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

Picking Luck in fantasy football

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

  • #31
    Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

    Yes, but you can always get a kicker like that in the last round is the point. Their scoring is very bunched up because of how they score.


    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
      The point is, kickers generally score in the same range. Akers season last year was an outlier. After him, John Kasay (No. 2 fantasy kicker) and Nick Novak (No. 12 fantasy kicker) last season were separated by a whopping 18 points.
      This is exactly the point. Akers' 2011 was completely out of line with everything he's ever done before. Hell, it was out of line with everything any kicker has ever done before. And still, the difference between the best fantasy producer and the worst fantasy producer was almost entirely neglible. Kickers can occassionally win you a game. They can occassionally lose you a game. But over the course of a season, they're essentially all the same.

      If a standard league has 12 teams and plays 1 QB, 2 WR, 2 RB, 1 TE, 1 Flex, 1 K, and 1 D/ST, the kicker is unquestionably the least important. Because there isn't a significant divide between the best and worst.

      We've already gone over the 2011 points gap for QB's because that was the quickest for me to pull up.

      The best WR? Calvin Johnson 277 pts. The 24th WR? Pierre Garcon with 134. 9 points per game.

      The best RB? Ray Rice 311 pts. The 24th RB? BenJarvus Green-Ellis with 150. 10 points per game.

      Add in the flex position and WR/RB is even more valuable.

      The best TE? Rob Gronkowski 244 pts. The 12th TE? Fred Davis with 96. 9 points per game.

      The best D/ST? San Francisco 196 pts. The 12th D/ST? Cincinnati with 139. 4 points per game.

      There is a reason that all the people who get paid to do this sort of thing say to never draft a kicker before the last round. This reason is that the kicker you take in the 6th or 7th round (now 8th or 9th I guess) is going to be statisically the same as the kicker who is taken with the last overall pick. You can and should take what the so called fantasy football "experts" say with a grain of salt. But not on this issue.
      "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

      -Lance Stephenson

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

        Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
        Have I even mentioned Akers in my past 10 posts? My thoughts aren't just around Akers, they are what I go by every year in fantasy, been doing it for over a decade now. Even a non-Akers top-3 kicker will generally outscore a #3 WR or TE.
        It's not a matter of total points. It's a matter of relative points. An elite kicker will score relatively the same as the absolute worst kicker.

        You aren't comparing a kicker to a WR. You're comparing kickers to kickers.
        "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

        -Lance Stephenson

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

          I was just about to post what Brush did. This is about comparing kickers to kickers. Not kickers to 3rd wideouts.


          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

            The point differential from 1 to 18 doesn't matter. What matters is who is scoring points for you. You only get around 8 roster spots to start. If I've filled 6-7 starters, and I'm down to choosing between a backup RB who may never play or at best will play 1-2 times, a 3rd WR or a TE and a kicker, and there is all 3 top kickers available, you go with the option that will score the most points even if it's only 2-3 extra points/game.

            There's no sense in drafting the best available #3 WR who is projected to score 80 points this year, when there is a kicker sitting there who is projected to score 150.

            In fact, that's a pretty good way to sum up my strategy. I almost always draft the guy available who is projected (by either the pros, or by my own gut feeling) to score the most points.

            You can disagree with it if you want, I don't care, but been doing it a long time, I typically tear it up in my leagues (until I hit the playoffs, I've got some sort of curse).
            Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 09-04-2012, 01:40 PM.
            There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

              I wish my league's participants all felt the same way.
              "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

              -Lance Stephenson

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

                Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                I wish my league's participants all felt the same way.
                I'm glad mine don't, if they did, I've have a lot more competition. /shrug In fact, you wanna join mine?
                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

                  Last year you said you had Gronk? How did you get Gronk? No one expected him to dominate. The WR, TE, RB, QB you pick in RD. 7-9 has a much higher ceiling than picking a kicker there. Stats over the past few years seem to suggest pretty reliably that the top kicker is going to score somewhere between 155-160 points and the 10th best kicker is going to be right around 130-135. Why reach on a kicker when you can get someone in the last round who is going to be in the same sort of ball park? I mean maybe if you had a guarantee Akers was going to repeat his previous season I could see it, but the odds on that are pretty much zero based on everything we've seen from kickers in fantasy in the past. There is a risk/reward to consider here, maybe you pick Akers in the 7th round and he probably gets you 160 this year, but maybe (like I did a few years ago) you pick a guy named Jamaal Charles in the 7th round and he ends up becoming the best fantasy back in football for that year.

                  What we're saying is that on any given week, your kicker and the other teams kicker are probably just going to cancel each other out. However, your 3rd WR or your second RB might be able to be a real difference between you and the other team.
                  Last edited by Trader Joe; 09-04-2012, 01:43 PM.


                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

                    I picked him up as a free agent believe it or not, in like week 1 or week 2, as a backup. I ended up benching my starter (can't remember who it was), and going with Gronk the rest of the way and then he just caught fire down the stretch. I monitor the waiver wire and free agents almost every week, and if there's a guy out there that isn't claimed that appears to be having a better season than someone I've got, I'll make the switch. Pretty common in the first few weeks as the cream of the crop starts to shake out.
                    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

                      Again, that's not the case in Yahoo, the top kickers will get you 140-150 pts pretty reliably (Akers was a freak last year), and the available #3 WRs might break 100 if you're lucky. Probly not.

                      The reason I compare a K to a #3 WR is that's about the same area you draft... usually 8th-9th round. We got 10 guys in both leagues, once we get to the 8th round the quality of receivers left is not very good at all, and typically not a single kicker has been picked yet because, everyone has the same silly mentality of kickers as you guys. By that time most people already have 1-2 Qbs, 2-3 RBS or 2-3 WRs and a TE... so you're generaly down to a 3rd WR or a TE or defense or backup RB. It's a no-brainer for me.. in the 8th, if the best WR is projected to score 80-90 and Mason Crosby is sitting there projected at 140 --- I'm goin' Crosby. I'll get my #3 later, maybe next round. I also will rarely draft a backup over a starter, unless someone out there is just too damn talented to pass up. A guy on your bench is getting you no points.

                      What you're talking about in this situation is going ceiling vs consistency. You're betting that the guy projected to score 80 is going to exceed expectations, whereas I'm betting the guy projected to score 140 is probly going to be around there and I'm fine with that. The WR would have to exceed his expectations by 60 just to even up with the kicker.

                      My scoring M.O. in fantasy is usually one of just brute force, across-the-lineup consistency. I'll get minimum 10-15 from almost every guy down the line, 20+ from my best RB, and 20-30 from the QB. But everyone gets 20+ from their RB and 25-30 from the QB... it's the teams where the manager actually placed some attention on the other slots and gets an extra 1 to 4 points from the other slots that will typically get the win.
                      Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 09-04-2012, 01:56 PM.
                      There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

                        I'll put in my two cents. Although I typically pick my kicker in the last round, I see nothing wrong with picking a kicker earlier. Typically, in a 14 round draft, any pick after round 9 is bench/waiver wire fodder. If you see a kicker in round 10 you like, you might as well draft him. Chances are your tenth round pick will go to the waiver wire eventually
                        Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

                          Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                          I'm in two leagues, and I drafted Luck as my only qb in both leagues.

                          I'm very high on Luck, but that's pretty gutsy.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            Compare that to the number 1 wide receiver and the number 10 wide receiver for example, the difference is usually about 50 points over the course of a season and has been as much as 100 points different.
                            The 1 through 10 WRs are gone by the time that you start selecting kickers. That's the point.

                            You don't select a KR over a WR if you think that WR is going to give you some major boost. But when trying to decide between a pool of 4th string WR, that's not going to get you many points, it might be a better idea to try and get one of the more elite kickers to set yourself apart. A big portion of that pool of WRs will be there the next round, and most likely the round after.
                            Last edited by Since86; 09-04-2012, 04:13 PM.
                            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

                              Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post

                              I have Stevan Ridley and Moss. It would be great for my team if Ridley busts out in New England now that the starting job is his. He should certainly get his fair share of red zone opportunities.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Picking Luck in fantasy football

                                Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                                The 1 through 10 WRs are gone by the time that you start selecting kickers. That's the point.

                                You don't select a KR over a WR if you think that WR is going to give you some major boost. But when trying to decide between a pool of 4th string WR, that's not going to get you many points, it might be a better idea to try and get one of the more elite kickers to set yourself apart.
                                The problem is even the elite of the elite don't set you apart. David Akers had the best season a kicker has ever had in 2011. And that was 3 points a game better than the worst kicker in fantasy. Not to mention, Akers was mostly undrafted a season ago. ESPN had him as the 20th ranked kicker before the season. Yahoo had him at 22. Trying to pick an "elite" kicker is a total crapshoot. And the worst part is that it is without any real payoff. You're rolling the dice and needing snake eyes to double up. It's just not smart no matter the justification attempt.

                                Huge risk. No reward.
                                "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                                -Lance Stephenson

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X