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

    Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
    Wall,Turner and Favors are why I want a top three pick this year!

    However, this years draft is deep in front court players so I'm thinking we will be able to pick up the player we need to go along with Hibbert and Hans, even if we miss at the top.
    A top 4 pick would guarantee Wall, Turner, Favors, or Davis, the players I want most.

    One or two of those guys (but not Wall) might be available in the 6 to 8 range, but that's iffy. I'm hoping prospects like the Dirk-wannabe gets hyped to high heaven and drops a better player to the Pacers. But I'm also fearful JOB might actually want that guy. No thanks!

    I think Patterson will be a really solid pro, but I don't see him becoming a star in the NBA. He looks powerful, active, and athletic, but he won't look as impressive in those areas against the NBA's best PFs. I think he'll be a solid pro player for whomever gets him, but I'm looking for more than solid if we get a high pick.

    Henry has the look of an NBA player already, but I wouldn't take him in the top 10. I don't think he's quite athletic enough even though he is very powerful. He scores points, but I don't know about his defensive potential long-term. I would rather see if Rush pans out.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      UNC vs Clemson
      Davis, Henson

      I don't see anything with Davis, and Henson's worse. As guys that might become something perhaps due to being tall and moderately athletic, but as elite PF prospects now it's a joke. Booker destroyed them, not just did better but outmatched them both on the court and as a potential NBA PF player, it was two different levels of talent. He was stronger, faster, and way more involved.

      First off, Henson is a stick. He looks like he weighs 160. Davis is bigger, but not a ton. Davis is very awkward running up court, he's slow and often didn't even get up court on transition offense. He's got long arms so he can reach for shots, but watching him in the post on either end was a lot like watching Bender do the same with the Pacers.

      Now it's possible that Davis gets more bulk and power as he gets older, but right now it's not there. There is no way you put him next to Patterson (KY) and see anything close to the same level of force and power.

      Booker, no slouch I'll admit, moved Davis off the block on either end at will. Davis tried to post several times and simply could not retain the post position. He'd get flipped over and have to then try to work to get back in front again. He couldn't protect his position long enough to be safely fed.

      Now if Davis was this incredible face up guy then okay, but as your monster force guy on the frontline, no way. Not yet at least.

      And Hensen is half that, insanely scrawny for a PF. Almost delicate.


      I will be very interested to see what they look like vs Lawal and Favors.

      I thought they already looked small compared to Ndiaye.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
        UNC vs Clemson
        Davis, Henson

        I don't see anything with Davis, and Henson's worse. As guys that might become something perhaps due to being tall and moderately athletic, but as elite PF prospects now it's a joke. Booker destroyed them, not just did better but outmatched them both on the court and as a potential NBA PF player, it was two different levels of talent. He was stronger, faster, and way more involved.

        First off, Henson is a stick. He looks like he weighs 160. Davis is bigger, but not a ton. Davis is very awkward running up court, he's slow and often didn't even get up court on transition offense. He's got long arms so he can reach for shots, but watching him in the post on either end was a lot like watching Bender do the same with the Pacers.

        Now it's possible that Davis gets more bulk and power as he gets older, but right now it's not there. There is no way you put him next to Patterson (KY) and see anything close to the same level of force and power.

        Booker, no slouch I'll admit, moved Davis off the block on either end at will. Davis tried to post several times and simply could not retain the post position. He'd get flipped over and have to then try to work to get back in front again. He couldn't protect his position long enough to be safely fed.

        Now if Davis was this incredible face up guy then okay, but as your monster force guy on the frontline, no way. Not yet at least.

        And Hensen is half that, insanely scrawny for a PF. Almost delicate.


        I will be very interested to see what they look like vs Lawal and Favors.

        I thought they already looked small compared to Ndiaye.
        Even being as skinny as he is, Ed Davis is blocking 3 shots per game and getting 10 rpg. As he fills out a bit and adds bulk, he will become much more effective. I agree he's not ready to play inside against the PFs of the NBA yet, but I think he's going to be quite good down the road.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          Boy, did I get a wake up call on Brackins. The real "Dale" is on KY.

          I finally got to sit down and really watch Kentucky. I can't believe how much bigger Patterson is this year. He's got huge arms and looks like a mountain. He's easily as quick as Brackins, good off the dribble, just an all-around bad a**.

          The weird thing is that with the trio of freshman he's kinda left out of the loop. They post Cousins all the time and Patterson ends up being set to the side a little. Some of this is on him to find his way into the flow, but not all of it.

          So what you get is lower stats from a guy that seems capable of doing damn near anything at anytime if the ball gets near him. He is up and down for dunks in no time flat, huge power, graceful footwork, quick AND fast, strong.

          There were a couple of plays, one a break, where he's just suddenly flying, moving faster than people and with tons of power. I couldn't figure out why every play wasn't just iso Wall/Patterson on the PnR and let mayhem rain down on FLA.
          Okay....obvious question...you think that Patterson is NBA-Ready? Is he ready to take on the Big Boys?

          or

          Is he Jordan Hill Part Deux?
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
            Okay....obvious question...you think that Patterson is NBA-Ready? Is he ready to take on the Big Boys?

            or

            Is he Jordan Hill Part Deux?
            He looks better than Hill. In college (heck, even in his pre-draft workout footage) Hill looked pretty stiff and mechanical. He just never impressed me much.

            Patterson looks like he's got some skill, but you just don't know how much translates to the pro game. In the pros, he's gonna be somewhat of an undersized power player. He's definitely an NBA player and I wouldn't have a problem taking him from around #8-12.

            John Wall pretty much puts everyone else to shame, but there are some other pretty talented guys in this draft.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              what games I need to watch today? and what players? thanks
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Originally posted by IndyPacer View Post
                Even being as skinny as he is, Ed Davis is blocking 3 shots per game and getting 10 rpg. As he fills out a bit and adds bulk, he will become much more effective. I agree he's not ready to play inside against the PFs of the NBA yet, but I think he's going to be quite good down the road.
                That's got to be the argument for him, you are gambling on him filling out well and developing the game to go with it. He is smooth enough and has long arms, thus the blocks, but he doesn't have the physical game yet. Not simply that he's not as bulky, but that he doesn't have those techniques either.

                Some guys do fill out, but I think he's a classic high risk big man which tend to be draft killers.

                The draft will be the judge, but I think in 3-4 months the stock on Patterson is going to be a lot higher. He looks like an NBA player already and he's super quick and smooth at that size.




                Seattle U vs Oregon St
                Well Charles Garcia basically blew a nice scouting chance (scouts and execs like Ainge at the game, plus ESPNU coverage) with huge foul problems. He barely played, ended with just 3 FGA and 3 rebounds.

                What little I saw showed a PF with legit size and modest strength, maybe Brackins strength, not Booker (Clemson) strength.

                Low post work, not that great. Doesn't work well for position at either end, sometimes not even looking to get involved.

                Defense, he's quick enough to rotate out some or close out a shooter, but not a stopper. He can block some shots, but he's also one of the bigger guys on the court most nights.

                He showed one true strength, his handles for a 6'10" guy are outstanding. He pulled a full court transition dribble complete with a nice crossover to go right into the lane and then dish for the potential layup (the catch was fumbled). He moves perhaps as good as Earl Clark, so that's pretty solid.

                But he did have the fouls and his 3rd came when he couldn't afford it and forced his dribble out of control and into a charge, so poor decisions are an issue.

                Athletic big without a clear big man game and on this night a really poor ability to come up under pressure to perform. And it's not like Oregon St is good, Seattle crushed them and led by 30 with tons of time left and him on the bench for most of that.

                He's beating up on schools like CalSt-Northridge, Wolford and UC-Irvine. He also tried to go to Washington and couldn't get admitted, so he settled on Seattle U.

                Major red flags on a kid that I predict will jump drastically when tryouts start and the actual playing of basketball ends. Draft at your own risk unless he gets a lot better. He should stay another year in school, but probably won't.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  what games I need to watch today? and what players? thanks
                  I don't know what's out there till the 2 giant SAT games on ESPN I mentioned. Don't miss those.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                    Okay....obvious question...you think that Patterson is NBA-Ready? Is he ready to take on the Big Boys?

                    or

                    Is he Jordan Hill Part Deux?
                    Way better than Hill. Hill had a delicate game to him. I liked his ability but I could see where the complaints on his toughness came from. Buddinger was the gritty, tough guy on that squad. When they faced up Hill struggled to outplay the rather tough Pendergraph.

                    Patterson is strong. Huge biceps and yet agile, quick and hoppy.

                    The issue is what KY is doing. They post Cousins a ton and leave Patterson to the side to watch. His game is maybe somewhere between Amare and Dale. A bit inside tougher than Amare, but more athletic on the run, offensively skilled than Dale.

                    That's STYLE, not saying yet that he can be as good as them. He's got to prove that over the next 3 months. But I doubt his 6'9"/235, and if that's legit it's in the same form as Kenyon Martin's 6'9"/240

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      I was reading something about Kentucky and what they're doing with Patterson, is that they wanted him to play some Troy Murphy like role on their team.

                      He had taken 4 three point shots the first couple years, and this year has already taken 24 (granted he's made 10 for 40%).

                      I thought that was kind of odd.

                      -- Steve --

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        Originally posted by Pacersfan46 View Post
                        I was reading something about Kentucky and what they're doing with Patterson, is that they wanted him to play some Troy Murphy like role on their team.

                        He had taken 4 three point shots the first couple years, and this year has already taken 24 (granted he's made 10 for 40%).

                        I thought that was kind of odd.

                        -- Steve --
                        He's trying to get JO'bs good side.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          Originally posted by Pacersfan46 View Post
                          I was reading something about Kentucky and what they're doing with Patterson, is that they wanted him to play some Troy Murphy like role on their team.

                          He had taken 4 three point shots the first couple years, and this year has already taken 24 (granted he's made 10 for 40%).

                          I thought that was kind of odd.

                          -- Steve --
                          Hmmm, it appears to me Seth is liking a stretch forward. (giggle, giggle, snort)

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Can I get a Jarvis Vanardo anybody? 17 points, 12 boards, 10 blocks tonight.

                            And Quincy Pondexter out of Washington continues to impress me. im surprised nobody talks about him. probably cuz he plays wayyyy out on the west coast but still.. he averages almost 20/10 at the SF spot, id like to make a run at him if we lose out on dunleavy.
                            "To give anything less than your best, is to sacrifice the gift." - Steve Prefontaine

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              I like the statisical numbers of Varnado. With everyone having major angst over the Pacers
                              winning games there will be some very good players available to the Pacers.
                              If the Pacers could in trade pick up another first Varnado might be someone to look at.
                              Very mobile and great shotblocker and rebounder. Evan Turner would be a great consolation prize.
                              {o,o}
                              |)__)
                              -"-"-

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                Originally posted by owl View Post
                                Evan Turner would be a great consolation prize.
                                I really can't see this draft turning out any way other than Turner and Favors being picked 2 and 3 (in some order) after Wall goes #1.
                                "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                                - Salman Rushdie

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X