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

Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

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

  • #46
    Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

    I forgot about Garnett. He's a center now. So center has Bynum, Garnett, Chandler and Bosh. Yeesh.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

      Originally posted by mattie View Post
      I forgot about Garnett. He's a center now. So center has Bynum, Garnett, Chandler and Bosh. Yeesh.
      yeah... KG is likely too.
      And I'd add Noah to that group as well. The Bulls stay solid - likely. They are still among the top defenses - likely too. If both are true, Noah will get considered.

      I think this might be Danny time. East lacks forwards. Iggy's gone. Amare, Gerald Wallace time has passed, most likely.
      LeBron/Melo will start. Deng/Pierce/Granger/Josh Smith for the 2 backup spots. Maybe Monroe or Nene, if they play forward and their teams are good.

      I think it will be Pierce and a coin flip between Deng and Danny.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

        With Bosh being a center this year, it's going to be really hard for Hibbert to make the team barring injuries.

        If Garnett is also a center, Hibbert certainly won't make it.
        "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

        -Lance Stephenson

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

          Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
          yeah... KG is likely too.
          And I'd add Noah to that group as well. The Bulls stay solid - likely. They are still among the top defenses - likely too. If both are true, Noah will get considered.

          I think this might be Danny time. East lacks forwards. Iggy's gone. Amare, Gerald Wallace time has passed, most likely.
          LeBron/Melo will start. Deng/Pierce/Granger/Josh Smith for the 2 backup spots. Maybe Monroe or Nene, if they play forward and their teams are good.

          I think it will be Pierce and a coin flip between Deng and Danny.
          That's going to be a tough sell too. Despite being the worst out of all 4, Deng is the current hipster pick favorite among coaches (those jackasses voted for him over Iggy all defense last season lol), Smith is the best out of all 4 and got snubbed last year, so he may be due for some makeup votes, and Pierce always has the tenured vote going for him.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

            By looking at the whole team George Hill is the one that looks to me like the one player with the better chance to be an all star, Rondo and Dwill are in for sure but after that who? if Hill has some good numbers and the Pacers have a good record George Hill could probably make it.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
              By looking at the whole team George Hill is the one that looks to me like the one player with the better chance to be an all star, Rondo and Dwill are in for sure but after that who? if Hill has some good numbers and the Pacers have a good record George Hill could probably make it.
              It's guards not points, as was mentioned earlier, so if any guard on the Pacers is going to make it next season it would be Paul.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                I guess I'm not a big fan of Josh Smith. I don't think he was snubbed last year, I think he was a marginal all star like several others.
                This year, as long as Al Horford is fully healthy, he should be the 2nd best post player on his own team. And if Horford isn't fully back, that team won't be good. So I don't see him as a major threat.

                I'm more worried about Deng, he'll have a big role on a team that should still make the playoffs.

                Everything said... Best teams get rewarded with all star slots. I think it will be easiest to reward Danny this year, the same way it was easiest to reward Hibbert last year, even though he didn't deserve it over Tyson Chandler and KG.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                  Josh Smith is pretty damn good, I get that many here hate his attitude but he averages 18.8 and 9.6 plays great D and can block shots too.
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                    i don't care about attitude, it's his game I don't like. Obviously, you take attitude/leadership into consideration when building a team, but a good player is a good player.
                    But he takes way too many bad shots for me to consider him a clear All Star. A marginal All Star, sure.
                    The sad thing is that he keeps adding to his game every year. He works, he gets more versatile. Now he can even play some 5. But at the same time, he keeps taking more and more bad shots. I liked him 2 years ago more. He wasn't able to play 5, but he attacked the basket more.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                      Originally posted by mattie View Post
                      That's going to be a tough sell too. Despite being the worst out of all 4, Deng is the current hipster pick favorite among coaches (those jackasses voted for him over Iggy all defense last season lol), Smith is the best out of all 4 and got snubbed last year, so he may be due for some makeup votes, and Pierce always has the tenured vote going for him.
                      Lol, who's the jackass? The guy that pushes a couple buttons on his computer to form his opinions or the the guy who spent nearly his whole life studying the game and earning his way to the top of his profession?

                      Fact is the numbers were nearly identical last year between Iggy and Deng. Deng actually held players to lower shooting percentages than Iggy, and the Bulls held opponents to the lowest fg% and ppg in the league so it's not crazy to see why Deng ended up with 1 more vote for the all defensive team (20-19).

                      That said I'd still take Iggy over Deng if I need 1 stop to end a game.

                      edit: what i can't explain is the Boozer vote. That must have been some kind of inside joke

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                        I think Deng deserved to be on the All Defense team, but Iguodala should've gotten Kobe or Ibaka's spot IMO.

                        re Deng-Ibaka, I'd probably take Deng on Melo, Kobe or Paul Pierce, someone big, great individually and with a solid post up game. But if I have to defend a smaller guy, and especially a playmaker (Wade, Harden, Rose) it's Iggy.
                        But tbh, you are fine just tossing a coin defensively, their offense is the difference. Do you want someone who will stretch the floor, or a far better creator.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                          I forgot there were people who actually wanted Nene. Lol.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            Josh Smith is pretty damn good, I get that many here hate his attitude but he averages 18.8 and 9.6 plays great D and can block shots too.
                            Agreed, Smith is an absolute handful, and could be one of the top players in the entire league if he played with a little more discipline and didn't fall in love with his jumpshot, which is more streaky than he treats it (not that it isn't devastating when it's going in, like in our last game vs. them)

                            I really disagree about Hill having a better shot at the ASG than Paul though. Hill is underrated here, and a very good combo guard, but George has more hype and momentum as a potential rising star, which shapes the perception of the player, and he simply has more raw talent. The fact that he's starting as the "2 guard" while Hill is starting as a 1 hurts Hill's shot too. Even though I look at Hill as just a "guard" he'll likely be competing with other point guards meaning he'd need to compete with

                            D Williams
                            R Rondo
                            D. Rose (if he comes back in time)
                            K Irving


                            Each of whom are significantly better than Hill

                            Also at least

                            J. Teague
                            J. Holiday
                            B. Jennings
                            J. Wall (though I expect a leap from Wall playing with some serious players like Okafor and Nene for a whole season to group 1)

                            Are comparably good and will probably have a larger role on their respective teams.

                            Paul though, competing against 2 guards, you've got-

                            D. Wade
                            J. Johnson
                            A. Afflalo (underrated, will get lots of shots on a terrible Orlando team and will get a look at the ASG if they are miraculously even just bad instead of terrible)

                            Is any other 2 guard head and shoulders better than PG in the East, especially if PG makes even a moderate leap next year?

                            I think the Pacers will get off to a very fast start (even you admit they are a very good regular season team, and have great chemistry), and will have at least 2 guys in the game, heck, we probably would have had 2 last year if Granger didn't lay an egg for the first quarter+ of the season.

                            His biggest comp will probably actually be Granger, since I don't see us with 3 All Stars.

                            If Granger recovers and is playing at anywhere close to his 2nd half of the season form, or really even the level of the 2 years before last (19-21 ppg 5-6 rpg on 43-45% from the field, 38-40% from 3) I see us getting Roy (14-15 ppg 9-10 rpg on 50% I don't think is unreasonable to expect from him since he was 13-9 last year and tends to improve each year and is still young) and Danny. If Danny is playing more like a 18 ppg 41-42% guy I think Paul has a great chance at the game if he is putting 14-15 ppg 6-7 rpg 2-3 apg 1 bpg 2-2.5 spg on his usual percentages while cementing his rep as a defensive stopper on one of the better teams in the conference.

                            We all know that PG has All-Star talent, I don't think him making the game next year is as pie in the sky as some think. Granger's 3rd year was the year he "made the leap" and PG is also a hard worker and is far more talented than Granger ever was, on both sides of the ball.

                            Our talent is pretty underrated, especially by those looking just at stats, afterall what other team ran such a balanced offense other than Memphis and Denver in the NBA?

                            You can argue that we have

                            Arguably the 2nd best center in the conference (opinions will vary, but Roy is comparable to Chandler, Noah, Lopez some put him at the top some put him below, the coaches put him above them all last season.) Bynum for now, is clearly the best as long as he is healthy of course.

                            Arguably the 3rd best Small forward in the conference (After LBJ/Melo he and Deng and Current Pierce are a crapshoot)

                            Arguably the 3rd best Shooting Guard in the conference ( I don't think it is crazy to say it gets muddy after Wade and J. Johnson)

                            I'm interested to see how West is with a full year between his rehab too, because the West that was with New Orleans would be a top 5 power forward in the conference pretty easily too, his 21-8 on 50% and great from the line years compare well to most of the 4 men in the East as well, though on this team he won't put up those numbers, he isn't far removed from some very, very good years with CP3 in New Orleans, he wasn't a 2 time all-star against the stacked big men in the West for nothing after all.

                            We need PG to make a leap to where he is inarguably the 2nd best 2 guard, who can at least contain Wade to really make the leap, but as a supporting cast for such a player we're pretty elite.

                            If we're on pace for a big season the coaches will give us at least 1 all-star, it's pretty much how it works, coaches reward players from winning teams, it is very tough to make it otherwise unless you're an anomaly like D-Will who is juts clearly a great player in a crap situation.
                            Last edited by daschysta; 10-08-2012, 04:06 PM.
                            Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                              Originally posted by Steagles View Post
                              Hes not a superstar or teammate of. The all star game might as well be Celtics/Heat/Nets/Bulls stars vs LAC/LAL/OKC/SAS stars and Dirk every year.
                              Don't forget the Knicks, Melo is going to be in every year too, and Boston doesn't have a player that will win the fan vote any more. I doubt a Pacer is going to win the fan vote of course, unless they knock Miami out of the playoffs or something, but Roy has a decent national presence.
                              Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Paul George "I want to be an All-Star"

                                but voters vote for "guard", "forward" and "center". Then there are two position-less spots. And injury selections.
                                So Paul George isn't just competing with Afflalo, he's also competing with Rondo, Irving, etc.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X