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

Summer League Video Feed Thread

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

  • Re: Summer League Video Feed Thread

    I wasn't especially impressed by A.J. Price during the summer league games, but I was only able to watch two of them, so I could have just caught the wrong ones. Do a lot of you feel like he's much better than Diener? I'm not only talking talent-wise, but in terms of what the team needs from a third string point guard.

    Comment


    • Re: Summer League Video Feed Thread

      http://www.shamsports.com/content/pa...ana-pacers.jsp

      FRIDAY, 10 JULY 2009
      POSTED BY SHAM AT 2:04 AM

      Summer league round-up: Indiana Pacers
      Still nothing from the Cavaliers about their summer league roster. Don't act like you're busy, Danny Ferry.

      This entry feels a little bit weird, considering that they've already played their games. But, still.

      View the Pacers summer league roster.

      - Will Blalock: The Pacers have been said to be looking for a point guard all summer long now. They kept Jamaal Tinsley inactive for all of last season, despite him being able and willing to play. Jarrett Jack is a restricted free agent, and even though he's expected back, he isn't really a point guard anyway. Neither is Travis Diener, and they seem to hate T.J. Ford more than it seems as though they should. (Must be because he's black.) But while Will Blalock is very much a point guard, I don't think the answer to the Pacers' point guard problem lies in a man who averaged 4.5 points and 2.1 assists in the German league last season.

      - Derrick Byars: Byars was briefly covered in the Nuggets round-up, but here's a bonus fact about him.

      Byars' three point percentage by month, last season:

      November - 0%
      December - 56%
      January - 28%
      February - 50%
      March - 26%
      April - 0%
      Overall - 38%

      It might be a coincidence that the two months he shot the most threes in were December and February. Or it might not.

      - Tyler Hansbrough: Us Bulls fans discussed at length whether it would be a good idea to pick Tyler Hansbrough at #26. We eventually decided on "yes". (And, after what we wound up doing with the pick.......well, you know.) As draft day approached, we moved on to discussing whether it'd be justifiable to pick Hansbrough as high as #16. Opinion was split, but the majority said "no". Turns out it was irrelevant anyway, as Indiana went for him at #13. And, since it's the 2009 draft we're talking about, I think they can get away with that.

      That earlier comment about T.J. Ford's race was uninspired satire, by the way. I don't care how vanilla the Pacers are. Neither should you.

      - Roy Hibbert: Frank admission - Roy Hibbert is better than I thought he would be. He can score at the NBA level. Just can. He'd be better if he toned down the shot block attempts and focused more on the rebounding, and that foul rate is pretty ridiculous, but not many 22 year old rookie centres can score at that rate. Once he stops being Bargnani-ish on the defensive glass, he'll be goooood.

      - Jared Homan: The Ho-Man played 16 games in the Euroleague last year as a member of Cibona Zagreb, which is a very high standard of basketball for any man to be playing. Unfortunately, he didn't play very well in them, averaging only 4.6 points and 3.3 rebounds, along with 2.4 fouls. His size is still a virtue, but his size is also nothing special by NBA standards. And nor is his age (26). Still, Rasho Nesterovic is a free agent, which opens up a space on the Pacers for a new white centre.

      (If I keep forcing this joke home, it might start being funny. Maybe.)

      - Aaron Jackson: Jackson broke the freak out last year, averaging 19.7 points, 5.5 rebounds, 5.7 assists and 1.6 steals per game, with percentages of 55.4%, 40.5% and 80.9%. Those numbers are up across the board from the year before, and his scoring output was more than doubled from his junior to senior years. Learning to shoot can do wonders for a man's game. If he'd been in a less point guard heavy draft, or at a school more noteworthy than Duquense, then he might have gotten drafted. As it is, he's now fighting Will Blalock for a training camp spot, a fight that both will probably lose.

      - Trey Johnson: Johnson briefly played in the NBA last season, signing a couple of ten day contracts with the Cavaliers. He only scored 4 points, all from the foul line, but it's an NBA career at least. When he wasn't at the big dance, he was in the D-League, living up to his first name with the Bakersfield Jam. Johnson scored 21 points per game in 41 minutes per game, shooting 46% from the field and 41% from the three point line. If he can be bothered to start playing defense, he might go down as the best player in the history of Jackson State. But until then, that title belongs to Lindsey Hunter. Or Purvis Short.

      - Leo Lyons: I watched a lot of Missouri last year. It was hard not to, because they did pretty well. J.T. Tiller is my boy. But my opinion of Lyons isn't highly flattering. He has some touch, some athleticism, and his wild flails to the rim are effective. But he makes a crap load of mistakes, doesn't really have NBA size, and nor was his heart really in it defensively. If he was a sophomore, he would have been one to keep an eye on. But he wasn't.

      - Josh McRoberts: McRoberts finally got some PT last season, and in doing so he put up an almost identical PER to that of Marquis Daniels. He's also grown a brilliant beard, and either is or was plugging Lauren Conrad from MTV's The Hills. Not a bad year for McBob, all told. He's a restricted free agent, but he'll return.

      - A.J. Price: If drafting three straight seniors out of big programs wasn't enough of a clue (Hibbert, Rush, Hansbrough), then the Pacers picking Price in the second round this year ought to have alerted you to the fact that Larry Bird watches the NCAA tournament. More importantly, if the Pacers really are serious about getting an extra point guard regardless of how many options they already have, I would imagine that Price has a beeline on that spot right now. But that's only if they do. (By the way, I just spent ten minutes trying to think up a plausible Jamaal Tinsley trade scenario. But I couldn't do it. Is there not room for him in Indiana to rebuild his value just a little bit?)

      - Brandon Rush: Rush's rookie year wasn't good, scoring inefficiently and ranking last on the team in plus/minus rating. But he has an opportunity here; Marquis Daniels is an unrestricted free agent, Mike Dunleavy's knee is reportedly all kinds of haggard, and new signing Dahntay Jones is a not-very-good defensive specialist. There's minutes available for Rush, then, if he can figure out how to get to the foul line more than once a week.

      - Anthony Smith: Smith averaged 17.6 points and 6.5 rebounds for Liberty last year. And here's a Googled factoid:

      As a junior, Smith was the only player in the nation during the 2008 season to attempt at least 200 three-point field goals and succeed on at least 40 percent of his three-point field goal attempts (41.0), while also hitting over 50 percent of his field goal attempts (51.5). Only four other players in the nation accomplish the same feat while attempting at least 100 three-point field goals, including Mario Chalmers (Kansas), Lee Cummard (BYU), Malik Hairston (Oregon) and James Harden (Arizona State).

      Despite the apparent brilliance of his jumpshot, though, he never shot over 66% from the foul line in his four year NCAA career. And that's all I've got.

      - Scott VanderMeer: It's difficult to find out information on Scott VanderMeer, since I've seen his surname spelt 4 different ways; VanderMeer, Vander Meer, van der Meer, and Van De Meer. Really helps things along, that. But here's what I've got anyway: VanderMeer is a 7 footer who just shot 40% in the seminal Horizon League. If that doesn't put the ****s up you, then it jolly well ought. The best part of his NCAA resumé is probably his shot blocking, to the tune of 2.1 blocks per game last year, an output which he'll have to roughly treble to trouble an NBA roster. Nevertheless, here's a 7 minute highlight video.

      Comment


      • Re: Summer League Video Feed Thread

        a little OT, but from Thorpe's tweets:

        david b. thorpe Mike Green, out of Butler, is playing for Houston. He's good, maybe NBA good.
        http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/...er-League.html

        Comment


        • Re: Summer League Video Feed Thread

          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
          I'm sure they do jumprope, along with other polymetrics.

          Seriously, if you're worried that jumping rope is going to mess up their knees, then they shouldn't be anywhere near a basketball court. They aren't made of glass.
          Actually, human knees are poorly evolved compared to other species, this effects bigger, taller people even more than the average person. So yeah they are kinda fragile, and especially in the NBA, a player is lucky to have 4 pro years without knee troubles.

          Comment


          • Re: Summer League Video Feed Thread

            If there is a Player that we'd add to the roster ( outside of McBob and Price ), I'm guessing that it would be Anthony Smith. He'd do a good job of warming the end of the bench to help fill out the GF rotation.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • Re: Summer League Video Feed Thread

              [QUOTE=Placebo;910537]http://www.shamsports.com/content/pa...ana-pacers.jsp

              shamwow

              Comment


              • Re: Summer League Video Feed Thread

                Scott VanderMeer: A poor man's Aaron Gray.

                Comment


                • Re: Summer League Video Feed Thread

                  Originally posted by Burtrem Redneck View Post
                  Actually, human knees are poorly evolved compared to other species, this effects bigger, taller people even more than the average person. So yeah they are kinda fragile, and especially in the NBA, a player is lucky to have 4 pro years without knee troubles.
                  What is your basis for saying that human knees are less "evolved" relative to other
                  species?

                  Based on what humans put their knees through I think they hold up pretty well
                  relatively speaking.
                  {o,o}
                  |)__)
                  -"-"-

                  Comment


                  • Re: Summer League Video Feed Thread

                    Originally posted by Burtrem Redneck View Post
                    Actually, human knees are poorly evolved compared to other species, this effects bigger, taller people even more than the average person. So yeah they are kinda fragile, and especially in the NBA, a player is lucky to have 4 pro years without knee troubles.
                    The one good thing about Roy's lack of athleticism and explosiveness is that if he damaged his knees you might not notice any difference.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Summer League Video Feed Thread

                      Originally posted by d_c View Post
                      FWIW, summerleague is a disorganized, chaotic league. Hibbert is a big center who isn't very mobile, and he's not going to look good in these settings.

                      He'll do better in an organized setting, though he's always going to have trouble with quicker opponents. He's always going to be useful as a big body against Dwight Howard, if anything. Main thing he has to improve is still his conditioning.

                      But yeah, don't count on Hibbert to set the world on fire in SL. This is not his enviornment.
                      M.V.P.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Summer League Video Feed Thread

                        Originally posted by sweabs View Post
                        M.V.P.
                        In fairness, our team wasn't as chaotic this year as in years past. Chalk that up to more guys on the team being legit players, and to Obie coaching it himself.
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Summer League Video Feed Thread

                          True. However, it was still a track meet of sorts and faster than a typical NBA game. He looked good in extended minutes conditioning-wise. That's really my biggest plus from Roy. He didn't look dead tired in 30 minutes of play. That's big.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Summer League Video Feed Thread

                            Stats for the Pacers in the Summer League are up ( averaged over 5 games )

                            http://www.nba.com/media/magic/ind_stats_071009.pdf

                            Here are the Lines of the Players we care about:

                            Tyler Hansbrough
                            25:34 MPG ( over 5 games )
                            4.8-6.4 FGM-FGA ( over 5 games ) / 44% FG%
                            8.2-9.6 FTM-FGA ( over 5 games ) / 85% FT%
                            5.6 RPG ( over 5 games )
                            1.0 SPG ( over 5 games )
                            1.6 TPG ( over 5 games )
                            2.0 APG ( over 5 games )
                            4.4 Fouls Per game
                            18.2 PPG ( over 5 games )

                            Roy Hibbert
                            28.23 MPG ( over 5 games )
                            7.6-12.0 FGM-FGA ( over 5 games ) / 63% FG%
                            4.8-6.4 FTM-FGA ( over 5 games ) / 75% FT%
                            9.0 RPG ( over 5 games )
                            1.2 SPG ( over 5 games )
                            3.2 TPG ( over 5 games )
                            1.8 BPG ( over 5 games )
                            2.8 Fouls Per game
                            20.2 PPG ( over 5 games )

                            AJ Price
                            22.6 MPG ( over 5 games )
                            3.2-6.8 FGM-FGA ( over 5 games ) / 47% FG%
                            0.2-0.6 FTM-FGA ( over 5 games ) / 33% FT%
                            1.6-2.8 3ptM-3ptA ( over 5 games ) / 57% FG%
                            2.0 RPG ( over 5 games )
                            0.2 SPG ( over 5 games )
                            1.0 TPG ( over 5 games )
                            3.2 APG ( over 5 games )
                            1.8 Fouls Per game
                            8.2 PPG ( over 5 games )
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Summer League Video Feed Thread

                              QUOTE-------
                              - Tyler Hansbrough: Us Bulls fans discussed at length whether it would be a good idea to pick Tyler Hansbrough at #26. We eventually decided on "yes". (And, after what we wound up doing with the pick.......well, you know.) As draft day approached, we moved on to discussing whether it'd be justifiable to pick Hansbrough as high as #16. Opinion was split, but the majority said "no".
                              QUOTE-------------

                              I found this part crack me up.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X