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 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

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

  • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

    Originally posted by Jose Slaughter View Post
    Sorry about asking this, it might have been covered earlier in the thread.

    Can you guys come up with 3 or 4 names of guys with the highest basketball IQ's or those that are most NBA ready.

    Clearly, I think that the guy Bird goes after will be on that list.

    Last year he even traded down a few places to get him, same could happen this time too.

    Thanks in advance.
    basketball iq means nothing without great talent. rush is an example of that. rush was just the wrong pick last year and that draft philosophy that bird is wanting to use of drafting nba ready players (in his opinion jrs and srs) is a completely flawed way of thinking...

    that we have a chance at drafting? honestly, outside of a few players in this draft, there aren't any that are nba ready. and no i wouldn't say curry has a good basketball iq. when i think good iqs, i don't think of players who continuously turn the ball over or jack up 3 pointers after only 5 seconds has come off the shot clock.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      Originally posted by IndyProdigy View Post
      Jamison = PF
      Marion = SF
      Josh Smith = SF
      Diaw = SF/PF
      Dirk = PF
      Sheed = C
      Odom = SF/PF
      Villanueva = SF
      Gomes = SF
      Yi = SF/PF
      Green = SF
      Young = SG/SF
      Okur = C

      of these guys our PF spot would be guarding jamison, diaw, dirk, maybe odom, and maybe Yi.

      brackins would be able to guard these guys just as well if not better than murph derrty
      Not to mention that is only 13 players, which doesn't even cover half the teams in the league. Dirk, Okur, Gomes and Odom we only play 2x a year totalling 8 games barring a finals match-up. Green, Thadeus and Josh Smith are all SF's. Sheed and Okur play C. And the rest are marginal players at best. Give me somebody that can guard the bigger PF's and abuse these guys listed down low on the other end any day.


      I still like Blair for us. He gives us everything we lack inside except for great shot blocking, which he can do a little of. And he will likely be available even if we sneak into the playoffs. In the second round I like gambling on Hudson as mentioned earlier. Of all the 2nd rounders, Hudson seems like the most talented. If he wasn't 24 years old and playing at Tenn Martin he would be an easy first rounder. He definately has the complete package. He's one of those guys that has "huge steal" potential. And in the second round that is what you should look for.
      "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Originally posted by croz24 View Post
        basketball iq means nothing without great talent. rush is an example of that. rush was just the wrong pick last year and that draft philosophy that bird is wanting to use of drafting nba ready players (in his opinion jrs and srs) is a completely flawed way of thinking...

        that we have a chance at drafting? honestly, outside of a few players in this draft, there aren't any that are nba ready. and no i wouldn't say curry has a good basketball iq. when i think good iqs, i don't think of players who continuously turn the ball over or jack up 3 pointers after only 5 seconds has come off the shot clock.
        I disagree, Steph Curry def is a high iq basketball player. Yea he shoots a lot of 3's but his teammates sure dont mind.

        Bob Knight considers him the best passer in college basketball.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Originally posted by ReginaldWayne View Post
          I disagree, Steph Curry def is a high iq basketball player. Yea he shoots a lot of 3's but his teammates sure dont mind.

          Bob Knight considers him the best passer in college basketball.
          there's a HUGE difference between college basketball and the pros...i take it you haven't seen many of davidson's games this year when they actually play respectable competition. curry has been dreadful. he's just not good enough, and makes way too many mistakes.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Weren't you banned?

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              Originally posted by HeartlandFan View Post
              Weren't you banned?
              unjustly

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Originally posted by ReginaldWayne View Post


                Bob Knight considers him the best passer in college basketball.

                Talk about a kiss of death.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                  there's a HUGE difference between college basketball and the pros...i take it you haven't seen many of davidson's games this year when they actually play respectable competition. curry has been dreadful. he's just not good enough, and makes way too many mistakes.
                  I like curry if the pacers have a chance to get him the should, he reminds me of EJ last year, people keep saying that he was never going to be good a now he is getting at least 25 points per game. Regarding his play Vs better teams I think the big problem is that his teammates are not that good and they double him all the time, just imagine a crapy team with one good player, you double the guy and let the other guys beat you.
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    I would draft Tyler Hansborough over Greg Monroe/Blair/Curry/Patterson. The kid is not going to be a bust. He has work ethic and heart. He has a better all around game than Murphy did in college as well. Patterson & Monroe do not have 1/3 of his heart or work ethic. I think Curry is a great college player but his game does not transcend to the pros. He will have to be able to defend a lot better than he scores in the next level.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      I like curry if the pacers have a chance to get him the should, he reminds me of EJ last year, people keep saying that he was never going to be good a now he is getting at least 25 points per game. Regarding his play Vs better teams I think the big problem is that his teammates are not that good and they double him all the time, just imagine a crapy team with one good player, you double the guy and let the other guys beat you.
                      the problem with that is the better teams actually don't double curry. they've had the athletes to play man defense against davidson with some switching. when curry is getting doubled is when davidson is winning ballgames. curry is indeed a solid passer and can split doubles very well. but when a man just as, if not more athletic than curry is guarding him, that is when he struggles by turning the ball over and taking some bad shots. in the nba, just about every player will be more athletic than curry at his position. that's the difference between he and ej. ej is a tremendous athlete. curry is not.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        I agree with Croz on Curry. You put Westbrook or Rush last year, perhaps Henderson this year, on Curry all game long and he's going to have a long night. EJ had athletic ability, the concern was handles and that was mostly if he played PG. Height at SG was the only other possible issue with EJ.



                        Louisville - I hate Clark, hate him with a passion as a top 10 pick. I just don't get it. Yes, he has a SF NBA stature to him and can make a jumper, but he does zilch to get himself involved let alone getting others involved. I've seen him several times this year and some last year too, and he's yet to be "the man". He's always picking up scraps from others. The buzz has him as a lottery pick still but I just don't see it.

                        Yesterday he traveled by even NBA standards 4 different times, got badly beaten on defense when he played the wrong side and let his main have a clear path to the rim, and let his man come by for an easy offensive rebound along the baseline when he turned and lost track of him. Really horrible basketball. IF he becomes a good pro it will have a lot to do with the coaching he gets IMO.

                        However L'ville does have a couple of nice prospects. Terrence and Terrence, as in Williams (PG) and Jennings (PF). Jennings is the backup for them but to me he's one of the main impact guys they have. He's not a scorer but he is a legit sized PF that is effective at locking up rebound space, defending the glass in scrums with him often coming down with the ball, and playing smart defense.

                        Williams was just brilliant yesterday, but he has been all year. The knock was his shot and he shot it smoothly yesterday. Pitino adjusted it and it's taken him some time to dial it in, but he put it up at will under pressure without adjusting his motion. He doesn't flinch on it with pending contact and also has range to it.

                        The rest of his PG game is beautiful, very traditional all-around game. He drives with passes in mind, doesn't get caught with no idea what to do. He's driving with a goal in mind of making specific guys move to free up a teammate or passing lane. He's very active on the glass even by SG/SF standards. He's an involved defender as well.

                        At one point late in the game he drove to setup a 3pt shot, which was made. Then on the inbounds he doubled back just as they passed it in, deflected it to Sosa who went on in for the 2pt and 1. 6 points all created by Williams in about 4 seconds of play.

                        His line was 6 reb, 7 ast, 6 steals, 5-6 from deep and not one of those numbers was cheap (uncontested board, pass around the arc assist, wide open 3). He makes that team go.

                        I watched the NC/Duke game right after this and I have to say that Williams is a far superior PG to Lawson. He just became my new favorite prospect this year.


                        Speaking of Duke/NC, Lawson just isn't that overall involved. He's quick, but he's not THE guy by any stretch. Of all the NC teams I can think of, this one is one of the least NBA star based yet. Traditionally they were like a JV NBA squad and it was teams like Duke and Indiana that were getting by with overall talent and quality NCAA level play rather than star power. Somehow that's flipped because Duke is basically Henderson and Singler and a lot of slop.

                        So I'm still not sold on Lawson, wasn't last year either. I like Singler as a Detlef type but he's not quite dominant so I'd say he's still a risk. Henderson is the real deal without a doubt. He might not be an all-star but he's chomping at the bit for the next level now. He was the only player in that game that looked like a man among boys IMO.



                        Still have to look at the last Wake game. HEADS UP ON ST. MARY'S. If they don't beat Gonzaga on Monday night you might not get to see Patty Mills again before draft night. Modest game yesterday coming off the injury, hopefully will get to see something more tomorrow night.



                        basketball iq means nothing without great talent. rush is an example of that
                        Uh, yeah. Because the big knock on Rush is that he's not athletic enough, can't jump, has no handles, can't rebound....oh yeah, he does have all that.

                        IQ means a ton and Rush is actually the perfect example. He's a guy that often won't step up to be a scorer and doesn't feel comfortable in that role which means he struggles. The reason you can leave him on the floor in spite of this is specifically because he is smart enough to read plays and make an impact away from the ball or even the box score at times. This means that he can buy himself some time till he gets the shooting confidence that he found toward the end of last season.


                        So I would agree with you that you must have talent and that Curry and PsychoT are both guys that seem to be maxing out their talent already among other guys who have higher peaks even now but aren't polished or mature enough to maintain that level. Frankly this is my concern with Singler despite liking the idea of his game, so I'm not just using this as a knock on players I don't like or something.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          I agree with Terrence Williams. He is my second favorite prospect after Evan Turner right now. But he is not a PG, he is a SG. (Sometimes he plays SF as Clark plays PF for them most of the time.) Terrence has okay handles but not PG caliber. His passing is great though. Shooting is still a question because he is not very consistent with his jumper. Other than that, he is a scrappy defender, plays tough, has an NBA body, one of the best athletes in college ball. I am very high on him...

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Originally posted by IndyProdigy View Post
                            Jamison = PF
                            Marion = SF
                            Josh Smith = SF
                            Diaw = SF/PF
                            Dirk = PF
                            Sheed = C
                            Odom = SF/PF
                            Villanueva = SF
                            Gomes = SF
                            Yi = SF/PF
                            Green = SF
                            Young = SG/SF
                            Okur = C

                            of these guys our PF spot would be guarding jamison, diaw, dirk, maybe odom, and maybe Yi.

                            brackins would be able to guard these guys just as well if not better than murph derrty
                            I don't really want to get into a pissing match about this, but I think you're appraisals are pretty inaccurate.

                            Okur and Wallace may be listed as centers, but you have to think about matchups. If our starting C is Roy Hibbert, only a complete moron would ask him to guard Wallace and Okur around the 3 point line.

                            Josh Smith, Boris Diaw, Ryan Gomes, Lamar Odom, Charlie Villanueva, Jeff Green, Thaddeus Young, and Yi Jianlian are all starting at PF for their current teams. They might not be true PF's, but their playing the position for substantial parts of the game.

                            On the list, Marion is the only one whom our PF would not be assigned to guard right now because he's starting alongside Bosh and Bargnani. He has, however, started at PF for the last 5-6 years of his career, and he still plays the position pretty regularly.

                            I don't want someone who can guard these guys as well as Murphy. I want someone who can guard them dramatically better.
                            "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                            - Salman Rushdie

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              Originally posted by Placebo View Post
                              I agree with Terrence Williams. He is my second favorite prospect after Evan Turner right now. But he is not a PG, he is a SG. (Sometimes he plays SF as Clark plays PF for them most of the time.) Terrence has okay handles but not PG caliber. His passing is great though. Shooting is still a question because he is not very consistent with his jumper. Other than that, he is a scrappy defender, plays tough, has an NBA body, one of the best athletes in college ball. I am very high on him...
                              I think Williams is a definite NBA player. There's a bunch of guys like Trenton Hassell and Greg Buckner who've made careers out of being solid, physical wing defenders. Williams is on par with either of those guys defensively and offers a lot more offensively, even if he never becomes a great jumpshooter.
                              "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                              - Salman Rushdie

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                Eric Maynor and VCU are playing G. Mason on ESPN 2 right now..

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X