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:
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

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

Nembhard, Nesmith, Mathurin

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nembhard, Nesmith, Mathurin

    What are we doing with these three - can we really keep them all?

    I heard on locked on Pacers today we are trying to extend Nembhard and his expected contract is like 78/4

    Nembhard is a nice player and had a good showing in the playoffs, but I don't really see him fitting here in our long term plan.

    Where do we play him? His ideal position is PG, but he's obviously not taking Haliburton's spot. He showed he can play SG, but is he really an ideal player there? He's really too small to play SG long term.

    Not to mention what would we do with Mathurin then? We'd have to slide Mathurin to 3 where he is also a little undersized. That's two good players out of position and doing a disservice to both in using them to their potential. That would also slide Nesmith to backup and he's too good (and will be too expensive) to come off the bench.

    I can't really envision a way to keep them all or afford them all. To me it seems like Nembhard is probably the best player to move. Mathurin playing to his potential is the most likely way to get a third AS level played with this core. But it would definitely be unfortunate to lose a player with that much promise. And, at the same time, what could be get back for him that could fit into our starting lineup?

    How do you see this shaking out?
    Lifelong pacers fan

  • #2
    Nembhard should continue to start at 2 and be Haliburton's long term back up.

    I don't have an issue with Mathurine as our starting 3.

    Nesmith is my favorite player but I'd rather him play off the bench as a 2, sometime 3.


    • #3
      Neismith is only earning 11 per year, 2 years left.
      so he is not expensive coming off the bench.

      the starting 3 if all goes well should go to mathurin. It’s his position to lose.


      • #4
        Originally posted by stew View Post
        Neismith is only earning 11 per year, 2 years left.
        so he is not expensive coming off the bench.

        the starting 3 if all goes well should go to mathurin. It’s his position to lose.
        Nesmith has 3 years left iirc. The deal this past summer was a 33 over 3 year extension (should kick in this upcoming season). I haven't looked at the deal specifics in a while, but I am fairly confident I'm not goofing up the details right now.


        • #5
          Originally posted by Ichi View Post

          Nesmith has 3 years left iirc. The deal this past summer was a 33 over 3 year extension (should kick in this upcoming season). I haven't looked at the deal specifics in a while, but I am fairly confident I'm not goofing up the details right now.
          You are right. I forgot that it’s an extension.

          such a value contract right now.


          • #6
            Best thing that could happen is the three continue to play well and compete for starter level minutes. They all have flaws that give some pause but if that happens one of them can be used to get a better fit defensively on the wing. The inability to match up defensively against the Tatum's, Brown's etc. IMO will be the true limiter on what this team can accomplish. Maybe Walker becomes that guy but suspect he will ultimately migrate to the 4 when Siakam ages out of the role.

            I think Sheppard has shown he is an NBA player and will ultimately fill a 3 & D bench roll.

            Would prefer the next piece not be a ball stopper and can facilitate or enhance the ball movement and unselfish play that makes the offense so dangerous. Would be critical if Mathurin stays as playing him with Siakam & Haliburton on the floor at the same time will look good on paper but IMO a high probability the results won't match expectations.


            • #7
              Originally posted by Jose Slaughter View Post
              Nembhard should continue to start at 2 and be Haliburton's long term back up.

              I don't have an issue with Mathurine as our starting 3.

              Nesmith is my favorite player but I'd rather him play off the bench as a 2, sometime 3.
              I agree with your idea about Nembhard being Halliburton’s
              long term back up and also play some 2
              That might be 20-30 games a year
              I hope they get the deal done. He is very young
              relative to TJ


              • #8
                This team needs a rebounding and physical defending
                And a large backup rebounding 5


                • #9
                  Nembhard had respectable playoffs performance, but I put my chips on Mathurin. I think he's the future and will be the best player on this team in 2-3 years.
                  Originally posted by Piston Prince
                  Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                  "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"


                  • #10
                    Mathurin will never start unless there are injuries. Rick hates him in the starting lineup for whatever reason.

                    The group that started for us in the playoffs is the group who will start for us for the foreseeable future. When healthy, we have an awesome bench though.


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by LongTimePacerFan View Post
                      Mathurin will never start unless there are injuries. Rick hates him in the starting lineup for whatever reason.

                      The group that started for us in the playoffs is the group who will start for us for the foreseeable future. When healthy, we have an awesome bench though.
                      IMO we need to start Mathurin or trade him.
                      Lifelong pacers fan


                      • #12
                        Re: Mathurin, I'm listening to the most recent Setting the Pace podcast right now with Chad Buchanan as their guest and they talked about Benn for a couple of minutes. They asked Chad about Benn's recent quote in his press conference about how he takes screenshots of his critics on social media (the guys even referenced that the last Tweet Benn liked from his account was a clip of when they had David Thorpe on the podcast toward the end of the season, when Thorpe claimed the Pacers are better without Mathurin) and Chad said that Benn is someone who doesn't like to receive too much praise. He then shared a story from his friend, Tommy Lloyd, who was his coach at Arizona. Tommy said that Benn liked to hang out in his office there a lot and he asked him one day why he didn't go out and enjoy all the benefits of the campus at Arizona, etc. but Benn replied that people just tell him how great he is out there, but his coach told him all the things he needed to improve and work on and that's what he wanted to be around. The kid has got such a Michael Jordan-esque sort of competitive drive and that's one of the reasons I would never count him out of our future plans.


                        • #13
                          I'm going to divide it into ceiling, fit, + future.

                          Ceiling: I see absolutely no reason he can't become a borderline All-Star or more. There are a bunch of guys out there from Jalen Brunson to Jimmy Butler to Khris Middleton to Malcolm Brogdon to Derrick White, who were later picks after completely multiple years at college and being really good. I can see him being a 20-8 guy with his own team, but with us more, an 18-4-6 guy.

                          Fit: Tyrese Haliburton is a poor defender, Andrew Nembhard is a good defender. Tyrese Haliburton gets pressured massively when bringing the ball up, Andrew Nembhard can bring the ball up and run the offense. Tyrese Haliburton and Andrew Nembhard have shown some nice off-ball shooting, where they can grow.

                          Future: TJ McConnell is 32 years old, and he will be 33 years old at the start of his next deal. He won't be playing forever in Indiana, and as he ages, we need someone to fill in the 2nd unit PG minutes. Well, Andrew Nembhard can very much play PG in those 15-18mpg that Haliburton is on the bench.

                          Ceiling: He showed some really nice stuff in the playoffs. His 3-ball was bad, but he pulled up in the mid-range, attacked close outs well, and finished in traffic really well. He puts those things altogether. We have a very good 3/D wing with some added extras kind of a smaller Harrison Barnes, but the Warriors version where he had a specific role in thrived in.

                          Fit: It's an ideal fit. We all wish he could be 6'7+, but he isn't, and as he ages, he should become more efficient as a defender. His rebounding will be a big factor in how good he is, but the man hustles, and I expect his game to evolve to incorporate this aspect more.

                          Future: His long-term future in Indiana looks good. I don't see him going elsewhere, but his role could change due to a number of factors. Personally, I think his team will be a truly competitive one when he is our 6th or 7th man, causing chaos on both ends.

                          Ceiling: If the idea of what I believe the Pacers want Mathurin to become actually come to fruition, then for me, that's like a mini Khris Middleton. Simply put, a very good 2-way player who can score, playmake, and defend with the best of them. His peak at his current playstyle for me is Jaylen Brown, an iso scorer who plays physical with good defense, I'm not sure this type of player fits on the roster or not without some sacrifice from Tyrese + Pascal in particular.

                          Fit: The fit is clunky as he is an iso scorer who requires the ball and doesn't know how to read and react that well yet. His development is key here, and I'm unsure what it looks like long-term. I kind of see a TJ Warren like skillset, and to me, that's a player that's ideal for an average offensive team, but that's not Indiana. The playmaking + defense needs to develop for the fit to work. The rebounding flashes he showed were huge as well. I wouldn't be shocked to see seasons of 6rpg+.

                          Future: I have no idea what it looks like. The raw tools are there. In theory, he can become a guy who provides everything that Nesmith does, except he is dropping over 20ppg at the same time. His physical strength is unreal, so despite being undersized at SF, I think that's where his playstyle best suits.

                          Ideal Scenario:
                          Andrew Nembhard turns into something along the lines of Derrick White where he scores 15ppg, dishes out 5apg, and defends the crap out of people.
                          Aaron Nesmith becomes that chaotic bench guy on the wing who can just make life very difficult for whoever he matches up with and loves doing it.
                          Bennedict Mathurin learns the system, becomes a 20ppg scorer while defending like Nesmith, and rebounding like Josh Hart.

                          Sent from my SM-S921B using Tapatalk


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by LongTimePacerFan View Post
                            Mathurin will never start unless there are injuries. Rick hates him in the starting lineup for whatever reason.

                            The group that started for us in the playoffs is the group who will start for us for the foreseeable future. When healthy, we have an awesome bench though.
                            I really think that Mathurin is better coming off the bench than he is starting. He still gets starters minutes, I don't see why we should we should care.
                            Go Pacers!


                            • #15

                              from the article:
                              Nembhard, should his team option covering the 2025-26 season be declined, would be eligible for a four year contract extension. The exact value can't be known until the league's estimated average salary is set for next season, but it would be near $78 million in total