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

Duarte

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

  • #91
    Originally posted by kent beckley View Post
    Also, we have Duarte locked up from 24-28 on a rookie deal. Drafting a 19 year old, you get very little production on the rookie deal, then if they show any promise as a 23 year old, you’ll have to pay 20-30 million dollars per season for those 24-28 seasons.
    Not always. We were able to lock in both Domas and Myles in fairly good deals despite the fact that they both produced quite a lot when they were on their rookie deals and were drafted at 20 and 19 years olds, respectively.
    Originally posted by IrishPacer
    Empty vessels make the most noise.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
      Going to completely disagree with the 1% chance of Giannis is better than 15 Brogdon’s.

      simply cannot disagree with that concept more. You take the guy who you believe will be the better player.

      in the case of Duarte, if you think he maxes out at a Brogdon level player (even though Brogdon himself says Duarte has a lot more to his game than he did at that age), then that’s way better than a 1% chance of Giannis or bust (assuming that’s the concept)
      Again it depends on what you want from your team and what your team's chances are of acquiring a top 10 player outside the draft. The bottom line is in a vacuum TJ Leaf and Aaron Holiday contribute the exact same amount to winning a championship as Brogdon and Sabonis. 0%. Giannis can turn a franchise that sold courtside seats for less than $50 into an NBA champion. Now if Sabonis and Brogdon were sidekicking for Giannis obviously their contributions begin to matter, but without him they just don't.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by Wage View Post

        Again it depends on what you want from your team and what your team's chances are of acquiring a top 10 player outside the draft. The bottom line is in a vacuum TJ Leaf and Aaron Holiday contribute the exact same amount to winning a championship as Brogdon and Sabonis. 0%. Giannis can turn a franchise that sold courtside seats for less than $50 into an NBA champion. Now if Sabonis and Brogdon were sidekicking for Giannis obviously their contributions begin to matter, but without him they just don't.
        You can’t predict the future. Brogdon’s are 20+ PPG scorers.

        It shouldn’t be hard to, at worst, flip them in trades for more impressive pieces. Every single move can’t just be championship or bust. That’s the ultimate goal, but you can’t take a swing at every move thinking “this is the reason I will win a championship or it’s meaningless”

        There have been teams that have won Championships with players worse than Giannis.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by BillS View Post
          Here's what gets left out of that argument - how long will it take the player 5 years younger to develop? If you can draft a guy at 24 who is ready to start vs. the 19 year old who isn't going to start for 4-5 years, what's the advantage of the younger guy?
          No one is talking about a player who will take 4-5 years to develop, though. We aren't talking about a "2 years away from being 2 years away" type of project here. We aren't talking about Bruno Caboclo.

          The main player that people have been talking about is Moses Moody who was generally considered to be NBA-ready despite only being 19. Yes, Moody has only played 10 minutes for the Warriors in these first two games so far. But who cares? Myles didn't play at all in the first game of the season his rookie year and he was our starting Center by the end of the season. The Warriors are contending right now and they have a slew of vets at the wing spot so I doubt that Moody becomes a starter this year but here's the thing. It doesn't matter whether he starts this year or not. Just like it didn't matter that Domas came off the bench in his first two seasons with us. When a player is young and a on a rookie deal, you can afford to take it slowly.

          As for the advantage of the younger guy, it's quite simple. A player who is already very polished cannot improve a lot unless they are a generational talent (think Luka, LeBron, KD, these type of players). They can definitely make improvements here and there and experience helps everyone but there is always a limit. On the other hand, a player who has talent but lacks polish can improve by leaps and bounds. Do you remember when PG started improving by leaps and bounds right in front of our eyes? He was pretty raw offensively at the start of his career and even had that infamous 0 point game (his trade value will never be higher). And then he managed to put it all together and exploded. Season by season, month by month, day by day, he became more and more polished and that was what led him down the path of stardom. It is exactly because he lacked that polished that he became so good when he finally acquired it.

          Now, was it a guarantee that PG was going to attain that polish that he initially lacked? No, it definitely wasn't. Not every raw player will manage to improve by leaps and bounds and reach his full potential. That is always a risk. And depending on your team's situation, you may or you may not want to take that risk. In my opinion, the Pacers were in a situation this summer where we needed to take that risk. Not just wanted to, needed to. And we didn't. Hence, the disappointment among many people.

          That said, I'm definitely enjoying Duarte right now. I feel very comfortable when he's in the game and when he's not, I'm waiting for him to come back in.
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • #95
            What talent does Moody have over Duarte that isn’t age?

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
              If you think a kid who’s 19 is as good of a prospect as a kid who’s 24 you should absolutely take the 19 year old, but I don’t think that’s the case here.
              Let's make one thing clear here. The majority of the draft experts thought that Moody was better than Duarte. Moody was often talked about as one of the first picks after the top 6 (Cade, Jalen Green, Mobley, Suggs, Barnes, Kuminga). He wasn't talked about as the first pick after them (that was usually Bouknight) but he was generally talked about as a top 10-13 pick.

              Duarte started picking up steam late into the drafting process and the spot that we picked him was generally thought off to be the highest spot he could go.

              Now, our FO definitely thought differently and that's what matters in the end but I do believe that it's important to note that the consensus at the time was that Moody was a step above Duarte.
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post

                You can’t predict the future. Brogdon’s are 20+ PPG scorers.

                It shouldn’t be hard to, at worst, flip them in trades for more impressive pieces. Every single move can’t just be championship or bust. That’s the ultimate goal, but you can’t take a swing at every move thinking “this is the reason I will win a championship or it’s meaningless”

                There have been teams that have won Championships with players worse than Giannis.
                0 teams have won a Championship without a current top 10 player (1st or 2nd team All-NBA) in the modern era (last 30 years). And I don't completely disagree with your assessment that every move doesn't have to be all in. But what in the world have you seen from the current Pacers regime that makes you think we would make a consolidation trade for a top 10 guy? KP is a hell of a con-man so maybe he is playing the longest con ever and suddenly going to be actively courting superstars...but I doubt it.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

                  Let's make one thing clear here. The majority of the draft experts thought that Moody was better than Duarte. Moody was often talked about as one of the first picks after the top 6 (Cade, Jalen Green, Mobley, Suggs, Barnes, Kuminga). He wasn't talked about as the first pick after them (that was usually Bouknight) but he was generally talked about as a top 10-13 pick.

                  Duarte started picking up steam late into the drafting process and the spot that we picked him was generally thought off to be the highest spot he could go.

                  Now, our FO definitely thought differently and that's what matters in the end but I do believe that it's important to note that the consensus at the time was that Moody was a step above Duarte.
                  Draft experts aren’t necessarily correct in what they view. If we take reporting into account, it was reported Golden State was trying to get us to trade them for Duarte for Moody. Probably says a bit on who the team Moody ended up with thinks about them.

                  So there seems to be a disconnect what the media draft experts thought and what NBA teams thought. I’m cool with going with the NBA guys think.

                  It’s obviously not an exact science; look at how many teams passed on Booker. Does what the draft experts said there matter? Early on Duarte has absolutely dazzled with just how developed his offensive game is.

                  Does preseason and a few regular season games mean we should all eat crow? No, but it definitely should probably make a few of us enter wait and see mode.
                  Last edited by BlueCollarColts; 10-24-2021, 06:38 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Wage View Post

                    0 teams have won a Championship without a current top 10 player (1st or 2nd team All-NBA) in the modern era (last 30 years). And I don't completely disagree with your assessment that every move doesn't have to be all in. But what in the world have you seen from the current Pacers regime that makes you think we would make a consolidation trade for a top 10 guy? KP is a hell of a con-man so maybe he is playing the longest con ever and suddenly going to be actively courting superstars...but I doubt it.
                    You think the 04 Pistons had top 10 players?

                    Their lead scorer averaged like 17 a game. They weren’t a team that relied on a top 10 guy, they were a team that was just very well rounded with multiple All-Star caliber players.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                      What talent does Moody have over Duarte that isn’t age?
                      Length (Moody's wingspan is a bit under 7'1 whereas Duarte's is 6'7) and defensive ability.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

                        Length (Moody's wingspan is a bit under 7'1 whereas Duarte's is 6'7) and defensive ability.
                        That’s great on a vacuum but I would still classify Duarte as a good defender, Moody has more potential on that end I think because of his length and his lateral quickness, but I don’t think Moody is even in the same stratosphere as far as where his offensive game is right now.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post

                          You think the 04 Pistons had top 10 players?

                          Their lead scorer averaged like 17 a game. They weren’t a team that relied on a top 10 guy, they were a team that was just very well rounded with multiple All-Star caliber players.
                          Ben Wallace was 2nd team All-NBA that year. One of 3 times he made 2nd team.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                            Draft experts aren’t necessarily correct in what they view. If we take reporting into account, it was reported Golden State was trying to get us to trade them for Duarte for Moody. Probably says a bit on who the team Moody ended up with thinks about them.

                            So there seems to be a disconnect what the media draft experts thought and what NBA teams thought. I’m cool with going with the NBA guys think.

                            It’s obviously not an exact science; look at how many teams passed on Booker. Does what the draft experts said there matter? Early on Duarte has absolutely dazzled with just how developed his offensive game is.

                            Does preseason and a few regular season games mean we should all eat crow? No, but it definitely should probably make a few of us enter wait and see mode.
                            1) I fully agree that draft experts aren't necessarily correct. But teams aren't necessarily correct either. Both of them hit and miss every single year. I just believe that it is important to know what the consensus was before the draft.

                            2) Yes, the Warriors were one of the teams interested in Duarte. That is definitely true. It also makes a lot of sense since the Warriors are contending this season and Duarte was considered to be one of the most NBA-ready players in the draft.

                            3) As for Duarte himself, I've already said a number of times that I like the player. I wasn't a fan of the pick but I'm a fan of the player. If the player ends up being significantly better than I expected then my opinion on the pick will likely change. So far, so good.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post

                              You think the 04 Pistons had top 10 players?

                              Their lead scorer averaged like 17 a game. They weren’t a team that relied on a top 10 guy, they were a team that was just very well rounded with multiple All-Star caliber players.
                              Depending what you think of Tony Parker, you might say the 2014 Spurs too.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Wage View Post

                                Ben Wallace was 2nd team All-NBA that year. One of 3 times he made 2nd team.
                                Calling 9.5 PPG Ben Wallace a top 10 player is a little much for me. Really good player who was a stud defensively, but he’s not what anyone thinks of when you think of a superstar.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X