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 LoneGranger33 View Post
    Shane Larkin is pretty much D.J. Augustin, right?
    No. DJ Augustin actually has a 6'3.5 wingspan. Shane Larkin's wingspan is only 5'11.

    BUT.

    DJ Augustin's no step vert = 28.5

    DJ Augustin's max vert = 35

    Shane Larkin's no step vert = 34.5

    Shane Larkin's max vert = 44

    Also:

    DJ Augustin bench press = 2

    DJ Augustin lane agility = 11.27

    DJ Augustin 3/4 Court Sprint = 3.07

    Shane Larkin:

    Bench press = 12

    Lane Agility = 10.64

    3/4 Court Sprint = 3.08

    So, athletically only 3/4 Court Sprin is comparable. Shane Larkin is an immensely better athlete in everything else. But DJ is bigger.

    Shane Larkin is actually a bigger Nate Robinson with shorter hands. Nate Robinson's athletic results were extremely comparable to Larkin's.

    Nate Robinson:

    No Step Vert = 35.5

    Max Vert = 43.5

    Bench Press = 13

    Lane Agility = 10.75

    3/4 Court Sprint = 2.96
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

      seen a few drafts of us taking mbawke in the second round other than his legal troubles sounds like someone that would be way worth taking a flyer on like we did with lance if he works out great if not...meh

      Comment


      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

        Originally posted by TheDon View Post
        seen a few drafts of us taking mbawke in the second round other than his legal troubles sounds like someone that would be way worth taking a flyer on like we did with lance if he works out great if not...meh
        Personally, I want Mbakwe to come over to Europe. He could be an extremely good player over here. He can play but he's small for the NBA. I'd certainly take him if I was an Olympiacos scout.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

          Originally posted by TheDon View Post
          seen a few drafts of us taking mbawke in the second round other than his legal troubles sounds like someone that would be way worth taking a flyer on like we did with lance if he works out great if not...meh
          Big issue I have with him is his age and limited skill set. He is almost 25 and all he does is rebound. I think there will be much better players who do more. I dont know if he will last in the league. I bet he ends up in Euro. He was fun to watch in college though hell of a rebounder.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Doddage View Post
            Detroit needs someone who can distribute since Knight isn't much of a point guard. I think MCW fits the bill since he has the size to play the 2 and his presence would allow Knight to focus more on scoring. Maturity will come with him I think; he's not the only prospect who's ever had off-court issues. He has the talent to be a high pick in the draft, so he'll at least go top 10, IMO.
            He's even more immature n the floor. Takes terrible, stupid risks on both ends of the floor. Can't shoot. Can't run an offense. He isnt an nba caliber PG or SG right now. Does nothing well other than run the floor and pass in transition. He's 21 with the maturity of a teenager. Also a Syracuse product, the graveyard of nba prospects.

            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

            Comment


            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

              Mbakwe seems like your prototypical undersized rebounder. A guy in the mold of Faried, or maybe Reggie Evans is a better comparison. Still, an Evans-like career is nothing to sneeze at for a 2nd rounder.

              Comment


              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                He's even more immature n the floor. Takes terrible, stupid risks on both ends of the floor. Can't shot. Can't run an offense. Does nothing well other than run the floor. He's 21 with the maturity of a teenager. Also a Syracuse product, the graveyard of nba prospects.
                I agree with most of this and I dont love him as a prospect by any means. I think I made it clear what you are stating here was my stance on him. He was super overrated all year IMO by most people. But in this draft he is likely a lottery pick.

                Comment


                • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                  Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                  Don't like Larkin for the NBA I explained it in one of these threads. He would be bar far the smallest guy I have seen be an impact player outside of Muggsy or Spud. He has super small arms and that really stood out on film. I mean Isiah Thomas for the Kings has a 6'2 wingspan and Larkin's is about 5'11 on a good day. I hope he proves me wrong and makes it as a rotation player I just dont see it.
                  there was some guy named Allen...
                  STARBURY

                  08 and Beyond

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                    Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                    place to discuss prospects for next years draft



                    I have got started looking at tape earlier than last year. I have watched most of the guys in DX 13 mock and even some of the incoming freshman(not many though).


                    Honestly I dont like this draft much at all. Last year when I started watching I normally start with the 2nd rd projects and work my way to the 1st. I loved a ton of 2nd rd ers last year and though they were gonna be nice NBA players. This year the guys I have watched so far like Zeke Marshall out of Akron(dont like) and Deonte Burton(dont like Scott Machado stole his lunch) of Nevada not too many 2nd rd small school guys I like compared to last year.


                    In general I think it will be a really weak draft for returning guys. I mean Josh Smith in the top 20 of a draft



                    I will do some video of guys after the season gets going a bit. If you want to see a certain guy make a request and I will try to do a breakdown on video.

                    2 guys I love for the Pacers but wont likely be there Tony Mitchell of NT and Andre Roberson of Colorado both 4s. I love Tony Mitchell think he will be able to play the 3,4 or 5 at the NBA level and he isnt a tweeaner he is just a freak athletically very Rodman like. My only fault is his motor it isnt bad but he does take plays off which concerns me but as a defender he can be elite and he does have solid offensive skills off the bounce and a sweet stroke facing up. His rebounding is sweet he gets big boy rebounds and can go way out of area and over people to get them.

                    A-Rob is a project for sure but offensively very good needs to improve defensively(but he is a shot blocker) and not the best body my comp based on last year Carl Landry with a little more skill and a better rebounder and much better defensively if he improves (like I project he will basically im saying he has the tools to be a good defender but has yet to show it enough ).




                    who is everyone looking forward to watching next year??


                    could we sticky this??
                    I think Tony Mitchell has a chance of being around actually.

                    For next years draft, I don't expect us to have any chance of grabbing any of the guys I am interested in watching but I am interested to see how Isaiah Austin develops, and of course all the guys who showed tons of potential last year. With the talent of guys coming in to college there should be tons of excitement. One guy that I am really interested to see is Kasey Hill, kind of weird, but he never blew me away with his play, but maybe it is because what he did looked like it was so easy to him, I wonder how he will turn it on when he gets to the next level. Also a little bit of a sleeper, but I wonder how Sam Dekker will do next year, saw him at AAU, and he showed pretty decent last year, I wonder what he will do this year with a bigger load on his shoulders.
                    Why so SERIOUS

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                      DJ Stephens reportedly record a 46 inch vert in a Brooklyn Nets work-out.
                      With the way the game went last night he might be the defensive guy that we need to come in and help out in some sub situations, a guy that can guard a lot of positions, I have had enough of Sam Young against the Heat, and Gerald Green just needs to go, I think his basketball IQ is just too weak for him to ever be successful in the league.
                      Why so SERIOUS

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                        Stats for Giannis. I'm really hoping he's the Pacers first round pick.

                        http://www.sportando.net/eng/stats/1...antetokounmpo/

                        And then trade up in the 2nd for Erick Green.
                        First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                          Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                          Stats for Giannis. I'm really hoping he's the Pacers first round pick.

                          http://www.sportando.net/eng/stats/1...antetokounmpo/

                          And then trade up in the 2nd for Erick Green.
                          By the way, what the people of Filathlitikos are doing is extremely commendable. They have helped and provided opportunities for a lot of immigrant kids that the Greek State refuses to recognize a lot of times.

                          I'm glad that people like them exist

                          I'd love it if we were to snatch Giannis and Erick Green. I have a lot of faith in our training staff.
                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                            Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                            Stats for Giannis. I'm really hoping he's the Pacers first round pick.

                            http://www.sportando.net/eng/stats/1...antetokounmpo/

                            And then trade up in the 2nd for Erick Green.
                            Wouldn't mind him, but would not want him to come over for a while, needs to develop against various levels of competition and learn how to dominate each and then I would bring him over. I am kind of interested in a guy who can come off the bench and contribute on the defensive end right away.
                            Why so SERIOUS

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                              Originally posted by Really? View Post
                              Wouldn't mind him, but would not want him to come over for a while, needs to develop against various levels of competition and learn how to dominate each and then I would bring him over. I am kind of interested in a guy who can come off the bench and contribute on the defensive end right away.
                              I disagree. Our coaching staff is excellent. If Giannis falls to us, we should bring him over immediatedly and do what we did with Lance.
                              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 disagree. Our coaching staff is excellent. If Giannis falls to us, we should bring him over immediately and do what we did with Lance.
                                Do you see how long it took Lance to crack the rotation? Also he is used to being 21 and being in the US, I think that is a tough transition for a young international guy to make, especially in a place like Indianapolis. Also if he is ever going to reach his potential he will need to play in games, he won't get that over her for a while, stash him overseas and let him develop. The level of competition that he has been facing as been very weak, not even close to D-I college level when I look at the tape.
                                Why so SERIOUS

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X