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

Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

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

  • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    Question for the group: Would you trade our first round pick (top 8 protected) for Gary Harris?
    No, Harris is not bad as a option, but I would rather go with the other 2 guard options that should be available at that point in the draft, not convinced he will ever be able to be a decent shooter in the NBA...
    Why so SERIOUS

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

      Originally posted by cdash View Post
      Second question to the group: Would you trade our first round pick--no protection--and Solomon Hill for Victor Oladipo? Catch being: We find out we need to shut George Hill down for the season.
      Interesting, I think you would have to, he is young, and fits what this team needs, he still has a crazy amount of potential, probably higher than most draft picks out there this year, but I doubt they make that trade even with Payton there. Vic may not be the same 3pt shooter that Russell should turnout to be, but he is more than solid enough shooting 37.4% on the year.
      Why so SERIOUS

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

        Originally posted by cdash View Post
        Second question to the group: Would you trade our first round pick--no protection--and Solomon Hill for Victor Oladipo? Catch being: We find out we need to shut George Hill down for the season.
        Oh yeah, just looking at their roster they may but it is a small chance I think, Really depends on if they really plan to have Aaron Gordon starting at the 3 for a while, I doubt they do, but in his limited time dude is shooting 54.5% from 3 which is actually pretty crazy... If this was the case then maybe they would be interested in Towns if he was available.

        But in reality I think he will be their future as a PF, with that being said, I guess it depends on how they feel about the SF options out there, Stanley Johnson would be a good fit there, and they could give Fournier more playing time at the two, and then having Solomon as a back up 3 would not be too bad.

        Payton, Fornier, Johnson, Gordon, Vucevic or possibly Payton, Russell, Harris, Gordon Vucevic.... but I think I like the first option for them better. I say there is a small chance they would do it since they have a good core developing, but maybe if the right guy they wanted in the draft was there they would do it.
        Why so SERIOUS

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

          Originally posted by cdash View Post
          Second question to the group: Would you trade our first round pick--no protection--and Solomon Hill for Victor Oladipo? Catch being: We find out we need to shut George Hill down for the season.
          Yes. Odds are we are drafting 6-11 and I doubt whoever we pick up will be as good/promising as Oladipo.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

            Originally posted by Really? View Post
            Who keeps telling you this stuff, how do you figure the Pacers will be no where close to drafting him?

            And where do you get that Willie can defend 1-5 in the NBA? Willie is fine, he is DeAndre Jordan in the making, which is not bad, but not what I think we really need, he is solid but I am not the biggest fan of him, to each his own.

            And yes I want videos on every I talk about, why would you assume I don't?

            I can agree Turner probably 3rd tier, and Johnson could be a little higher, but this is my thinking Turner has a unique set of abilities, he can put the ball on the floor, has range out to 3, and has the length and athletic ability to be a good defensive 4, he still has a long way to go on his post fundamentals which is why he was dominated against Kentucky, but his ceiling is much higher than Willies.

            Stanley Johnson does not really bother me much, but trying to see if I can vision him being a 2 in the league, he is not bad at all, but I think there are other guys I feel fit better as 2's for this team than Johnson.

            Oubre is not one of my favorite, but I think his skillset could be useful for the Pacers team again like I said, this is a tier ranking specifically for the Pacers which takes into account, talent, potential and need.

            Feel free to make your own, this is just my interpretation of how I think guys pan out for what we have.

            Oh and Okafor is good but I don't think he is the biggest need for us, but he would be a good fit, would allow us to throw it down low and let him go to work, and since his skillset is so good I would be fine with him as the pick, again his tier for ME is bast more on talent than need or potential.

            Just for the sake of saying it Willie would have been tier 5.
            While I would want Miles Turner over Cauley-Stein, I don't think that Miles has the lateral speed to be a 4 in this league. He would be a huge liability against the pick and roll with players like LMA and the SF that are logging major minutes at the four spot.

            I think he can be better at closing out, but he does get sucked into the lane. Miles has potential, but I think he will slide on draft day to 15-20 range. He has a jerky motion to his running gate, we saw Hibbert fall to 17 because he was like running through wet concrete.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

              I would take Stanley Johnson over Russel any time. I don't see Russel's shot holding up in the NBA. And a Stanley Johnson and Paul George wing duo would be amazing defensively.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                Originally posted by cdash View Post

                Question for the group: Would you trade our first round pick (top 8 protected) for Gary Harris?

                NO

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                  Originally posted by diamonddave00 View Post
                  I meant brings shot blocking, and defense like Roy, but his strengths are almost entirely on the defensive side of the court like Roy. But his offense is not even at Roy's level and until this season he was a below 50% foul shooter. I'm not saying he's not a top 5-9 pick in the draft only that on a Pacers team they need offense which Willie will not provide. He is 100 times the athlete Hibbert is but IMHO he is not the skill set the Pacers need.

                  I must disagree, but I also have no hopes Bird would draft Willie. He'll go another direction. Just hope he picks the right player.

                  The thing about the 9-10 McD allstars on KY team is that the platoon system does not allow them the minutes to truly develop like other teams good players do. Calapari when asked about having all this talent, said he hadn't anticipate having this situation as some players came back this season. The Harrison twins didn't go to the draft, and probably one of the bigs, Poythress or Johnson, didn't transfer out. I don't see him having that problem next year, but since the Harrisons are ranked second rd picks I'd think it would be humorous if they came back in order to upgrade their draft status in 2016.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                    I haven't really kept up with this thread all that much, but since I followed the recruitment of most of these Indiana boys, and he is on the NBA minor league system in Kentucky, have we talked about Trey Lyles yet? Guy has a lot of skill, and a high basketball IQ. Could be a nice stretch four, although I don't think he's ready yet to contribute for a winning team.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                      Originally posted by cdash View Post

                      Second question to the group: Would you trade our first round pick--no protection--and Solomon Hill for Victor Oladipo? Catch being: We find out we need to shut George Hill down for the season.

                      I am not fan of IU, it's players, not seen much Orlando games this year, BUT from what I observed of Oladipo's play I'll put my feelings away on IU and say with a resounding ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY YES! My reasoning is he's a proven player that I feel could help the Pacers where a 7-11 pick is nothing but potential. I'd rather have him next to PG at SG than Solo. It's not anything I could see happening, but I'd totally be in favor of it.

                      I like what I saw of Orlando's team with players like Vucevic, Oladipo, and Payton. I've always liked Vucevic,and now with 2nd yr Olapido and rookie Payton. Nice core! Throw in Tobias Harris, Aaron Gordon, plus the years lottery pick, and I see an up n coming team. One that I'll try to watch and follow in the future as I did with Memphis in their upcoming years.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                        Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                        I am not fan of IU, it's players, not seen much Orlando games this year, BUT from what I observed of Oladipo's play I'll put my feelings away on IU and say with a resounding ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY YES! My reasoning is he's a proven player that I feel could help the Pacers where a 7-11 pick is nothing but potential. I'd rather have him next to PG at SG than Solo. It's not anything I could see happening, but I'd totally be in favor of it.

                        I like what I saw of Orlando's team with players like Vucevic, Oladipo, and Payton. I've always liked Vucevic,and now with 2nd yr Olapido and rookie Payton. Nice core! Throw in Tobias Harris, Aaron Gordon, plus the years lottery pick, and I see an up n coming team. One that I'll try to watch and follow in the future as I did with Memphis in their upcoming years.
                        This is kind of a tangent, but what the hell: Part of me likes what Orlando is building--I like those pieces all individually. The other part of me thinks they don't fit together all that well. Oladipo's shooting has improved, but he's still not a great shooter. Payton flat out cannot shoot. Gordon isn't a great shooter if they are going to keep him on the wing. Vucevic isn't a stretch 5. That's the core (you could maybe stretch this out to Tobias Harris and Evan Fournier, but they aren't foundation pieces imo). With the way today's NBA is going in terms of spacing and passing--I don't see that group faring all that well.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                          Originally posted by cdash View Post
                          I haven't really kept up with this thread all that much, but since I followed the recruitment of most of these Indiana boys, and he is on the NBA minor league system in Kentucky, have we talked about Trey Lyles yet? Guy has a lot of skill, and a high basketball IQ. Could be a nice stretch four, although I don't think he's ready yet to contribute for a winning team.
                          Trey Lyles isn't ready for the NBA. With the glut of KY bigs going to the NBA, he'll now get the minutes he needs to develop. He really needs to stay at KY another year to hone his BB skills.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            This is kind of a tangent, but what the hell: Part of me likes what Orlando is building--I like those pieces all individually. The other part of me thinks they don't fit together all that well. Oladipo's shooting has improved, but he's still not a great shooter. Payton flat out cannot shoot. Gordon isn't a great shooter if they are going to keep him on the wing. Vucevic isn't a stretch 5. That's the core (you could maybe stretch this out to Tobias Harris and Evan Fournier, but they aren't foundation pieces imo). With the way today's NBA is going in terms of spacing and passing--I don't see that group faring all that well.

                            If you feel Olapido isn't a great shooter, why would you suggest trading for a shooting guard who isn't a great shooter and giving up the 1st and Solo?

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                              Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                              If you feel Olapido isn't a great shooter, why would you suggest trading for a shooting guard who isn't a great shooter and giving up the 1st and Solo?
                              Because he's a good shooter--good enough to keep defenses honest, and he's improving. Because he's already gotten a lot better as a scorer in his second season. Because I watched him work his *** off for three years in college and have no doubt he will continue to do so. Because he's already a good defender and has the potential to be a defensive menace. Because he can handle the ball some and give our offense different looks in case we did want to play George Hill off the ball in certain situations. Because he can guard three positions on the court effectively. Because I'm not sold on whoever we would pick in the draft being better than him, and he is already better than Solo will ever be.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                                If you feel Olapido isn't a great shooter, why would you suggest trading for a shooting guard who isn't a great shooter and giving up the 1st and Solo?
                                As far as Vic, he is not a great shooter, but how many great shooters are there in the league, the Pacers for sure don't have any. I think he is a good shooter and like I said shooting 37.4% from 3 this season is pretty amazing seeing where he was a few years ago at IU, he really has worked well to develop that aspect of his game.
                                Why so SERIOUS

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X