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 Trader Joe View Post
    Bologna. When Noel got injured UK had won 5 in a row and 9 of their last 12 and one of those losses was a 3 point loss to this team called Louisville on the road, I heard they ended up being OK.

    UK's season started rough, they lost 3 of their first 7, but after that they were on a 13 of 16 run when Noel went down. After Nerlens hurt himself, UK went 4-6.

    He was playing at just as high a level as Anthony Davis did at that point if not higher on the defensive end. If Noel didn't get hurt, UK would have not only made the tourney, but I think they could have made it to the sweet 16 which says a lot about how important he was and the level at which he was playing. He wasn't just skilled either, I think it says a lot about his potential leadership skills that he was able to keep that team on a winning track until he got hurt considering the fact that Calipari pretty much came out and said that Harrow, Goodwin, and Poythress were three of the most uncoachable guys he had ever been around.
    Come On, Anthony Davis is a once a decade player John Caliapera said so. Noel is Bismark Biyombia of Bobcats Anthony Davis was an olympian.

    Comment


    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

      Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
      I honestly have no idea who I want the Pacers to draft. I don't want Zeller because he isn't ready for the NBA
      Wait to see how draft pans out. Have you watched any of Isiah Cannan Murray State ? He is a point guard I could see wearing blue and gold. Smaller / Strong solid scorer a back up to George Hill.

      Comment


      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

        I really like Reggie Bullock for the Pacers in the late first round.

        Comment


        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

          I wouldn't waste a 1st rounder on a PF that isn't a sure thing. There's many NBA ready PFs in this draft that will likely be 2nd rounders or undrafted

          Comment


          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

            Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
            tell me about Erick Green from Virginia Tech. 25 a night on 47% in the ACC on a complete crap team is impressive.
            He is legit I like his game a lot. Deceptively athletic he isnt very good on defense but the way he plays offensively is perfect for what the Pacers do. He has been on my short list all season.

            Here is the writ-up I did of him in February


            Erick Green scouting report 2/27/13
            Brian K.
            Offense

            Post Play/Footwork
            He has very good footwork especially coming off screens. He has a solid mid-range game. I wish he posted up more often he just doesn’t really have that in his game.

            Off ball/Screening
            Erick is a very good player coming off screens. He doesn’t gain separation like you would expect a player to but he doesn’t need much space. He reads screens very well and knows how to use them. I love him in a motion based offense as his movement and shooting is a great combo.

            Ball handling
            Erick handles the ball pretty well. He looks like he could be pressed due to lack of speed. However that isn’t the case because he has a good handle with both hands. Pretty low dribble and should be solid at the next level.


            Perimeter Shooting
            Love his form and most of the time his shot selection. At times especially when the game is getting away he will force but not very often. He should be a good shooter at the next level.


            Offensive Rebounding
            He doesn’t crash the offensive boards at all.


            Passing Skills
            He moves the ball well. Not the best vision but he is unselfish and makes the right play a lot of the time. I think he is the best fit in an offense that lets him play off the ball a lot. He would be a really good fit for what the Indiana Pacers run(where the wings create more and the pg gets to play off the ball). He won’t wow you in passing but he is pretty good at just keeping the offense moving.


            Pick and Roll/ Pop skills
            Erick is a deceptively quick player. He isn’t fast at all or even has a good first step. He changes speed well though and as a result can get in the lane very well. He reminds me of Rubio in that way not a good athlete at all. But he gets it done because he is super quick way quicker than fast. He reads picks well and very good at finding the open man or creating for himself.


            Free Throw Shooting
            Very good free throw shooter and gets to the line with his high IQ. He just has great instincts and knows how to get open in different situations and draw the foul. He gets in the paint when it looks like he shouldn’t be able to. He is just super crafty and knows how to get to the line.

            Defense

            Post Defense
            He rarely gets posted and if he did I think he could handle himself well.

            Perimeter Defense
            This is my main question with Erick. I don’t see him as a good defender at the next level. He is solid in college but I can’t see it that way in the NBA. I hope he proves me wrong I just don’t like his defense at the next level. They hide him off the ball at times and he may be better guarding SG’s anyway. That means you need a shooting guard who can cross match and that limits the combinations he can play well with.


            Help Defense/Shot Blocking
            He is in the right spot a lot of the time and that is all you can ask for out of a player. He stays between his man and the ball and fights through screens.

            Defensive Rebounding
            He is just an average rebounder not really part of his game.

            Transition offense and defense
            His strength is in the half court in my humble opinion. He makes good decisions on the fast break but likes to hold up quite a bit. He isn’t a good transition defender he isn’t very good moving laterally on the break.

            Athleticism/ Body/ frame
            Long and Lanky for a pg. He isn’t a good athlete for the pg spot but makes up for it with intelligence and quickness and size. He is a much better basketball athlete than just an athlete and that bodes well for him.

            Intangibles and motor
            Love Erick’s intangibles a much better player than a player of his talents should be. That isn’t a knock by any means. He just knows how to play basketball and is a very good player. I will take a good basketball player over a great athlete who isn’t a good player any day. His quickness is much underrated and is why he will be a solid pro.


            Future prognosis?
            I think he is a good backup in the NBA for a long time. I would like to see a team who runs a lot of motion draft him. He would be a good fit for a lot of teams.

            Draft Value: He would be a very good 2nd rd pick.
            Last edited by pacer4ever; 04-13-2013, 11:28 PM.

            Comment


            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

              P4E
              I enjoyed the Eric Green analysis. You mentioned him on your "short list". What other players are on your "short list"? The players names would be just fine for right now, if you don't mind saying who they are. Looking forward to seeing who they are.

              Comment


              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                If you want shot blocking, then Withey is your guy
                Why?

                Noel averaged 4.4 bpg in 31.9 minutes compared to Withey's 3.9 bpg in 30.9 minutes. Even blocks per 40 minutes, Noel has 5.54 to Withey's 4.97.

                Comment


                • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                  People are say PJ Hairston from UNC could be an idea for the Pacers
                  Smothered Chicken!

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                    Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                    Nah, he's going to get drafted by Detroit. How I'd love to see the IU fans cry about their guy being drafted by the Pistons and having to watch the Pistons' games to see him play! Oh how sweet it would be. LOL!!!

                    Yes, I have been known to have a cruel streak at times. Even worse for IU fans is that MJ drafts him. Even I wouldn't wish that on Olapido.
                    I honestly don't think a single IU fan would really care. Once they get to the NBA, I follow the guys and root for them, but don't make it a point to watch their games or root for their teams.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                      i say we resign west for around 10 mill, depending on what happens with danny, if he restructures for about 5-6 mill per year we keep him only if hes 100% otherwise we trade him and save $11-$14 mill extra. In free agency, lets go after jarrett jack as he can play the one and hill can slide to the 2 guard sometimes, im guessing he would want around $5.5 mill per for a one year deal. And if we can land him and a PF such as Carl Landry for around 4-5 mill per year and/or Pendergraph, then i think our bench is better than this years by far. Yes this means we let tyler walk, as Jack fills his scoring roll and more. Then sign the two draftees that was aquire.

                      So
                      PG- Hill, Jack, Possible Draftee
                      SG-Lance, Johnson, Possible Draftee
                      SF-Paul George, Gerald Green, Possible Draftee
                      PF- David West, Pendergraph and/or Landry, Possible Draftee
                      C- Roy Hibbert, Ian, Miles

                      Thoughts?
                      "That picture is dope man". -Paul George

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                        West likely has played himself into a $12 to $13 mil per year / 3 to 4 year contract.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                          Marcus Smart going back lol good luck going top 5 next year son
                          Counting down the days untill DJ Augustin's contract expires.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Hypnotiq View Post
                            Marcus Smart going back lol good luck going top 5 next year son
                            Get the distinct feeling the guy thinks he can be a the 1st overall next year. Not going to happen. Guy needs a jumper

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                              Marcus Smart won't even be a lottery pick next year.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                                Lol yeah no way he's top 5 next year.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X