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

Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

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

  • #16
    Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

    Kravitz

    Indy Star

    http://www.indystar.com/article/2009...h+to+NBA+draft


    Spend 15 minutes standing in the rain above and outside the Indiana Pacers' practice court at Conseco Fieldhouse, and what you see is the distilled essence of Brandon Jennings.

    There are moments when the young point guard looks like an emerging Tony Parker, a player with speed, flash, style and that unteachable something that leaves talent evaluators searching for the right adjectives.
    Advertisement

    And then there are moments when Jennings, who bypassed college to spend a year playing pro in Italy, looks like all that style has left substance behind, when his decision making is beyond regrettable.

    Let's put it this way: While I don't know who the Pacers are going to take in next Thursday's NBA draft, I'm pretty confident Jennings, who came in Thursday for a workout, won't be the guy.

    (And, as a follow up, I'm not too bullish on the possibility that DeJuan Blair is the choice, either. There are concerns around the league about his knees, although there were concerns about Danny Granger's knees, too. I'm hearing, though, that Blair didn't blow away anybody in his workout.)

    But back to Jennings . . .

    The Pacers are open to drafting a point guard despite having T.J. Ford and possibly re-signing Jarrett Jack, and that's a positive sign that team president Larry Bird is looking toward the long term rather than just next season. But Jennings is too much of a risk for a franchise that can't afford to be wrong any longer. The Pacers noticed that Jennings' team in Rome used him off the bench and at shooting guard, not trusting his choices as a point guard. He averaged 5.5 points in 17 minutes per game.

    If you're going to grab a point guard in draft with a lot of them, why not go for a proven quantity, an established guy, like North Carolina's Ty Lawson?

    That said, I'm rooting for Jennings to go high in the draft and have a nice career because he did something too few kids are willing to do: He stepped outside the system and used the system before it could use him.

    When it became clear he wasn't headed to college -- he had no desire to go, and didn't score well enough on tests to get admitted to Arizona -- he joined with former shoe executive Sonny Vaccaro and worked a deal where he could play one year in the Euroleague.

    If the NBA and its insipid age limitations were not going to let him chase his dreams, why should he waste a year languishing at some junior college? The Euroleague is the second-best league in professional basketball. Jennings got to play NBA-quality players, and learned how to survive the NBA lifestyle. Drop an L.A. kid into the middle of Rome just after his 18th birthday, and he's going to grow up, whether he likes it or not.

    Jennings did it, and another Vaccaro product, high school junior Jeremy Tyler, is headed overseas for two years.

    Of course, when basketball players make noise about coming out early, the outrage chorus reaches a predictable crescendo. But when a 16-year-old baseball player recently chose to concentrate on baseball rather than his high school studies, there was nary a peep of discontent.

    "Of course the (NBA's age limitation rule) is unfair," Jennings said after his Thursday workout. "You're stopping a kid from his dream. You've got this 16-year-old baseball player, he's not even going to high school his junior and senior year, but he'll be making big money at a young age, just like in golf and tennis and other sports.

    "Look at the NBA right now. Dwight Howard. Kobe (Bryant). LeBron (James). Kevin Garnett. All guys right out of high school who are the face of the NBA right now."

    There will be skeptics who will look at his subpar numbers at Lottomatica Roma and say, "Well, he would have been better off playing a year in college."

    First, this presupposes he could have gotten into college, and that's hardly a guarantee given his test scores. (Maybe Derrick Rose's buddy could have lent a hand, and a No. 2 pencil.)

    Beyond that, he had to learn a hundred times more about high-level basketball playing and practicing in the world's second-best league with grown men. In college, he would have practiced against lesser players and, in most games, he would have played against lesser talents. In Italy, he was challenged every day.

    "These are grown men," Jennings said. "These are pros who fight for minutes like their lives depend on it."

    He was asked whether high school players going to Europe could become a trend.

    "If I go top five, you'll see more kids go (overseas) early," he said. "I think I could be a trendsetter."

    He probably won't be a Pacer, but I'd like to see him move up the draft charts. He took a risk where others chose to play it safe. He may be a project, but he's an intriguing one.
    I'll leave the "Kravitz & 15 minutes in the rain" jokes to your own imagination.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

      I think he reads our critiques of him on here...I think he's right that Jennings won't be the guy, and I don't think Blair will be either. I'm guessing Lawson.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

        Originally posted by ESutt7 View Post
        I think he reads our critiques of him on here...I think he's right that Jennings won't be the guy, and I don't think Blair will be either. I'm guessing Lawson.
        I swear it sure seems like he does.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

          Originally posted by Speed View Post
          I swear it sure seems like he does.
          Haha this was a bit of a mea culpa for the Blair article. He was SO sure the other day that Blair was the right pick, and we MUST pick him. Now he's not so sure, huh? Maybe he's actually doing some homework now.

          We should start a thread with no credibility whatsoever and see if he writes a column picking up the same idea.......

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

            Lawson had probably the most impressive workout out of all the prospects..fwiw

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

              We are harder to peg this year than we were last year. I basically knew going into the draft that Rush and Hibbert would be the picks (although I didn't see the trade coming).

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

                Originally posted by Mr. Sobchak View Post
                Lawson had probably the most impressive workout out of all the prospects..fwiw
                With...us? Were you there/how do you know? I've been thinking for a while now that Lawson would be the guy, so that doesn't surprise me. I think we'll find a taker for TJ Ford.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

                  Yes -- with us. The team is also higher on TJ than most of us are on here. Don't be suprised to see another team overpay for Jack and us to draft a guard to back up TJ.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

                    So the Pacers wouldn't mind having 2 6' tall PGs? That's interesting. Where did you get the info on Lawson's workout?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

                      I'm not exactly at liberty to say...It's good info - I wouldn't make stuff up like that.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

                        Originally posted by ESutt7 View Post
                        I think he reads our critiques of him on here...I think he's right that Jennings won't be the guy, and I don't think Blair will be either. I'm guessing Lawson.
                        A local call in show host JMV is a big time fan of this website. When I call in he always asks what are they talking about on PD. He is a very decent dude and is hosting a predraft party of @ The Pub. I will be there.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

                          I will say... and if I am wrong I will gladly eat my words. I DON'T WANT THE PACERS TO DRAFT JENNINGS EVEN IF HE DOES FALL TO US. He is a me-first type of player. He makes the fantastically "wow" plays, but I am not a hopeless romantic over-looking his lack of real basketball IQ. He is not the type of player that makes entry passes. He is the guy that creates for himself and when its not there, he passes. I just don't care for him. I don't like his new-found "maturity". He is just not the type of player I want the Pacers taking a risk on. I would much rather have Maynor or Lawson. There is no way Holiday or Evans falls. I think their upside is better because they are bigger guards. Jennings will be a waste of a lottery pick. If we draft a PG, it is either for another team or we aren't re-signing Jack.
                          "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

                            Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                            You're not alone on the Maynor-Billups comparison. I've felt the same way. I think it's that they look fairly similar and both are apt to hit the big shot.


                            I completely agree with this assessment. I think someone mentioned this the other day. Maynor is more of a floor general and a leader. He just knows how to play the game the right way. Not super athletic but has savvy moves to get past his man. If he can put on a couple of more pounds he would be a stud. A taller point guard to boot.


                            Jennings reminds me of a kid who plays at the playground, sort of like those and1 type of events. He has the talent to play ball the right way, but looks like he wants to play streetball more. I was stated that Roma used Jennings as a shooting guard because they didnt trust his pg judgement, which I tend to agree watching numerous clips of him. Jennings will give you the wow factor but it seems mostly he will leave you shaking your head at thimes with his decision making.

                            I think drafting Maynor that high would be a reach but ultimately if we could somehow get him later on I wouldnt be disappointed.

                            My guy is Tyreke Evans btw, but I know there is no way in God's green earth will will get him.


                            2006 WORLD CHAMPION INDIANAPOLIS COLTS

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

                              Originally posted by ESutt7 View Post
                              We should start a thread with no credibility whatsoever and see if he writes a column picking up the same idea.......

                              We tried that once when it seemed like Ron Artest trade rumors were coming from what was discussed on PD. Didn't happen. Pissed off some members who felt we were deceiving them. Not going to do that twice.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Jennings and Maynor workout for Pacers

                                Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
                                A local call in show host JMV is a big time fan of this website. When I call in he always asks what are they talking about on PD.
                                Thanks. I truly appreciate you mentioning it and I likewise appreciate JMV being positive about PD.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X