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 mattie View Post
    He has the reputation of course, but Wade's leaping ability is highly overrated and basically is based on him being a superstar, and also his long arms make it appear he is getting up higher than he really is.
    He isn't aging well but I was referring to his prime. I mean he and Westbrook had the same no step vert. Wade was one of the quickest leapers in the league, if not the quickest for a period of time.

    He still is a pretty good leaper.

    Comment


    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

      By the way, and this is out of left field, it's a shame how Zeller's game has been developed.

      He's been used as a big man his entire career and he's tried to become that type of player, but I think it has just been the wrong thing to work on.

      He's so quick, has footwork, and he's so slender, had he worked on his shooting and ball handling, I think he could have been an NBA 3. Seriously. Weird for a me to say that about a 7 footer, but really he's every bit as quick as most 3's in the league, and if he had spent his time working on it, I have no doubt he could have been a strong ball handler.

      As it is, it'll take while for him to develop the strength he needs to be an NBA post player, and his wingspan already hurts his effectiveness against other NBA bigs.

      Anywho, I realize that sounds ridiculous but I've never been good at predicting NBA talent anyways. So that's probably the most ridiculous ****.

      Comment


      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

        Speaking of my terrible ability to predict NBA prospects... See I think Victor Olidipo is a guaranteed NBA all-star. I just love his game, and I think he's going to be a stud. But then watch him be an NBA fringe bench player or something lol

        Comment


        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

          Originally posted by mattie View Post
          Speaking of my terrible ability to predict NBA prospects... See I think Victor Olidipo is a guaranteed NBA all-star. I just love his game, and I think he's going to be a stud. But then watch him be an NBA fringe bench player or something lol
          He measured almost exactly what I thought he would. Some posters said he is undersized, but watching him live he is far from it. He and Jamaal Franklin both measured how they played super long active defenders.

          Hardaway measured smaller than I though he would. I figured he had a bit long wingspan. I think that could help us land him.

          I loved what Tony Mitchell had to say in his interview with DX. He views himself as a 4 and wants to play the 4. I have always viewed him that way. He also said he wants to go somewhere that will develop his skills. If he truly means that and will put the time in he has the talent to be the best player in the class. I would take him if he is there. His 38in vert surprised me I figured he would have a 40+ in vert lol he has special talents. He can be a much better Kenny Faried but he is a huge gamble dude takes so many plays off. He is the quickest leaper I have seen at his position.


          Speaking of Franklin he is one of my favorites in the class for one reason. He gets to the line at will a skill we really need. He is like my prototypical wing I love him for whatever team gets him.
          Last edited by pacer4ever; 05-18-2013, 06:24 AM.

          Comment


          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

            Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
            He measured almost exactly what I thought he would. Some posters said he is undersized, but watching him live he is far from it. He and Jamaal Franklin both measured how they played super long active defenders.

            Hardaway measured smaller than I though he would. I figured he had a bit long wingspan. I think that could help us land him.

            I loved what Tony Mitchell had to say in his interview with DX. He views himself as a 4 and wants to play the 4. I have always viewed him that way. He also said he wants to go somewhere that will develop his skills. If he truly means that and will put the time in he has the talent to be the best player in the class. I would take him if he is there. His 38in vert surprised me I figured he would have a 40+ in vert lol he has special talents. He can be a much better Kenny Faried but he is a huge gamble dude takes so many plays off.
            Think the Pacers would take him at 23 if he was still available?

            Comment


            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

              Originally posted by mattie View Post
              Think the Pacers would take him at 23 if he was still available?
              Who? I dont think Franklin or Mitchell will be there. I would hope they would be high on both and snatch up if they fall.

              Hardaway could be there. I hope we draft lower than #23 though. Franklin is a perfect for us "smashmouth" is his game. He would bring much needed skill to the team. I see us drafting someone like him that. I just dont know if we go D and 3 like a Reggie Bullock who I really like. Or a guy with a lot more skill like Franklin who also defends, but lacks the shooting. I am still debating this issue we really need both. I think OJ can be the shooter if he takes the next step so I am leaning toward a guy like Franklin if we go wing.

              Erick Green is really another guy I think the Pacers will love due to our system. He is almost a perfect fit for what we want a pg to do. I wouldn't be shocked if he is the pick. Still to early to tell though.
              Last edited by pacer4ever; 05-18-2013, 06:38 AM.

              Comment


              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                Who? I dont think Franklin or Mitchell will be there. I would hope they would be high on both and snatch up if they fall.

                Hardaway could be there. I hope we draft lower than #23 though. Franklin is a perfect for us "smashmouth" is his game. He would bring much needed skill to the team. I see us drafting someone like him that. I just dont know if we go D and 3 like a Reggie Bullock who I really like. Or a guy with a lot more skill like Franklin who also defends, but lacks the shooting. I am still debating this issue we really need both. I think OJ can be the shooter if he takes the next step so I am leaning toward a guy like Franklin if we go wing.
                I meant Mitchell, just realized I didn't say who-

                See I want the Pacers to get someone raw. I think they have a spectacular coaching staff right now that can really improve players and allow them to reach their potential. Which means the Pacers are prime to to snag a "steal of the draft" if they go for someone with a lot of potential.

                I don't think Lance would be who he is now in almost any other organization except the Spurs for example... The Pacers can make raw potential realize its self if they go for that...

                Comment


                • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                  and I don't want the Pacers to go wing, I want point or big. If I was the Pacers I'd cross my fingers that both Orlando and Granger solve our wing problems. Meaning Granger is healthy next year for a championship run and Orlando/Lance make a badass wing tandem off the bench.

                  I mean that's asking a lot but I could see it happen. I like Orlando, and it is conceivable that Granger could get healthy again. Maybe not. We'll see.

                  Regardless, the Pacers are going to need a point and big.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                    Originally posted by mattie View Post
                    I meant Mitchell, just realized I didn't say who-

                    See I want the Pacers to get someone raw. I think they have a spectacular coaching staff right now that can really improve players and allow them to reach their potential. Which means the Pacers are prime to to snag a "steal of the draft" if they go for someone with a lot of potential.
                    I would draft him if I was the GM. Unless the scouts just told me no, due to the red flags. I would still likely gamble on him unless they told me there is no chance he will take to coaching. he just has stuff that doesn't come along very often. If there is a 10% chance that Vogel and the team can get the best out of him I would take him no questions ask. I think the rewards is worth the risk.


                    Speaking of Green he just compared himself to George Hill in his combine video and that is so funny. He gave me that vibe the whole season watching him. Like I said I think the Pacers will like him and he is a perfect fit for what the Pacers want in a pg. Ray McCallum and Green are really the only two pgs I think we consider. I like them both as a fit for our system. The pg class will be all about fit IMO and those two fit what we do.

                    Kabongo is the one wild card pg wise. I like him on defense and I could see the Pacers drafting him. However he is a long term guy and may fizzle out. He would be the one pg who would solve the need of a defensive minded quick guard.
                    Last edited by pacer4ever; 05-18-2013, 06:54 AM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                      Originally posted by mattie View Post
                      I meant Mitchell, just realized I didn't say who-

                      See I want the Pacers to get someone raw. I think they have a spectacular coaching staff right now that can really improve players and allow them to reach their potential. Which means the Pacers are prime to to snag a "steal of the draft" if they go for someone with a lot of potential.

                      I don't think Lance would be who he is now in almost any other organization except the Spurs for example... The Pacers can make raw potential realize its self if they go for that...

                      How much more raw do you want than Plumlee?

                      Why take on another project to develop? How many projects are you expecting the Pacers to try and develop at a time. Just remember Juice is still a project too.

                      I would like to trade out of the draft, but I'm not sure you could find another team willing to trade for the Pacers #23 unless it's part of a larger trade. Maybe #23 and Plumlee to move UP in the draft. Not sure if Plumlee has any value other than to Bird.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                        Originally posted by mattie View Post
                        Regardless, the Pacers are going to need a point and big.
                        I agree.

                        I'm just not comfortable counting on Granger next year, and I don't really see any SF that would be available that excites me. IMO, the FO had better cover their bases this off season by getting another SF, b/c you can't count on Granger again for next season and definately not Green. You need more than Sam Young as a b/u SF.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                          Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                          On potential alone he should be a lottery pick in this draft. I have only watched him in an all star game setting,but in this draft he is worth a flyer in the lottery. You just cant teach his size speed combo. He is going to be a nightmare on defense if he puts the effort in. He should be a lock down defender early in his career I love his tools on that end of the floor.
                          Agreed. He definitely should be a lottery pick on potential alone. Same with Antetokounmpo. I was just hoping that the US media would forget about the international class and thus they would fall.

                          It doesn't seem like Schroeder is going to fall after the combine. Thankfully, Antetokounmpo has not participated in a combine yet.
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                            Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                            Speaking of Green he just compared himself to George Hill in his combine video and that is so funny. He gave me that vibe the whole season watching him. Like I said I think the Pacers will like him and he is a perfect fit for what the Pacers want in a pg. Ray McCallum and Green are really the only two pgs I think we consider. I like them both as a fit for our system. The pg class will be all about fit IMO and those two fit what we do.
                            Watching the DX video on Green at the moment. I think that I'm sold.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                              Watching the DX video on Green at the moment. I think that I'm sold.
                              Doesn't he weigh like 140 lbs at 6'2?
                              "There is a time to play and a time to win. It is what you do during winning time that differentiates the average players from stars."

                              ~Ahmad Rashad~

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                                Originally posted by Mr.Hinds View Post
                                Doesn't he weigh like 140 lbs at 6'2?
                                He weighted in at 178.2 lbs. He also measured at 6'3 with shoes (6'1.5 without).
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X