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

Cousins and the draft

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

  • #91
    Re: Cousins and the draft

    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
    Just say Vlade Divac. It'll be easier.
    How about Vlade with 40lbs and an attitude. That is about right.

    Cousins is just about a lock to be a 15/10 guy...which is darn good, but due to lack of athleticism...at this level and in today's NBA, it is very difficult to dominate with size and skills only. Guys like Haywood, Andrew Bynum and Roy Hibbert will match up just fine with Cousins...and may out play him...and while those guys are pretty good centers they are not the cream of the crop.

    I have some doubts that Cousins is as skilled as Roy on offense. Bynum is clearly more athletic. Both are taller and about the same weight. Honestly, with Cousins playing under the basket, I don't see him being that dominant. Maybe good Eddie Curry level...
    Last edited by BlueNGold; 04-01-2010, 08:25 PM.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Cousins and the draft

      This Divac, Curry, OldShaqWeb level is less than I would expect from a #3 pick which is where I would project him. Perhaps I'm setting my expectations too high, but at #3 I would be hoping for an all-star level player. Maybe get lucky and pick a superstar. I think we know Cousins is not going to be that good.

      I guess one thing I'm pretty sure about is...at #3, Cousins will not be the best player available. If you want to go safe in terms of picking talent, he's probably the man at #3...but don't expect him to lead you to any post-season success...either in the NCAA or NBA...

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Cousins and the draft

        I think Cousins can easily be a 20/10/2 center, with his skill set. The fact he has such a diverse offensive game means that his lack of athletic ability won't hinder him as much as others.

        At 7 feet 280, you really don't need to be all that athletic to play at a high level. You just need skill. People underrate how much mileage you can get out of just being able to play basketball.
        Last edited by Kstat; 04-01-2010, 08:57 PM.

        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Cousins and the draft

          Originally posted by Kstat View Post
          I think Cousins can easily be a 20/10/2 center, with his skill set. The fact he has sucha diverse offensive game means that his lack of athletic ability won't hidner him as much as others.

          At 7 feet 280lb, you really don't need to be all that athletic to play at a high level. You just need skill.
          If he's 20 and 10, you are saying he will be a perennial all-star. I will have to see that to believe it. I'm not saying it won't happen.

          How he develops will be interesting. Every team will throw a big body at him, so things will be harder for him than college where he regularly outweighed his opponent by 40lbs and used his size to get what he wanted. I'm not sure if I see a great motor there either. Seriously, I see a lot more Kwame and Eddie than Dwight.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Cousins and the draft

            He demolished Cornell's 7-foot conference DPOY center in the tournament. That was enough to convince me he didnt need to have a size advantage to outplay someone.

            Kwame and Eddy...a player with one skill and another player with zero skills...come on

            Dwight Howard has very few actual basketball skills as well. Fantastic player, but he lacks a great skill set. Try actually comparing him to skill-heavy players instead of pure athletes with little skill.

            Cousins isn't very fast, doesn't jump exceptionally high, and he also doesn't have a great motor. What he does have is the ability to play the game of basketball very well and very efficiently in a massive frame. Most coaches will take that 9 times out of 10 over an athletic freak that needs someone to teach him how to dribble without looking down.
            Last edited by Kstat; 04-01-2010, 10:40 PM.

            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Cousins and the draft

              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
              He demolished Cornell's 7-foot conference DPOY center in the tournament. That was enough to convince me he didnt need to have a size advantage to outplay someone.

              Kwame and Eddy...a player with one skill and another player with zero skills...come on

              Dwight Howard has very few actual basketball skills as well. Fantastic player, but he lacks a great skill set. Try actually comparing him to skill-heavy players instead of pure athletes with little skill.

              Cousins isn't very fast, doesn't jump exceptionally high, and he also doesn't have a great motor. What he does have is the ability to play the game of basketball very well and very efficiently in a massive frame. Most coaches will take that 9 times out of 10 over an athletic freak that needs someone to teach him how to dribble without looking down.
              The Ivy league conference...?

              Cousins put up 16 and 7 against Mr. Defense. Good outing, but demolish?

              Cole Aldrich played Mr. Defense as well...and beat his season average too....putting up 13 and 9.

              Yes, Cousins had a good game...but their C is over-rated going against Ivy league all year.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Cousins and the draft

                I must admit, I don't get all the Cousin's love.
                Sure, I get the size & natural ability to score inside, but he is a C pure & simple, IMO. I do not see him as a PF in the league, as he is too slow of foot & has a limited range shot (from what I've seen - limited as it may be).
                I would take a Blake Griffin 100x out of 100 over Cousin's. I see him as a terible mix w/ Roy, which is why if we got pick #3, I take Favors if I think he is a future star, or I trade down. I see him as a force down low, but a potential clog in the middle as well. For a team w/o a C or low post dominate PF, he would do well, but if a team has a low post player already, he is not what is needed. Simply put, I pass (or trade), nothing else.
                "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
                (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Cousins and the draft

                  from an Indiana standpoint, I think Evan Turner or Favors would hold more value, since they do already have a center.

                  Obviously nobody is going to draft Cousins and use him as a PF. That was never the discussion at hand.
                  Last edited by Kstat; 04-02-2010, 08:20 AM.

                  It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                  Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                  Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                  NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Cousins and the draft

                    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                    The Ivy league conference...?

                    Cousins put up 16 and 7 against Mr. Defense. Good outing, but demolish?

                    Cole Aldrich played Mr. Defense as well...and beat his season average too....putting up 13 and 9.

                    Yes, Cousins had a good game...but their C is over-rated going against Ivy league all year.
                    This is why you would do better to watch the games instead of just regurgitating the box score.

                    Cornell dominated everybody defensively all year long, not just the ivy league. They shut down the inside of every team they faced, kansas included.

                    Cousins came down and scored at will the first handful of possessions against a frontline that nobody was beating all season long, and for the rest of the game they were forced to double down on him, and that was it. Cornell got picked apart.

                    There is nothing more misleading in all of college basketball than a big man's stat line, because so much of the college game is about aggressively double-teaming the post.
                    Last edited by Kstat; 04-02-2010, 08:24 AM.

                    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                    Comment


                    • Re: Cousins and the draft

                      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                      Blair was passed over because he has no ACLs in his knees, not because he was a headcase.
                      Yes, that's what I said - in other words, there really are good players whose risks are not based on their attitudes.
                      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: Cousins and the draft

                        Kstat... I agree with you on this debate of Cousins. I really do. I do not think he is as skilled on the dribble as you say, but in terms of footwork and touch around the basket, he clearly does those things exceptionally well for his age. I think Cousins will be a very good player and 20/10/2 is a very realistic line for him.

                        The one concern I had was that the Cornell center went basket for basket with Cousins at the beginning of that game. The difference in the game though was that the other players on Kentucky were able to be very effective off of the inside out game... whereas the other Cornell players did not play particularly well because of their lack of athleticism. The game was a low scoring grind it out game, but my point is that the legitimate 7 footer from Cornell scored easily OVER cousins. Cousins IMO is a touch shorter than what a lot of centers are and does not jump like a lot of the PF's playing undersized at center (i.e. Al Horford). I think he will be a very good player, but will struggle the same ways that Al Jefferson does defensively. He will get blocks and "man" his guy in the post, but a quicker guy will go around him or bring him out of the lane and a taller guy will shoot over him. I could see Hibbert's hook shot being very effective against him. I think very highly of his game and he is a perfect fit in Detroit, but like you said... for the Pacers, Turner or Favors make WAY more sense to the roster. But this whole thing is moot since we will be picking at 10 even though this thread is dedicated to Cousins.
                        "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                        Comment


                        • Re: Cousins and the draft

                          Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                          Most coaches will take that 9 times out of 10 over an athletic freak that needs someone to teach him how to dribble without looking down.
                          Wait... you're not supposed to look down?
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Cousins and the draft

                            Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                            This is why you would do better to watch the games instead of just regurgitating the box score.

                            Cornell dominated everybody defensively all year long, not just the ivy league. They shut down the inside of every team they faced, kansas included.

                            Cousins came down and scored at will the first handful of possessions against a frontline that nobody was beating all season long, and for the rest of the game they were forced to double down on him, and that was it. Cornell got picked apart.

                            There is nothing more misleading in all of college basketball than a big man's stat line, because so much of the college game is about aggressively double-teaming the post.
                            Cornell is not the NBA. That's probably all you need to know.

                            Cousins is 280lbs and hardly anyone who relies on strength in college can stop him. That is Cornell's game which usually works in the Ivy League. That is not how the NBA game is played at all. Cornell simply had not dealt with a player that big and it showed...particularly when they had to contend with John Wall...who they could not match in terms of athleticism.

                            The short of it is, an NBA team with stronger and more athletic bigs is not going to have the same difficulties stopping a brute...especially a guy who is both slow and unathletic. This reminds me a little of how T-Hans discovered true NBA athletes in the paint. The Pacers will throw Roy Hibbert at Cousins and do just fine...and Roy is not that great defensively...but if you noticed, Roy does just fine against slow bigs.

                            As for Kansas, they must not have been shut down that badly even with Aldrich giving up 20lbs to Cornell's C and 35lbs to Cousins. In fact, Aldrich beat his scoring average. That doesn't sound like he was shut down.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Cousins and the draft

                              the ivy league isnt the NBA...nor is the SEC, ACC, or the big 10. What's the point?

                              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                              Comment


                              • Re: Cousins and the draft

                                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                                the ivy league isnt the NBA...nor is the SEC, ACC, or the big 10. What's the point?
                                The SEC, ACC, and Big Ten are a hell of a lot closer to the NBA than the Ivy League. They don't even offer athletic scholarships in the Ivy League.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X