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

The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

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

  • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    That draft is actually the worst draft to cite. Of the top 5 in 2003, only Darko was a bust. LeBron, Wade, Bosh, and Melo all went on to become superstars.
    The idea that since some top-5 picks became busts that devalues a top-5 pick is absolutely ludicrous regardless of which draft you cite.

    I'd also gladly wager that the amount of top-5 picks who became stars is greater than all the other picks combined.
    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

    -Lance Stephenson

    Comment


    • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

      Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
      I'd also gladly wager that the amount of top-5 picks who became stars is greater than all the other picks combined.
      Than all the other picks combined? I would take that bet.

      Comment


      • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

        Rooting for Warriors (so Nets lose) and Suns (so Heat lose) tonight! Also will be fun to see Beldsoe guard Dragic...

        Comment


        • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

          Originally posted by cdash View Post
          Than all the other picks combined? I would take that bet.
          I found this question interesting so I did some really quick research. The best way I could think of was to just use the NBA's 50 Greatest Players list they released for the 50th Anniversary of the NBA by in 1996. I figured using this list would take out any ambiguity about whether a player should be considered a star or not.

          Of the 50 Greatest Players, 30 of them were top 5 picks. 14 of them were outside the top 5, but that includes Larry Bird who had a whole set of rules about drafting players named after him because it was so shady, and Julius Erving and George Gervin who were already ABA players at the time. 4 players were considered "Territorial" selections, because their local teams picked them when that was still a thing. Moses Malone went straight to the ABA from high school, and George Mikan was before there was ever a draft.

          The only players picked outside the top 5 without extenuating circumstances to be considered in the greatest players list were Nate Archibald, Clyde Drexler, Hal Greer, John Havlicek, Sam Jones, Karl Malone, Robert Parrish, Willis Reed, Bill Sharman, John Stockton, and Lenny Wilkens.

          11 of them were the 1st overall pick. So essentially, there were equally as many historically great players picked 1st overall, as there were players picked outside of the top 5.

          Comment


          • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

            Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
            I found this question interesting so I did some really quick research. The best way I could think of was to just use the NBA's 50 Greatest Players list they released for the 50th Anniversary of the NBA by in 1996. I figured using this list would take out any ambiguity about whether a player should be considered a star or not.

            Of the 50 Greatest Players, 30 of them were top 5 picks. 14 of them were outside the top 5, but that includes Larry Bird who had a whole set of rules about drafting players named after him because it was so shady, and Julius Erving and George Gervin who were already ABA players at the time. 4 players were considered "Territorial" selections, because their local teams picked them when that was still a thing. Moses Malone went straight to the ABA from high school, and George Mikan was before there was ever a draft.

            The only players picked outside the top 5 without extenuating circumstances to be considered in the greatest players list were Nate Archibald, Clyde Drexler, Hal Greer, John Havlicek, Sam Jones, Karl Malone, Robert Parrish, Willis Reed, Bill Sharman, John Stockton, and Lenny Wilkens.

            11 of them were the 1st overall pick. So essentially, there were equally as many historically great players picked 1st overall, as there were players picked outside of the top 5.
            Modern guys that could conceivably be added to the Greatest 50:

            Tim Duncan, Lebron James, Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Dirk Nowitzki, Dwayne Wade, Jason Kidd, Kevin Durant, Allen Iverson, Chris Paul, Steve Nash

            I won't get into who's spot they should take. Of that group you've got two guys taken outside the top-10 in Kobe and Nash and one guy outside the top-5 in Dirk. The rest are all from the top-5. Three number 1's, two number 2's, one number 3, and 2 number 5's.

            Of the 61 best NBA players of all-time, 38 were top-5 draft picks.
            "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

            -Lance Stephenson

            Comment


            • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

              The problem with your data set, Mackey, is that all of those players were drafted before 1994. You have to admit that the draft classes today are vastly different than those twenty years ago. The talent pool is so much wider. Your argument might still hold up, but arguing about the 2015 draft with these players as your examples seems inadequate.
              Last edited by LG33; 03-02-2015, 03:03 PM.

              Comment


              • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                Originally posted by LG33 View Post
                The problem with your data set, Mackey, is that all of those players were drafted before 1994. You have to admit that the draft classes today are vastly different than those twenty years ago.
                Not to mention a good chunk of those guys were playing in the NBA when there was 8 teams, and even more when there was less than 20.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                  Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                  Modern guys that could conceivably be added to the Greatest 50:

                  Tim Duncan, Lebron James, Kobe Bryant, Kevin Garnett, Dirk Nowitzki, Dwayne Wade, Jason Kidd, Kevin Durant, Allen Iverson, Chris Paul, Steve Nash

                  I won't get into who's spot they should take. Of that group you've got two guys taken outside the top-10 in Kobe and Nash and one guy outside the top-5 in Dirk. The rest are all from the top-5. Three number 1's, two number 2's, one number 3, and 2 number 5's.

                  Of the 61 best NBA players of all-time, 38 were top-5 draft picks.
                  Greatest players of all time wasn't what you initially said. You said "stars". If we are talking the greatest players of all time, then yeah, the truly transcendent players are going to be picked in the top 5.

                  Comment


                  • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                    Originally posted by cdash View Post
                    Greatest players of all time wasn't what you initially said. You said "stars". If we are talking the greatest players of all time, then yeah, the truly transcendent players are going to be picked in the top 5.
                    It'd be tough to agree on a consensus star plateau but just casually looking over recent drafts, I still think that's true. I don't want to take the time to post every star from every draft but if somebody does, I'd be glad to be proven wrong.

                    Basically my whole point, is that a guy like Paul George is an exception to a rule. Sure it's possible to get a great player outside the top-5. It's just far less likely than getting one in the top-5.
                    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                    -Lance Stephenson

                    Comment


                    • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                      Originally posted by LG33 View Post
                      The problem with your data set, Mackey, is that all of those players were drafted before 1994. You have to admit that the draft classes today are vastly different than those twenty years ago. The talent pool is so much wider. Your argument might still hold up, but arguing about the 2015 draft with these players as your examples seems inadequate.
                      No question that's a big problem. I just wasn't going to take the time to make my own list.

                      Comment


                      • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                        Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                        It'd be tough to agree on a consensus star plateau but just casually looking over recent drafts, I still think that's true. I don't want to take the time to post every star from every draft but if somebody does, I'd be glad to be proven wrong.

                        Basically my whole point, is that a guy like Paul George is an exception to a rule. Sure it's possible to get a great player outside the top-5. It's just far less likely than getting one in the top-5.
                        I'll agree that it's less likely, but that's about it.

                        Let's take this year's All-Star rosters as a quick litmus test:

                        Top 5 picks:
                        Carmelo Anthony
                        Pau Gasol
                        John Wall
                        Chris Bosh
                        Al Horford
                        Kyrie Irving
                        Dwyane Wade
                        Blake Griffin
                        Anthony Davis
                        LaMarcus Aldridge
                        DeMarcus Cousins
                        Tim Duncan
                        Kevin Durant
                        James Harden
                        Chris Paul
                        Russell Westbrook
                        =16
                        Outside of top 5:
                        Kyle Lowry
                        Jimmy Butler
                        Kyle Korver
                        Paul Millsap
                        Jeff Teague
                        Marc Gasol
                        Stephen Curry
                        Kobe Bryant
                        Damian Lillard
                        Dirk Nowitzki
                        Klay Thompson
                        =11

                        So your theory holds true for this year's All-Star class.

                        Comment


                        • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                          Originally posted by cdash View Post

                          So your theory holds true for this year's All-Star class.
                          It's entirely possible I'm wrong but I highly doubt this is some sort of coincidence. I really think this is going to be the case nearly every single year.
                          "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                          -Lance Stephenson

                          Comment


                          • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                            Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                            It's entirely possible I'm wrong but I highly doubt this is some sort of coincidence. I really think this is going to be the case nearly every single year.
                            It probably is. A good chunk of those guys are ASG staples. I won't go through all of them, but I'm inclined to think I lost that imaginary bet.

                            Comment


                            • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                              Originally posted by cdash View Post
                              That draft is actually the worst draft to cite. Of the top 5 in 2003, only Darko was a bust. LeBron, Wade, Bosh, and Melo all went on to become superstars.

                              Just because it's fun, let's go over the top 5 picks in the past decade+ of of the draft (not including the last two years because it's really too early to make proclamations about those guys):

                              2012:
                              1. Anthony Davis
                              2. Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
                              3. Bradley Beal
                              4. Dion Waiters
                              5. Thomas Robinson

                              Of those five, Robinson is a bust for sure, Waiters is trending that way (he's certainly not worth a top 5 pick), and the other 3 are solid enough.

                              2/5

                              2011:
                              1. Kyrie Irving
                              2. Derrick Williams
                              3. Enes Kanter
                              4. Tristan Thompson
                              5. Jonas Valanciunas

                              Williams is a bust at #2, Rie is a star, the other three the jury is still out on.

                              1/5

                              2010:
                              1. John Wall
                              2. Evan Turner
                              3. Derrick Favors
                              4. Wesley Johnson
                              5. DeMarcus Cousins

                              Two busts there in Turner and Johnson, jury is still out on Favors.

                              2/5

                              2009:
                              1. Blake Griffin
                              2. Hasheem Thabeet
                              3. James Harden
                              4. Tyreke Evans
                              5. Ricky Rubio

                              Only Thabeet was a bust of this group. Rubio and Evans aren't world beaters, but I wouldn't call either of them busts.

                              1/5

                              2008:
                              1. Derrick Rose
                              2. Michael Beasley
                              3. OJ Mayo
                              4. Russell Westbrook
                              5. Kevin Love

                              Beasley is a bust, Mayo is a toss-up, but has mostly underwhelmed.

                              2/5

                              2007:
                              1. Greg Oden
                              2. Kevin Durant
                              3. Al Horford
                              4. Mike Conley
                              5. Jeff Green

                              Oden is an obvious bust; Green is kinda whatever, but a solid top 5.

                              1/5

                              2006:
                              1. Andrea Bargnani
                              2. LaMarcus Aldridge
                              3. Adam Morrison
                              4. Tyrus Thomas
                              5. Shelden Williams

                              Oof. Aldridge is the only player from this group. Awful top 5.

                              4/5

                              2005:
                              1. Andrew Bogut
                              2. Marvin Williams
                              3. Deron Williams
                              4. Chris Paul
                              5. Raymond Felton

                              Only Marvin is a bust from this bunch. Felton has had some moments.

                              1/5

                              2004:
                              1. Dwight Howard
                              2. Emeka Okafor
                              3. Ben Gordon
                              4. Shaun Livingston
                              5. Devin Harris

                              Tough group to analyze. Okafor and Gordon were decent at one point, Livingston is decent now but injuries derailed his career and Devin Harris is just kinda whatever. I'll call it two busts.

                              2/5

                              2003:
                              1. LeBron James
                              2. Darko Milicic
                              3. Carmelo Anthony
                              4. Dwyane Wade
                              5. Chris Bosh

                              See above. One of the best top 5s ever when you subract Darko.

                              1/5
                              Mkg is a bust. #2 pick who can't shoot for shii.

                              Comment


                              • Re: The 11th Annual NBA Random Thoughts Thread 2014-2015: Bowties Are Cool

                                Originally posted by BornIndy07 View Post
                                Mkg is a bust. #2 pick who can't shoot for shii.
                                Except Charlotte seems to play better as soon as he became the starter. He may be an Andre Iguodala type guy. Not that much scoring by himself, but does everything else well enough to make up for it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X