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 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

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

  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

    Finally getting into the thick of game watching. BTW, if you haven't already been doing it you definitely should lean on ESPN360 for tons of games. Lots of nice replays to be found out there.

    WVa vs Rutgers
    Ebanks - WVa
    Not that impressed with my first viewing of him. His box looks awesome, but I don't think he got a single rebound that didn't hit the floor first, and I'm not joking. WVa plays a slashing, always moving offense which tends to leave lanes open to follow toward the rebound, and Ebanks lived off that stuff.

    He's got a modestly nice jumper, not explosive, not a quick release, doesn't quite look like a go-to scorers move. He had a couple of steals that were somewhat team generated, though credit him for being where the ball was headed to make the play.

    He wasn't bad, and in fact IN THEIR SYSTEM he was great. But Rutgers was overmatched in depth and Ebanks didn't stand out as more special than several other WVa guys (Butler and the pinball PG Bryant)

    Need to see some more play from him, but these guys should have a long season and get plenty of national air time.

    The sneaky stars to me were Ndiaye (C) and Rosario (SG) from Rutgers. Ndiaye is a SR and is crushing in blocked shots. I happened to be doubling this viewing with the Rutgers/UNC replay during timeouts, so I was also seeing him vs Ed Davis. Ndiaye is a little rough in some places, but IMO he's better than Thabeet was last year at this point. He can make some pretty good moves in the lane and certainly is a big, impressive defender.

    Rosario got the same treatment he saw vs UNC, they put bigger, physical defenders on him and it gave him some trouble. But he also lacked the team support to help get him good looks. Despite a not great night, his moves and style look very NBA capable. He's only a sophmore and I assume will stay one more year. I think he's a guy to keep your eye on as a pure scorer.


    Ed Davis just does not impress me when you see him against a kid like Ndiaye. He's not as big, not as physical, and yet he's got all these "PF numbers". I can't buy in yet. If the concern was that James Johnson or Jordan Hill were soft as bigs, then it has to apply to Davis too. At least from what I've seen.

    His teammate John Hensen...um, do you really want a stick figure as your PF? He doesn't play inside, he moves gingerly around the mid range area and weighs about 110 pounds. I can't see why he'd come out this year or why teams would draft him. Major, major risk with little proven upside to it. No thanks unless I see some serious development.



    Where I'd pick 'em right now

    Ebanks - maybe at 16th
    Ndiaye - worth a 15-18th, right now might not get drafted so could be a nice 2nd round steal or serious camp invite
    Rosario - next year, 15-20th
    Ed Davis - 14-17
    Hensen - maybe a mid to late 2nd round this year




    *on Tivo, Seattle, Iowa St, Duke, Syracuse, UCLA, rest of UNC/Rutgers, and this SAT the Baylor game.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      I upgraded my DirecTV so I'm finding tons of good games out on the sports networks (the Fox, MSG, etc). Plus ESPN360 viewing on the CPU opens up a ton more games. So the TV schedule thing is less critical than it was even 2 years ago.

      Still I put the work in and finally have it ready. I've just dug up the ESPN/CBS/some Fox listings for the top 16-20 guys per Express, HoopsHype and NBADraft.net.

      SAT 1/9 on ESPN
      Monroe vs Robinson (Gtown vs UConn)
      Singler vs Favors (Ga Tech vs Duke)

      SUN 1/10
      CBS has Kansas (Aldrich, Taylor, Collins, X Henry)

      FSN lists UNC and the Florida St (S Alabi) games

      If you are trying to see Alabi, this is one of only 3-4 times FSt is listed on the air this year, at least for major coverage.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        BTW, the starts for Monroe and Ed Davis sure have taken some shine off the front court depth in the draft for me. Of course it's crazy early. This is just the feeling out point from a scouting POV.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          Finally getting into the thick of game watching.
          At the risk of feeding your ego, Seth (to the dismay of others ), I'll say that I highly value your draft-related opinions and insights. That said, as the winter unfolds, may I ask you, please, to gather evidence and post an opinion on Larry Sanders? I got an early seat on his bandwagon -- I believe he could develop into the Player X we've longed for to complement Hibby and your buddy Hans -- but I don't watch nearly the amount of footage you do, and I'd really appreciate your notes on him (in time).


          "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 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Hey fellas. Evan Turner played against my Hoosiers last night. Seemed to have pretty decent numbers for 20 minutes of play. Did anyone get to watch the game and can tell me how he looked?
            First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
              Hey fellas. Evan Turner played against my Hoosiers last night. Seemed to have pretty decent numbers for 20 minutes of play. Did anyone get to watch the game and can tell me how he looked?
              I caught 3/4 of the game and Turner looked healthy. Of course any stats you read I would take with a grain of salt. THe Hoosiers were obviosly out played on both sides of the floor.

              In the game I didn't see him hold his back or look to be in any pain.

              On a side note I have noticed that there seems to be a lot of interest in PF's on this thread but why? Hans to most people looks to be the future starter and we have backup pf. I really hope we don't load up on one position and not address our overall team needs.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                I caught 3/4 of the game and Turner looked healthy. Of course any stats you read I would take with a grain of salt. THe Hoosiers were obviosly out played on both sides of the floor.

                In the game I didn't see him hold his back or look to be in any pain.

                On a side note I have noticed that there seems to be a lot of interest in PF's on this thread but why? Hans to most people looks to be the future starter and we have backup pf. I really hope we don't load up on one position and not address our overall team needs.
                I think some of us realize drafting Hansbrough was a mistake.

                I bleed Tar Heel blue and love Hansbrough, but we really needed a PG, and last year was one of, if not the strongest PG draft ever. This year, there is no PG's and thats what this team needs, while it is one of the strongest PF drafts ever.

                I've watched Hansbrough for the last 4 years, 5 if you include this year, he is the perfect player to bring off the bench. However, no NBA team will get really far with him starting. I think he would be one of the most valuable bench players in the NBA who could put up good stats as a starter from time to time, but in the long run, we need someone else to take that starting spot.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                  BTW, the starts for Monroe and Ed Davis sure have taken some shine off the front court depth in the draft for me. Of course it's crazy early. This is just the feeling out point from a scouting POV.
                  Ed Davis has played really well, what are you talking about? He started off a little hesitant, but if you watch a UNC game now he has stepped up as the leader - he just has 5 other post players he has to share time/shots with: Deon Thompson, John Henson, Tyler Zeller, David Wear, and Travis Wear.

                  His rebounding and defense have been great too.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                    I think some of us realize drafting Hansbrough was a mistake.

                    I bleed Tar Heel blue and love Hansbrough, but we really needed a PG, and last year was one of, if not the strongest PG draft ever. This year, there is no PG's and thats what this team needs, while it is one of the strongest PF drafts ever.

                    I've watched Hansbrough for the last 4 years, 5 if you include this year, he is the perfect player to bring off the bench. However, no NBA team will get really far with him starting. I think he would be one of the most valuable bench players in the NBA who could put up good stats as a starter from time to time, but in the long run, we need someone else to take that starting spot.
                    I think its what bird believes in that will dictate who we draft. He might go after a PF but honestly I think he believes that we have the future center and pf position filled.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      If NJ wins the lottery and drafts Wall, I'm thinking they may be willing to take an expring (Ford?) for Harris. Then, we should be in a position to draft Turner.

                      Hibbert
                      Hansbrough
                      Granger
                      Turner
                      Harris

                      I could get really excited about that. And we'd still have the expiring deals of Murphy and Dunleavy on the table.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                        On a side note I have noticed that there seems to be a lot of interest in PF's on this thread but why? Hans to most people looks to be the future starter and we have backup pf. I really hope we don't load up on one position and not address our overall team needs.

                        We need a Dale Davis type player to go along with Hans and Hibbert. Sort of like we already have our Smits in Hibbert, and we already have our Anthony Davis in Handbrough. Now we need our Dale Davis player.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          Originally posted by Shade View Post
                          If NJ wins the lottery and drafts Wall, I'm thinking they may be willing to take an expring (Ford?) for Harris. Then, we should be in a position to draft Turner.

                          Hibbert
                          Hansbrough
                          Granger
                          Turner
                          Harris

                          I could get really excited about that. And we'd still have the expiring deals of Murphy and Dunleavy on the table.
                          Why would NJ need an expiring then? It's this Summer that they are trying to get Lebron.

                          I think they would keep both. Wall is 6'4 so they, Harris and Wall, could play together at times. Regardless I see no reason for them to trade Harris for Ford. Harris is an All Star type and they could get more for him than just an expiring.

                          We would no doubt draft Turner anyway unless we had the #2 pick, then it would probably be Derrick Favors.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Originally posted by Shade View Post
                            If NJ wins the lottery and drafts Wall, I'm thinking they may be willing to take an expring (Ford?) for Harris. Then, we should be in a position to draft Turner.

                            Hibbert
                            Hansbrough
                            Granger
                            Turner
                            Harris

                            I could get really excited about that. And we'd still have the expiring deals of Murphy and Dunleavy on the table.
                            Why would they take 2 cents on the dollar? They can get a lot more for Harris, the center piece would have to be our pick.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                              We need a Dale Davis type player to go along with Hans and Hibbert. Sort of like we already have our Smits in Hibbert, and we already have our Anthony Davis in Handbrough. Now we need our Dale Davis player.
                              There are only so many minutes to go around. To me Dale was a great player but the biggest need on the team is sg and pg.

                              Someone to control the paint is nice but if he only steps on the court in a limited role whats the point. Anybody getting excited about Jeff Foster here lately? Didn't think so.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                                Why would NJ need an expiring then? It's this Summer that they are trying to get Lebron.

                                I think they would keep both. Wall is 6'4 so they, Harris and Wall, could play together at times. Regardless I see no reason for them to trade Harris for Ford. Harris is an All Star type and they could get more for him than just an expiring.

                                We would no doubt draft Turner anyway unless we had the #2 pick, then it would probably be Derrick Favors.
                                I don't see them dealing Harris unless they are sure they have Wall locked up.

                                Harris has also regressed big time this season so I could see NJ just wanting to get out of his deal if nothing else materializes. Remember, they're going to be moving soon, so payroll is a cause for concern.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X