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

Pacers Digest mock draft 2013 FINAL, POST 1 UPDATED

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

  • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

    BlueCollarColts and the Phoenix Suns are on the clock.
    "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


    • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

      With the 57th pick the Phoenix Suns select Solomon Hill, we were worried about our SF and hopefully in a few years we think he can be able to help

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

        Yay, I'm on the clock. I'll post my pick within this hour
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

          So, I have tons of players under my radar at this point. I'll write some words for them and then make my pick:

          James Southerland: A 6'8 SF with a 7'1 wingspan and solid athleticism that is projected as one of the best shooters in the draft. I don't understand why no one has picked him yet. I believe that he will get drafted.

          Nemanja Nedovic: A 6'4 combo guard with a 6'6.75" wingspan. Great athlete. He has some experience of high level pro basketball as he participated in the Euroleague with Lietuvos Rytas. He is a bit turnover prone but he has the necessary tools to be a shot creator.

          Ryan Kelly: Kelly has two main strenghts. He has size (almost 7 ft) and can play basketball. He has an array of scoring moves and he is a good passer as well. In other words, the kid knows how to play basketball. He does't seem like an NBA athlete, though. I'm not sure if Ryan Kelly is going to make it in the NBA. But I believe that he deserves a chance. In case that he doesn't make it in the NBA I know that he will be a very good player in Europe. His game will definitely translate over here just like it happened with Paul Davis.

          Mindaugas Kupsas: Ok, I have a soft spot for Kupsas so I'm probably a homer here. But he's huge. He measured 7'1.5" in shoes with a 7'3 wingspan (9'5 Standing Reach) and weighted 276 lbs. He is an awful athlete but he knows the game. He belonged in the Arvydas Sabonis school so how could he not know the game? Good post player that knows what to do with the ball in his hands. Solid defender due to size and good fundamentals. He could develop into a two-way player but that will only be possible if he works hard to improve his athleticism like Hibbert did.

          Norvel Pelle: Potential could be his middle name. This guy was once considered an elite HS player. He is long (7'2.5" wingspan), he is a good athlete and he can play. But he only weights 207 lbs and gets pushed around like no other. He needs a lot of work. Luckily, he is still only 20 years old (a young 20) so he has the room to improve.

          Zeke Marshall: A 7 footer with a 7'5 wingspan that has a semblance of an offensive game and blocks tons of shots. He is definitely worthy of consideration at this point. I'd love him if he was a better rebounder.

          Alex Oriakhi: I don't consider Oriakhi a Center prospect at the NBA level. I see him as a PF. And at PF his size and length intrigue me. He measured at 6'9.75" with a 7'3.75" wingspan. Those measurements are similar with David West (6'9.25", 7'4.25"). He also scored an impressive 20 in bench press. It's clear that Oriakhi has the size and strength to play as a PF in the NBA. But does he have the skills to do it? Well, he was a good FT in his senior year. He shot 74.6% from the line and went to the line often. He is also a good rebounder. I like him as a player. If he can develop a mid range jumper then he can evolve into a nice two-way player.

          Arsalan Kazemi: He was one of my favorite players to watch. Amazing rebounder, smart passer and good defender. Kazemi's problem is that he has the size of a SF but the game of a PF. Can he make the transition to SF or will he remain a tweener? That's the major question. I believe that his rebounding will translate to the NBA level and that he'll be able to fit in any team as an energy player that plays great D, rebounds amazingly, makes smart passes and scores efficiently in limited volume.

          Matthew Dellavedova: A very interesting 6'4 PG. He is a mediocre athlete. His length isn't impressive (6'4 wingspan) and he didn't score well in Lane Agility and 3/4 Court Sprint tests. In fact, Arsalan Kazemi beat him in Lane Agility (Dellavedova scored 11.70 while Kazemi scored 11.66) and came close in 3'4 Court Sprint as well (Dellavedova scored 3.35, Kazemi scored 3.43). But he is strong and actually beat Kazemi in bench press (Dellavedova scored 16 while Kazemi scored 12). His 31 inches max vert isn't impressive either but he can compensate it due to height and strength. The best part of Dellavedova is his basketball skills. He is a very smart passer and a capable scorer. He knows how to attack a defense and exploit its weaknesses. He has a nice shot and he also has experience at the top level since he played for the Australian NT in London. I like that he grabbed 3.3 RPG in college and I think that this will translate as well due to his strength.

          Ok, here's my pick now:

          With the 58th pick of the NBA Draft, the San Antonio Spurs select Matthew Dellavedova from St. Mary's College of California.

          I already addressed the need for a big man in the first round. Furthermore, the Spurs don't seem to have a need in the wing position since Danny Green and Kawhi Leonard are under contract until the end of the 2014-2015 season. So, I went with a guard that seemed like the best fit.

          It's important to note that the Spurs have an established Australian connection due to Brett Brown who coached the Australian NT in the 2012 Olympics (Dellavedova participated in this team) and is now a San Antonio Spurs assistant coach. It's also important to note that the Australian NT run several Spurs play due to Coach Brown and thus Dellavedova is already acquainted with the Spurs system. There also two more Australians in the Spurs (Patty Mills and Aron Baynes).

          Plus, Gary Neal may not return so Dellavedova could fill in at the role of the back-up PG.

          Ultimately, Dellavedova seems like the ultimate Spurs pick.

          If I was the Spurs, I'd try to snatch two more picks in order to pick Arsalan Kazemi and Mindaugas Kupsas. They were one rebound away from being NBA champions so rebounding is still a big need. A guy like Kazemi that can defend both inside and outside and then hustle and snatch the important board would be perfect for them. Kupsas is an interesting player for the reasons I mentioned earlier and I'm sure that the Spurs would make good use of his talents.
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

            Yeah, I thought of Kupsas too. Fat but huge and long. Not a total stiff. At this point of the draft, it makes sense to take a longshot stash project unless the team really loves someone else a lot. Other guys can be invited to the camp as undrafted free agents.

            I would've picked him here with the #59 if the draft went a bit differently. But considering the draft, I'm probably going Yugoslavian now.

            I'll pick in a few hours, a bit busy at the moment.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

              Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
              I would've picked him here with the #59 if the draft went a bit differently. But considering the draft, I'm probably going Yugoslavian now.
              I think that I know who you're picking
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

                I like Dellavedova. Good player, solid point guard and has a nice shot
                Smothered Chicken!

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

                  With the penultimate pick in the 2013 NBA draft, the Minnesota Timberwolves select:

                  Marko Todorovic, PF/C from Montenegro

                  What are people eating in Montenegro? The country has a population of only 600k, yet they produce an NBA big man prospect almost every year. Nikola Pekovic, Nikola Vucevic, Nikola Mirotic, Bojan Dubljevic, Marko Todorovic, all in the last several years, all 6'10 and bigger. Maybe Arvydas Sabonis or Vlade Divac took a few adventurous vacations in Montenegro 20-25 years ago?

                  Anyway, Todorovic spent last season playing for Barcelona in Spain. He was successful in lower levels and international youth play, but he doesn't get big regular minutes for Barcelona yet. However, when he got an opportunity in the Euroleague Final Four this year (the match for the 3rd place vs. CSKA Moscow), he was the best big on the floor. Which is impressive for a 21 year old.

                  Todorovic is a good mobile athlete, fundamentally sound for his age, boxes out, sets screens and plays with energy on both ends. There's positional flexibility, he's tall and long enough for a 5 but quick enough for a 4 and often plays at 4. He's not a bruiser and lacks strength right now when defending power 5s in the post. He somewhat compensates for it with quickness and long arms right now, but he'll need to get stronger for the NBA. He also has to work on his shot.

                  But overall, I don't see an unfixable weakness in his game. He gets offensive boards and overall has been a good rebounder everywhere he played, blocks some shots, a very willing help defender. Offensively, he's a solid passer, can handle a little and drive, sets screens and rolls to the rim, draws fouls, scores off offensive boards, will chase a loose ball. And he's just active and smart. He will need a few years in Europe but I think he's an NBA player.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

                    I was trying to think of a comp for Todorovic last night as i was typing but I couldn't think of one.

                    A bit of Tyler Zeller, but Todorovic is a couple inches smaller. A better passer. Also, I'm not sure he'll be suitable at center in many matchups in the NBA. He'd be giving up an inch or two to most NBA centers, so it depends on how much strength he can add without losing the mobility that makes him good; he would need to be able to play more physical.

                    But i think I found the comp that I like - Nick Collison. Similar size, length, mobility, similar types of game. Todorovic looks more athletic but overall I think that could be his NBA game.
                    Last edited by hackashaq; 06-27-2013, 07:42 AM.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

                      Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                      I was trying to think of a comp for Todorovic last night as i was typing but I couldn't think of one.

                      A bit of Tyler Zeller, but Todorovic is a couple inches smaller. A better passer. Also, I'm not sure he'll be suitable at center in many matchups in the NBA. He'd be giving up an inch or two to most NBA centers, so it depends on how much strength he can add without losing the mobility that makes him good; he would need to be able to play more physical.

                      But i think I found the comp that I like - Nick Collison. Similar size, length, mobility, similar types of game. Todorovic looks more athletic but overall I think that could be his NBA game.
                      Not a bad comp. Nick is an excellent player.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013

                        Memphis Grizzlies

                        PG - Conley, Wroten, Siva (55)
                        SG - Allen (U), Thomas (41)
                        SF - Prince, Daye (QO), Pondexter
                        PF - Randolph, Arthur
                        C - Gasol, Davis, Lauer (QO)

                        Here with this last pick, we will be looking for a developmental big most likely. Ryan Kelly is intriguing. He playes a smart game and would be more likely to contribute minutes to a playoff team than the other guys on this list. James Southerland is more SF, which we are loaded with contracts at that position. Colton Iverson and Zeke Marshall were the biggest guys in their conferences basically. Tough to know how either would translate. Decent skills, but need vast improvement to get minutes. Both improved their bodies significantly coming into this past season. Dewayne Dedmon is really raw, but the most athletic of all of these guys. He started playing basketball AFTER high school at JUCO/CC and transferred to USC. He has great touch and looks to dunk whenever he can. He needs a lot of technical skill building, but we find him very intriguing since his upside is huge. He has grown his game significantly in a short amount of time and we feel with better direction/teaching in the NBA he could be a real asset. Richard Howell lead Division I in total rebounds this year. He is a bit undersized at PF in the NBA, but he has very good strength, a solid work ethic, and a fantastic nose for the ball. He was second on the team in scoring and averaged 11 boards per game in the ACC. We did not feel as highly about his more touted teammates in Leslie and Brown. Brown would be a consideration here if we didn't draft Wroten last year, which would make Brown very redundant to our roster make-up. We think that Howell could transition into a very good defender at the PF position and not hurt the team offensively as he refines his game. His offensive game is already better than many similar NBA guys who've made careers of being undersized and tough. He would fit our culture of defense and rebounding in Memphis and that is why we are going to offer him our 15th roster spot as an undrafted FA. With this selection however we are going with the highest upside player available to us.

                        With the 60th and final selection in the 2013 Pacers Digest Mock NBA Draft, the Memphis Grizzlies select Dewayne Dedmon, USC.
                        "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


                        • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013 FINAL, POST 1 UPDATED

                          Adam Silver out.



                          That was fun. And I got a chance to download a few college games and get to know some of these guys, otherwise I would've been too lazy.
                          Last edited by hackashaq; 06-27-2013, 12:42 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013 FINAL, POST 1 UPDATED

                            I'm going after Arsalan Kazemi and Lorenzo Brown in UDFA.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013 FINAL, POST 1 UPDATED

                              I'm inviting Mr. "6 fouls" aka Colton Iverson.
                              And inviting the agents of Nemanja Nedovic and Bojan Dubljevic to my mansion in Bahamas for the summer. Neither is ready for the NBA now but relationships won't hurt.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers Digest mock draft 2013 FINAL, POST 1 UPDATED

                                I can't believe we made it through all sixty picks - a Pacers Digest first! I want to thank everyone who made picks over the past couple weeks, but a special thanks is reserved for our mock commissioner, hackashaq, who somehow organized everything and everyone. Well done, sir!

                                It'll be interesting to see how our mock stacks up to the real thing. Also, we'll have to revisit this thread in a few years to see how our draft stacks up to the BPA re-draft.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X