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

ESPN Insider NBA Rookie Rankings - Paul George Gets Honorable Mention

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

  • ESPN Insider NBA Rookie Rankings - Paul George Gets Honorable Mention

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insid...Rookies-101104
    Nov. 4, 2010 David Thorpe ESPN.com

    Summer league and preseason play can serve an important purpose for rookies: Letting them know where they're going right, and where they're going wrong.

    From the looks of the first few NBA games, this year's rookie class has some outstanding students -- guys who have already learned from their past mistakes.

    Here's our first look at which rookies have jumped out of the starting gate at full speed.


    • Hollinger's stats: Rookie leaders

    1. John Wall, Wizards | Rookie card
    Throughout summer league, preseason and Washington's first regular-season game, Wall looked like he was shooting jump shots on roller skates. He landed and drifted every time, with no lower-body balance at all.


    Frustrated, he went to work on this on his off day, then unleashed a much better-looking shot in the second half of his next game. He tallied 12 points on perimeter jumpers in the half. If he can maintain the form he showed, his jump shot will be a legit threat for him all season. Consider the fact that Derrick Rose needed a few months to get his midrange jumper in check, and Tyreke Evans is still working out his kinks from the perimeter in his second year, and yet both had terrific rookie seasons.


    2. Blake Griffin, Clippers | Rookie card
    In Griffin's case, it's less about lessons learned and more about his bottled-up frustration from missing an entire year due to injury. He unleashed his power and grace from the first minute of the first game and has not stopped. I love that he not only plays with force, but also makes plays above the rim. That's a rare talent, and one he exhibits frequently.


    Not only can he win the rookie of the year award, he could possibly be an All-Star this season, which says a lot about him considering all of the talented power forwards in the West. The quicker Baron Davis realizes he has a special talent on his roster, the faster the Clippers will return to relevance.


    3. Derrick Favors, Nets | Rookie card
    If we handed out an award for "Most Improved Player from July to Halloween," Favors would be the easy winner. He showed almost nothing in summer league and preseason, but had two strong efforts in New Jersey's first two games (both wins) by rebounding and finishing buckets in the paint.



    If he excelled in only those two areas for the rest of the season, he'd be seen as an enormous success. Remember, he turned 19 during summer league and is playing a man's position. We know he's going to be an effective pick-and-pop shooter, but there are plenty of guys who can do that. Playing alongside a talent like Brook Lopez will allow him to focus on being complementary in his role, and he's off to a great start.



    4. DeMarcus Cousins, Kings | Rookie card
    All season long I suspect we'll be hearing about how good Cousins is going to be one day based on his upside. But with his size and prodigious game, the future is as much about today as it is down the road, simply because he can impact games now.



    He's such a natural scorer. On top of that, he's not afraid to take big shots and he's able to make very tough shots. As long as he's plugged into his team's game plan and connected to his coaches and teammates, he can't help being successful. Thus far, it's all smiles in Sacramento.



    5. Landry Fields, Knicks | Rookie card
    Some would wrongly assume that Fields has fit right in at this level from day one of summer league because he's a four-year college player. But the fact of the matter is most four-year college players don't make the NBA. So what Fields has been doing is impressive indeed.



    Fields has earned a starting guard position for the Knicks, and his willingness to do more than just shoot and score will ensure rotation minutes for him far into the future. It's nice that he averaged 11 points in his first three games, but I love that he grabbed 18 total rebounds in tough games against Portland and Boston. Rebounding is a weakness for the Knicks, and his efforts have kept them beyond respectable in that area.


    6. Armon Johnson, Blazers | Rookie card
    Johnson is playing his way into a strong Portland rotation with excellent defense and energy. There are people in Portland who think his surprising play is what paved the way for the Blazers to trade a lottery talent like Jerryd Bayless.



    7. James Anderson, Spurs | Rookie card
    Solid. Solid. Solid. That's what I see when I watch him play, on both ends. In San Antonio, no defense means no playing time if you're a youngster. Anderson plays defense the right way, with his head and his heart. As an added bonus, he's made five of his 10 3-pointers.



    8. Eric Bledsoe, Clippers | Rookie card
    After barely playing in the Clippers' first two games, Bledsoe replaced an injured Baron Davis and showed his considerable upside and incredible athleticism. His 17-point, eight-rebound game sparked their big upset over OKC on Wednesday.



    9. Wesley Johnson, Timberwolves | Rookie card
    Johnson started the season confident in his ability to make perimeter shots. Of his first 30 shots (10 each in Minnesota's first three games), 19 had been from 16 feet or further. However, he made just five of them, including making only 2 of 10 from behind the arc.



    As he learns to attack more and settle for long jumpers less -- he has shown the ability to make special plays with his athleticism -- his productivity and efficiency should increase.


    10. Evan Turner, 76ers | Rookie card
    The best thing about Turner's start is that he's been better than he was during summer league and preseason. He's still struggling as a shooter and scorer, but Turner was the No. 2 pick and the best player in college because of his ability to impact games in a variety of ways.



    He's doing a nice job on the glass and as a playmaker, and had just four turnovers in Philly's first three games (compared to 10 assists). I'd like to see him look to make more plays on defense, though.



    Honorable mention: Paul George, Pacers | Rookie card
    George, who can easily fall into being just a scorer, has provided a decent all-around dimension to the Pacers that the team was hoping for when they drafted him. It's great that he made four of eight 3-pointers in the team's first two wins, but even better that he also grabbed seven boards and dished out four assists in those games.


    It's worth noting that on David Thorpe's Rookie Top 50 list that he has George ranked 13th, behind #12 Nikola Pekovic(Wolves) and #11 Gary Neal(Spurs). The top ten is listed above. Lance Stephenson is ranked #43 and here is what Thorpe says....."He might be young, but he showed better shot selection than anyone else I saw these past two weeks. He missed only eight shots in four games and still averaged almost 15 points per game (it would have been more had he played more than eight minutes in his last game). He did this all while playing a lot of minutes at the point guard spot, which was an experiment that turned out to be a successful one. I loved how competitive he was as well." - July 23, 2010
    Last edited by Hibbert; 11-04-2010, 01:51 PM. Reason: additional info

  • #2
    Re: ESPN Insider NBA Rookie Rankings - Paul George Gets Honorable Mention

    typo eric bledsoe had 8 assit not reb

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: ESPN Insider NBA Rookie Rankings - Paul George Gets Honorable Mention

      Thanks for posting this. I noticed the article on espn.com and was wondering about it.
      Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: ESPN Insider NBA Rookie Rankings - Paul George Gets Honorable Mention

        I'm not surprised to see James Anderson in the top 10. He's a player I would have been very interested in for Indiana had we traded down last draft, although I'm glad we didn't and landed George (and Born Ready). Anderson seemed very underrated to me around draft time, and I couldn't help but shake my head thinking the Spurs had landed yet another very solid talent later in the draft.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: ESPN Insider NBA Rookie Rankings - Paul George Gets Honorable Mention

          PG has beautiful form on his shot.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: ESPN Insider NBA Rookie Rankings - Paul George Gets Honorable Mention

            I know im going off topic a bit, but man is Blake Griffin amazing. I dont remember ever being so impressed by a rookie. Couldnt help but watch every minute of Clippers games so far. I don't know if Clippers will recover now because of Griffin / Bledsoe / Gordon or find a way to screw it up, but either way, what an amazing rookie.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: ESPN Insider NBA Rookie Rankings - Paul George Gets Honorable Mention

              Interesting. I think Paul is one of those players who could just come into his own in the next 2 years or so. A few interesting comparisons:

              Paul George: 5.5ppg, 3 rpg, 1.8 apg in 19.8 minutes per game

              Danny Granger rookie year: 7.5 ppg, 4.9 rpg, 1.2 ast per in 22.6 minutes
              Tracy McGrady rookie year: 7 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 1.5 ast per game in 18.4 minutes

              I'm not saying Paul is going to be either player, but he's played only 4 games so far this year. He'll probably hit the rookie wall later this year, but I think he has a chance to become a 20/5/4 guy in the next few years.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: ESPN Insider NBA Rookie Rankings - Paul George Gets Honorable Mention

                People said not to expect anything from PG this year, but he's shown flashes of talent and his defense and shooting have been impressive. He also has shown the ability to drive and create his own shot. The guy's going to be a stud.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: ESPN Insider NBA Rookie Rankings - Paul George Gets Honorable Mention

                  Originally posted by MyFavMartin View Post
                  People said not to expect anything from PG this year, but he's shown flashes of talent and his defense and shooting have been impressive. He also has shown the ability to drive and create his own shot. The guy's going to be a stud.
                  There was some analyst around draft time that said George will be the best player of the draft in 5 years. The more I see him and the more I hear about him the more I believe it to be true. I don't think it is that far of a reach to believe George will be the best player on the team by his third season.

                  The two things about Hibbert and George that stand out to me. Hibbert has the work ethic and mindset of all the greats. He works harder to get better than everyone, and pushes himself harder than anyone else can. George seems to be an extremely fast learner, which is hugely evident by the fact that he is getting a lot of playing time now despite Bird saying it would be a few years before he contributed. Those are the two biggest reasons this team has a bright future. Those aren't attributes that are very common in the league.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: ESPN Insider NBA Rookie Rankings - Paul George Gets Honorable Mention

                    Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                    There was some analyst around draft time that said George will be the best player of the draft in 5 years.
                    Wow. Someone actually said he'll be better than Wall in 5 years?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: ESPN Insider NBA Rookie Rankings - Paul George Gets Honorable Mention

                      Originally posted by MyFavMartin View Post
                      People said not to expect anything from PG this year, but he's shown flashes of talent and his defense and shooting have been impressive. He also has shown the ability to drive and create his own shot. The guy's going to be a stud.
                      I didn't think George wouldn't be given an opportunity to contribute this year a la McRoberts in the past seasons, but George is capable of making contributions now. He'll make mistakes and get much better in time, but he's a decent player already.

                      I think the key for George will be always working to improve and not eventually getting satisfied with relying on his physical gifts. I think many underestimate what an athlete he could be. He's far from peak strength right now being so young, but he has the height, size, length, and athleticism to be a great pro and a tremendous defender. He's not quite a "freak" athlete, but jumping ability, decent speed, height, and length like he has are not typical, at least all in one person. He is already fairly skilled as well. He will eventually be capable of playing either wing position and cause opponents lots of problems on both ends of the floor.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X