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

  • #46
    Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

    Originally posted by MUpaceSIC View Post

    8. Detroit - Tristan Thompson (6'9'', PF, Texas, Fresh.)
    I hate you. There's probably a %5-10 chance you're actually right, but I hate you nontheless.
    Last edited by Kstat; 06-08-2011, 12:02 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


    • #47
      Re: My Mock Draft

      Originally posted by MyFavMartin View Post
      I'm just not seeing a powerful frontcourt player available (in my mock) to pair with Monroe... and nothing better than what they've got in Charlie V. (I think Bismack would be great for Detroit but I have Toronto plucking him earlier.)

      Daye's got the SF position covered, and I'm thinking Bynum and Stuckey have the PG position covered. Having a guy like Burks might allow to play small ball with sllding Daye over to PF ala the Pistons have done before with Prince and Gordon at the 2.

      Also see Burks having the potential to develop and having strong stock for trade in a weak SG draft class. Not been a fan of Gordon starting due to his size and defense. (Have him spend his energy on scoring from the 2nd unit, a role that he thrives in.)
      ok.....the 7th best frontcourt player available is still more valuable to the Pistons than the top shooting guard. They will take Biyombo, Vesely, or Valanciunas, or Kanter, or whomever, but there will be a fan revolt if they draft another ****ing shooting guard.

      Also, CV31 has nothing locked up. He couldn't start even last year with a wet paper bag playing in front of him.
      Last edited by Kstat; 06-08-2011, 12:09 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


      • #48
        Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

        Originally posted by Kstat View Post
        I hate you. There's probably a %5-10 chance you're actually right, but I hate you nontheless.
        Huh? Though 5-10% sounds about accurate in this draft. I could see them selecting any one of these guys: Tristan Thompson, Bismack Biyombo, Jonas Valanciunas, Jan Vesely, Marcus Morris, Alec Burks (would be awful, but it's the Pistons), or Kemba Walker (if he somehow fell). I still think T. Thompson or Biyombo is the likely selection.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

          My hope if that they aren't flying overseas to interview Biyombo just to pass him up.

          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


          • #50
            Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

            Originally posted by Kstat View Post
            My hope if that they aren't flying overseas to interview Biyombo just to pass him up.
            Haha yeah, that would be rough. I like Biyombo a lot, and he would fit perfectly on the Pacers. Biyombo and Thompson are the two best fit players (that could be available) for the Pistons. Thompson just has more potential IMO.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

              You mentioned that you could see the Jazz trading at pick three with PG their most likely pick. I could also see them trade up with Cleveland from 3 to 1 if they really like Irving more than Knight. I could see them swap Harris, Raja Bell, #3 and #12 for Davis, #1, and Manny Harris (and probably one or two more roster evening minimum contracts).

              I don't know what Utah's new owners would think of Baron, but he is an upgrade talent-wise but his contract is hard to swallow for his recent production. Utah has their front court pretty solidified for the next several years, with guys who are fairly young. They get the best available PG who fits their younger roster and a guy who he will push for minutes. It might spark Baron to either go crazy or step his game up. I think Utah would prefer to have Irving long-term.

              Long-range roster: Irving/Miles/Heyward/Harris (3rd wing)/Favors/Jefferson/Milsap (3rd big)

              Cleveland gets Devin for a couple of years to let Knight develop. With picks 3 and 4, I would assume Cleveland would go Knight and Kanter, which sets them up nicely going forward by filling PG and C. They get the 12 pick that they would probably use on the best available wing, possibly Singleton or Burks. They need help at both spots.

              Long-range roster: Knight/Eyenga/Singleton/Hickson/Kanter/Varajao (3rd big)

              I think this makes a heck of a lot of sense for both teams.

              Another team I could really see making a big move early would be Detroit. I think they might want to try to move up to four if Kanter is available. Putting Kanter next to Monroe would be a great move. Those two would compliment one another well, assuming the skills Kanter is said to have.
              "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


              • #52
                Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

                I don't think Thompson has much potential at all, but that's a discussion for a different thread. If they passed on Biyombo, Valanciunas AND Vesely for Thompson, that would be the worst decision since Darko.

                Also, something that will influence Jonas's draft status: His buyout is on a sliding scale, so the lower he gets drafted, the less his buyout will be. I don't see him falling into the teens.

                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


                • #53
                  Re: My Mock Draft

                  Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                  ok.....the 7th best frontcourt player available is still more valuable to the Pistons than the top shooting guard. They will take Biyombo, Vesely, or Valanciunas, or Kanter, or whomever, but there will be a fan revolt if they draft another ****ing shooting guard.

                  Also, CV31 has nothing locked up. He couldn't start even last year with a wet paper bag playing in front of him.
                  I read a comment from another Pistons fan that stated other than Monroe, the entire team needs an upgrade of talent at every position.

                  Maybe Detroit signs a PF in FA or thinks they can get a decent enough guy at #33 (Jordan Williams, JaJuan Johnson, Harper, or that getting Burks is an upgrade and allows them to make a trade.

                  I'm not sold on Vesely and I've got the 3 other guys you mentioned (that I like and agree would really help Detroit) already gone.

                  Keep it up Kstat and I'll change my mock to having the Pistons select Jimmer.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

                    I'd love Jimmer. He's an actual PG.

                    And no, with Rodney Stuckey and Ben Gordon, we do not need an upgrade at shooting guard. And that's even assuming we find a way to dump Rip Hamilton.

                    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


                    • #55
                      Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

                      If Jonas goes 14th i would throw my remote at my TV He would be a perfect fit here we need a guy like him for screens and rebounds. (and I have never done anything like that)


                      However Cleveland has Jonas rated above Enes on there draft board and for good reason he is a much better fit with Kyrie Irving than Kanter is. Jonas is a beast in the PnR.(which is what we really need.)

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

                        Originally posted by Speed View Post
                        Heard podcast from Givoney, Draftexpress guy, said that Jonas finished pick and rolls in Europe at an amazing rate, great motor, gets to the line. I guess he is still learning and it could go either way, but he has a high ceiling, if he works. I like your draft too, MU.
                        He also reported the Cavs have him higher on there board than Kanter. He said the Cavs FO told him.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

                          My Mock Draft! (please no flame I'm a noob hehe)
                          1st round

                          1. CLEVELAND - Derrick Williams
                          2. MINNESOTA - Kyrie Irving
                          3. UTAH - Brandon Knight
                          4. CLEVELAND - Kemba Walker
                          5. TORONTO - Enes Kanter
                          6. WASHINGTON - Kawhi Leonard
                          7. SACRAMENTO - Jimmer Fredette
                          8. DETROIT - Bismack Biyombo
                          9. CHARLOTTE - Jan Vesely
                          10. MILWAUKEE - Alec Burks
                          11. GOLDEN STATE - Jonas Valanciunas
                          12. UTAH - Klay Thompson
                          13. PHOENIX - Donatas Motiejunas
                          14. HOUSTON - Tristan Thompson
                          15. INDIANA - Marshon Brooks
                          16. PHILADELPHIA - Marcus Morris
                          17. NEW YORK - Kenneth Faried
                          18. WASHINGTON - Markieff Morris
                          19. CHARLOTTE - Chris Singleton
                          20. MINNESOTA - Tyler Honeycutt
                          21. PORTLAND - Tobias Harris
                          22. DENVER - Darius Morris
                          23. HOUSTON - Jordan Hamilton
                          24. OKLAHOMA CITY - Jeremy Tyler
                          25. BOSTON - Reggie Jackson
                          26. DALLAS - Justin Harper
                          27. NEW JERSEY - JaJuan Johnson
                          28. CHICAGO - Josh Selby
                          29. SAN ANTONIO - Davis Bertans
                          30. CHICAGO - Trey Thompkins


                          2nd round

                          31. MIAMI- Shelvin Mack
                          32. CLEVELAND- Malcolm Lee
                          33. DETROIT- Norris Cole
                          34. WASHINGTON - Nikola Mritoc
                          35. SACRAMENTO- Jordan Williams
                          36. NEW JERSEY- Nolan Smith
                          37. LAC - Kyle Singler
                          38. HOUSTON- Nikola Vucevic
                          39. CHARLOTTE- E'twaun Moore
                          40. MILWAUKEE- Rick Jackson
                          41. LAL- Iman Shumpert
                          42. INDIANA- Keith Benson
                          Last edited by BornReady; 06-08-2011, 04:16 PM. Reason: I forgot Enes Kanter because I'm a pro
                          Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

                            So Kanter is not in your top 42?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

                              Originally posted by PurduePacer View Post
                              So Kanter is not in your top 42?
                              LOL super fail xD good catch HAHAHA. I think i need some adjusting...
                              Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: your mock draft for 2011 !

                                You did a lot more than I ever would.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X