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

List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

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

  • List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

    PLEASE REMIND ME IF I FORGOT SOMEONE. I'M NOT JOHN HOLLINGER/ZACH LOWE.

    I came up with this list because while I was having fun researching the Indy point guards I was astonished at how many talented point guards the league has. It really is amazing. Brandon Jennings would be considered one of the worst on this entire list, and he can explode for 40 at any point...

    Notes:

    I was harsh when it came to Nash. His recent injuries, his old age, and his god awful defense. Later in the season he may establish himself once again as a top 10 PG, but right now I don't think it is honest, and given the choice I would not take him. I can't stand players that cant defend and he's so slow at this point he's just terrible on D.

    Couple guys I added at the bottom of the list because they were injured and we don't really know where they should be until they finish a whole season in the future. (rubio, lowry)

    Also, so many of the all stars are nearly interchangeable. So don't give me to much grief if you think Tony is so much better than Kyrie or something. The point of the list is to see the sheer number of talented points. I tried to be objective as possible. I mean this is based off my opinions, but also numbers.. I woul change some things if we were all in a backroom and I could give my opinion without getting laughed at.. lol

    Everyone one of these point guards is bringing a lot to the game. Just amazing. No other position has half as much talent.



    1. CP3
    2. Derrick Rose (I have to add him)
    3. Rajon Rondo
    4. Kyrie Irving (he may be my favorite PG in the league, I love his game)
    5. Russell Westbrook (shutup about "pure PG" there's nothing pure about RW's game, but he's top 5 in the game)
    6. Tony Parker
    7. Stephen Curry (too high? maybe, I love what he's doing...also best pure shooter in the game??)
    8. Deron Williams (low? ****, maybe not low enough. I've always been a HUGE fan, but he hasn't played well since he's been a Net! Maybe the Pacers dodged a bullet?)
    9. Jrue Holliday
    10. Mike Conley Jr (I think he's better than Jrue but, but Jrue's numbers are much better, have to give Jrue the nod)
    11. Damian Lillard A favorite of this board this past draft, but of course we really had no way of obtaining that pick unfortunately
    12. George Hill
    13. Steve Nash
    14. John Wall
    15. Kemba Walker
    16. Ty Lawson (I know a lot of people would have him higher, but I'm not the biggest fan, plus he's having a horrible start shooting so far this season.)
    17. Goran Dragic (another favorite of this board, but do not include me in that list. Again, I'm not a fan of players that don't do defense)
    18. Greivis Vasquez (He's having a great season)
    19. Brandon Knight
    20. Jeff Teague
    21. Jose Calderon (this is another guy that most would have much higher. I am not a fan at all. Sue me)
    22. Brandon Jennings
    23. Mo Williams
    24. Kyle Lowry
    25. Ricky Rubio
    Last edited by mattie; 12-26-2012, 04:37 AM.

  • #2
    Re: List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

    You've got Rubio tragically low.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

      Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
      You've got Rubio tragically low.
      Check the notes. Both Rubio and Lowry are low. But until they actually perform for a whole season we can't really know. Rubio has played 41 games. That's it. Lowry has been injured the last two seasons. I put them on the list to note they are two more talented guards but I'm not going to try to rank them.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

        Okay, well, I'd have to say that my top 3 point guards (in no order) are CP3, Rondo, and Williams. Able scorers with incredible passing abilities, which is a trait that defines the point guard. For that reason, I would put Derrick Rose 4th, maybe 5th depending on how Irving performs next year. Also, Rubio is top-15 already, and has potential to be top-10, even top-5 in years to come. I wouldn't put him anywhere below Brandon Knight, Kemba Walker, or Mo Williams, simply because Rubio already has talent that shines. Knight and Walker are Rose-esque PG's, and that will only get them so far.
        witters: @imbtyler, @postgameonline

        Originally posted by Day-V
        In conclusion, Paul George is awesome.
        Originally posted by Slick Pinkham
        Our arena, their arena, Rucker park, it just doesn't matter. We're bigger, longer, younger, faster, and hungrier.


        Comment


        • #5
          Re: List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

          My definition of a PG is a lot different then most. Hell I would still have Jason Kidd high on that list just because of his ability to make his team better. I disagree that that position has the most talent. I see very few that play that position correctly and make their teams win because of their skill set. Instead I see a lot of guys that want to drop 40 and are okay with 6 assists.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

            I'm not sure he deserves to be on the list now, but I fully expect Eric Bledsoe to move up that list in the next few years once he's out of Chris Paul's shadow. He's so athletic. The key is if he continues to develop an all around game. He could probably be starting for some teams right now.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

              I don't know about Hill being ranked before Nash, Wall and Lawson
              "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


              Comment


              • #8
                Re: List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

                Jeremy Lin #1
                Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

                  Originally posted by mattie View Post
                  Both Rubio and Lowry are low. But until they actually perform for a whole season we can't really know.
                  Lowry had consecutive seasons of 82, 77, 68, and 75 games played before a freakish abdominal infection last year and a torn triceps this year. Not exactly the type of china doll-type injuries that earn a player the reputation you suggest
                  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


                  • #10
                    Re: List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

                    I'm glad you put in a note that Deron Williams has been awful since the trade to the Nets. He really hasn't been very good for them.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

                      I don't think Hill should be ranked over Nash, Wall, Lawson, Rubio, Lowry... And I still need to think about Jennings, Kemba and Dragic...
                      Originally posted by Piston Prince
                      Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                      "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

                        Hill is in the top 15
                        Smothered Chicken!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

                          Originally posted by imbtyler View Post
                          Okay, well, I'd have to say that my top 3 point guards (in no order) are CP3, Rondo, and Williams. Able scorers with incredible passing abilities, which is a trait that defines the point guard. For that reason, I would put Derrick Rose 4th, maybe 5th depending on how Irving performs next year. Also, Rubio is top-15 already, and has potential to be top-10, even top-5 in years to come. I wouldn't put him anywhere below Brandon Knight, Kemba Walker, or Mo Williams, simply because Rubio already has talent that shines. Knight and Walker are Rose-esque PG's, and that will only get them so far.
                          It's so frustrating when you start a thread and make notes only to have them ignored. I clearly explained why I had Rubio and Lowry at the bottom of the list. I wanted to note their talent but make NO ATTEMPT at ranking them. Can you not read? I believe there are 4 comments overall complaining about one of the two's "ranking."

                          Also, some food for thought: Rubio averaged 10 points on 35% shooting and 8 assists per game. Not saying he sucks because he doesn't, but that isn't exactly a stunning performance. Now, we all KNOW he's going to be a big time star as I CLEARLY noted. But we have no idea how to truly rank him as a player.

                          Originally posted by dohman View Post
                          My definition of a PG is a lot different then most. Hell I would still have Jason Kidd high on that list just because of his ability to make his team better. I disagree that that position has the most talent. I see very few that play that position correctly and make their teams win because of their skill set. Instead I see a lot of guys that want to drop 40 and are okay with 6 assists.
                          Jason Kidd is averaging 4.7 assists per 36 minutes. He's such a great point guard right now!

                          By the way, according to your definition of how a point guard should play, Westbrook doesn't make his team better (HAHA), and Derrick Rose, who's team has the best record in the East as long as he's playing, doesn't make his team better. You can talk about your definition of a "true point guard" and making the team better, blah blah blah, but reality shows a different story. Players such as Westbrook, Stephen, Rose, Parker, Lillard, and Hill are all making there teams MUCH better.

                          This idealistic view PD members have of what a point guard should do is ridiculous. It is simply wrong, and the W/L totals of many of the good teams in the NBA prove this.

                          Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
                          I don't know about Hill being ranked before Nash, Wall and Lawson
                          I noted why I had Lawson and Nash so low. I think Lawson is nothing more than Jeff Teague in a perfect system, while I personally do not prefer Nash's current level of play. Even then, I noted that here in a few weeks after a bunch more 17/11 performances I'll have to note that Nash is once again among the better PG's in the league.

                          Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                          Lowry had consecutive seasons of 82, 77, 68, and 75 games played before a freakish abdominal infection last year and a torn triceps this year. Not exactly the type of china doll-type injuries that earn a player the reputation you suggest
                          It's still tough at this point to exactly pin point his abilities. Say what you want, but once he again puts forth a large sample of performances we'll better know how to rank him. That's just my reasoning. I'd rather not rank him. I noticed he's one of the many talented guards, that's it.

                          Originally posted by yoadknux View Post
                          I don't think Hill should be ranked over Nash, Wall, Lawson, Rubio, Lowry... And I still need to think about Jennings, Kemba and Dragic...
                          Once again, I noted Lawson, Nash, Rubio and Lowry in the first post. Some how you missed this...

                          I know people like Jennings. I do too actually. I love watching him play. The truth is though, Jennings is one of the worst point guards on this list. People see his performances on S/C and they miss out on his many bad games. He cannot score efficiently. He has lots of games were he is simply not a factor in any way. He cannot defend anyone, at times he stalls the offense because he's looking for his own shot. Jennings actually might be the worst point guard out of all 25 on this list. He definitely has talent though.

                          Kemba right now is scoring 18 points on a shitbag team while playing poor defense. It is a fair argument that he should be ranked higher for sure, but until he truly proves that he is much better Im fine with where he's at.

                          Wall is a player that has talent but needs to make much more improvement. He has good numbers for sure, but if you watch the games you'll be unimpressed with his game. He's an inefficient scorer, he's an average defender, and he is a good passer tho his lack of range on his J hinders his options. Wall will get there, but I'm betting it takes longer for him to totally realize his game.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

                            Originally posted by mattie View Post
                            Check the notes. Both Rubio and Lowry are low. But until they actually perform for a whole season we can't really know. Rubio has played 41 games. That's it. Lowry has been injured the last two seasons. I put them on the list to note they are two more talented guards but I'm not going to try to rank them.
                            It makes sense, but it applies to Lillard and some 5 other guys on that list too.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: List of top 25 point guards in the NBA, the League of Point Guards

                              Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                              It makes sense, but it applies to Lillard and some 5 other guys on that list too.
                              Rubio has only played 41 games. We have no idea.

                              The rest of the guys are all currently playing at a level they will most likely sustain. So it isn't that hard to rank them.

                              Lowry accordint to TOR may have LOST his starting job. Again, I just don't know where to rank him.

                              Every other guy on that list besides the two mentioned, can be reasonably ranked by any NBA fan.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X