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

Second or third chance guys (Gerald Green mentioned)

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Second or third chance guys (Gerald Green mentioned)

    http://www.hoopsworld.com/michael-be...-nba-retreads/

    Beasley, Thabeet Highlight NBA Retreads
    By Alex Raskin
    Senior NBA Writer
    Follow @Alex RaskinAlex RaskinEmailPrint5 Comments
    After being selected with the eighth overall pick of the 1976 NBA Draft, center Robert Parish joined a Golden State Warriors team that was just two years removed from an NBA Title — another championship was conceivably right around the corner.

    But even though the man who would become “Chief” was surrounded by elite talents like Rick Barry, Phil Smith and Jamaal Wilkes, the Warriors finished third in 1976-1977 and Parish averaged just 9.1 points per game.

    Parish’s scoring improved in his second season (12.5 points per game), but the Warriors sank to fifth in the Pacific Division and things only got worse from there. By 1978-1979, Parish had established himself as a legitimate center (17.2 points, 12.1 rebounds, 2.9 blocks), albeit a losing one. The Warriors finished the decade with two sixth-place finishes and Parish’s reputation as a good individual player, who wasn’t necessarily a winner, was pretty much cemented.

    Thankfully, Parish got a second chance.

    Chief was packaged with a first-round pick (Kevin McHale) to the Boston Celtics for two first rounders (Rickey Brown and Joe Barry Carroll) and arguably the greatest frontcourt in NBA history was complete. Parish would team with McHale and Larry Bird to win three NBA titles and now Chief is remembered more for winning (and the longevity of his career) than his own personal stats, which remain impressive to this day. He also won a title in his final season as a member of the 69-win Chicago Bulls in 1996-1997.

    Here are some of the NBA players who are getting a second (or third) chance to make good on their talents this season:

    Michael Beasley, Phoenix Suns: Realistically, this is Beasley’s third chance, but he’s still only 23 years old, so there’s time to turn the ship around. The problem is that Beasley may have regressed in 2011-2012. He had career lows in points (11.5 points per game) and Player Efficiency Rating (13.11) and did nothing to further his reputation as a rebounder or a defender. In fact, Beasley’s best season remains his 2008-2009 rookie campaign. At least he could still hit free throws then (77.2 percent as a rookie, 64.2 percent last year). There is good news though. Beasley will get to play with a dynamic point guard in Goran Dragic this season and since the Suns lack scorers, he should see plenty of opportunities. The downside is that, with Luis Scola at power forward, Beasley will likely play the three, which isn’t necessarily his best position. He’s a defensive liability at both forward spots, but Beasley is much too fast for most power forwards to defend.

    Andray Blatche, Brooklyn Nets: Now that he’s been waived using the amnesty clause, Blatche’s cap figure can’t be used against him in the court of public opinion. The Nets needed a backup for Brook Lopez and Blatche provides scoring. Defense and rebounding will be a work in progress, but he’s supposedly in better shape and as Nets general manager Billy King said, the Syracuse native has a clean slate in Brooklyn. The good news is that Blatche will be surrounded by scorers with the Nets’ second unit (MarShon Brooks, Mirza Teletovic, C.J. Watson) so he won’t be the focal point of the opposing defense.

    Earl Clark, Los Angeles Lakers: The 14th-overall pick of the 2009 NBA Draft developed into a solid defender during his time with the Orlando Magic and Phoenix Suns. The problem was, besides being able to run the floor, Clark offered nothing offensively. That’s why joining the Lakers is a good fit. If he’s coming off the bench with veteran Antawn Jamison (a good offensive player who struggles to defend), there won’t be much for him to do at that end of the floor anyway. Clark can guard multiple positions and now that his offensive shortcomings aren’t as much of a liability, he could finally start playing major minutes after never averaging more than 12.4 minutes per game throughout his career.

    Toney Douglas, Houston Rockets: A tireless worker and talented defender, Douglas’ 2011-2012 season was an offensive black hole. He was packaged off in the sign-and-trade deal that sent Marcus Camby to the Knicks, which means he’s still looking up at Jeremy Lin on the depth chart. Douglas isn’t really a point guard (even though he’s generously listed at 6’2) so the fact that he hit just 23.1 percent of his three-point attempts last season is really an indictment of his entire offensive game (did we mention he struggles to penetrate, too?). However, Douglas did hit 38.9 percent of his three-point attempts as a rookie and 37.3 percent in 2010-2011. If he can find his outside shot, Douglas can definitely contribute to a winning team, because he’s among the best in the league at defending point guards.

    Gerald Green, Indiana Pacers: We’re not going to count how many chances this is for Green. The point is, this could be the best one he’s gotten. The Nets pulled Green out of the D-League last season and quickly discovered that his ability to score hadn’t gone anywhere. In fact, the former 18th overall pick has only sharpened his game. He hit 39.1 percent of his three-pointers, 48.1 percent of his field goals and averaged 12.9 points per game over 31 appearances. For a team in need of perimeter scoring, the Pacers’ biggest offseason acquisition might help push this team to the next level.

    Wesley Johnson, Phoenix Suns: We learned that Johnson isn’t a shooting guard, but besides that, his tenure in Minnesota wasn’t all that revealing. In a lot of ways, we’re still waiting to see what kind of player Johnson can become. He should refrain from shooting from the outside too much (31.4 percent from deep last year) and he should never have the green light to drive to the hoop. Realistically, Johnson is a good athlete who has more Bo Outlaw in his game than perhaps people realize. Johnson rebounds well for his size (6’7) and is actually one of the better perimeter shot blockers in the NBA. Hopefully he’ll have a chance to do what he does best in Phoenix: provide energy.

    Robin Lopez, New Orleans Hornets: New Orleans could have used its second lottery pick to draft center Meyers Leonard, but they went with Austin Rivers instead. That, of course, opened the door for Lopez, who is coming off another lackluster season with the Suns. Lopez was more efficient last season (his PER went up over the league average of 15), but he didn’t play significant minutes, largely because Marcin Gortat continued to improve. Now Lopez has the chance to shed the “immature” label he picked up in Phoenix and he’ll do it alongside talents like Anthony Davis and Ryan Anderson. Lopez should be familiar with Anderson (they played against each other in college and Lopez’s brother Brook is good friends with the former Cal Bear) so hopefully there will be a certain level of comfort when the two are on the floor together.

    O.J. Mayo, Dallas Mavericks: Jason Terry struggled to make a name for himself before he joined Dirk Nowitzki and the Mavericks and now it’s Mayo’s turn. There’s no doubting Mayo’s talent, but he’s never really developed as a distributor or a defender, and that limited his opportunities with the Grizzlies. The good news is that players tend to play well alongside Nowitzki and Mayo could have significantly more room to work with this season.

    Daniel Orton, Oklahoma City Thunder: Orton is the poster boy for staying in school. After leaving Kentucky before he’d even become a starter, Orton was considered a project in Orlando, but he completely failed to develop. Yes, the knee injury he suffered as a D-Leaguer is partially to blame, but Orton still looked lost in his brief appearances with the Magic last season. Fortunately he’s still only 22 years old, and anyone with his size (6’10, 255 lbs.) and athleticism has a chance to make it in the NBA.

    Hasheem Thabeet, Oklahoma City Thunder: Give Sam Presti some credit. The Thunder general manager has been throwing a lot of crap against the wall this summer, and some of it just might stick. Thabeet is 25 years old (supposedly), so it’s too soon to write him off as a bust. He does some things well (blocks shots, was tied for 35th in the NBA in rebounding rate last year), but Thabeet offers nothing offensively and needs to add strength. Between Thabeet and Orton, the Thunder might have one real NBA center, and if that’s the case, the rest of the league should be very afraid.

    Nick Young, Philadelphia 76ers: Doug Collins will get his chance to coach Nick Young this year, and there’s really two possibilities. The first is that Collins reaches Young, gets him to play tough defense and helps to improve the 6’7 swingman’s shot selection. The other is that Collins ties up Young and drops him off the Schuylkill Expressway. Either way, this is going to be a fun season to watch the 76ers. Young has enough talent to be a big-name player, but his boneheaded offensive play and indifferent defensive demeanor has kept him from NBA stardom.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Second or third chance guys (Gerald Green mentioned)

    Nothing we haven't known. Green has the chance to be a real difference maker.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Second or third chance guys (Gerald Green mentioned)

      The addition of Gerald Green is very important to the Pacers. If you consider that Augustin will probably spend a lot of time on the floor with Gerald, we should see better production from the bench. If we had DC, I don't believe Gerald would be as productive. Now we should expect Gerald to be the guy off the bench for offense...while we still have a PG capable of scoring and dishing to other guys. Also, Ian may not be a scorer but I doubt he's as wild as Lou and should for a better percentage.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Second or third chance guys (Gerald Green mentioned)

        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
        The addition of Gerald Green is very important to the Pacers. If you consider that Augustin will probably spend a lot of time on the floor with Gerald, we should see better production from the bench. If we had DC, I don't believe Gerald would be as productive. Now we should expect Gerald to be the guy off the bench for offense...while we still have a PG capable of scoring and dishing to other guys. Also, Ian may not be a scorer but I doubt he's as wild as Lou and should for a better percentage.
        Agree 100%

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Second or third chance guys (Gerald Green mentioned)

          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
          The addition of Gerald Green is very important to the Pacers. If you consider that Augustin will probably spend a lot of time on the floor with Gerald, we should see better production from the bench. If we had DC, I don't believe Gerald would be as productive. Now we should expect Gerald to be the guy off the bench for offense...while we still have a PG capable of scoring and dishing to other guys. Also, Ian may not be a scorer but I doubt he's as wild as Lou and should for a better percentage.
          Mahinmi is going to be the dirty work guy of the bench. He averaged like 3.6 Offensive Boards per 36 last year. And he does shoot a great percentage. So he will keep the defenses honest, and if they don't we will have to count on Augustin to get him the ball

          Comment

          Previous template Next
          Working...
          X