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 DrFife View Post
    Seth and others, what do you think of Aminu? Given the current roster, we clearly don't need another SF, I know ... but Draft Express makes an interesting conjecture:

    http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/...uq-Aminu-1293/

    As I recall, this was the developmental hope for Shawne Williams when Larry selected him. IF Aminu could grow into a sleek PF, he might be just the complement & eventual successor to Murphy's game. Thoughts?
    A) He's hoppy

    B) He's raw, plays youthful

    I'd like to see him stay another year at Wake, but a thin draft might lure him in. He's active on the boards, really likes to get in there and can get back up quickly (thus hoppy). Coordinated enough to have decent handles by PF standards, but as a true SF he's not Q'Rich let alone Lebron. If he's a SF it's toward the PF end of things (ala Shawne as you mention). I don't see him as a true deep ball guy like Troy or Shawne though.

    He's an energy rebounder, undersized PF. Baston but young; little more fight in him perhaps.


    I've only seen those guys 3 times this year however.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      James Harden and Demar Derozan are playing now on CBS. Harden will probably go 2-3 and will be out of our reach. Derozan could be there when we pick if he comes out though.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Could terrence williams really play PG in the NBA? You don't see a lot of 6-6 Point Guards these days. Could he gaurd the quick PGs of the leauge?

        His Draft Express profile talks about him as a SG/SF prospect. Also said he has a problem with TOs... which isn't good for a PG. Though that was an older report.

        He kinda sounds like a better version of Kyle Weaver based on the draft express profile, so I see why Seth likes him. It would be a smart draft pick from the perspective of addressing two need areas for next year, depth on the wing and future PG prospect. Versatility is always nice. Is his jumpshot as hopeless as Marquis though? Would a few sessions with Billy Keller do any good?
        Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 03-14-2009, 05:50 PM.
        "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

        - ilive4sports

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          I watched Williams a bit yesterday and wasn't too impressed. He didn't shoot well, and seemed to take a lot of bad shots. He did handle the ball well and made some nice passes though. As seth said, he's a good rebounder as well. Watching him though, I got the sense that he would be a SG at the next level. It seems like Seth has watched more of him than me though so I would trust his word over mine.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            It would be great if we either trade down, or trade for another pick and snag Terrance Williams. Despite being 4-10, infact he hits a 3 as im typing this, hes single handedly(word?) picking apart Syracuses defense. Jay Bilas just said he thinks he will become a better shooter at the next level when hes maore time to focus on improving it.

            Hard dribbler, fast penetrator, no look passes for 3, down low on Cuse's 2-3 Zone, anticipating the pass and stealing it( he has to have atleast 3 at this point, top half of the 2nd half), contesting jump shots, good defensive foot work, batttling for rebounds on both ends, telling his teammates where to be on O and D, knows when to slow it down and when to push it, most athletic on the court, fast in the open court, seeing the whole court.

            He doenst have the prettiest stroke, but certainly not the ugliest. definitely one that can be tweaked to become a little more text book. Easily UL's most important player on the court. I hope UL gets knocked out of the tourney early so he doesnt have more chances to showcase his skills, raising his stock. But id be surprised if hes taken after 20.

            edit: So Jay Bilas just said Terrance Williams has 7 steals.
            Last edited by ReginaldWayne; 03-14-2009, 10:11 PM.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              Derozan put USC on his back tonight and pulled out the come-from-behind victory tonight against James Harden and 'Zona State.

              "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Terrence Williams really sounds like Daniels. Point guard skills and can't shoot. But he's younger and would be cheaper. He also sounds like someone Bird would go after. Four year college player that has a high basketball I.Q.

                This is what Chad Ford has to say about him.

                http://insider.espn.go.com/nbadraft/...draftyear=2009

                Terrence Williams Draft Bio



                School/Country

                Terrence Williams
                Shooting Guard (Rank: #30) | 6-6, 210 | Age: 21
                Louisville (Senior)
                Hometown: Seattle, WA

                Season Averages
                YR GMS MIN PTS REB AST TO A/T STL BLK PF FG% FT% 3P% PPS
                2008-093233.812.48.55.12.32.2/12.30.81.7.426.574.3731.16
                2007-083635.911.17.24.52.91.5/11.30.81.9.411.571.3401.13
                2006-073433.012.47.03.82.41.6/11.30.72.1.367.604.2610.98
                2005-063325.18.44.72.11.71.2/11.00.31.8.391.612.3101.05
                · View full player card
                Draft Projection: Mid to late first round

                Notes:

                Positives:

                Superathletic swing man
                Excellent rebounder
                Long and explosive
                Skilled player who can do a little bit of everything

                Negatives:

                A very inconsistent shooter
                Has range and isn't shy to let it fly, but his shooting percentages are shaky
                Not always aggressive, can fade into the background
                Poor free-throw shooter.

                Summary: Jan 23 Update: Williams is another player I've been critical of over the years. His potential is obvious -- he is an excellent athlete, has an NBA body and is a very versatile player -- but his shooting troubles have really plagued him in the past. Lately, though, he's been on fire. His 24-point, 16-rebound, 8-assist game versus Notre Dame was one of the best individual performances of the season. And he followed that up with huge games against Pittsburgh and Rutgers. Williams is another player who will skyrocket up the rankings if he can keep this up. On pure talent, he's one of the best prospects in the draft.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  I don't really think the T-Williams/Daniels comparison is a great one once you get past the SG-size/PG-skills part of their games. I like Williams a lot, but I have a couple of questions about him playing PG in the NBA. Can he bring the ball up the court against pressure defense? Also, can he guard quick PG's like Ford and Parker?

                  I thought Clark looked pretty good rebounding yesterday, but other than that I didn't see too much out of him. I didn't get a chance to watch much of the game.
                  "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                  - Salman Rushdie

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                    T. williams
                    Positives:

                    Superathletic swing man
                    Excellent rebounder
                    Long and explosive
                    Skilled player who can do a little bit of everything

                    Negatives:

                    A very inconsistent shooter
                    Has range and isn't shy to let it fly, but his shooting percentages are shaky
                    Not always aggressive, can fade into the background
                    Poor free-throw shooter.


                    Another guy who can't shoot? He can get behind Rush.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      Originally posted by pacertom View Post
                      I've seen quite a few of their games and lots of teams put a box-and-one on him, or doubled him constantly. This was especially before he got banged up.

                      His size and stength will hurt him, and I don't see him as an NBA starter, but I think he will find a job in the NBA as a slightly better version of Eddie House--more range obviously, with instant offense but a guy to hide on D.
                      i've seen the top teams throw mulitple defenders at him or constantly switch on to him, but i rarely see them double him.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        have any of you guys seen Greivis Vasquez? he looks good and it seems that he is almost a triple double waiting to happen he got 35 pts 11 reb and 10asst against UNC. also good high for a point guard at 6'6, he could be a nice pick in the second round. I forgot today he just got 22 points 9 assist and 8 rebounds.
                        Vasques, Patty Mills, & Eric Maynor all have very legit shots at being NBA players. The thing about this draft is there will be many diamonds in the rough. I do think Hansborough is getting enough credit. I compare him to Ronny Turiaf.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          i like evan turner.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            On T'Will - one, Pitino broke his shot totally down and had him change all mechanics. The Big East Tourney wasn't a brilliant representation, although let's be fair. If you watched the games you know he missed those inside shots I mentioned vs Provi and was just off on a couple of his misses vs Syracuse before hitting back to back 3's to crush them.


                            Fades into background? Not even remotely. T'Will is involved in almost literally EVERY SINGLE PLAY. HE IS NOT THEIR SHOOTING GUARD.

                            He plays point by any practical definition. If you give him the ball up top and let him drive to create passes, if you have him handle the ball in any pressure situation, and if he's just as likely to pass for an assist as take a jumper, the dude is a PG. He's a Jason Kidd, a big PG that couldn't light it up outside but stayed respectible.

                            The Syracuse game was prime example of his game and intelligence. He's a coach among kids out there, he knows how the plays are going to go and reads them at both ends better than anyone else on the court. That's where he's SEVEN steals vs Cuse came from. They tried to pin it on Cuse passing, but did you see any other Lville players stealing the ball almost every other trip at any point in that game?

                            It's not even funny how much he runs their show.

                            And on the PG thing, look at the TYPES OF PASSES he can and does make. My knock on Maynor is that all he has is the jump 2 handed pass from the top of the lane, even when it's not applicable.

                            You don't see TWill throw the same type of pass two times in a game. He comes over the top to slam it hard and low past a guy, then turns right around and fades it over a guy's head. Vs Cuse he slung one from nearly halfcourt through THREE DEFENDERS to Harris at the rim, who promptly fumbled it away blowing his assist. A bit later he hit another brilliant pass to Clark who was fouled, again no assist.

                            He does EVERY INBOUNDS pass from the baseline for them. Again for a reason.

                            And then he rebounds like a maniac. There is no doubting that. He is a playmaker PG in the NBA that creates first and uses the shot only to keep the defense honest. He will hurt you at the FT line, no doubt about that. As his only serious knock I can live with it.

                            Another guy who can't shoot? He can get behind Rush.
                            The report quoted is from mid-Jan and is painfully out of date. Don't take my word for it. Go look at T'Will's 3pt shooting the last 8-10 games of the season this year. What, was that just lucky magic over and over?

                            I liked Rush but I have always said you could have gotten the cheaper poor man's version down in the 20's with Courtney Lee or Kyle Weaver.

                            T'Will is a much better player than Rush was. He's super-aggressive rather than deferring to a fault like I said over and over about Rush, he's a far better passer and playmaker. He's like Chalmers added to Rush with a greater desire to rebound. He's far closer to what WESTBROOK was for UCLA except he's not letting a Collison-type handle the halfcourt ball like Westbrook did.

                            The only risk is that all of this has just come from his own smarts and understanding the college game and that once faced with pro-talent he'll be overwhelmed. Of course that applies to many players.




                            Point vs quicker NBA PGs - no more than Kidd or Jax, but you know that tradeoff. He's 6'6". Can they defend him at the rim or keep him off the offensive glass? Can he pass over them?

                            Cuse put Flynn on him a few times, didn't seem to have an impact IMO.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              Clark - I thought Clark had a pretty solid game vs Cuse. He can certainly shoot, he's pretty smooth and for once he got after it both on the boards and with some creating of his own. Funny he only had 3 assists because I thought he passed it better than that. I don't dislike him, I just think his mental game is a big risk and that his position/style of strength (lanky smooth SF) isn't exactly an area of need in the NBA.

                              It would be nice if he had something more defining his game, some "hook" to hang his hat on. I mean he's just not the L'ville go-to guy. He doesn't have Love's fundamentals or outlets, he doesn't have the hops of Westbrook, doesn't have the handles of Augustin. I don't know, I guess in fairness he still has to be a top 15 pick.


                              Mullens - still a bit raw but he's come a long way this year. I would guess he really will come out based on his play yesterday. For a kid his size he can play pretty smooth. He's still in the project stage but he's interesting.


                              Flynn - I know he played himself ragged, but my thing on him is that he plays like a poor man's Lawson, and I'm not all that big on Lawson. Waterbug PGs with running floaters from the FT line don't usually carry over well to the NBA. He doesn't really have the cross over or step back moves that you see a kid like Maynor show and that really defined what you liked about Bayless and Augustin last year.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                Oh, and no Patty Mills in the NCAA tourney. Would have been nice to see him in that showcase.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X