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

your mock draft for 2011 !

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

  • #16
    Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

    Originally posted by Spirit View Post
    NBADraft.net has him as the 39th pick. I know they aren't the best draft mock site, but they normally are pretty solid.
    Ya that site is a joke but i dont care where they have him I have him where i want and think he would be a good fit. You can make a mock and put him 39 thats cool with me but he will go higher.


    I just checked his profile on that site it hasn't been updated since last year it calls him a poor shooter 50% isn't a poor shooter. It was last updated 1/13/10 ya that site is a joke compared to the mothership fox draftexpress ect.


    http://www.nbadraft.net/players/reggie-jackson
    Last edited by pacer4ever; 05-30-2011, 04:30 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

      Plus, this year will be a crapshoot when it comes to targetting players at a certain point. The draft is deep, but nothing is solidified at the top of the draft outside of maybe the top 3. Maybe. Teams with two picks in the first round will likely go with players at different positions so the first choice will dictate the second to a degree.

      This is one of the toughest years to project a mock draft, because of the ability for players to move up or drop off. The talent pool is there, but the opinions on a lot of these guys I would think is going to be much different than most years. The amount of Euro players contributes to that as well. I think some GM's love Euros and others despise them.

      I don't think 15 is too high for Jackson. Or Darius Morris either. Another PG I see as having better value than where he has been mocked up to this point. There are players like Justin Harper from Richmond who just started playing basketball late in life. He grew like 4 inches in college and really worked through a touch of awkwardness early in his college career. He has a smooth stroke and is long. He has post up moves, but he has been adding a lot of muscle in anticipation of the draft. He put up one of the top marks for bench press (which I don't love as a stat, but shows the work he has put in). That kid could go anywhere from 15 to 45 and I wouldn't be surprised.

      A guy like Jordan Williams was supposed to be a big bodied center, and he came in much shorter than was thought. Josh Selby has been all over the place. Jeremy Tyler and Noguiera could go much higher than has been projected based on potential. I don't think you can take any of these mock drafts this year with as much certainty as we have had in years' past, and even then they are never really that close.

      I will post my here in the next week or two. I just need to get my thoughts together on who, where, and why.
      "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


      • #18
        Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

        If we do pick Reggie Jackson, I just hope that he doesn't end up being Mr. October, meaning that he plays his best in October and strikes out a lot.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

          Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
          Ya that site is a joke but i dont care where they have him I have him where i want and think he would be a good fit. You can make a mock and put him 39 thats cool with me but he will go higher.


          I just checked his profile on that site it hasn't been updated since last year it calls him a poor shooter 50% isn't a poor shooter. It was last updated 1/13/10 ya that site is a joke compared to the mothership fox draftexpress ect.


          http://www.nbadraft.net/players/reggie-jackson
          I like your input, but please use some punctuation --- this isn't Twitter! My brain hurts.
          There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

            I'll weigh in on the Pacers picks.

            #15 Josh Selby
            #42 Vernon Macklin

            http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Josh-Selby-5682/

            http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Vernon-Macklin-235/



            http://nbadraft.net/players/josh-selby

            http://nbadraft.net/players/vernon-macklin

            My thoughts from reading up on them.

            Macklin is 24, but they've shown they will take an older guy with Magnum and Tyler recently. He killed Butler in the tournament last year (25 pts). He has the measureables for sure as far as size, so I think he could be a rebounder, although the numbers don't show it. He has already worked out here. Roy's buddy from days in Georgetown.

            Selby is a pick for potential, his ability to create a shot would stand out on a team that lacks this skill, like the Pacers. He'll, likely, have more upside than anybody available at #15. He could easily bust or could also be your leading scorer off the bench, in 2 years. He has alot to prove after Kansas, might have a sizeable chip on his shoulder to prove it.
            Last edited by Speed; 06-02-2011, 07:54 AM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

              I have a feeling that every mock out there will be quite a bit off unlike we have seen before. Following the draft this year has been tough honestly i will give an example Bismack could go #2 or he could go #11 this draft is crazy. I just cant wait till next years draft with a goodd group of incoming freshman and a lot of good sophomores.

              My Mock will be way off

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

                I'm not sold on Macklin in the second round. He is 24, and only 6-9, long arms, but only 6-9 in shoes. Probably be a productive player for a 2nd round pick, but i'd rather the Pacers draft a big brooding PF as a project.
                You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                Comment


                • #23
                  My Mock Draft

                  1 Cleveland Kyle Irving PG - Cleveland addresses a big need at a very important position.
                  2 Minnesotta Enes Kanter PF/C - Minn models themselves after Memphis and addresses a huge need at C: Love/Kanter ala Randolph/Jaric.
                  3 Utah Derrick Williams SF - Jazz get a big time talent. AKwho?
                  4 Cleveland Jonas Valanciunas C - Reportedly Cavs love this Jonas brother and pairs well with in the FC with Hickson.
                  5 Toronto Brandon Knight PG - Raptors like Jose Calderon, big gets a PG with size, length, and moxie.
                  6 Washington Bismack Biyombe PF/C - Defensive powerhouse would look great next to McGee and bad to other teams.
                  7 Sacramento Kemba Walker PG - The Kings have tried and tired of the Evans/PG experiment and get a true PG that can hit from range and brings tremendous leadership. Fans will love this pick.
                  8 Detroit Alec Burks SG - A SG with size. Gordon returns to the 6th man role that he's so good at.... in a year or 2.
                  9 Charlotte Jann Vesely SF/PF - Addresses a bigtime need at the 3 spot after Gerald Wallace was sent to Portland.
                  10 Milwaukee Kawhi Leonard SF - A tough hard nosed, get the most of his body/talent pick seems to match Skiles' likes and style.
                  11 Golden State Markieff Morris PF - Warriors need size and this twin actually has it.
                  12 Utah Chris Singleton SF - Great value and talent. Tremendous length. Gives Utah Hayward/Derrick Williams/Singleton to work the wings.
                  13 Phoenix Marcus Morris PF - Fits Phoenix's style, an athletic guy that can hit a jumper and run the court.
                  14 Houston Tristan Thompson SF - This athletic, bulky guy seems a tweener but knows how to play ball and really matches Houston's draft history.
                  15 Indiana Marshon Brooks SG - A guy with good size who can create his shot. Instant offense.
                  16 Philadelphia Nikola Vucecic C - Hawes needs replaced. And this guy has size and impressed me in USC games with rebounding and low post offense.
                  17 New York Kenneth Faried PF - An athletic tweener who fits IT's draft history. Would look very good next to Amare and Anthony. Guy doesn't need shots - he gets them for others on the glass.
                  18 Washington Jimmer Freddette PG - Backup to Wall and spot minutes at 2 since he can shoot from outside.
                  19 Charlotte Jordan Hamilton SF - Depth at wing is a weakness of the 'Cats.
                  20 Minnesotta Donatas Montiejunas PF - Depth at FC is a weakness of the Wolves and Minny takes a chance on a offensive-oriented Euro often compared to Bargnani... he might even have the same lackadaisical attitude.
                  21 Portland Josh Selby PG - Needs a longterm prospect behind Andre Miller and the Blazers roll the dice with the next Bayless-ic experiment.
                  22 Denver Klay Thompson SG - Replaces JR Smith's outside shooting.
                  23 Houston Reggie Jackson PG - Size to complement Lowry's speed at the PG rotation.
                  24 OKC Nikola Mirotic PF - Backup to Durant with size and outside shooting.
                  25 Boston Tyler Honeycutt SF - Wing prospect often compared to Tayshaun Prince as a heir to The Truth.
                  26 Dallas Darius Morris PG - PG with size. Kidd turns 39 next year.
                  27 New Jersey Jordan Williams PF - PF is a huge hole for NJ and Jordan would more than fill it with bulk and good low-post offense. Potentially good pairing with the length and midrange game of Brooke Lopez.
                  28 Chicago Tobias Harris SF - Reminds me of James Johnson, a tweener, that gives the Bulls flexibility but a tough guy to bring in with the second unit that knows how to play and has a decent midrange game.
                  29 San Antonio JaJuan Johnson PF - Long skinny PF with quick feet and good low-post skills and developing midrange game. Rebounding would be compensated by Blair or Splitter.
                  30 Chicago Shelvin Mack PG - Potential Ben Gordon-like spark to bring off the bench.
                  ---------------------------------------

                  I did this mock considering team need a little more heavily than most (ie Kanter makes a lot sense for Minny at the 5 spot and its a vote of confindence in Beasley.)
                  Last edited by MyFavMartin; 06-06-2011, 10:15 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: My Mock Draft

                    can we merge this with the my mock thread?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: My Mock Draft

                      I don't think Jimmer gets by us if he's there at 15.

                      I think he'll go earlier to one of Utah's picks. If he's there at 15, I don't think he slips past us.

                      Still a pretty good mock though.
                      Last edited by Psyren; 06-03-2011, 05:13 PM.
                      Stop quoting people I have on ignore!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: My Mock Draft

                        Detroit is not drafting Alex Burks 8th. Come on now. He's the last player they would look at.

                        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


                        • #27
                          Re: My Mock Draft

                          http://pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?t=64709

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

                            I am not going to make a mock draft. I just want to be on record on my philosphy of th Pacers draft pick @ 15.

                            I do not believe this organization is far away from winning a first round series @ all. In this draft I would rather draft a player with a certain needed skill set ie Jimmer for outside shooting/ Faried for Rebounding/ Singleton wing defense or Jordan Hamilton for bench scoring than an unproven player with 'potential' I am very high on Paul George/Roy Hibbert and would love to see them get their chances to be more effective in the offense.

                            Get a player with a needed skill set , be smart with the FA money and in two years I really believe the Pacers are playing in the Eastern Conference Finals. They have to be smart though is all. This is not a weak draft it a wild card draft!!!!

                            Hibbert/ Paul George / Hansbrough are a very good nucleus.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

                              I know I am super out of place with this comment but looking through the mock draft something hit me that I had forgot about... that is Terrence Jones heading back to UK...

                              I think that was not a good move on his part, but oh well... Thought he would have went late lottery in this draft...

                              Also I am still surprised at how Brandon Knight has moved up in these mock draft and how far Dontas has slipped, I think he will rise up after the eurocamp and go somewhere in the lottery... too much potential and too much size...
                              Why so SERIOUS

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

                                I think we do what it takes to move up a couple spots and take Burks, hes our answer at the 2.
                                GO HARD OR GO HOME

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X