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

Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

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

  • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

    Originally posted by Wage View Post
    If you are using the term "lottery pick" to assign some sort of high expectation to a pick , I agree completely. After that, it is mostly just guys you hope can be decent starters/role-players.
    This is a good point. I usually look at the top 5 picks as "they must be good starters within a year or so...or the pick was a bad one".

    BTW, could you imagine the Blazers with Kevin Durant?....

    Comment


    • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

      as of 5 left in the 2nd, looks like a bit of premature jocularity on this thread, as the fellas on Sportscenter used to say

      Comment


      • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

        I like Tyler a LOT. I think those of you basing his future value on numbers are missing 1/2 the picture.
        The guy is a big time hustler. A big time winner. And oh by the way, a very large man with an aggressive disposition that seems to enjoy physical play.
        DOES ANYONE THINK THE PACERS COULD USE SOMEONE LIKE THAT??????????????
        What he's shown as far as team defense has been simply outstanding given the injury. No training camp. Still working into shape. etc His sliding over and picking up other teammates men at the right time improves our defense every time. As he gets up to speed, he will be setting some MONSTER picks for our jump shooters. And taking a lot of beating off of Roy.
        He's going to be Roy's best buddy on the floor very soon.
        And his midrange jumper to compliment Roys low post game? Oh la la.

        Comment


        • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

          I'll say this... I've been pleasantly surprised by his defensive ability, even in one on one situations. He has much more lateral quickness than I would have expected.

          Comment


          • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

            I don't see this thread as being about Josh vs Tyler because IMO they aren't mutally exclusive choices. I didn't like taking Tyler and one of the reasons was that we already had McBob. My choice was Blair or trading down for Budinger or Sam Young.

            But Tyler is here now and the relevent point of this thread is a fanboyish rush to praise someone that makes the board seem less knowledgable that it is or should be.

            Having said that....

            Originally posted by BillS View Post


            Yeah, but if Josh had played for coaches other than Nate McMillan and Jim O'Brien he'd be doing just as well.

            McBob has not played for any coach yet. That's my complaint.

            Tyler is a freaking starter by comparison. Don't believe me?

            McBob's minutes ALL of last season = 279
            Tyler's minutes this year so far, about 1/4th done = 311


            Think about that. McRoberts had 3 games LAST season in which he put up numbers on par with Tyler's top games. He had an 11 rebound game, he had a 4 blocks game, he had a 5 assist game. He didn't score much but then he also didn't miss many shots either, unlike Tyler so far.

            So whatever you think you've seen Tyler do, it hasn't translated to many wins and it hasn't translated to big stats. His production is no better than McBob showed he could do last year. The difference is that when he played well he got buried right back on the bench.

            McBob this year = 28 minutes, 12 came in one game, so barring lots of injuries (cause there already have been plenty) he's on pace for perhaps 70 awesome developmental minutes, just the right amount to prove his skills.

            There is 100% no way you've seen a guy get 28 minutes at age 22 and realized his full potential or ability to play.


            What do I want with all this debating, what's my point?

            1) Let's keep the "Tyler is amazing" tied to reality. He hasn't been amazing, not even for a 13th pick. He's been okay. No more praising him unless Indy is going to have a Joe Dumars parade to congratulate him for picking Jerebko. And if you don't know who that is then you really don't have the proper perspective for praising the local rookie.

            Did I expect the 13th pick to be as good as 13-15 other rookies at this point? Yes. And more so when you consider that he one of the oldest rookies out there, perhaps the oldest. He should be more mature, more physically developed and more ready to go. 24 is not a "project", not with ANY 4 year college guys.



            2) I would like to see us find out what McBob can do and try to develop him. I think he can be better by age 24 (2 years from now) than Tyler is now at age 24....unless he remains buried on the bench.

            Do you remember how JO magically became a near MVP simply by leaving Portland? He didn't get better because his per minute numbers stayed about the same that first Indy season. What he got was A CHANCE.

            I'm not saying McBob is JO. I'm saying that you can have a solid player and not know it if he doesn't play. There is no good reason not to try and work with McRoberts as much as they did with Ike or Harrison. He appears to be more capable than Ike (taller, more physical on defense) and certainly of better temperment than Hulk.

            And yet he slips off to nowhere. He comes in and blocks a guy, then on a transition he sprints to keep even with the SF and rides him right into the Hibbert block, and then draws the offensive foul by stepping in front of the baseline cross screen. He then rides the pine the entire 2nd half. That was the Clippers game and the SF was Thorton, who just prior to the block had faked out Brandon Rush with the same exact up fake move.
            Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 12-15-2009, 05:26 PM.

            Comment


            • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?



              No need to re-quote Seth's lengthy post for a one sentence reply.




              I'm fairly certain that if McBob went to UNC, you would say he didn't belong in the NBA.
              Last edited by Roaming Gnome; 12-15-2009, 09:28 PM.

              Comment


              • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                Big McBob fan here. I love his athleticism and think he's under utilized. However, from an offensive skills standpoint, he is light years behind Hans and will never be close. Also Hans is not that far behind him defensively. All factors considered, neither of these guys will be great PF's, but McBob will never be as good as Hans and that's a big reason he has his booty glued to the bench.

                We will all be having a different conversation when Hansborough's midrange shot starts falling with regularity.

                Comment


                • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                  Still waiting to hear about the avatar.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                    Still waiting to hear about the avatar.
                    He's had that avatar for months... why the sudden fixation?
                    This space for rent.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                      He's had that avatar for months... why the sudden fixation?
                      It's not sudden. I brought this up during the summer.

                      And even if it were new, it'd be the same reason: Don't tell me you're rooting for Tyler when you celebrate his nose being broken. Let alone being objective.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        1) Let's keep the "Tyler is amazing" tied to reality. He hasn't been amazing, not even for a 13th pick. He's been okay. No more praising him unless Indy is going to have a Joe Dumars parade to congratulate him for picking Jerebko.
                        However, he IS amazing compared to Darko.




                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          McBob has not played for any coach yet. That's my complaint.
                          And, clearly, both of the coaches he didn't play for are blind and stupid.

                          I'm figuring we see how many other coaches in the NBA who aren't blind and stupid go after Josh every year because he's clearly such a bargain that JOB has buried on the bench because he's an idiot, just like Nate McMillan was an idiot.
                          BillS

                          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                          Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                          Comment


                          • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                            It's not sudden. I brought this up during the summer.

                            And even if it were new, it'd be the same reason: Don't tell me you're rooting for Tyler when you celebrate his nose being broken. Let alone being objective.
                            Exactly.

                            Hicks, you think theres anyway ya'll could add a PSN leaderboard as well?

                            Comment


                            • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                              McBob has not played for any coach yet. That's my complaint.
                              Yea, I'm sure McRoberts is absolutely dominating Hansbrough in practice, Jim O'Brien just wants to stick it to the man. The man being you of course.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Did Anyone Think Hansbrough Would Be This Good So Soon?

                                Especially whenever it comes after Tyler has one of his better games, it reminds me of Anti-Dad (0:59 through 2:12):

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X