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

Best young cores

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

  • Re: Best young cores

    Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
    Reid WAS the pick. I distinctly remember Adam Silverman coming out and saying the Pacers select Reid. It wasn't announcerd later about the trade. If you have a LINK to disprove this, I'd love to read it.

    Granted James is in Europe, but then where is Rolle? There isn't anything wrong with going to Europe to get some experience b4 trying the NBA. It worked well for A. Davis and the Pacers.

    As far a N'Daiye, he's scored 3 more points and played 11 more minutes in the NBA than that fantastic NY phemonema Lance Stephernsen has. Lance has so much talent yet after 36 games he still hasn't played a minute in the NBA, and nearly all season has been inactive. That really says alot for such a "talented" pick that you tout on about. Not to mention Bird gave him, a 2nd rounder, a guaranteed contract. James White #II.

    And I'm tired of listening to apologists as you try to spin bed time fairy tales too. Stephenson can't play "D" nor can he play PG. That was obvious in the pre-season games, but just keep looking through those rose colored glasses.

    I'd still have taken either Jordan or N'Daiye. Neither would be any worse than than Rolle, and far less a PR problem than the phenomenal NY player Lance Stephenson. People like you make me ill by willing to swing for the fences knowing Stephenson is another PR problem away from dragging the image down that the franchise has tried so hard to rebuild. I call it reckless blindness.
    Who cares if Reid was ANNOUNCED as the Pacers pick?...He was picked because that's who OKC wanted as a part of the trade..If you don't see this, then I really don't know what to tell you.

    BTW, here is your link...
    http://www.nba.com/thunder/news/reidbio_100629.html

    Few draft pundits had Ryan Reid on their draft boards.

    But the Thunder had been following the Florida State product closely throughout his four-year career. And like Executive Vice President/General Manager Sam Presti said, there are no silver bullets when it comes to evaluating talent.

    Oklahoma City heard the Florida State coaching staff rave about Reid’s attitude and defensive abilities, about his work ethic both on and off the court.

    Off it, Reid became the first member of his family to graduate college.

    On it, he was so fundamentally sound as a defender that FSU head coach Leonard Hamilton told the Orlando Sentinel earlier this season that he wanted to make an instructional video on how to defend based on Reid’s defensive techniques.

    “I would recommend anybody buy a video of him teaching people how to guard the low post,” Hamilton told the Sentinel.

    So based on his character and drive alone, Reid embodies what the Thunder is all about, which is why the organization swapped second-round picks with the Indiana Pacers to get him during last Thursday’s NBA Draft.
    The THUNDER had been following Reid for 4 years, not the Pacers. The Thunder knew that they could trade down and pick up some extra cash AND still get the guy they wanted.

    XBulletproof said it better than I could...

    Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
    You're missing the point, in the trade with Portland we were under obligation to take whoever THEY wanted. Just because it was announced that we drafted him, doesn't mean it was our decision. We were drafting FOR Portland, otherwise we just take Rush at #11.

    You really can't be this blind.

    The only reason Rolle isn't on the team is because we ran out of roster spots. Jordan, on the other hand, simply sucks. The Knicks have no backup center and if he was any good he would be playing. Simple as that. That's not to say he can't get better with some seasoning in Europe, but the dude is already 24 years old.

    If I'm a blind optimist and apologist, you're a debbie downer - constantly railing Bird for everything from draft picks to contract negotiations. Quick, give me 10 players in the last 5 drafts from the second round that have become NBA role players. Better yet, give me a few after pick 50....I'm not even sure there are any.

    Point being, second round picks rarely ever amount to anything. That's why we were willing to overlook a few of his past transgressions. This team needs more TALENT at every position.

    Also, I disagree with the notion that Lance is even viewed by the front office as a point guard. I think they were trying him out there because we only had Ford and AJ. He is a shooting guard...and his D will be serviceable at that position. We're stacked at the wing right now so Lance hasn't gotten his shot yet. But he will - he's only 20 years old.
    Last edited by Mr. Sobchak; 01-15-2011, 03:18 AM.

    Comment


    • Re: Best young cores

      Why are people still responding to aaronb? He doesn't use or listen to logic or reason, so what's the point? He hates Larry Bird and no one is going to be able to convince him otherwise regardless of any cold hard facts put in front of him.

      Comment


      • Re: Best young cores

        Originally posted by Mr. Sobchak View Post

        Quick, give me 10 players in the last 5 drafts from the second round that have become NBA role players. Better yet, give me a few after pick 50....I'm not even sure there are any.


        McBOB
        Carl Landry... who I would have liked Bird getting when he was a RFA.
        Marc Gasol... a nice young core piece for the Griz.
        Mario Chalmers... who I liked as a 2nd round pick.
        Blair... a favorite of Seth.
        Chase Budinger... Seth again.
        Sonny Weems... Bulls b4 injury.
        Dragovic(sp?)... b/u pg for Parker.
        Milsap... which many on this board wanted at PF earlier this season.
        Glen Davis... need I say more with his championship ring.
        Landry Fields... Knicks
        Bill Walker... Knicks
        Ramon Sessions... who I have always liked.
        DeAndre Jordan... Clips who has a PD thread on him of late.
        Mbah a Moute... Bucks


        #50 and below.

        The supposed steal of the the 09 draft, AJ Price, if he could get any PT.


        You are right I don't have much in the way of positive things to say about Bird, but I give him credit when it is due... I always have. I have been easy on Bird this year compared to previous years. I have never felt Bird is FO material, but was a GREAT BB PLAYER. I have my own view why Walsh hired Bird, and it will never change. If you and others like Bird POB, that's your perogative, but I get irritated with posters who feel he hasn't made mistakes and won't admit to them. I will always show he has and what they are. You won't change what I think of Bird, and I won't change how you think about Bird. But BOTH views should be allowed to be voiced whether you and others agree with "those" that feel Bird has made mistakes. A forum is a place where BOTH sides can express their views whether YOU feel they are negative b/c they don't agree with your views. I believe this has been done in a civil fashion.


        My point was that the Pacers drafted Reid. It doesn't matter if there was a pre-arranged agreement between teams. The Pacers still drafted Reid and Bayless, Portland drafted Rush, and OKC drafted Rolle... draft results show it as such. Point made, conversation over! Thank you and have a great day.

        Comment


        • Re: Best young cores

          So thats 15 guys out of 150. It's a crap shoot.

          Comment


          • Re: Best young cores

            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post


            My point was that the Pacers drafted Reid. It doesn't matter if there was a pre-arranged agreement between teams. The Pacers still drafted Reid and Bayless, Portland drafted Rush, and OKC drafted Rolle... draft results show it as such. Point made, conversation over! Thank you and have a great day.
            But they drafted those players because the other teams told them too. That's how that trade works..

            Honestly, I don't think that many people overrate Bird. He's done a decent job. I think some are underrating.

            Comment


            • Re: Best young cores

              Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
              So thats 15 guys out of 150. It's a crap shoot.

              I'm sure if I spent the time researching I could find more. A # of years ago I did research on how many 2nds were still in the league after 5 years. IIRC, it was 34% which is a lot higher than a good many posters choose to believe.

              As far as drafting goes, it's all a crap shoot, using your terminology. Some GM's are better than others at it. I always thought the best thing about Zeke was his ability to judge talent and for the most part draft well. Some GM's just have a knack at finding gems in the 20-30 spots and in the 2nd round.

              Comment


              • Re: Best young cores

                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                I'm sure if I spent the time researching I could find more. A # of years ago I did research on how many 2nds were still in the league after 5 years. IIRC, it was 34% which is a lot higher than a good many posters choose to believe.

                As far as drafting goes, it's all a crap shoot, using your terminology. Some GM's are better than others at it. I always thought the best thing about Zeke was his ability to judge talent and for the most part draft well. Some GM's just have a knack at finding gems in the 20-30 spots and in the 2nd round.
                Yeah, I can't disagree there. It's possible to find someone, but the likelihood is still against a GM's favor though.

                Comment


                • Re: Best young cores

                  Hmm...our young core seems to be slipping in the standings with each passing week.

                  At minimum Hibbert and Rush are far enough in that they should be showing significant advances. Yet here they are treading water or even regressing.

                  Any discussion of our core needs to be qualified. It is a core of potential role players and/or solid back ups. There is no legit impact power in it, which is obviously what we desperately need to make a jump in overall team quality.
                  I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                  -Emiliano Zapata

                  Comment


                  • Re: Best young cores

                    Originally posted by Sookie View Post

                    But they drafted those players because the other teams told them too. That's how that trade works..

                    If OKC thought so much of Reid, they could have drafted him themselves at #51 instead of having the Pacers do it at #57. What did the Pacers give them that was so valuable for them to chance losing Reid to another team drafting after them when they supposedly wanted him so badly? IIRC, it was a couple $100,000, so they thought so much of Reid they were willing to chance losing him to another team drafting before the Pacers for the money. WOW!

                    Bird paid money plus Reid to get Rolle who got cut. Bird traded Alex Johnson and 2 extra 2nds to get James White who got cut. Bird stated since the Pacers traded their 2007 1st in the Harrington fiasco that he'd get a pick in the draft. It was commonly believed he was referring to a 1st pick. Instead, he came up with a 2nd pick from Orlando where he drafted Stanko. Less than 10 picks later the Lakers drafted Marc Gasol. GRRR

                    Bird's 2nd round acquistions:
                    Lorbek
                    Stanko
                    James White
                    Price
                    Stephenson
                    Rolle

                    Only one has ever logged any minutes in a Pacers uni, and too few at that!
                    You'll have to admit Price is the best of the bunch. Seth has a far better record on 2nd round picks than Bird the POB! I'm sure for some monetary inducement Seth would be more than willing to pick a "winner" for Bird in the 2nd round this June. I know I'd feel more confident in the outcome!

                    Comment


                    • Re: Best young cores

                      Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                      Less than 10 picks later the Lakers drafted Marc Gasol. GRRR
                      You could play that game with every GM in the league. They'd all look equally silly.

                      We can have complaints about Bird, but be realistic. 2nd round picks aren't something worth throwing a fit about.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Best young cores

                        Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post

                        2nd round picks aren't something worth throwing a fit about.

                        I know I'm in the minority, but I view EVERY pick as a valuable building tool... even 2nd rd picks. A wasted pick is a lost future asset to build with whether it is a 2nd rd pick or a 1st round pick. It bothers me other teams can draft players in the 2nd round that helps their team and Bird record of drafting contributing players in the 2nd round sux. It gripes me to see the daily box scores and see other teams 2nd rd picks, like Blair last night, making great contributions while the only Bird 2nd round pick who has ever played a NBA minute is Price. It just grates me to no end. I'm a firm believer there are gems to be found in the 2nd rd, and I feel the Pacers should be a team finding those gems. JMOAA

                        Comment


                        • Re: Best young cores

                          I think most people view 2nd rounders as a bonus. If you get one that pans out, great. Otherwise it's what you expected. Look at this breakdown of draft picks results in the past ...

                          http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

                          In the 2nd round for each pick there's a total of 100% right? For all 30 picks it's a total of 3000%. I'm going to add up the "Deep Bench", "Bust" and "Did Not Play" percentages and see what the total is. I'd bet it's enormously high.

                          OMG I typed that before adding it up .... and I'm even shocked at the numbers. 2,550. What does that mean? That means from 1989 to 2008, that 15% of 2nd round draft picks have become a role player or better according to this chart. 85% became bench warmers, busts, or never played.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Best young cores

                            Just to add context to what's posted above, that 15% means that roughly 4 players per year in the 2nd round end up as role players, or better.

                            4 hits, 26 misses.

                            I have a hard time knocking a guy for not overcoming such overwhelming odds.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Best young cores

                              Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                              I think most people view 2nd rounders as a bonus. If you get one that pans out, great. Otherwise it's what you expected. Look at this breakdown of draft picks results in the past ...

                              http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

                              In the 2nd round for each pick there's a total of 100% right? For all 30 picks it's a total of 3000%. I'm going to add up the "Deep Bench", "Bust" and "Did Not Play" percentages and see what the total is. I'd bet it's enormously high.

                              OMG I typed that before adding it up .... and I'm even shocked at the numbers. 2,550. What does that mean? That means from 1989 to 2008, that 15% of 2nd round draft picks have become a role player or better according to this chart. 85% became bench warmers, busts, or never played.

                              Who are you trying to snow? That is their stats/system, if one looked hard enough one could probably find stats to show my thinking is more in line. Stats can be twisted and manuvered to show anything one wants.

                              Lets just end this debate with you and I having different views about the value of 2nd rd picks.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Best young cores

                                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                                Who are you trying to snow? That is their stats/system, if one looked hard enough one could probably find stats to show my thinking is more in line. Stats can be twisted and manuvered to show anything one wants.

                                Lets just end this debate with you and I having different views about the value of 2nd rd picks.
                                Trying to snow? Who says that?

                                Regardless this isn't a chart I made specifically tailored to this argument. I would be incredibly shocked if you could find someone who said any good amount of 2nd rounders amounted to anything. They don't. You can name the few that did so easily only because they stand out so well.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X