round, it could redefine the way other players view the D-League over time though that will likely take time given the league’s reputation.

      Star Butler shooting guard Rotnei Clarke also attended Monday’s workout with the Pacers, and at 5-foot-11 acknowledged he’s unlikely to get drafted next week. While Clarke promised to do whatever it took to get to the NBA, Clarke said he had not spoken with Rice about his D-League experience and that it was unlikely he would follow that trek.

      “If I go to the D-League, it would have to be a situation where I would be called up pretty quick,” he said. “I don’t want to spend the whole season there when I could go overseas and make a lot of money.”

      For Rice, the decision was no mistake.

      “I think he took the correct route because you’re playing in a league with NBA coaches, NBA systems and an NBA environment so you get a great teaching tool,” Blake said. “Most athletes have to pay their dues. They don’t just become top athletes in the world without paying their dues. But think about it. Here’s a guy that didn’t play much till the latter part of the year, but he worked hard and he got that opportunity. It can only help him.”

      Read more: The Marietta Daily Journal - Glen Rice Jr may be first round selection in NBA draft
      {o,o}
      |)__)
      -"-"-

      Comment


      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

        Basically 2nd rd pick prospects is what I see. If by chance the Pacers aren't working out players for the 1st rd, could it be they have a trade in the works with no reason to workout 1st rd players? I realize there is still another week b4 the draft to bring 1st rd pick players in for workouts. My expectations are to see more higher quality players in for workouts, and hope to see this happen in the next week.

        In the past, teams had workouts and other NBA teams were allowed to attend. Is this still a practice where possibly the Pacers have attended other teams workouts?

        Comment


        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

          Wow Ben McLemore has been way out of shape in his workouts according to Chad Ford, and having some of the same agent problems as Noel. That is really sad love the kids talent, but if he doesn't have the work ethic that would suck. Hope he gets it together. I hope he just doesn't know better he has a rough backround. I bet they (his AAU coaches and handlers) treated him like a piece of meat growing up and is just naive to the process.

          Comment


          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

            FWIW Chad Ford said this in his recent chat:

            http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/48279

            Nets looking at wings and bigs -- Tony Snell, Tim Hardaway and Gourgi Dieng seem like possibiltiies.Pacers looking at PGs and bigs -- Kelly Olynyk, Isaiah Canaan both strongly in the mix there. Tony Snel another possibility.Knicks are a tougher read. Heard Tony Mitchell there a lot. Also hear they really like Nate Wolters.

            Comment


            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

              Originally posted by wintermute View Post
              FWIW Chad Ford said this in his recent chat:

              http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/48279

              I'll be extremely disappointed if Dieng is still available and the Pacers don't draft him! I like Canaan and feel he'd be a good pick for the Pacers. Olynyk just doesn't excite me as a pick. I'm not looking for another disappointing Plumless pick.

              Comment


              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                Gorgui Dieng does not excite me in the slightest bit. I am warming up to Isaiah Canaan in the first round though.

                Comment


                • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                  Chad ford says we are interested in PG's yet have had like 1 in for a workout.

                  i legit think we have a trade down in place.
                  Counting down the days untill DJ Augustin's contract expires.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                    Originally posted by Hypnotiq View Post
                    Chad ford says we are interested in PG's yet have had like 1 in for a workout.

                    i legit think we have a trade down in place.
                    I doubt it. Chad Ford isn't nearly as tuned in with the Pacers as he used to be.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                      Franklin or Bullock please. Canaan would be okay too. NO OLYNYK!

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                        Originally posted by Miller_time04 View Post
                        Franklin or Bullock please. Canaan would be okay too. NO OLYNYK!
                        Olynyk seems like a legit Backup PF scoring option....I'd take him over Mitchell if he was available at #23.
                        Last edited by CableKC; 06-19-2013, 06:44 PM.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                          Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                          I'll be extremely disappointed if Dieng is still available and the Pacers don't draft him! I like Canaan and feel he'd be a good pick for the Pacers. Olynyk just doesn't excite me as a pick. I'm not looking for another disappointing Plumless pick.
                          Comparing Plumlee to Olynyk doesn't seem like a fair comparison. Olynyk is slated to be a legit 1st round pick....anywhere between 15 to the early 20s in various Mock Drafts. Whereas we can legitimately say that not that many Mocks/Scouts had slated Plumlee until the late 1st round ( which is questionable ) and more than likely a early 2nd rounder.

                          I can see why many are disappointed in the Plumlee pick cuz honestly...no one thought that he'd be picked so early by the Pacers....but for Olynyk...it's not so debatable as to whether he should be picked in the mid-teens to early 20s or not.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                            Olynyk seems like a legit Backup PF scoring option....I'd take him over Mitchell if he was available at #23.
                            Why not Hardaway as a solid backup 2?
                            Smothered Chicken!

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                              Are there any Quality Euro-Players that are in the draft that COULD fall to the 23rd spot that we may want to consider ( even if they don't come over immediately )?

                              Legit question......but is there any chance that IF a quality EuroPlayer drops to the Pacers at the 23rd spot ( meaning one that is clearly worth it ) that they would draft him then stash him overseas until the 2015-2016 season ( specifically AFTER PG, Lance and/or Granger is re-signed )?

                              That would save roughly $1.08 mil in 2014-2015 salary that can go towards re-signing Lance and/or Granger. I know, it's far fetched....but I can see this as a move for the 2nd round pick or even for the 2014-2015 offseason for either draft picks in order to save on Cap-Space
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                                Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
                                Why not Hardaway as a solid backup 2?
                                JMHO....but we have a platoon of backup 2 and 3s that are being paid to watch on the bench. Like it or not...OJ and Green are on the bench. If we are looking for a legit Wing Player to get regular minutes....I'd rather give it to them ( yes, I am praying that Green is spending the summer with a Shooting Coach while continually texting Shaw for advice ).

                                Assuming ALL THINGS ARE EQUAL ( as in, there isn't much difference between drafting the Best Available Wing Player, PG or PF and therefore it's essentially a 3 way coin toss as to whose the best Player to pick )......IMHO....it's not far fetched to think that the FO and ( most notably ) Herb would question why we'd be spending another pick on another Wing Player when Granger ( assuming that he's here for the rest of the season ), OJ and Green is still sitting on the bench.

                                To be clear, I'm saying that if a Wing Player that the Pacers want is way up there on the Pacers BPA list and is WAY BETTER than the best available PG or PF.....then, I have no problem with choosing the BPA...even if it's a Wing Player. But if it's clearly debatable as to whose the BPA ( cuz honestly, we are talking about the 23rd pick...at this point...a likely role Player ) and you don't really lose either way...then I'd rather go with a Backup PG or PF......especially if Olynyk is on the board.
                                Last edited by CableKC; 06-19-2013, 07:22 PM.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X