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
    Here's a recent mock draft (through the lottery) that I found to be particularly entertaining (albeit opinionated) yet reasonable:

    http://arjun-allthingssports.blogspo...9/05/2009.html

    He has Brandon Jennings falling out of not only the top 10, but out of the lottery completely?? However I do like that he has the Pacers slotted to take T-Will. A trio of wings like Rush, Granger, and Williams does sound pretty good to me.

    "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

      http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft...aftTour-090528

      Buzz from the NBA Draft Combine
      Chad Ford, ESPN.com

      Here's the rest of the gossip I heard Wednesday ...



      Holiday
      • In case you missed the mock draft Wednesday, a number of guys appear to be on the rise after putting in strong workouts. Jrue Holiday and Jonny Flynn are hot point guard prospects and seem to be moving into the top-10 conversation for virtually every team.

      A couple of other forwards also seem to be prying their ways into the lottery: Georgetown's DaJuan Summers is getting a lot of praise from scouts for a few workouts he did in Los Angeles, and Missouri's DeMarre Carroll has drawn impressive reviews from virtually every workout he's attended.

      "Carroll is just so active, and he's bigger and more athletic than you think," one NBA executive said. "I'm not sure he's a star in the league, but I do think he's going somewhere in the first round. A contending team needs guys like him. He'll do anything and do it with a smile on his face."

      I've also been hearing some really positive feedback for Notre Dame's Luke Harangody.

      "He may not look like much, but he cleaned everyone's clock in our gym," another scout said.

      On the flip side, Wake Forest's James Johnson and Louisville's Terrence Williams have had some red flags in their background checks, according to several team sources. Teams would not give me details and insisted there is nothing criminal to report. However, terms like "high maintenance" and "chemistry problems" seem to be giving teams pause.

      • For those of you wondering how tall Pittsburgh's DeJuan Blair really is, one NBA team told me he measured 6-foot-6 in socks and 6-7 1/4 in shoes. His wingspan was 7-2, and he had a 28-inch standing vertical jump and a 33-inch one-step vertical jump. The size part doesn't surprise me, but the vertical jump numbers suggest Blair is more explosive than he looked in college.


      Jennings
      • The Brandon Jennings Italian experiment is finally over. His team lost 83-79 in the Italian League playoffs, ending the season and Jennings' controversial stint as a trailblazer for high school players who would like to skip college and go directly to pro ball in Europe. Jennings didn't play in the series and ended the season on a pretty low note.

      Word also came late Wednesday night that he is leaving Italy for the United States and won't participate in the Reebok Eurocamp as promised. One source close to the situation confirmed Jennings won't participate and will instead focus on individual workouts with teams. That's going to come as a big disappointment to a number of NBA executives who were planning to attend.

      Jennings is all over the map for NBA teams, and seeing him play five-on- five in the camp would have been helpful. It will be harder to evaluate him in individual workouts. He has great individual skills, but it's tough to evaluate his feel for the game or decision-making in a workout setting. He could go anywhere from No. 4 to No. 17.

      • Jennings might be pulling out of the camp, but it looks like another intriguing point guard prospect might take his place: Australian point guard Patrick Mills is leaning strongly toward playing in the camp now. Mills impressed scouts with his strong play in the Olympics last summer, but his draft stock took a hit with a late-season injury. The chance to show his stuff in five-on-five play at the camp could help rekindle that spark many NBA teams felt last summer.

      •The players who could be hurt the most by the new NFL-style combine are the bubble first-rounders. In years past, they were the hottest names in the gym because most of the top talents were skipping the camp. Teams would overreach a bit because, placed against inferior players, they suddenly looked really good. Now, with lottery players in there, they aren't looking so hot anymore.

      • A number of NBA executives were comparing notes on interviews late Wednesday night. They were getting chuckles over what seemed to be some serious over-coaching by players' agents. Many agents hire media coaches to help players prepare for interviews. A few executives noted that players represented by the same agent were giving identical answers to questions. My favorite?

      "What are your hobbies?" Their answer? "My hobby is doing community service. That's what I like to do in my spare time."
      "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

      - Salman Rushdie

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Jennings is the one player that I am most concerned about. And what is up with the
        red flags on Williams and Johnson? I still feel Blair is the player the Pacers need and should take. Power on the front line is something woefully lacking currently.
        {o,o}
        |)__)
        -"-"-

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Originally posted by owl View Post
          Jennings is the one player that I am most concerned about. And what is up with the
          red flags on Williams and Johnson? I still feel Blair is the player the Pacers need and should take. Power on the front line is something woefully lacking currently.
          This is the first I've heard anything about Johnson, but there have been a number of these non-specific comments made about Williams.

          I think it's kinda bush league to talk about red flags, particularly on background checks, really, in any case, but to be non-specific about it is really unfair to the players.

          It's possible that somebody's swift-boating Williams, but whatever is going on, it will probably end up hurting him. Also, I have to wonder how much of it is that they look at the package and think he should be better than he showed, so now they're just looking for reasons not to like him.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Very interesting. I'm not predicting Jennings will fall, but I could see it happening because he's a relatively unproven commodity. (Can we call players "commodities"?) If he does, I want to see Seth do back flips (or a swan dive) if we take/pass on him.

            The note on Twil reminds me of some PD chatter a few months ago. Which one of you Louisville locals was arguing vehemently that he's got a squeaky-clean image and record? 'fess up, now!

            I'll be eager to hear others' comments on Blair and his improving explosiveness, although I'm suspicious that a measure of lateral quickness may be of greater consequence to TPTB.

            Is anyone else thinking that Earl Clark -- and not DeJuan Blair -- will be available to us at #13 ... and that we'll pass?

            (More and more, I'm hoping for a trade.)


            "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

            - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              Originally posted by DrFife View Post
              Is anyone else thinking that Earl Clark -- and not DeJuan Blair -- will be available to us at #13 ... and that we'll pass?

              (More and more, I'm hoping for a trade.)
              Given what I have read about Clark from UncleReg and Seth, I wouldn't mind if we passed on him.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Originally posted by count55 View Post
                This is the first I've heard anything about Johnson, but there have been a number of these non-specific comments made about Williams.

                I think it's kinda bush league to talk about red flags, particularly on background checks, really, in any case, but to be non-specific about it is really unfair to the players.

                It's possible that somebody's swift-boating Williams, but whatever is going on, it will probably end up hurting him. Also, I have to wonder how much of it is that they look at the package and think he should be better than he showed, so now they're just looking for reasons not to like him.
                You must be a big fan of T-will.

                I would much rather know non-specific comments than no comments at all especially if my team is looking into spending millions on a player.

                Look at former Pacers Jamal T. and David Harrison. I would have like to have been told about there issues.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  Originally posted by DrFife View Post

                  I'll be eager to hear others' comments on Blair and his improving explosiveness, although I'm suspicious that a measure of lateral quickness may be of greater consequence to TPTB.



                  (More and more, I'm hoping for a trade.)
                  The lateral quickness thing also has me concerned. I wouldn't mind Blair if he could at least provide defense on more atheletic power forewards.

                  T-Will is redundant to me. I mean if Rush progresses then where will T-will get his minutes from.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                    The lateral quickness thing also has me concerned. I wouldn't mind Blair if he could at least provide defense on more atheletic power forewards.

                    T-Will is redundant to me. I mean if Rush progresses then where will T-will get his minutes from.
                    Any GF that we play next season will get the minutes that Marquis and Graham received. On top of that....at least for ( what appears to be ) 3 or 4 months into the season.....Dunleavy will likely be out. But draft a player like TWill is a move for the future......specifically he will have 1-2 seasons to grow into a 6th Man role on this team where we would have a Granger/BRu****Will future SG/SF rotation.

                    One way ( through the draft ) or another ( by resigning Graham or another FA GF ), there will be minutes for a GF in the rotation for the foreseeable future. IMHO, whoever we draft now is going to be part of our future core....if TWill is ready before Dunleavy comes off the books....all the better.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                      You must be a big fan of T-will.

                      I would much rather know non-specific comments than no comments at all especially if my team is looking into spending millions on a player.

                      Look at former Pacers Jamal T. and David Harrison. I would have like to have been told about there issues.
                      Actually, I don't care one way or the other about T-Will.

                      And I think it's important that the Pacer front office should know as much as possible about the character and issues of any prospective player, and if they see red flags they should take them in account and avoid Williams and/or Johnson if they are true.

                      All that being said, I think that telling some reporter some generic "high maintenance" or "chemistry problem" comments without giving attribution or taking responsibility for them is pretty much a dick move, and I'm going to treat the comments with some skepticism.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        Right now on ESPN U they have a Pre Draft skills special on till 10:00 AM. It is Friday morning 8:30 several very decent guards are performing.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          Larry Bird is there, Tyler and Flynn are also there
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Originally posted by count55 View Post
                            Actually, I don't care one way or the other about T-Will.

                            And I think it's important that the Pacer front office should know as much as possible about the character and issues of any prospective player, and if they see red flags they should take them in account and avoid Williams and/or Johnson if they are true.

                            All that being said, I think that telling some reporter some generic "high maintenance" or "chemistry problem" comments without giving attribution or taking responsibility for them is pretty much a dick move, and I'm going to treat the comments with some skepticism.
                            From Draftexpress....

                            -James Johnson is being knocked by some teams for not being very impressive in their interview sessions, but others are wondering if those are the same franchises that appear to be most interested in him at this point. We’re hearing that Phoenix at 14, Detroit at 15 and Chicago at 16 all like him quite a bit, and there are some question marks about whether there are smokescreens being placed in order to cause him to fall.

                            “He was great in the interview we did with him. Seems like a really nice kid,” one team that sat down with him here in Chicago said. “I’m not really sure where that stuff is coming from.” Johnson is being knocked by some for not always being terribly enthusiastic about practice, and also for butting heads with Wake Forest head coach Dino Gaudio and teammate Jeff Teague at times.


                            Maybe a smokescreen but something that needs to be checked out.
                            {o,o}
                            |)__)
                            -"-"-

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              Originally posted by owl View Post
                              Johnson is being knocked by some for not always being terribly enthusiastic about practice, and also for butting heads with Wake Forest head coach Dino Gaudio and teammate Jeff Teague at times.
                              There was obviously something wrong with that Wake Forest team at the end of the year. They had as much talent as any team in the country and we all know what happened against Cleveland St. I've been assuming that it had a lot to do with Gaudio not be a great coach but chemistry issues could have played a major role.
                              "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                              - Salman Rushdie

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                True Holiday, Tyler and another big guy that I don't know his name are looking good in the combine, Tyler made jump shot after jump shot and has not miss yet, is anybody else looking at this? Blake Griffin is also there.
                                Last edited by vnzla81; 05-29-2009, 10:53 AM.
                                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X