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

    The only way we draft T-Will is in the second round. He is a dime a dozen player. Field's of Pitt distributes the ball better. Patty Mills/Eric Maynor/Lawson would be better suited for the Pacers than T-Will.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
      The only way we draft T-Will is in the second round. He is a dime a dozen player. Field's of Pitt distributes the ball better. Patty Mills/Eric Maynor/Lawson would be better suited for the Pacers than T-Will.
      No way does he last until the second round though. Everybody knows the Warriors will take him and they are picking before us.

      "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

        Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
        What is a salary cap? What is a luxury tax?
        Beat me to this one

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Okay plax. Obviously you have strong opionons about Rush. And obviously getting to the ft line as a rookie wing on this team with ford, danny, and jack slashing does not figure one iota into your stance. Look at rush's role. He hits the open jumper off of space created by said players above. Not exactly shots that would send you to the ft line.

          And just because he does shoot less fts than he should does not detract from his overall production.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Originally posted by Plax80 View Post
            Lets camn down about Brandon Rush' defense.......geez. You probbaly had Chuck Person pegged as a top 5 defender and penetrator as well.

            As the ESPN guy would say.......talk it out loud..........11 FTA in a MONTH in the NBA where stats are padded with FTs every night. You can't be a good penetrator.....you can't talk about a guys extension going to the cup............about strentgh at the rim.............when he averages LESS THAN 1 FTA per game in his breakout month. He scores 58 points in 2 games .......57 from the field.

            *removed* Keep politics OFF of this forum!

            MOR RIS PETER SON.
            you can if you watch the games, and see what is going to come in the future, which I highly doubt you did, thats why you only talk about his ft attempts, and dont recognize his defense.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              I see BRush not getting to the Free Throw line as a huge opportunity in the future. Just think how his scoring could improve when he starts to get to the line.

              Last game for example, he pump faked from 3 and his defender jumped right out at him. He took a dribble and took an uncontested 19 footer, not a bad choice. Maybe next time he let's the defender fly into him and draws 3 FTs. All part of the progression in my mind. He'll be doing that without thinking in 2 years. By the way, he missed the 19 footer.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Originally posted by Peskoe97 View Post
                I should have clarified -- he is "testing the draft process," so he could pull his name out if he doesn't like where he ends up being projected.
                Yeah, I came back here to talk about it when I saw that today. Smart move. Both he and Flynn don't belong out there this year. I'm not really sold that Flynn will ever climb higher to be honest, and if you aren't certain to be an NBA smash you might as well enjoy as much NCAA glory as you can get (plus the education).

                I do think Jrue is a better PG prospect long term, but yes as of now Evans has more credibility. As I said before, Jrue strikes me as a Vern Fleming type, and while not a star he wasn't too shabby in his youth. That's a big part of how he stuck in the NBA so long. Typically he didn't have much around him as a Pacer.

                However as of now I'm not sold that he's going to go as high this year as he will next year. I'd almost compare he and Evans to Griffin and Beasley last year. Griff stayed and surpased Beasley so that no team would trade the #1 pick for Beasley as this point.

                Evans might be rated higher now, but a year from now after he's been the man at UCLA I don't think that would be true.


                I'd guess he would probably consider staying in if he's projected top 10, which does seem possible. His tourney games showed that he is better than Collison and has probably been held back by him. I wonder if the temptation to chase top 5 money would keep him in? I wonder if somehow the buzz on him will keep him outside the top 10?

                Flynn definitely isn't going to get "come out now" kind of feedback I'd guess.

                Field's of Pitt distributes the ball better.
                Come on now, let's be realistic. Fields is a mundane "sparkplug" college player who benefits from having 2 top 15 potential draft picks on the floor with him, both as potential scoring mismatches that the opposition must focus on to stop.

                T'Will is the best player on his team and often the only reason there is a pass available for him to make is because of his own creative actions. Fields tossing it into Blair, not brilliant. Fields driving and then turning backward to throw it back to Sam Young for a jumper, not brilliant.

                TWill will drive, throw a fake look to one guy to create the bounce pass lane behind him and will then throw a pounding bouncer the comes straight up to his man's hands on the run. And this kind of stuff comes out of broken plays half the time.

                This awareness is also why he's a monster defender and Fields is not.

                I like Fields as a college player. He brings energy and helps keep the ball moving. But it's a totally different level of play.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  Are Jrue and Tyreke really true PG prospects? I was under the impression they were more like undersized shooting gaurds or at most scoring points. Can these guys run a team, do they show any potential in that area?
                  "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 havent seen much of Jrue, but I think Tyreke has the potential to be a terrific dribble-drive, kick-out point guard, which is exactly what we need with our great wing shooters (Granger, Rush, Dun). He gets into the lane so easily and is a deadly finisher, forcing defenses to collapse on him. He probably has the most fluid ball handling of any prospect. He's definitely a score-first point guard, but showed that he can run an offense after being put at the point halfway through the season. He is a mismatch nightmare at 6-6 and almost 7-foot wingspan. He just needs to work on his decision making...

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      Fields was a great college player for Pitt. I compare him a little to G Mc Namara of Syrcuse. He does distribute the ball better than T-Will. He is not more athletic or quicker is all.

                      I like T-Will but I believe Earl Clark will/should be drafted ahead of this year. I would be suprised if he is taken before T Evans.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
                        Fields was a great college player for Pitt. I compare him a little to G Mc Namara of Syrcuse. He does distribute the ball better than T-Will. He is not more athletic or quicker is all.

                        I like T-Will but I believe Earl Clark will/should be drafted ahead of this year. I would be suprised if he is taken before T Evans.
                        You lost all credibility when you called T-Will a second-rounder. And why is Levance in the discussion? No chance he gets drafted...

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          Originally posted by Plax80 View Post
                          [Rush] shot a TOTAL of 11 Free Throws.

                          There a dozen SG in the league that average close to that many attempts per night.
                          I'm curious as to what you mean by "close to."

                          Only player in the league who shoots that many a night is Dwight. Closest SG is Kevin Martin at 10.3, then Wade at 9.6. Kobe is next with 6.9, then Brandon Roy (6.5), Iverson (6.1), and Iguodala (6.1). That's only six, not a dozen. I'll let you count the rest if you like, but by the time you get to the bottom of the dozen in FTAs you're nowhere near 11 per game.

                          It doesn't change your statement that Rush could be getting more FTAs, and I think that's a valid place for him to work on improving (just like Danny did last year). But if that's your primary criterion as to why he's a bust, then there's something wrong with your standards.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Originally posted by UncleReg View Post
                            You lost all credibility when you called T-Will a second-rounder. And why is Levance in the discussion? No chance he gets drafted...
                            Do you think T-Will is a better ball player than Chris Douglas Roberts? I see T-Will going closer to pick number 25 than 15 this year is all. The only way the Pacers draft him is in the second round. Larry Bird has a plan for this team.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                              Are Jrue and Tyreke really true PG prospects? I was under the impression they were more like undersized shooting gaurds or at most scoring points. Can these guys run a team, do they show any potential in that area?
                              Jrue is a true PG. Tyreke is more of a combo guard. That's why I would rather have Jrue, though I'll be very happy if we wind up with either one of them.

                              Jrue had to play off the ball at UCLA because of Collison, but he showed plenty of the attributes you'd like to see in a PG. He can advance the ball against pressure, he rarely plays out of control, he can run the pick and roll effectively, he has good court vision. I also think Jrue is a better defender than Evans.

                              Evans is a PG the way that D-Wade or Rodney Stuckey or Gilbert Arenas or Jarret Jack is a PG. He can do all the PG things, but either not as well or in the same way that you'd want him to be able to. I think his best position will always end up being off the ball.

                              That being said, I'd be happy with either. Though I think only Jrue would be a long-term answer at PG.

                              The more I look at and read about this draft, I'm thinking that the most talented player available when the Pacers draft is going to be a wing. That wouldn't be my first choice of positions, but I'll take it.
                              "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                              - Salman Rushdie

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
                                Do you think T-Will is a better ball player than Chris Douglas Roberts? I see T-Will going closer to pick number 25 than 15 this year is all. The only way the Pacers draft him is in the second round. Larry Bird has a plan for this team.
                                Yes.

                                I would question why you would even make that comparison, because they are totally different players. CDR can score, but a lot of players can score.

                                There is a very select few players that have Williams' skill set.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X