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

SI top 100 NBA players

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

  • Ace E.Anderson
    started a topic SI top 100 NBA players

    SI top 100 NBA players



    https://www.si.com/nba/2018/09/10/to...-dirk-nowitzki


    ​​​​​​I always look forward to this list every year, specifically 30-11. All of those guys are so close in terms of ability and impact.

    Pacers listed:

    Domantas Sabonis- 79
    Thad Young - 76
    Myles Turner - 67
    Victor Oladipo - 20

  • PacerDude
    replied
    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    I think Paul has proven he cannot be shut down.
    5-21.

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueNGold
    replied
    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post

    Would agree with you on all around ability. But regarding in between the years (smarts and clutch performance) Dipo is clearly better, and that quality is critically important when it matters most.
    True. Clutch is a critical part of a player's game. Dipo has Paul beat there. But I really don't know if Dipo has been tested as much as Paul though in the playoffs. I tend to believe it is harder to take Paul's effectiveness away. Dipo still has to prove to me that he's one of those guys in the NBA who really cannot be denied. I think Paul has proven he cannot be shut down. Paul isn't Kevin Durant but he's got some of that ability to "get his" regardless of who might be defending.

    Besides that, Dipo is a natural leader. Part of that is unselfishness. Nobody wants to follow a selfish player. Not saying Paul's selfish. I think Paul kind of wants to lead but he's not a natural. He also has poor judgment at times. I think Dipo has his act together a bit more IMO. So...on that note I would take Dipo over Paul. I just don't think talent-wise that Dipo is quite as good.

    Leave a comment:


  • pacers_heath
    replied
    Dipo certainly has a lot of expectations to live up to this year...

    Every time he has a bad game this year everyone will be screaming to trade him followed by a discussion about how he is Robin-not batman. I've seen it a million times.

    What is the over/under on the first TRADE VICTOR!!!! thread? lol...

    Leave a comment:


  • McKeyFan
    replied
    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    and while I like Dipo I still think Paul George is a better NBA player.
    Would agree with you on all around ability. But regarding in between the years (smarts and clutch performance) Dipo is clearly better, and that quality is critically important when it matters most.

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueNGold
    replied
    And no, Giannis isn't as good as Kevin Durant. Both awesome players. Durant is near #2 or #3 in the league.

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueNGold
    replied
    Originally posted by EthanHarris View Post
    Russel Westbrook is only 7.. Not sure Giannis is better than him..
    There is this idea out there that Westbrook isn't really that good because he's not efficient. Stats are a funny thing. I understand that idea. I don't agree with it though. Westbrook should be much, much higher on this list and while I like Dipo I still think Paul George is a better NBA player.

    Leave a comment:


  • EthanHarris
    replied
    Russel Westbrook is only 7.. Not sure Giannis is better than him..

    Leave a comment:


  • Drew46229
    replied
    Originally posted by mattie View Post
    My top 25:

    1. LeBron James
    2. Anthony Davis
    3. Steph Curry
    4. Giannis Antetokounmpo
    5. Kevin Durant
    6. Kawhi Leonard
    7. James Harden
    8. Victor Oladipo
    9. Paul George
    10. Joel Embiid
    11. Chris Paul
    12. Kyrie Irving
    13. Klay Thompson
    14. Damian Lillard
    15. Russell Westbrook
    16. Gordon Hayward
    17. Jimmy Butler
    18. John Wall
    19. Al Horford
    20. Khris Middleton
    21. Draymond Green
    22. Rudy Gobert
    23. Nikola Jokic
    24. Karl Anthony Towns
    25. LaMarcus Aldridge
    No Ben Simmons?

    Leave a comment:


  • mattie
    replied
    My top 25:

    1. LeBron James
    2. Anthony Davis
    3. Steph Curry
    4. Giannis Antetokounmpo
    5. Kevin Durant
    6. Kawhi Leonard
    7. James Harden
    8. Victor Oladipo
    9. Paul George
    10. Joel Embiid
    11. Chris Paul
    12. Kyrie Irving
    13. Klay Thompson
    14. Damian Lillard
    15. Russell Westbrook
    16. Gordon Hayward
    17. Jimmy Butler
    18. John Wall
    19. Al Horford
    20. Khris Middleton
    21. Draymond Green
    22. Rudy Gobert
    23. Nikola Jokic
    24. Karl Anthony Towns
    25. LaMarcus Aldridge
    Last edited by mattie; 09-27-2018, 10:06 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • mattie
    replied
    Just to get this back on topic since I helped derail it:

    My Current Top 10 in the NBA would be as follows:

    1. Oladipo
    2. Myles Turner
    3. George Hill
    4. Thad Young
    5. Sabonis
    6. Aaron Holliday
    7. Doug McDermott
    8. Kyle O'Quinn
    9. Bogie
    10. CoJO

    TIA!

    Leave a comment:


  • Peck
    replied
    Okay we are crossing a line here that needs to stop. Get this back on the topic of the top 100 players.

    Leave a comment:


  • Banta
    replied
    So, BBIQ is a real thing. And black athletes playing basketball is also reality. Black players will be labeled as high or low BBIQ. Doing so is not latent racism.

    White men need to drop this fallacy that blacks inherently need our patriarchal protection. It is condescending. It taints and trivializes black accomplishments.

    Leave a comment:


  • freddielewis14
    replied
    Originally posted by mattie View Post
    I wasn't being contrarian, or insulting, however I am critical of the way our Pacers fans (note, for some reason on the Colts side the fans are way more supportive currently) are today to some extent.

    Pacers fans used to be incredibly supportive of players. We loved Haywood Workman. Derrick McKey. Foster. Davis. Davis. Jalen. Mark Jackson. Travis Best (even if we complained about his dribbling), Smits, O'neal etc.

    Part of this is probably our current political climate, and the conservative nature of our state, but after the brawl, the way Pacers fans are able to tear down players is incredible. And yes, I believe flash is far more appreciated and desired than it once was.

    I should note, that there is nothing wrong with that. As an example, preferring basketball players like Pistol Pete over Kevin McHale is actually fairly normal, and we should stop framing this little discussion as if appreciating "substance over style" is somehow morally superior. It's not. What you like to watch, and enjoy is just that, what you like. It's basketball. It's a sport. It's entertainment, nothing more.

    That said, I will roll my eyes if anyone says we appreciate the "put your head down and play" style of basketball. That's absurd. Paul George, who's from a small town, was NEVER a top tier prospect as was erroneously said prior, was the definition of put your head down and play. He's low key. He literally will play in the smallest city in the NBA, because he wants to compete, he's anti super team, which many of his critiques claim to appreciate.

    But if our fan base really appreciates that, then why is literally every word PG has ever said picked a part, taken at face value instead of attempting to understand his actual point of view. (not saying there is anything wrong with legitimate disappointment he left).

    This is a common way Pacers fans view many players. Already Jimmy Butler is being ripped up one side and down the other as if he's a selfish, me- first player. Except interesting fact that just came out: KAT said he didn't want to play with Butler! Yet here we are ripping Butler in every way possible, when he's the definition of hard work and effort, a second rounder who built a career from nothing.

    Yes. I'm critical of Pacers fans. If what I'm saying is NOT true? Then stop finding away to hate on NBA players, and our own players there's a far difference from being critical of a players weaknesses, and literally tearing them down and bringing wild accusations about a players IQ (inherently a racist accusation, whether you want to be in denial or honest with yourself), or such baseless claims that a player is "soft", "me firsT" "selfish" or the many accusations that Pacers fans lob at players at every opportunity.

    But again, if we supposedly appreciate "substance" then PLEASE ask yourself why our fan base literally ripped the most low key, "Hoosier" basketball player of all time. A local. Indy born and raised. IUPUI, a small D1 college. Not a big time recruit. Late 1st round pick. Built himself into Mr Fundimental. Wears tattoos of Indiana all over him. Refers to himself as Indiana. One time, he criticized his own hometown, as I and everyone else who's ever lived here has done before as well, because they tried to EXPLOIT his fame for money. Naturally he was upset. Some fans used that as an excuse to literally hate him. That's ridiculous!

    Yet he was absolutely brutally criticized. I'm fairly confident if he made more 1 handed passes, had a better crossover, and went for a higher assist count, fans would have appreciated him. But we appreciate "substance?" No we don't.

    If you want to be THAT type of fan base? Then, in the kindest words possible, stop "hating." Stop saying Paul George was selfish. He wasn't. He just wanted to win. Stop saying he didn't "try" that's untrue and we know it. Stop saying Roy Hibbert sucked. He was really good, for a moment, even tho the league passed him by. Stop finding a reason to tear down a players character:

    "Sabonis can't go right and doesn't have a post game, but has a brilliant PnR game, and is fluid, smart player maker". That's accurate. "Sabonis is soft and lazy" isn't accurate and all, and as a result is really an unfair accusation that denigrates who he is as a player and a person.

    "Lance is flashy and throws the ball in the stands, and can't shoot, but he's fun, energetic, and a riot to watch" is accurate.

    I dunno, I guess I find it hard to believe that our fan base appreciates the hard workers, when we can turn around and rip player after player after player. (Butler, George, Hibbert, Hill, Turner, the list goes on...)

    I can tell you that every single player that donned a uniform of the last 20 years I've appreciated except Troy Murphy and Monta Ellis. That's it. I even like Monta Ellis actually prior to the signing!! I used to love watching him play, I was more upset at Bird for bringing him in, when he was FAR /from being even "average". It was one of the worst free agent signings in NBA history.
    LOL, this is so over the top.

    GHill got criticism in the local media and a little with fans because Hoosiers knew how good he was and George wouldn't be aggressive and show it.

    Leave a comment:


  • tnasty4l
    replied
    Originally posted by kent beckley View Post

    Well then, if you think Bojan is dumb, then you are a xenophobe
    I didn't say nor do I think he's dumb. But you calling me a xenophobe just proves my point.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X