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

Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

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

  • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

    Originally posted by Jose Slaughter View Post
    [url]Negatives: Lacks a developed midrange game. Doesn't always show up on the defensive end. Has been pegged by scouts as a potential point guard, but seems to lack the decision making skills or feel to run the point. Has had some off-court issues. Teams worry that his ego is overinflated with all of the hype since eighth grade. A year older than everyone else in his class.

    Summary: Mayo is having a solid USC, but scouts are still trying to figure out what he actually is. It's clear he's going to be a great NBA scorer ... but will he give a team anything else?
    If the Pacers have the 9th or 10th pick in the draft.....given these very reasons.....I would not pick Mayo.

    We have enough offense.....we need a player that has some inclination to defend opposing players.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

      Originally posted by croz24 View Post
      that's fine but mr. westbrook is NOT a pg and will not be tall or strong enough to be a decent sg in the nba...westbrook is the kind of guy you take a chance on late in the 1st...just don't waste a top 10 pick on him...especially since this is the 1st year he's ever received any sort of accolades for his play...
      AKA a Fred Jones type- Count me out on Westbrook. Maybe if we got a late first on the side, but then I can still think of people going late I would rather have.
      Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
        I'm confused....are you talking about getting into the 2nd round of this years' playoffs?

        IMHO...I can hope that we somehow draft a player that can be a Franchise player....but I'm not expecting anything more then getting a player that will fix one of the many weaknesses that this team has.

        Whoever we draft ( assuming that we don't do something stupid like drafting Bantum or Gallinari ) will likely be talented enough to help us get better for the long-term. If we draft Thabeet.....I know that he maybe a project and that he won't be a Franchise saver....but I know that he will likely fix one of the huge holes that we have right now in our Frontcourt.
        Generally speaking people have hinted that the prospect that we select could be the Savior of the franchise. What I merely suggest is that defeating an opponent that we have no buisness of beating, to get in the second round would have a better long range result than a Thabeet (especially if our pick drops enough to get Love). Getting a franchise guy in the draft would be nice, but how did that work out for the Wolves? My point is that it is going to take more than one pick to turn this around. For me it is going to take more than personnel. It starts at the top. The pieces have to fall in place. And that should start at the top.

        Just looking at the talent in the first round picks 10-14, do you see a player that would help us more than getting to the playoffs? I believe that getting to the playoffs and drafting 15-20 would be better than missing and getting a slightly better "prospect".

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

          I remember when Marvin Williams came out everyone was fizated on his productiion at UNC, off of the bench. He is playing well, but it is clear that the Hawks should have drafted Paul or Williams.

          I see the same with Westbrook. I like him and I would rather have him over Thabeet. But I would rather have Bayless and Rose. And if we can't get them then I would still take Gordon.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

            Originally posted by intridcold View Post
            I remember when Marvin Williams came out everyone was fizated on his productiion at UNC, off of the bench. He is playing well, but it is clear that the Hawks should have drafted Paul or Williams.

            I see the same with Westbrook. I like him and I would rather have him over Thabeet. But I would rather have Bayless and Rose. And if we can't get them then I would still take Gordon.

            What if all three are off the board?

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

              Then Lopez, Jordan, or that WEstbrook kid.

              I would think that the Pacers would select Bantum or Galirharininja.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                Originally posted by intridcold View Post
                Then Lopez, Jordan, or that WEstbrook kid.

                I would think that the Pacers would select Bantum or Galirharininja.
                Lopez won't be on the board by the time the Pacers draft....maybe DeAndre Jordan....but I'm with those that really wonder about Westbrook. He's been playing, but hasn't really popped onto anyone's radar until recently...which I'm kind of concerned that he's more of a "flash in the pan" as opposed to a talent that has been making waves for awhile.

                As for Bantum or Gallinari.......they are European and play the SF positions......I wouldn't be surprised if Bird was thinking that we needed more of those in our lineup.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                  Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                  that's fine but mr. westbrook is NOT a pg and will not be tall or strong enough to be a decent sg in the nba...westbrook is the kind of guy you take a chance on late in the 1st...just don't waste a top 10 pick on him...especially since this is the 1st year he's ever received any sort of accolades for his play...
                  I don't see why he can't eventually be a PG in the NBA. His apg are solid, and more importantly, his assist-to-turnover ratio is solid. He's just a college sophomore who barely played his freshman season, so it's likely we've only seen the tip of the iceberg as to what he can do.

                  Originally posted by Draft Express
                  He is averaging 5.7 assists while playing off of the ball for the most part, leaving one to ponder what he could be able to do with the ball in his hands for the entire game. His court vision isn’t spectacular by any stretch, but he does a good job playing within UCLA’s system, and finding the many weapons he has around him within their set offense.
                  As for the whole "you haven't seen him so you don't know" argument....I've never bought it. I can tell plenty from accurately reading his stats, looking at his size and level of competition, and of course reading scouting reports. A lot of fans like to believe they're scouting guru's who can watch 3-4 games and tell you everything about a player. I call those people delusional, but I digress.

                  The scouts are warming up to him for a reason, and it's not just NBADraft.net but Chad Ford as well. What he did last year means jack squat now. He was a freshman on a loaded squad and he barely played. Now that he's getting minutes, he's delivering the goods, and NBA scouts are taking notice. I probably wouldn't take him over Mayo, Gordon, Bayless, Rose, Beasley, Lopez, Randolph, Jordan or Greene - but if all of those players are off the board/don't declare, and Westbrook is there, I wouldn't have second thoughts about taking him, unless he's a complete dud in pre-draft workouts or suffers a major injury between now and the draft. And if he plays strong the rest of the season and/or has an amazing workout, I could see taking him before some of the aforementioned players.


                  Here's a scouting report on his strengths, that was written BEFORE the season, back when he was coming off a 9 mpg freshman season, when his NBA stock was much lower than it is now...

                  Originally posted by NBADraft.net
                  Strengths: Athletic and explosive combo guard with the length to make up for his lack of height … Attacks the basket with a lethal first step and crossover ability … Can handle the rock well and gets into the lane effortlessly … Finishes well at the rim and is unafraid to go up in traffic … Huge wingspan allows him to play much bigger than his 6-3 height … Gets good lift on his jumpshot and has a quick release … Solid passer with unselfishness, always looks for the open man … Has an excellent mid-range game … A gym rat, really works hard to improve … Has a great attitude, extremely coach-able … Has the potential to be a bigtime scorer when given the chance … Really excels defensively and has a chance to develop into a great defender … His anticipation for steals and his on ball defensive ability are special … Solid passer who shows the ability to play the point guard position..
                  Sounds to me like the exact type of player we need badly.
                  Last edited by Kofi; 02-29-2008, 07:11 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                    One thing you want to look for is winners!

                    Once it's draft time and you have players in for workouts, you go by what you need, and who you think will fit, but you also want to pick winners.

                    Most of the guys... keyword: most, that are in the NBA, have done something special come tourney time, and helped lead their teams deep into the playoffs.

                    I'm not talking guys that can score only, but guys that just seem to put on a show and carry a team in the NCAAs.

                    They won't all amount, but that's a thing to look at as well.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                      Kofi - i seem to agree with you completely when it comes to what this franchise needs and how they should go about improving the team...i also feel we both have a great understanding of the types of players that could make the pacers a contender again...however, i disagree entirely with anyone who thinks russell westbrook should be the pacers 1st round draft pick in 2008 (if he even declares). westbrook is not a great ball handler, can't shoot very well from range, is small and thin, does have a high assist average considering his position but much of that imo can be attributed to the team around him. he merely goes through the SYSTEM to get his assists as opposed to playmaking ability. for me to even consider him on the pacers he would need to be the leader and team carrier on ucla next year without love, collison, mbah a moute, and possibly shipp. and i highly doubt he even comes out this year b/c i think scouts will feel the same way...

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                        Originally posted by Kofi View Post
                        I don't see why he can't eventually be a PG in the NBA. His apg are solid, and more importantly, his assist-to-turnover ratio is solid. He's just a college sophomore who barely played his freshman season, so it's likely we've only seen the tip of the iceberg as to what he can do.



                        As for the whole "you haven't seen him so you don't know" argument....I've never bought it. I can tell plenty from accurately reading his stats, looking at his size and level of competition, and of course reading scouting reports. A lot of fans like to believe they're scouting guru's who can watch 3-4 games and tell you everything about a player. I call those people delusional, but I digress.

                        The scouts are warming up to him for a reason, and it's not just NBADraft.net but Chad Ford as well. What he did last year means jack squat now. He was a freshman on a loaded squad and he barely played. Now that he's getting minutes, he's delivering the goods, and NBA scouts are taking notice. I probably wouldn't take him over Mayo, Gordon, Bayless, Rose, Beasley, Lopez, Randolph, Jordan or Greene - but if all of those players are off the board/don't declare, and Westbrook is there, I wouldn't have second thoughts about taking him, unless he's a complete dud in pre-draft workouts or suffers a major injury between now and the draft. And if he plays strong the rest of the season and/or has an amazing workout, I could see taking him before some of the aforementioned players.


                        Here's a scouting report on his strengths, that was written BEFORE the season, back when he was coming off a 9 mpg freshman season, when his NBA stock was much lower than it is now...



                        Sounds to me like the exact type of player we need badly.
                        I've watched about 5-6 UCLA games this year and while yes Westbrook is as athletic as all hell, and plays some seriously stifling defense...he just doesn't have the vision and leadership abilities of a good pg. If you watch how DJ Augustin or Rose control the game and open people up, he doesn't have that. His assists come during fst breaks and quick gimmes. He has no playmaking skills in the half court. He won't translate into a PG, he has Fred Jones syndrome.
                        Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                          Everything I'm reading is stating that he's a point guard, so with all due respect, I'll take the majority of the draft experts opinion over yours and croz24's.

                          I think a lot of the anti-Westbrook sentiment is the fact that he's not a "sexy" name. He's not Mayo, he's not Rose, he's not even Gordon. When I first went to NBADraft.net and saw he was penciled in as going to Indiana at #9, I felt the same way. However after reading what experts have to say regarding his game, and accurately analyzing his stats, I've come to the conclusion that he would be a fantastic pick up for us. I have a hunch by the early part of April, a lot more people will be talking about this Westbrook kid.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                            Reading reports are fine. But you have to see him life and in game situations. Stats do not mean a thing if we do not know what scenario they are in. To understand the scenario completely you have WATCH A GAME. I read the reports and make judgements as well. But not with the discernment of you Kofi. That is your choice. Westbrook will be a project at PG. It would be better for him to stay one more year and showcase his PG skills without Collinson. Who knows maybe he showcases them in the tourney. But at this point I am not willing take him with other players on the board.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                              Westbrook, PG? Not even close. To me he plays a college SG/SF tweener. Shipp plays the more traditional 2 and obviously Collison is the 1 for that team.

                              Whatever Westbrook does with the ball is dwarfed by how Collison plays at PG, and I think Collison is overrated somewhat. But with Collison I can see him as at least a backup PG.

                              Westbrook might be a better player than Fred Jones (hard to be sure) but he's still in that vein I think.

                              Not a sexy name? Um, people notice him. The UCLA guys are all getting notice, even the bench guys. Westbrook is considered a better prospect than Shipp and probably 3rd on the team after Love and Collison.

                              I agree with 'cold that he would be better served to stay another year.

                              His assists come during fst breaks and quick gimmes. He has no playmaking skills in the half court.
                              Exactly.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                                Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                                if we are going to base a player's ability on statistics, i could name you 50+ players in college right now with better stats than westbrook...i think we ought to make a rule that you may only comment on a prospect who you've watched play at least twice (and even that's not a high number)...
                                I agree. That's exactly why I've gone out of my way to make the time on these guys. It really changes your view of the draft. And when I watch I really just focus on the potential prospects. Westbrook, like Austrie (UConn) as well, stood out just in the course of watching other players, so I put him on my radar. Price, I only noticed him while watching Thabeet, but it stood out pretty quickly, and then in turn I noticed Austrie.

                                I do think that if you watch 4-5 games of a guy, at least in quality games, you start to see who stands out as clearly better than the rest even if the numbers don't always pan out. This is why a guy like Mayo stays toward the top of the boards.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X