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

Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

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

  • #46
    Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

    I would absolutely play Turner at PG, look at what Brandon Roy does for his team. There comes a point and time where you take the best player and run with him. Look at Tyreke Evans, people said the Kings didn't need him.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

      Originally posted by eldubious View Post
      I would absolutely play Turner at PG, look at what Brandon Roy does for his team. There comes a point and time where you take the best player and run with him. Look at Tyreke Evans, people said the Kings didn't need him.
      Roy doesn't play PG, and Sacremento has figured out Tyreke shouldn't either..and want a PG.

      Look, most other positions, you can switch players in and out. And sometimes, you can even have a big PG play as a shooting guard..(or a little one, if you're Jim O'brien)

      but playing a non PG at the PG position is, as a general rule..a very bad call. I wouldn't play Kobe Bryant at PG for more than 5-10 minutes..never mind a rookie that has no where near the skills of Bryant.

      Nothing against Turner. he's a fantastic player, who makes some great plays. That doesn't make him a point guard.
      And..when you force a player like Turner, who isn't a PG to play PG..you actually hurt them. They won't adjust as quickly. They won't be able to do thing they are used to. There are a ton of responsibilities that come with PG, and if you aren't a real PG..then it hurts your game in a multitude of ways. (Scoring, sometimes passing, having to worry about directing traffic, calling plays, ect..)
      Last edited by Sookie; 03-13-2010, 09:56 PM.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

        Originally posted by Sookie View Post
        Nothing against Turner. he's a fantastic player, who makes some great plays. That doesn't make him a point guard.
        Agreed. Just look at the kid... prototype shooting guard.

        LeBron was supposed to be a PG, anybody remember that? He's a much better player at SF.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

          Sookie I am pretty sure that Turner already knows how to play PG the guy is the player of the year and his numbers are really good also, I know you are making an excuse so they can play AJ more, but if the pacers get Turner they got to play him at PG he would create shots for everybody around him and would kill every opponent by doing it the only way he knows slowly
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            Agreed. Just look at the kid... prototype shooting guard.

            LeBron was supposed to be a PG, anybody remember that? He's a much better player at SF.
            Have you seen Lebron numbers when he was playing PG more?
            Lebron is their PG there is not doubt about that, he has the ball in his hand most of the time and he is the one that creates the offense and also the three "point guards" they have are shooting guards in PG bodies they are not true PG's
            Last edited by vnzla81; 03-13-2010, 10:29 PM.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

              I agree, we don't want him playing PG. I think he would be ok with AJ starting. In fact, I think he would be great with AJ at PG and Brandon moving to SF. Yes, Brandon is plenty big enough to play SF.

              We just need a tough as nails PF, ala Al Horford, to play alongside Hibbert, and I would pit that team against anyone.

              And yes, Al could be a Pacer for Danny. JoeJ is going leave I think. And they might view Danny as filling Joe's role. totally speculating here...

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                Sookie I am pretty sure that Turner already knows how to play PG the guy is the player of the year and his numbers are really good also, I know you are making an excuse so they can play AJ more, but if the pacers get Turner they got to play him at PG he would create shots for everybody around him and would kill every opponent by doing it the only way he knows slowly
                Honestly, I'm not.

                It's a really REALLY big pet peeve of mine. I hate it when teams do that. The Uconn men tried it a few times this year with Jerome Dyson (*vomits*)

                You
                A. hurt the player whose being forced to play out of position
                B. hurt the team, because the player is being forced to play out of their position.

                It's just a bad call..almost any other position you can mix and match..just..you can't force a non point to play the point.

                And for the record, he's had a fantastic season, but statistically as a point guard, it's not good. And his team really just plays three shooting guards, and Turner just so happens to bring the ball up the court. (I watch that offense with the Uconn women..) A shooting guard can create shots for other teammates (a la Wade and Bryant and Ginobili) And really really good SG/SF can get away with playing the PG at the college level (Wade, Tyreke, Lebron would have) they can not in the Pros..Turner is turnover prone in College..

                And honestly, IMO, Ohio State not having a true point guard is going to hurt them in the NCAAs. Some team is going to press the crap out of them, and they'll struggle.

                And the bottom line is, why would we want to make Turner less effective? Why would we want his job to suddenly be making sure other players score, instead of looking for his points for. Or directing traffic, when quite frankly he's not as equipped to do that. Or taking care of the ball excessively..just causing more turnovers.. I'm not saying he's not going to drive and create shots for others, but I'm saying leave the "court general, bringing the ball up the court, setting up the offense, directing traffic ect" to an actual point guard..whether it's AJ or Augustine or someone else we trade for.

                Honestly, if we insist on playing this "3SG/SF rotation with no acutal point" - which doesn't work - then I'd rather give Rush the role of point. From what I've seen, he's got better handles then Turner, it takes some responsibility off the rook, and it might force Rush to come out of his shell. Plus..the guy is past first anyway..let Turner continue scoring.
                Last edited by Sookie; 03-13-2010, 11:00 PM.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

                  Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                  Listen. He's not a PG. Just like Wade isn't a PG. Just like Evans wasn't either.

                  He "can play PG" at the college level. That's extremely different then being a PG or even being a PG at the NBA level. It's not a measurements thing, it's a what position he's best suited for thing. Heck..today..he had a triple double. Points, Rebounds, and Turnovers. Not. A. Point. Guard. It's not about his defense, it's about his offense. (although interestingly, he's apparently dating the Ohio State women's point guard...who is one hell of a point guard..sort of the Lindsay Lohan of Long Island points though.)

                  If we're lucky enough to get Turner, we'll probably have the best wing combination with Turner/Granger + Rush as a backup to either and DJones to fill in in the NBA. But you don't force an excellent rookie into a role he won't excell at, particularly when he will excell at another role.

                  He CAN play PG at the NBA level. NO doubt about that. Now time will tell if it's his BEST position. But one thing fits.
                  The guy cannot be stopped one on one. He can get into the lane with no help and finish or dish.
                  He's an excellent passer.
                  You can call him whatever you want, but whatever team gets him....
                  they WILL put the ball in his hands at crunch time.
                  like every other star.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

                    Originally posted by MLB007 View Post
                    He CAN play PG at the NBA level. NO doubt about that. Now time will tell if it's his BEST position. But one thing fits.
                    The guy cannot be stopped one on one. He can get into the lane with no help and finish or dish.
                    He's an excellent passer.
                    You can call him whatever you want, but whatever team gets him....
                    they WILL put the ball in his hands at crunch time.
                    like every other star.
                    way to describe Kobe Bryant...who is...not a point guard.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

                      Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                      And for the record, he's had a fantastic season, but statistically as a point guard, it's not good.
                      And the bottom line is, why would we want to make Turner less effective?
                      19.5 ppg 5.9 apg 9.1rpg 1.8 spg all this as a PG, so yes he is a point guard, end of the discussion.
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        19.5 ppg 5.9 apg 9.1rpg 1.8 spg all this as a PG, so yes he is a point guard, end of the discussion.
                        4 turnovers per game. 1.5 assist to turnover ratio. Which admittedly is better than his 1.1 assist to turnover ratio the year before.

                        I'm not gonna argue it anymore though. If we're lucky enough to get him, It'll be pretty obvious he's not a point guard. I understand people absolutely drool over the scoring advantage we'd have at the point, with Turner having to be guarded by like..Nash..but honestly, the negatives really out weight the positives (espeically since, despite having the scoring advantage, his #1 job will be setting other people up. Wouldn't we rather someone was setting HIM up.)
                        Last edited by Sookie; 03-13-2010, 11:45 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

                          Originally posted by SMosley21 View Post
                          Really? What are you basing this statement on, because it definitely can't be facts. Considering we're 4th worst in the league right now and not showing any improvement, I'd say the numbers give us a very good chance of being "somewhere near a top 2 pick".
                          It's by no means a lock. We're equally close to picking 9th-10th. One of our patented, late season, lottery screwing runs would do it.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

                            If we could somehow land Turner if Wall were already gone I'd be very happy. I think they both will be special players at the next level. I think that he is my favorite college player this year.

                            I think with Turner we could play that small ball JOB likes so much. Maybe with this line-up:

                            PG- Price
                            SG- Turner
                            SF- Rush
                            PF- Granger
                            C- Hibbert



                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

                              Originally posted by jeffg-body View Post
                              If we could somehow land Turner if Wall were already gone I'd be very happy. I think they both will be special players at the next level. I think that he is my favorite college player this year.

                              I think with Turner we could play that small ball JOB likes so much. Maybe with this line-up:

                              PG- Price
                              SG- Turner
                              SF- Rush
                              PF- Granger
                              C- Hibbert




                              Oh, Obie would just love that..why don't we only have McBob as a backup PF and Solo as the only backup Center..just to make Obie SUPER Happy.
                              Last edited by Sookie; 03-13-2010, 11:55 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Say we somehow land Evan Turner...

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                Have you seen Lebron numbers when he was playing PG more?
                                Remind me... what was his team's record back then?

                                Originally posted by venezuela1981
                                Lebron is their PG there is not doubt about that, he has the ball in his hand most of the time and he is the one that creates the offense and also the three "point guards" they have are shooting guards in PG bodies they are not true PG's
                                Sure. And Kobe's a point guard. And Brandon Roy's a point guard. And Dwayne Wade's a point guard. And probably Dirk too.
                                This space for rent.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X