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

Josh Powell = Solid

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

  • #46
    Re: Josh Powell = Solid

    One thing about Rawle and Powell (and Greene) vs White and Williams, they both saw real NBA minutes last year which certainly is helping their confidence and awareness, so SOME (but not all) of what impresses about them is a poise that you can expect White and Williams to find by next year.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Josh Powell = Solid

      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
      Give the man solid minutes in the regular rotation.

      Heady, savvy defense.

      Good, well-positioned rebounding.

      Pure shooter.

      Deliberate, confident free throw shooting (important under pressure).

      Decent one-on-one moves.

      Knows where to position himself on the court to get the assist for an easy shot.

      This guy is a keeper.
      Co-sign

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Josh Powell = Solid

        Originally posted by Ralph Snart View Post
        This is such a good problem for us to have. To be honest, when the AJ trade went down, I was scratching my head a little, but based on this preseason evidence, I have to say, I think we took Dallas to the cleaners. Armstrong is a good replacement for AJ, and depsite being older, I think he has a better motor in him. Rawle and Josh look like they are complete steals.

        Giving up AJ for these three guys may be one of the best moves Donnie has pulled off in the past few summers. How do they always find a way of unearthing these end-of-bench gems?
        Plus it allowed us to get John Edwards, which is what we needed to get Al Harrington.

        Big steal.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Josh Powell = Solid

          I would be willing to release or trade one of the two slower, big guys who can't shoot and foul out within 3 minutes of entering the game. Their upside is limited and they are tapping on the ceiling of their success right now.

          The only thing that separates them is attitude. Using this as a determining factor I would trade or release David Harrison. (If we can't or won't cut Jackson outright.)

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Josh Powell = Solid

            Originally posted by dlewyus View Post
            Powell looks good. He might make one of the other bigs expendable.

            If his production continues like this, Harrison or Foster could very well be
            expendable. JO was promoting Powell at the beginning of training camp.
            He has great touch for a bigman. He has better mechanics that JO.
            As far as the AD comparison, he may not block shots as well but he rebounds as well and definitely shoots better than AD. This guy will be first off the
            bench by the end of the season to back up Al or JO
            Rawle also could be quite the offensive player. REALLY long arms and can drive and dish as well as hit the short jumper. These guys played in an
            uptempo offense last year so they know how to run already.
            Keepers.
            {o,o}
            |)__)
            -"-"-

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Josh Powell = Solid

              The cuts I believe will come from either...

              Baston
              Armstrong
              Harrison(trade?)

              Why keep Armstrong when he is a one and done type player?
              Why not make him an assistant coach. The only thing he really brings
              is leadership. He can do that from the bench. Why give up a very promising
              and useful player this year such as Green.

              One other comment which already has been mentioned, when was the last
              time we had this much discussion on the last player to be cut?
              Ever? The team is deep and if they play defense and RUN this will be
              a much more enjoyable brand of basketball to watch.
              If they play slog ball as in years past all this talent will be wasted.


              owl
              {o,o}
              |)__)
              -"-"-

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Josh Powell = Solid

                What's interesting to me, if tptb knew Powell is this good, would they have signed Baston. Also, if they knew Marshall was this good would they have traded 3-2nd rounders for White? BTW, Marshall is only 10 months older than White.

                Lastly, are these newcomers Greene, Marshall, and Powell really good or are we all so starved for new, athletic players that if they make, if they get to play will all of their shortcomings become obvious and we will see why their previous teams were willing to part with them?

                Another words, is it like falling in love with the new girl in school or like not eating for 3 days and getting a stale cracker and thinking its the best food you've ever had?

                I'm playing devil's advocate here, I said in a previous post that Powell could be their 3rd best all around 4/5, right now.

                Also, also, out of Powell, Marshall, and Greene do we really think they will be in the normal playing rotation? I think Powell will, I don't think they will be able to keep him off the court. I think Green could, if Carlise is calling him the team's best on the ball defender, right now.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Josh Powell = Solid

                  Originally posted by owl View Post
                  The cuts I believe will come from either...

                  Baston
                  Armstrong
                  Harrison(trade?)

                  Why keep Armstrong when he is a one and done type player?
                  Why not make him an assistant coach. The only thing he really brings
                  is leadership. He can do that from the bench. Why give up a very promising
                  and useful player this year such as Green.

                  One other comment which already has been mentioned, when was the last
                  time we had this much discussion on the last player to be cut?
                  Ever? The team is deep and if they play defense and RUN this will be
                  a much more enjoyable brand of basketball to watch.
                  If they play slog ball as in years past all this talent will be wasted.


                  owl
                  I wonder if Armstrong is willing to do this? I wonder what the rules are to bring him back as a player if a season ending injury happens? He was brought in to be a vocal presence, can he do this as a coach?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Josh Powell = Solid

                    Originally posted by owl View Post
                    Why keep Armstrong when he is a one and done type player?
                    Because right now he's our second-best point guard?
                    This space for rent.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Josh Powell = Solid

                      http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/insider_061019.html

                      Until the last couple of games, Josh Powell had done most of his impressing behind the closed doors of practice, showing determination, toughness and a consistent willingness to do the dirty work – hard screens, tough rebounds, strong box-outs and the like.

                      On back-to-back nights, he showed he can shine in the bright lights, as well.

                      Powell scored 20 points with five rebounds off the bench, scoring eight in the fourth quarter as the Pacers pulled away for a 109-96 victory over Charlotte Thursday night in a preseason matchup of two extremely shorthanded teams.

                      "The numbers don't lie," said Coach Rick Carlisle of Powell's performance. "He's doing good things but he can't let up. He's got to keep doing them."

                      Powell had 12 points and eight rebounds Wednesday night in a loss to Denver in Cincinnati, giving him 32 points and 13 rebounds on back-to-back nights while recovering from the flu. With cuts looming, both Powell and fellow former Maverick Rawle Marshall, who had 12 points, three rebounds and three assists, have made strong cases for roster spots.

                      "It's becoming more and more evident who the better players are," said Carlisle. "… I would advise everyone involved to keep playing hard in practice and to keep playing hard in games." .......


                      .....Powell then became the go-to guy, scoring 12 of the team's final 30 points. After Charlotte cut the deficit to 92-87 midway through the fourth, he made key plays on three straight possessions, hitting three-of-four free throws while shutting down Sean May in the post, and then grabbing the rebound. That led to a 3-pointer by Sarunas Jasikevicius that made it 98-87 and effectively sealed the game.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Josh Powell = Solid

                        Armstrong, I don't believe is even in the team's discussion as a possible cut. He is the best leader on the team, he is the second best point guard on the team, his value to the team can't be measured. He isn't going anywhere

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Josh Powell = Solid

                          Why not just package Harrison and Sarunas for a shooter?

                          Q looks very expendable in NY with Marbury, Francis, Crawford, Rose, Nate, and Zeke's new toy, Balkman.

                          I'm not a huge fan and he has a pretty crappy contract, but he thrives in open space and could help space the floor.
                          Read my Pacers blog:
                          8points9seconds.com

                          Follow my twitter:

                          @8pts9secs

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Josh Powell = Solid

                            Originally posted by Jermaniac View Post
                            I would trade Sarunas in a second for a 2nd round pick. I wonder if the Cavs still want him. He can go play with Big Z.
                            That's actually a really good idea. And Jay, I don't think this team needs any more bodies at the 1, 2 or 3 position unless they part ways with Jackson. There are already enough guys who need to be getting minutes.

                            I'd be looking for a way to get back into next year's draft.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Josh Powell = Solid

                              Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
                              That's actually a really good idea. And Jay, I don't think this team needs any more bodies at the 1, 2 or 3 position unless they part ways with Jackson. There are already enough guys who need to be getting minutes.

                              I'd be looking for a way to get back into next year's draft.
                              If/when Tins goes down then who is the starting point guard and whats the rotation, at point.

                              The argument for this type of trade is this though, I would bet Carlise has played Saras at the two as much as the pg, so far this preseason. Is this out of necessity due to the injury to MD or is this again how Carlise is going to use him, which has shown that he's disinterested/ineffective at the two.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Josh Powell = Solid

                                I echo the thoughts of keeping all three - Greene, Powell, and Marshall. If we can ship Harrison or Sarunas out for a 2nd, or package them both for a decent player, that would work out perfectly.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X