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 Justin Tyme View Post
    If Withey can be gotten then fine.

    Finally, someone has seen the light. This is exactly what I've been saying.
    Withey is projected to go at the early 20s in most mock drafts.
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

      [QUOTE=Nuntius;1620102]

      Exactly. Plumlee came out of a good draft. /QUOTE]


      EXACTLY and what does that say when the best you could get out of a good draft is Plumlee!?!? Yet, you feel some jewel is going to fall to the Pacers in a weak draft. I just don't see the odds in the Pacers favor that happening.

      I'd trade Plumlee in a heartbeat for Patrick Beverly and feel afraid I was going to get arrested for theft!. If necessary, throw in a pick to get the deal done.

      Comment


      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

        Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
        EXACTLY and what does that say when the best you could get out of a good draft is Plumlee!?!? Yet, you feel some jewel is going to fall to the Pacers in a weak draft. I just don't see the odds in the Pacers favor that happening.
        I'm afraid that you didn't understand what I said.

        Strong draft = strong lottery

        Those strong lotteries are mostly set. Not a lot of players that have the talent but have red flags are going to come out because they're not as likely to be a lottery pick.

        Weak draft = weak lottery

        That means that several players that have the talent but also have significant red flags are going to come out. Why? It's extremely simple. There are more chances that they will be lottery picks in a weak draft since the lottery is not set. So, a lot of them are going to try it.

        That means that a decent amount of players that could be picked in the lottery fall outside of it and go late 1st.. It's simply a matter of supply.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
          I'm afraid that you didn't understand what I said.

          Strong draft = strong lottery

          Those strong lotteries are mostly set. Not a lot of players that have the talent but have red flags are going to come out because they're not as likely to be a lottery pick.

          Weak draft = weak lottery

          That means that several players that have the talent but also have significant red flags are going to come out. Why? It's extremely simple. There are more chances that they will be lottery picks in a weak draft since the lottery is not set. So, a lot of them are going to try it.

          That means that a decent amount of players that could be picked in the lottery fall outside of it and go late 1st.. It's simply a matter of supply.

          I can't agree there is going to be an exodus of college players coming out this year. As I pointed out after the Euros are taken out of the 1st rd, players who might have been available at #23 won't be. They will fall down into the middle part of the draft. There are always players that mock drafts have coming out that won't enter the draft as well. The further down the better players fall towards the lottery the less quality there are to draft in the latter part of the draft, especially in a poor overall draft. There are players drafted last year in the teens that would be to 5-10 picks in this draft. That's how poor this overall draft is. Better yet there are 2nd round players last year who would be 1st round players this year and the Pacers have one of them... JUICE. That's how poor the quality of this draft is this year. Picking a jewel out of this lottery isn't impossible, just extremely highly improbable. I'd rather have better odds and a better opportunity to get a player to help the Pacers by packaging the #23 in a trade.

          Do I feel Walsh will do it? Absolutely not. The only 1st I can remember in the last decade Walsh was here b4 leaving to go to NY he traded it to Atlanta to get the infamous half season rental of Big Al Harrington. So I expect to see some here today gone tomorrow player drafted by Walsh in June b/c for heavensake don't trade the #23 pick in the 1st round as you might miss out on the opportunity of getting another Scott Haskins.

          Comment


          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

            Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

            Draftnet.com has us taking Doug McDermott. He is a great scorer at the college level but will it translate in the NBA?

            It's important to note that Draftnet.com has the following players being drafted after our pick:

            Gorgui Dieng, Jeff Withey, Tony Mitchell, Tim Hardaway Jr, Isaiah Austin, Archie Goodwin. There is some real talent here.

            http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...-nba-franchise

            Bleacher report has us taking Tim Hardaway Jr.

            Players after that pick:

            Gorgui Dieng, Archie Goodwin, James Michael McAdoo, Tony Mitchell. They also have Withey at #22.

            There is talent to be had at our pick in this particular draft.
            My guess is Dieng or Hardaway Jr. won't be there when we pick after workouts. However, if they were, I'd pick either one and not look back.

            Comment


            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

              Originally posted by PR07 View Post
              My guess is Dieng or Hardaway Jr. won't be there when we pick after workouts. However, if they were, I'd pick either one and not look back.
              I believe they can add a good player at their pick. Those two would not be bad.
              {o,o}
              |)__)
              -"-"-

              Comment


              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
                Look who is in the draft. I mean how many guys would you draft ahead of Burke and McLemore?
                Above McLemore: Noel, Oladipo, Marcus Smart, Anthony Bennett, maybe Otto Porter
                Above Burke: CJ McCollum (underrated) , Michael Carter Williams, Jeff Withey(underrated)

                Comment


                • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                  Can someone tell me what is so great about Nerlens Noel? He has no offense at all, and he isn't the best shot blocker in this class. He is a more hyped Bismark Biyambo. He went to Kentucky....and that's it. Has a school alone ever created so much buzz about the potential top pick in the draft?
                  Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                    Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                    Can someone tell me what is so great about Nerlens Noel? He has no offense at all, and he isn't the best shot blocker in this class. He is a more hyped Bismark Biyambo. He went to Kentucky....and that's it. Has a school alone ever created so much buzz about the potential top pick in the draft?
                    You probably could've said that about Dwight Howard coming out too. Not that Nerlens is Dwight, but it's hard to project what a 19 year old big man will become.

                    Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
                    Above McLemore: Noel, Oladipo, Marcus Smart, Anthony Bennett, maybe Otto Porter
                    Above Burke: CJ McCollum (underrated) , Michael Carter Williams, Jeff Withey(underrated)
                    I think you could make the case on some of these, except for Withey. PASS. He's tall and that allowed him dominate in college, but he didn't demonstrate anything to me that will set him apart in the pros.
                    Last edited by PR07; 04-10-2013, 07:20 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                      Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                      You probably could've said that about Dwight Howard coming out too. Not that Nerlens is Dwight, but it's hard to project what a 19 year old big man will become.



                      I think you could make the case on some of these, except for Withey. PASS. He's tall and that allowed him dominate in college, but he didn't demonstrate anything to me that will set him apart in the pros.
                      In 2013, there should be NO DOUBT about what you are getting when you are being drafted number 1. Anthony Davis, John Wall, Kyrie Irving, Blake Griffin are all studs. Noel doesn't belong with those guys
                      Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                        Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                        In 2013, there should be NO DOUBT about what you are getting when you are being drafted number 1. Anthony Davis, John Wall, Kyrie Irving, Blake Griffin are all studs. Noel doesn't belong with those guys
                        I remember everyone was bashing Orlando for taking Dwight over Okafor. Noel may not have the pedigree right now, but I don't think there's any question he has the highest upside in this draft. He very well could be a bust, but it's hard to fault a GM for rolling the dice.

                        Any discussion about Noel's potential as a NBA prospect should start with his phenomenal physical attributes. Measured at 6-10 without shoes, with a 7-4 wingspan and exceptional athletic ability, Noel is a rare specimen. He runs the floor like a guard, is extremely nimble and quick, and has pogo stick leaping ability. This allows him to cover ground unbelievably well both vertically and horizontally, which helps him impact the game in numerous ways. It's safe to say that, should he make a full recovery from his injury as expected, he'll be one of the most athletic big men in the NBA.
                        When freed from the burdens of having to create his own offense, Noel absolutely shines. With his terrific height, long arms, and tremendous explosiveness, he's one of the best finishers in college basketball, converting an outstanding 64% of his attempts around the rim in the half-court. He shows great potential as a pick and roll finisher, being capable of finishing emphatically from extremely difficult angles and vantage points thanks to his long arms and how high he gets up in the air.

                        Interestingly enough, while not overly polished, Noel shows the willingness, and at times the ability, to use either hand equally well inside the paint, something that's fairly rare for an 18-year old big man. This is definitely something he can build on as he gets stronger and his touch around the rim hopefully improves.
                        -DraftExpress.com
                        And I get it, Tyrus Thomas was athletic, but I think it's his willingness/ability to use both hands in the paint which to me (at the age of 19), makes Nerlens a Top 5 pick in any draft, let alone a weak one like this.
                        Last edited by PR07; 04-10-2013, 07:44 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                          Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                          I remember everyone was bashing Orlando for taking Dwight over Okafor. Noel may not have the pedigree right now, but I don't think there's any question he has the highest upside in this draft. He very well could be a bust, but it's hard to fault a GM for rolling the dice.



                          And I get it, Tyrus Thomas was athletic, but I think it's his willingness/ability to use both hands in the paint which to me (at the age of 19), makes Nerlens a Top 5 pick in any draft, let alone a weak one like this.
                          ultimately even with uber talent there are no guarantees.
                          {o,o}
                          |)__)
                          -"-"-

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                            especially in a poor overall draft.
                            Here's where we disagree, Justin. I don't believe that this a poor overall draft. It really isn't. It is only poor at the top. But we're not picking at the top, luckily. It is a great draft for good teams picking late in the first.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                              tell me about Erick Green from Virginia Tech. 25 a night on 47% in the ACC on a complete crap team is impressive.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                                Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                                Here's where we disagree, Justin. I don't believe that this a poor overall draft. It really isn't. It is only poor at the top. But we're not picking at the top, luckily. It is a great draft for good teams picking late in the first.
                                Is it just me, or is every draft recently supposed to be "weak". Yet every draft produces quality NBA players.
                                Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X