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

Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

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

  • Re: Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

    Originally posted by repole View Post
    DeRozan's pretty inefficient shooting the ball, which sort of highlights the problem. The one thing that saves his efficiency is his turnover rate, something that's likely to plague Oladipo at least early in his career.

    As for Oladipo's shooting, he's taken less than half as many threes as Gerald "39%" Green did last year. Tony Allen was a 39% 3 point shooter his rookie season on 31 attempts, which is just 14 less than Oladipo's had this year. That should be a pretty clear warning on his sample size and just how much meaning you can extract from it. I'm not saying he hasn't improved as a shooter, he certainly has, and he certainly can continue to improve. Just saying there's far from anything definitive that tells us he's a reliable jump shooter at this point.
    Comparing Oladipo's shooting as a college player, to Tony Allen and Gerald Green in the NBA makes no sense. Tony Allen had those 31 attempts in 77 games.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
      Meteoric?
      As in like a meteor.

      Comment


      • Re: Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

        http://espn.go.com/ncb/notebook/_/pa...ome-court-live

        Originally posted by By Eamonn Brennan | ESPN.com

        EAST LANSING, Mich. -- Victor Oladipo and Cody Zeller have a beef.

        This can't happen very often. You can't be co-stars on a team as successful as the Indiana Hoosiers have been this season -- IU is the No. 1 team in the country, the nation's most efficient offense, the only 12-2 team in the best conference in college hoops and the obvious national title favorite going forward -- and not see things the same way at least 90 percent of the time.

        But if you ask Oladipo about his sudden national player of the year frontrunner status, how it feels to go from being a hardly recruited raw athlete to a defensive stopper to a role player to drawing almost weekly broadcaster comparisons to a young Michael Jordan, the Hoosiers' overnight star interjects what is by now a minority opinion on the topic.

        "I've told you who I think the player of the year is -- it's Cody Zeller," Oladipo said Tuesday night. "He always has been. If we didn't have him, I wouldn't be successful. None of us would be successful."

        Ahem -- Cody? Your thoughts on the subject?

        "He'll be the player of the year," Zeller said, laughing.

        So, yes. For the 2012-13 Indiana Hoosiers, this is what passes for a beef.

        It's not hard to see why: In their best win of the season and almost certainly the best of Tom Crean's career at IU -- a physical 72-68 trial against Michigan State, a fellow 11-2 conference title challenger in front of one of the best and most intense crowds you'll see anywhere, in any sport -- Oladipo and Zeller both crossed the 1,000-point scoring threshold for their careers. Along with Christian Watford and Jordan Hulls, the duo made history. They became part of the first team in the school's history to feature four 1,000-point scorers in the same game.

        Reminder: "Indiana history" includes a team that went undefeated.

        That is balance and depth and experience and leadership, and all of it was on full display Tuesday night. All four 1,000-point scorers (who ought to start some sort of campus club) finished in double figures: Oladipo had 19, Zeller 17, Watford 12, Hulls 12. Zeller, who has played as well as any player in the country in the past three weeks, began the game with two quality post moves and a 17-foot jumper. He couldn't keep that kind of offensive performance up -- he began exerting more and more energy on the defensive end, where his size was often the only thing stopping Michigan State's imposing interior from totally bossing the paint -- and he struggled on a series of possessions throughout the late first and early second halves.

        But his teammates were always there. Hulls hit four threes on the night, one of them from somewhere in Canada, each of them coming at the best possible times. Watford went 2-of-5 from deep, and just 4-of-10 from the field, but he made the most important play of the game -- a drive and finish and foul and free throw with just 1:25 left, which cut Michigan State's suddenly imposing 67-63 lead to just one.

        "Christian was just a grown man the whole night," Crean said.

        And then there's Oladipo. Just two days after Indiana's do-everything junior sprained his ankle in a win over Purdue, there he was opening the game with cannon-shot drives to the rim, ruining passing lanes with chaos-inducing defensive hands, chasing back for crowd-silencing fast-break blocks, using crossover dribbles capable of putting even good perimeter defenders -- in this instance, Keith Appling -- at risk of their own ankle damage. There was Oladipo looking like the best player on the floor no matter what he did, which is probably most succinctly described as "everything."

        When asked to name the difference between 2012's surprisingly good IU team and the title-or-bust 2013 edition, Tom Izzo's first-instinct response was exactly one word: "Oladipo."

        Two years ago, Oladipo arrived at IU a three-star prospect ranked No. 54 at his position; he was a nice athlete, sure, but few coaches noticed. Two years ago, IU was coming off a 10-win season, Crean's second at the school, and it just so happened that the coach needed athletes. Frankly, he needed anyone.

        Since then, Oladipo has morphed from an exciting leaper (2011) to a defensive specialist and rim crasher on a team with great need of both (last season) to one of the most efficient offensive players in all of college basketball. After Tuesday's 7-for-11 performance, Oladipo has made 118 of his 175 2-point field goal attempts this season, good for an eye-popping 67.4 percent. His advanced efficiency statistics -- things like offensive rating (127.8) and true shooting percentage (70.8) and effective field goal rate (69.2) -- all rank him among the best in the country. And when he deigns to shoot the ball from the outside, he makes over 50 percent of his 3s, too.

        There may be better pure defenders in college basketball, and there may be more skilled scorers, and there may be more dominating rebounders, but no player combines all of those skills into a single package the way Oladipo has.

        All of which would be merely impressive had Oladipo not also developed a knack for the game-winning play. But he has, and he was there again Tuesday night, recording the go-ahead tip-in with 47 seconds left, corralling IU's last two defensive rebounds, running out on the game-sealing fast break dunk, silencing a crowd so loud my ears popped.

        And he did it all with a two-day-old sprained ankle.

        "People asked if Victor Oladipo is 100 percent," Crean said. "There was no way of knowing he wasn't close to 100 percent tonight. The way he played was excellent, but the way he finished this game when he was winded and there's no doubt that his foot hurt -- he might tell you different, but I've been around him long enough to know when he is right. But I knew that his mind was right."

        "He's just a refuse to lose kind of guy," Izzo said. "He reminds me of a few guys I've had. In winning time, he made the plays."


        The Michigan State locker room was despondent, and Izzo wasn't much happier, convinced that the Spartans had let a crucial win slip away with mistakes throughout the game. There were plenty of bad decisions. One extreme example came when Derrick Nix took what looked like a cheap shot at Zeller's more sensitive regions (retaliation for what Nix thought was a similar low blow on an early play), but mostly those bad decisions were a shot forced against good interior defense, or a silly foul on a three-point shooter, or turnovers. Appling had his worst game of the season, a six-point, four-turnover, 1-for-8 outing -- he said it elicited the "worst feeling ever." The officiating was a constant theme on Twitter. Both sides were victims of bad calls, but a second-half foul and continuation for Zeller was especially egregious, and robbed the Spartans of whatever momentum Gary Harris had built with a three and a steal on previous possessions.

        And despite all that, Michigan State still had a chance to tie the game in the final seconds, when Will Sheehey fouled Harris on a three-point attempt. Harris missed the first free throw, sealing the loss.

        "We didn't answer the bell," Izzo said. "We always talk about buzzer-beaters and end-of-game plays, but two points at the beginning, because you don't guard a guy or don't cover a back cut, are the same as two points at the end of the game. They all add up.

        "Games aren't lost with a free throw at the end, we just magnify it," Izzo said. "That game was lost early. They took it at us."

        The upshot is more than a big conference win, more than pole position in the Big Ten chase, more than POY buzz for Oladipo. Perhaps the biggest implication, at least for Indiana, is the advantage over Michigan State if both wind up as No. 1 seeds. One of this year's regionals takes place in Indianapolis, and the higher-seeded No. 1 team gets first dibs. Indiana would very much like to be that team.

        Check and check. Then again, if the Hoosiers keep this up -- and by "this," we mean the offensive balance and the defensive deflections and the senior leadership capable of toughing out these types of games, another of which lies in wait March 10 at Michigan -- lining up home court advantage in Indianapolis will seem like small potatoes.

        In the meantime, maybe the Hoosiers can settle on a company line for player of the year. A coordinated campaign. A billboard, maybe? At least a flyer, right?

        Victor?

        "I'm just going to do whatever I can to help my team win -- I just want to win," he said. "But Cody has always deserved it."

        Cody?

        "He can have it," Zeller said.

        Guys, come on. This is a problem.

        A really, really good problem.

        Comment


        • Re: Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

          Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
          Comparing Oladipo's shooting as a college player, to Tony Allen and Gerald Green in the NBA makes no sense. Tony Allen had those 31 attempts in 77 games.
          It's not a direct comparison, it's a caveat about sample size. I'm not comparing him as a shooter to Allen or Green, I'm only stating that small sample sizes can be deceiving.

          A Gerald Green fan who now finds himself rooting for the Suns.

          Comment


          • Re: Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

            http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/47144

            Originally posted by From Chad Ford's Chat on ESPN.com
            Pete (Minneapolis)

            Victor Oladipo had another great game last night. Do you think its possible he is a top 5 pick? Not a ton of comps out there with his combination of athleticism and defense.
            Chad Ford (1:48 PM)

            Yes. He's moved into the Top 5 on our Big Board and for the first time, I've had a couple of GMs tell me that they like him more than Ben McLemore. They are in the minority right now ... but still. What a rise. In all my years of covering the draft, I've never seen a player improve as much as I've seen him improve in such a small period of time. He has weaknesses, but major, major upside. If he continues to improve, I don't think it's out of the question he could be the No. 1 pick in June. He's not there yet, but he's special.
            Wow. Wait until they see what he does at the combine.

            Comment


            • Re: Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

              Dick Vitale is basically a walking schtick. Dick Vitale keeps calling Victor "Baby Michael Jordan". I have no idea how to take that.

              Comment


              • Re: Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

                Originally posted by TinManJoshua View Post
                Dick Vitale is basically a walking schtick. Dick Vitale keeps calling Victor "Baby Michael Jordan". I have no idea how to take that.
                Vitale is going to die on air. The guy is clearly not all together there and they keep rolling him out there.


                Comment


                • Re: Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

                  Originally posted by TinManJoshua View Post
                  Dick Vitale is basically a walking schtick. Dick Vitale keeps calling Victor "Baby Michael Jordan". I have no idea how to take that.
                  Take it like you would take anything Vitale says. With a whole heaping truck load of kosher salt.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

                    At this point there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Oladipo and Wade comparisons. The similarities are striking. Two mid level recruits, both coached by Crean. Similar body type, insane athletes, respectable shooters, but not the best.

                    The Oladipo and Jordan comparisons are crazy.

                    Though when Vic made that steal and the save to Yogi then got the dunk and as he was walking back he had that wry smile on his face like he just knew that he could make any play IU needed....well you'd be lying if it didn't at least flash across your mind.


                    Comment


                    • Re: Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

                      BTW, would love to get Harris if he comes out and is around during our pick. Game has really slowed down for him.


                      Comment


                      • Re: Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

                        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                        Vitale is going to die on air. The guy is clearly not all together there and they keep rolling him out there.
                        He was ready to dole out sexual favors to Magic on air last night.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

                          Originally posted by cdash View Post
                          He was ready to dole out sexual favors to Magic on air last night.
                          Did anyone notice back about mid January through early February he had clearly fallen on his face and gotten busted up? He had a big *** band aid on his nose and bruises on both eyes. Now I am saying this purely as just another human being, but when you are reaching the age when you are busting your *** that bad when you stumble, it's time to hang up the announcing stuff.


                          Comment


                          • Re: Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            Did anyone notice back about mid January through early February he had clearly fallen on his face and gotten busted up? He had a big *** band aid on his nose and bruises on both eyes. Now I am saying this purely as just another human being, but when you are reaching the age when you are busting your *** that bad when you stumble, it's time to hang up the announcing stuff.
                            He apparently walked into a plate glass window or something. He's also blind in one eye, seriously.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

                              Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                              Crazy we have the same 1-2-3. Ben McLemore to me is clear away the best prospect his jumper so the best I have see plus he has a motor physical tools ect. After that there are Noel and Victor clear and above the rest. Then about 10 players that have a really solid case and a total crap shoot right now. Marcus Smart to me is almost in the Victor and Noel class on projection and future prognosis I would have him next and finally Isaiah Austin kid is a elite rebounder with a great skill set. Need to be patient with him but I could see him going as high as 2 really gifted.
                              I haven't watched much of (anything other than highlights) of Marcus Smart. I'm excited to see him against Kansas tonight. I'll be interested to see if Smart and McLemore are matched up against each other much.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Who to draft? Burke or Oladipo?

                                Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                                He apparently walked into a plate glass window or something. He's also blind in one eye, seriously.
                                Can't make that stuff up.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X