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

Where do you rate Kobe all time?

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

  • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
    I agree. Championships matter far more in basketball than football or baseball when it comes to ranking all-time greats. In football you can only play one side of the field and in baseball you can only bat 4 or 5 times. But in basketball you have the opportunity to dominate both ends of the court.

    Winning only two championships in an era where there were like 14 teams just isn't enough to be labeled a top 3 all time player, IMO. I don't see how anyone could put him over Jordan when Jordan won 6 championships in an era where there were far more teams, not to mention a far better talent pool of athletes. There was literally nothing else that Jordan could have accomplished in his career. The man did it all. With Wilt OTOH, there will always be a "yeah, but....." Wilt is not top 3.

    Now I obviously never saw Wilt play, but I'm going to presume that the majority of the people commenting here didn't either. He last played in 1973, so you'd have to be in your early 50's to have any memory of him. You'd have to be closer to 60 to have any clear memory of him during the prime of his career.
    I am 65 so I remember when Wilt played. I also will admit that the NBA was not what it is now as there were very few games one tv. You can make all the numbers mean what ever you want but when it comes to Wilt the numbers mean he was by far the best most dominate player ever. The thing about having fewer teams is that every team had several good players. When Jordan played and won his championships the league had expanded and the talent pool was really spread out. So when Jordan played he had another top 5 player (Pippen) on his team. No other team had 2 top 5 players. Also Jordan never won ship when bird and Magic were in their prime. As a matter of fact Bird's record in games against Jordan was 24 wins to 16 losses. Jordan record in the playoffs against Bird was 0 and 6. Two best of 5 series and he couldn't even win 1 game. Nike and Pippen made Jordan the greatest of all time, just not to me. Give me Wilt everytime.
    Good is the enemy of Great


    We're changing the identity of our basketball team -- dramatically. We're a power post team -- a blood-and-guts, old-school, smash-mouth team that plays with size, strength, speed and athleticism. We attack the basket. . . . This is the new identity of our team. It was a great effort. I'm very proud of our guys."
    -- Frank Vogel.

    Comment


    • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

      Originally posted by colts19 View Post
      I am 65 so I remember when Wilt played. I also will admit that the NBA was not what it is now as there were very few games one tv. You can make all the numbers mean what ever you want but when it comes to Wilt the numbers mean he was by far the best most dominate player ever. The thing about having fewer teams is that every team had several good players. When Jordan played and won his championships the league had expanded and the talent pool was really spread out. So when Jordan played he had another top 5 player (Pippen) on his team. No other team had 2 top 5 players. Also Jordan never won ship when bird and Magic were in their prime. As a matter of fact Bird's record in games against Jordan was 24 wins to 16 losses. Jordan record in the playoffs against Bird was 0 and 6. Two best of 5 series and he couldn't even win 1 game. Nike and Pippen made Jordan the greatest of all time, just not to me. Give me Wilt everytime.
      I too am 65 and I saw Wilt in all of those years too. I agree with every word you say here. ...

      Comment


      • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

        Both Wilt and Russell were way before my time, but I'll put in my 2 cents anyways. Wilt was better. Older people that I've spoken to about Wilt, describe him as inhuman, unstoppable force. Russell has the hardware, but you need to look into more of their accomplishments besides the championships. 100 points...I doubt this will ever happen again in the NBA. Another reason Wilt is better is because Bill Simmons says Russell is better. Simmons is almost always wrong when it comes to player evaluations
        Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

        Comment


        • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

          Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
          I also saw Wilt go against Kareem at the end of his career and you are correct, Wilt was a whole lot better. Wilt was the best rebounder to ever play the game. He was also a great defender and shot blocker. He was as strong or stronger than Shaq and much more mobile. They changed the rules for Shaq. If he had played like that in Wilt's day, he would have fouled out of every game in the first quarter..... ...
          I think Kareem is an excellent measuring stick and Wilt was clearly a better player. At the same time, I don't think Kareem matched up all that well with Wilt. Wilt was too powerful. I think Shaq and Hakeem would have given him more problems.

          Also, I think the 90's was the strongest era of big men and it didn't end with the Shaqs, Robinsons, Kareems, Hakeems and Ewings. I think Wilt was better than any of them, but I think that era would have been more challenging for him. Mourning and Mutombo are a couple others that would have defended Wilt fairly well.
          Last edited by BlueNGold; 12-07-2012, 09:26 PM.

          Comment


          • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

            '71 or '72 playoff game, Old Wilt, young Kareem, 7 blocks by Wilt on Kareem, 2 on one possession:



            In an 8 team, two division league, when with Philly he would face Russell over 20 times a year including playoffs. He faced Hall of Famers weekly. The crack about "average centers being 6'7" tall" is made up BS. Heights were measured barefoot and he faced the 6 '9 1/2" Russell (with freakish length), 6'11" Bellamy, 6"11" Thurmond, 7"0' Counts, 6"9' Pettit, and others. The smallest starting center I am aware of in he era was Red Kerr of the Bulls at 6"8".

            Wilt had his 55 rebound game being guarded by Russell, the best defender ever. The year Wilt averaged 50, he averaged over 45 against Russell. Before Wilt's rookie year no NBA player had ever averaged even 30 ppg, so the game was largely transformed by him and also by the Celtics passing/fast break style, which many copied.
            Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 12-08-2012, 12:30 AM.
            The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

            Comment


            • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

              Wow. Wilt is mid 30's and blocks a fade away sky hook. That ball was still going up.

              Comment


              • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                I'm not singling you out. I'm just saying you or others who never saw Wilt play can't truly evaluate his greatness. You were never blessed to see his Greatness 1st hand. That winning Championships isn't a criteria that GREATNESS should be based upon. Some seem to feel it is. I could name many great old time baseball players who never won a World Series that are still ALLTIME GREAT players.
                I agree that championships aren't the only indicator. However, championships in basketball are more important than in football or baseball when it comes to judging individual greatness. In baseball, you can only bat 4 or 5 times a game. In football, you can only play one end of the field. However, in basketball you have the unique opportunity to dominate at both ends of the court. That's what Jordan did. He literally willed the Bulls to championships. In 1998, the Pacers and Jazz were both probably better overall teams than Chicago. Pip had been hurt all year and wasn't the same as in prior years. But Jordan literally willed the Bulls to victory. Putting a team on your back and leading it to a championship like MJ did 6 times matters a helluva lot in a debate like this.

                Comment


                • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

                  Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                  What more could Jordan have possibly done? Guy was still dominating the league in his mid 30's. He was basically perfect in every conceivable way.
                  Not to mention he was still potent enough as a Wizard, clearly past his prime, to score 51 points in December of 2001 and over 40 points thee different times in 2002-03.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

                    This is kind of random, but I wish I could see a team of 86 Bird playing with 96 Jordan on a team otherwise filled with good role players and just see what happened. I'd love that.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      I know Russell played with atleast 6-7 other HOF players on the Celtics, but I'm not sure how many Wilt ever had. Anyone know?

                      When you compare individual stats, Wilt blows Russell out of the water. They both averaged 22rebs for their entire careers (crazy) but Wilt doubled Bill's scoring average. 30.1ppg average compared to 15.1ppg average.

                      Russell's fg% of 44% isn't very good, compared to 54% for Wilt.
                      I just never know how to translate their era to the modern one or even the 80s or 90s NBA. I tend to think they wouldn't do nearly as well today (particularly Russell at his size and skill set) with those same bodies/talent, though they would still be good or very good players. No way to really know, I guess.

                      That's why I always have trouble with putting them in my 'best ever' lists because I have a hard time separating how dominant and awesome they were in their own era with how I think they might fare in 2012.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

                        Kobe Bryant is a top 10 player all time. I think the top 10 looks like this:

                        1. Michael Jordan
                        2. Larry Bird
                        3. Magic Johnson
                        4. Wilt Chamberlin
                        5. Kareem Abdul Jabbar
                        6. Bill Russell
                        7. Kobe Bryant
                        8. Hakeem Olajuwan
                        9. Oscar Robertson
                        10. Tim Duncan

                        Comment


                        • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

                          I don't know if anybody feels the same way I feel with the old school players but to me when I compare old school players to this new era of NBA players is not even close, this new guys are bigger and stronger, I think that a lot of old school hall of famers would be bench players or decent starters in this new NBA so when I make a list of top 10 all NBA players I take this into consideration.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

                            I can't think of any other shooting guard I would rank 2nd to Michael Jordan other than Kobe Bryant.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

                              Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
                              I can't think of any other shooting guard I would rank 2nd to Michael Jordan other than Kobe Bryant.
                              Then let me help you with that. Jerry West....... Check that playoff scoring average....

                              Comment


                              • Re: Where do you rate Kobe all time?

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                I don't know if anybody feels the same way I feel with the old school players but to me when I compare old school players to this new era of NBA players is not even close, this new guys are bigger and stronger, I think that a lot of old school hall of famers would be bench players or decent starters in this new NBA so when I make a list of top 10 all NBA players I take this into consideration.
                                Well, Wilt would be bigger and stronger and faster than any other centers in the game now. Oscar Robertson would be bigger than just about every point guard now. ...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X