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

Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

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

  • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

    Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
    I don't think the Pacers will have to worry about Kamansky. He looked very good vs Kentucky bigs.
    You think that he hurdled his way into the top 8?

    How did Dekker do?

    I'm guessing that with Wisconsin making it to the Finals.....both Dekker and Kaminsky boosted their draft stock?
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

      Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
      depends how high in the lotto we're talking. after about 8 or so I like him as much as anyone else. I'd do a cartwheel if we got him.
      DX has him at 19....but than NBADraft.net has him at 7
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

        It was going to be hard for anybody to standout in that game. The defense was really physical & aggressive on both sides and the officiating was frustratingly inconsistent as well. Been watching the key players on these two teams pretty closely in the tournament.

        The best pro prospect is obviously Towns. Just question his motor a little bit. He probably wouldn't want to go there but put him at the 4 between Dieng & Wiggins and the TWolves instantly have one of the best young front courts in the league.

        WCS has potential to be a game changer defensively. Reminds me of a young KG on that side of the ball. Can guard three positions at the NBA level. Can cover huge areas of the court. Really disruptive and will only get better. I get he could disappoint offensively but the rebounding will come and he would be perfect for the Pacers IMO. The Pacers need to retool around PG with the emphasis on defense and team rebounding. WCS gets them a long way down that road.

        I like Kaminsky a lot just don't like him for the Pacers. He is a much better rebounder than he gets credit for and very skilled offensively. Would love to see him develop a Dirk-like turn around jumper because even with all his post skills he will have a lot of match-ups in the league where he will struggle around the basket. Yes he can take people out on the floor but on a good team in big games he will need to find a way to score and be effective in the post.

        I agree with peoples concerns on Sam Dekker. Not quite quick or athletic enough to play the 3 & not quite big or long enough to play the 4. Also think he will have a low shooting % in the pros. Could see him having a long career as a bench/energy guy who gets minutes with his defense.

        I see Lyles as a tweener too. He is certainly big & long enough to be a legit 4 but doesn't play like an interior big. He will likely have a long career because of his offensive skills but really feel like he will need to play next to a Dwight Howard type center to get the most out of his game. Don't really like him for the Pacers either.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

          Much of it ain't aesthetically pleasing, but I am now firmly convinced that Frank Kaminsky is just a very, very good basketball player. I cannot see how the combination of what he can do offensively, at his size, in today's NBA doesn't = a very long and prosperous NBA career.
          "I’m your favorite player’s favorite player. And it’s not enough for me for him to know that. I want the world to know that." -- Michael Beasley

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

            Never been a big college watcher, but I will say that I would not cry if we were able to get Kaminsky. I'll wait for the Tbird analysis first, though
            BillS

            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
            Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

              Originally posted by diamonddave00 View Post
              Cauley- Stein didn't exactly stand out 33 minutes 2 point on a dunk 40 seconds into the game on a fast break and 5 rebounds.
              He isn't a great rebounder, you are correct. The fact is that he gets switched out to so many perimeter players, his real value is rotating quickly and contesting shots. With most spots on the court he starts out in less than ideal rebounding position.

              He is like Tyson Chandler with less rebounding, but better at switching screens and guarding multiple positions. He will never be a big time offensive talent though.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                So lets see Cauley- Stein can't shoot, can't rebound, guards out to the perimeter so away from the basket so he doesn't protect the rim. Hmmm sounds like a career backup.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                  Originally posted by diamonddave00 View Post
                  So lets see Cauley- Stein can't shoot, can't rebound, guards out to the perimeter so away from the basket so he doesn't protect the rim. Hmmm sounds like a career backup.
                  Maybe. Or he could be a great asset playing against teams who spread the court and like to shoot threes. Also, the kid is 21 years old. Like everyone else he has room to grow.

                  I like to focus on what NBA level skills incoming college guys have. Not too many (even Okafor and Towns) can give you what Cauley Stein can.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                    Originally posted by diamonddave00 View Post
                    So lets see Cauley- Stein can't shoot, can't rebound, guards out to the perimeter so away from the basket so he doesn't protect the rim. Hmmm sounds like a career backup.
                    Basically a Hibbert that guards the perimeter instead of protecting he paint.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                      Dekker is a lottery pick. His motor and athleticism will intrigue GMs. If he develops a consistent 3 pt shot, he'll be a solid player.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                        WCS isn't asked to guard in the post. That is Townes role. All the tools are there to defend the post especially as his body matures. I get that he could disappoint as an NBA player but that would likely be more about a lack of offensive development or just being resistant to learning & playing smart basketball.

                        Roy Hibbert wasn't exactly viewed as defensive juggernaut coming out of college. He was considered very foul prone & was often compared to guys like Joel Pryzbilla on that end of the court.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                          On the right team, I think WCS would be a good addition. But his lack of offensive game and offensive potential makes him a questionable for for the Pacers IMO. We need someone who is probably less of a project, and also someone with more offensive potential.

                          Bird has a good track record of evaluating talent for the most part, so I'm not worried. With that said, we can't afford to miss on this pick, and you're gambling when you take a guy like WCS who doesn't really have one true go-to NBA skill outside of athleticism
                          Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 04-05-2015, 11:45 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                            Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post

                            hope so

                            So do I. Hope he returns to KY for another year to upgrade his game.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                              Originally posted by diamonddave00 View Post
                              So lets see Cauley- Stein can't shoot, can't rebound, guards out to the perimeter so away from the basket so he doesn't protect the rim. Hmmm sounds like a career backup.

                              The BB experts I've listened to and read all season totally disagree with you!

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2014-2015 NBA Draft Prospect Thread

                                I was VERY disappointed in Calipari's coaching. He refused to show the team film on Wisconsin, had players switching leaving Booker, Ulis, and Harrison on Kaminsky and Dekker to exploit their size advantage, and didn't emphasize what got KY a 38-0 record coming into this game.... their size. SMH

                                I will be cheering for Wisconsin tomorrow night. There isn't a NCAA team I dislike more than DUKE. It will take a well played near perfect game for Wisconsin to win.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X