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

Should AJ Griffin be the pick?

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

  • Should AJ Griffin be the pick?

    This man can touch the rim with his head and is the best shooter in this class. Remember the last time we had the chance to get the best shooter in the draft? I know myself and many others were screaming at the TV for Devin Booker. Whoooopsie - we took Myles. Griffin and Mathurin might both be there. Aside from looking like he rides a mechanical bull in his spare time I see no downside to Grif. I don't know much about his defense though. But his wide stance reminds me of another guy with a wide shot stance - Klay Thompson.

    This guy is also built like a cross between Julius Randle and Jimmy Butler. He has crazy side steps and step backs too. Plus he can handle the ball. This situation reminds me of D Book because everyone was looking at the top guy on the team, meanwhile there is another player just as good! Just was curious what are people's thoughts on this guy? Is there any basketball reason he's not as good as Mathurin? I like Mathurin 2nd as far as realistic picks but I'm liking this guy best I think, JMO though.

  • #2
    Imma wait for TBird's analysis.

    Comment


    • #3
      I’ve heard people are concerned about his injury history.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by bumpercar3 View Post
        Aside from looking like he rides a mechanical bull in his spare time I see no downside to Grif.
        I got a few negatives for you.

        Doesn't pass. He is too tunnel-visioned on getting his own shot once he gets the ball. Ignores open team-mates/better shots.

        Needs to tighten and quicken his release. Not going to always have time to widen that stance and set his shoulders/hips.

        And the big one...

        His knees. Besides the obvious players, you can't take him over guys like Mathurin, Eason, Daniels, Sochan, and Murray. His knees are too much of an injury risk.

        I love his size, strength, shooting and athleticism and would take him with a later pick but there is no way I'd take him as high as 6th, with those knees.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by bumpercar3 View Post
          This man can touch the rim with his head and is the best shooter in this class. Remember the last time we had the chance to get the best shooter in the draft? I know myself and many others were screaming at the TV for Devin Booker. Whoooopsie - we took Myles. Griffin and Mathurin might both be there. Aside from looking like he rides a mechanical bull in his spare time I see no downside to Grif. I don't know much about his defense though. But his wide stance reminds me of another guy with a wide shot stance - Klay Thompson.
          I was right there with you wanting Booker. Griffin is no Booker though. Go back and watch Booker's Kentucky highlights showcasing his mid-range/pull up game, ability to slash, quickness off screens, decisiveness, finishing around the rim, quick release, etc. Booker showcased a complete package, including an elite awareness on the court without the need to dribble the air out of the ball. Griffin is far more iso and tends to play in slow motion, and often foolishly attacks the rim for contested shots. His shot is money when he's open, but I'd strive for much more than another Buddy Hield with injury issues if I'm the Pacers. Pacers just aren't the right team for him IMO.

          Comment


          • #6
            My least favorite player mocked near our range and the only guy I want way less than Murray. I just don't see it with this guy. A 3 and D guy who can't play D, moves like a robot on the court, and disappears for long stretches of games. I think his best case scenario is basically Duncan Robinson and I'm pretty disappointed with that result at 6.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by festar35 View Post
              Imma wait for TBird's analysis.
              So you cannot have an opinion without 12 paragraphs of word salad?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by croz24 View Post

                I was right there with you wanting Booker. Griffin is no Booker though. Go back and watch Booker's Kentucky highlights showcasing his mid-range/pull up game, ability to slash, quickness off screens, decisiveness, finishing around the rim, quick release, etc. Booker showcased a complete package, including an elite awareness on the court without the need to dribble the air out of the ball. Griffin is far more iso and tends to play in slow motion, and often foolishly attacks the rim for contested shots. His shot is money when he's open, but I'd strive for much more than another Buddy Hield with injury issues if I'm the Pacers. Pacers just aren't the right team for him IMO.
                That’s a pretty good critique. But I’m glad there’s some athletic shooters in our range.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by bumpercar3 View Post

                  So you cannot have an opinion without 12 paragraphs of word salad?
                  I have an opinion, but honestly I like conversing about players after TBird has done a write up as it offers a lot of context rather than some sort of hype post.
                  I like Griffin about 4th or 5th among potential picks for us.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by festar35 View Post
                    Imma wait for TBird's analysis.
                    I didn't realize T Bird was the only one allowed to write about players Pacers could potentially draft?
                    Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      No, cuz of his lack of athleticsm and injury history.

                      But given that this is what the Pacers ALWAYS look for in a Player and the FO has a tendency to **** off the majority of hardcore fans by reaching and drafting someone that they don't want.....AJ Griffin is destined to be a Pacer.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by bumpercar3 View Post

                        So you cannot have an opinion without 12 paragraphs of word salad?
                        I'm hoping you just aren't aware of the actual meaning of "word salad". TBird's analysis is pretty far from word salad. It's well written, informative, and lacks the redundancy and hyperbole of the actual word salad that can be found, on pacersdigest, from time to time.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post

                          I didn't realize T Bird was the only one allowed to write about players Pacers could potentially draft?
                          Going to be like that are you? Look he dives deep into the tape and the background of a prospect, it's far more in depth that he is a cross between Butler & Randle which is just crap.
                          AJ Griffin may have a body like Butler, but that is it. He isn't a huge playmaker, he appears to be an elite 3pt shooter which neither Butler or Randle are. He isn't known at all for his defense, in fact it's a bit of a weakness right now.

                          "The problem with Griffin is how he impacts the game when his shot isn’t falling. Some people fear that on an off-night, Griffin may not bring much else to the floor. His feet are slower than most, raising concerns about his defense, too."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            No. He has injury issues.

                            I’m tired of having players that are injured most of the time.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by festar35 View Post

                              Going to be like that are you? Look he dives deep into the tape and the background of a prospect, it's far more in depth that he is a cross between Butler & Randle which is just crap.
                              AJ Griffin may have a body like Butler, but that is it. He isn't a huge playmaker, he appears to be an elite 3pt shooter which neither Butler or Randle are. He isn't known at all for his defense, in fact it's a bit of a weakness right now.

                              "The problem with Griffin is how he impacts the game when his shot isn’t falling. Some people fear that on an off-night, Griffin may not bring much else to the floor. His feet are slower than most, raising concerns about his defense, too."
                              You could have written the above before bringing T Bird into this. If you are really looking forward to what T Bird has to say, you could have said something like "Thank for sharing your thoughts on Griffin. It will be interesting to see if T Bird agrees or disagrees with you."

                              I just thought you used poor message board etiquette. Everyone should have the same rights to post opinions on whatever player they feel like. This is Pacers Digest, not T Bird's 2022 NBA Draft Preview.
                              Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X