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

Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #16
    Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

    I posted this in the draft thread but I think it might be a better fit here...

    Thought this was interesting.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/column...ana&id=3437642

    Jordan's game trying to catch up with his body

    PHILADELPHIA -- The kids were merciless.

    "C'mon," they'd scream. "You're the tallest guy out here. We keep throwing you the ball, and you don't do anything. You're awful."

    And those were DeAndre Jordan's teammates.

    That's the thing about being tall; people assume you are born with the tools of Wilt Chamberlain and the skills of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Forget that Jordan felt more like an awkward colt, all elbows and ankles as he tried to adjust to his chronically growth-spurting body.

    He was the tallest kid in his class every year. He should be able to play.

    "Oh my god, I heard so much trash talk," Jordan said and laughed.

    The expectations didn't change much when he got to college, when that body had sprouted to 7 feet and the entire state of Super-Size-Me Texas expected Jordan to deliver great things to Texas A&M. He was OK but not a force, averaging 7.9 points, 6.0 rebounds and 1.3 blocks per game in his first and only season with the Aggies.

    Now Jordan is about to pack his size 18 sneakers for the NBA. In a league that loves nothing more than potential and upside, the freakishly athletic Jordan induces salivating. He has hardly grown into his frame, his strength is all concentrated in his lower body with his upper body still like a piece of putty waiting for a weight-room sculptor to mold it.

    He can handle the ball fairly well -- at a recent workout he did a series of 100 dribble drills, fumbling only twice -- and is a tremendous rebounder. His weakest link is his offense, but the NBA is littered with guys who couldn't/can't shoot.

    On every draft board, he is a lottery pick lock. ESPN.com's Chad Ford rated him the 15th-best player in the draft, concluding that "on talent and physical ability, he's got the makings of a Top 5 pick."

    But is the big, awkward kid ready to blossom?

    "If someone is looking for instant gratification, he's not the right guy," said former NBA scout Steve Rosenberry, who's been working out Jordan for the past seven weeks in Philadelphia. "But three years from now, I mean who knows? Nobody has a crystal ball, but he could be the third-best player in this draft."

    That's nothing shy of astounding to people who remember how Jordan played in the postseason.

    And there probably aren't many who do remember him.

    In two Big 12 tourney games and two NCAA tournament games, Jordan had seven points and five rebounds. Total.

    "He'd make a play, we'd sit on the bench and think, 'There goes a first-rounder,'" Texas A&M coach Mark Turgeon said recently. "Five minutes later, he'd do something else and we'd think, 'He's coming back.'"

    Far from home, far from anything he knows, the Houston native -- who has already signed with an agent, thus closing the book on a return to College Station -- has become a hoops rat. He spends upward of four hours a day in the gym at Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine (the same place the 76ers practice) before heading back to his hotel room.

    Kansas State's Michael Beasley was here for a while but he left a few weeks ago, so Jordan's free time is pretty routine.

    "What do I do when I'm done? Sleep," he said.

    Most people would agree this change of scenery is exactly what Jordan needed. Blessed with ungodly physical talents -- he's a YouTube dunk favorite -- Jordan needed to reawaken his passion for the game.

    College sort of sucked it out of him.

    Like a lot of freshmen, Jordan struggled with the weight of expectations compared to the reality of results. In the hypercompetitive Big 12, he had great games (14 points and 9 rebounds versus lowly Colorado), average games (8 and 6 versus Iowa State) and awful games (2 and 3 versus Oklahoma State). And he rode the roller coaster of emotion with every one.

    Before the season started, a frustrated Turgeon said "he's 18 going on 12" of Jordan's emotions. Jordan admits his tattered self-esteem would take a bath every time Turgeon yelled at him.

    "I talked to him about getting too high and too low, but that's tough for me at my age and that young man had extraordinary pressure on him," Turgeon said. "Sometimes he'd get low, and it would carry over to practice. It was an ongoing thing. We talked all the time."

    There's no room for mood swings in an 82-game NBA season. Coaches don't have the time or the interest in coddling players or offering buck-up speeches. Don't produce and want to pout? The guy one seat over will gladly take your job.

    Consequently Rosenberry has spent as much time on Jordan's mental toughness as his physical skills. He admits he "loves the kid" and delighted at a recent prank Jordan pulled. But he hasn't been afraid to give him a good verbal lashing.

    On Friday, Jordan had two awful practices, Rosenberry said. Jordan wasn't hitting his shots, so he decided everything he had done had been wasted.

    Rosenberry not so gently explained to him that wasn't the case.

    "When guys are young, everything is predicated on how many shots they make," Rosenberry said. "That's not who he is. His shot will get better with repetition and I told him, 'Everybody has days when you don't make shots.' I give him a lot of credit. He came back Saturday [in a private workout with 19 teams], and his workout was off the charts. He's come a long way."

    If a sign of maturity is recognizing where you messed up and admitting it, Jordan is on his way. He knows now that his emotional and mental makeup interfered with his physical progress at A&M, knows he has no one to blame but himself.

    "You have to keep a level head, stay on the path, and I didn't do that," Jordan said. "I was inconsistent because I'd get down on myself. I think if I went back to college, people would see a different player."

    Maybe even a kid who plays as big as he stands.

    Comment

    • #17
      Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

      I think the Pacers are locked in on a big man and it's not Jordan or Spieghts. Think Koufos. I just hope they don't take him at 11 rather with a second 1st round pick.

      Comment

      • #18
        Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

        Originally posted by eldubious View Post
        I think the Pacers are locked in on a big man and it's not Jordan or Spieghts. Think Koufos. I just hope they don't take him at 11 rather with a second 1st round pick.
        Yeah I hope not either. But it certainly looks like we are interested in him. T-Bird said there was a rumour that he came in for a "secret" workout, then he came in on Monday to work out and he his supposed to work out again for us later this week. Although I have a slightly higher opinion of him than T-Bird I think he will only be a rotational player in the NBA.

        Comment

        • #19
          Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

          Originally posted by eldubious View Post
          I think the Pacers are locked in on a big man and it's not Jordan or Spieghts. Think Koufos. I just hope they don't take him at 11 rather with a second 1st round pick.
          I don't want Jordan. I will absolutely flip out if we draft Koufos.

          Comment

          • #20
            Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

            I guess I'm one of the few people who likes Koufos. I wouldn't take him at #11, but I think he'll make a solid starting C in this league.

            Comment

            • #21
              Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

              Originally posted by PR07 View Post
              I guess I'm one of the few people who likes Koufos. I wouldn't take him at #11, but I think he'll make a solid starting C in this league.
              DJ White > Koufos

              That's all you need to know.

              Comment

              • #22
                Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

                Right now, yes. DJ White might be one of the most immediate impact bigs in this draft. I think he'll be like Utah's Paul Millsap where he will impact a team from the bench his very first season. However, I don't see him getting much better than he is.

                Give me 4 years, and I think Koufos is Mehmet Okur, and DJ is well...still Paul Millsap. That's not a bad thing though, you need those type of guys.

                Comment

                • #23
                  Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

                  Originally posted by Shade View Post
                  I don't want Jordan. I will absolutely flip out if we draft Koufos.
                  Can't wait for Thursday.

                  Comment

                  • #24
                    Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

                    Originally posted by Peskoe97 View Post
                    Yeah I hope not either. But it certainly looks like we are interested in him. T-Bird said there was a rumour that he came in for a "secret" workout, then he came in on Monday to work out and he his supposed to work out again for us later this week. Although I have a slightly higher opinion of him than T-Bird I think he will only be a rotational player in the NBA.
                    Geezer started a JOB thread where it was stated by JOB, IIRC, "the team isn't necessarily looking for players who fit well into their offensive system."

                    After reading the above post, it makes me wonder if the referrence could be to Koufos. Even if the Pacers add another 1st, I sure hope they don't draft him. RB is right Koufos would be just a duplication of Murphy, and why do the Pacers need 2 of them? One's more than enough, especially at his albatross salary!

                    Comment

                    • #25
                      Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

                      The draft can't come soon enough! All the speculation is killing me.

                      Koufous if we've traded down I could probably live with. We couldn't seriouslly be targeting him with the 11, right? My feelings on him are somewhat like how I view Hibbert. Top ceiling probably a solid rotational player, borderline effective starter potential. Neither appropriate at 11. Jordan makes me very uneasy period.

                      Personally, I continue to be focused on how we will approach the acquisition of one or more PG options. Still think this has to be our top short term priority. Or have Tins, JOB, et al reconciled?
                      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                      -Emiliano Zapata

                      Comment

                      • #26
                        Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

                        I'm sure it's mentioned elsewhere, but Jordan fell to #21 in Ford's latest Mock.

                        As for Koufos, I like the kid, but I think there are better options for us out there, even late 1st round. I see him as a borderline starter at best, the kind of guy who ends up starting for a bad team because they don't have anybody better.
                        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                        Comment

                        • #27
                          Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

                          Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
                          I'm sure it's mentioned elsewhere, but Jordan fell to #21 in Ford's latest Mock.

                          As for Koufos, I like the kid, but I think there are better options for us out there, even late 1st round. I see him as a borderline starter at best, the kind of guy who ends up starting for a bad team because they don't have anybody better.
                          He's (Jordan) also dropped to 19 in Draft Express' latest mock.

                          Comment

                          • #28
                            Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

                            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                            Can't wait for Thursday.
                            What if I said Shade and I will team up to go on a kill crazy rampage ala Natural Born Killers if they draft Koufos? That should dampen your anticipation a bit.

                            Barring some brilliant trade situation I'd see Koufos at 11 as a HUGE mistake. I'd never even considered it a real option till the last few days. And it still has me

                            Comment

                            • #29
                              Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

                              Originally posted by Peskoe97 View Post
                              I posted this in the draft thread but I think it might be a better fit here...

                              Thought this was interesting.

                              http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/column...ana&id=3437642
                              Yikes. Bison Dele springs to mind. Almost forced to play because of his size but with no history of passion for the game from within himself, emotionally hyper-sensitive and prone to mood swings, not particulary skilled in any offensive area, is a gym rat because he'll spend UPWARD of FOUR hours in the gym in preparation for the draft which is the ONLY thing he has going on in his life at this moment (goes back to a hotel room afterward).

                              What's not to like?

                              Comment

                              • #30
                                Re: Tbird draft analysis: DeAndre Jordan

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                                What if I said Shade and I will team up to go on a kill crazy rampage ala Natural Born Killers if they draft Koufos? That should dampen your anticipation a bit.

                                Barring some brilliant trade situation I'd see Koufos at 11 as a HUGE mistake. I'd never even considered it a real option till the last few days. And it still has me

                                It probably is a toss up among all three of us on who dislikes Koufos as a player the most. Personally, I'm stunned anyone is considering drafting him in the top 20. In my own draft threads I think I compared him to Stuart Gray. In doing so, I got an email from a friend of mine who said that was unfair, and that it wasn't right to insult Stuart that way!

                                Koufos can't play.

                                The thing that is keeping my sanity about this is that I strongly suggest that our interest in him is all smoke and mirrors, designed to hide whoever we are really interested in.

                                If we DID select Koufos at #11, I would strongly suspect that a deal would be in the works with the Cavaliers, who supposedly like Koufos. In that scenario we would be selecting the player they want at #11 for them, although I can't quite grasp what the specifics of a deal between the 2 teams involving our #11 pick would look like.

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                                Working...
                                X