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

Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

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

  • #91
    Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

    Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
    Collison's a legitimate pass-first point guard with one of the best assist-to-turnover ratios in the league, whereas Ellis is a shot-happy comboguard who's also a turnover machine.

    If we played Collison the way Golden State plays Monta─huge minutes and total domination (30%+) of our offensive possessions─there's no question he could give us close to 20 & 10 a night.

    Don't believe me?

    Just take a look at what he did as a starter during his rookie season. That was New Orleans using Collison the way Golden State uses Monta; huge minutes (40.2), and total ball domination.

    The end result? 18.8 ppg, and 9.1 apg, and he did it while being far more efficient than Monta.

    Darren could do that for us, I'm sure, but is it conductive to winning? I would think most would say no.
    I'm sorry, I just can't agree with you. Collison is far from a pass first point guard in my opinion, but we obviously disagree. Collison is terrible at setting up the pick and roll and can't defend it if his life depended on it. I love Darren, don't get me wrong, but for me to think that Monta is not a complete upgrade from Darren I would have to change the way I see the game. And that won't happen. I appreciate your opinion, however.
    "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


    • #92
      Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

      Slow footed Brook Lopez with David Lee?


      There are renewed rumblings about the Warriors possibly getting Brook Lopez from the Nets in a multi-team deal involving Howard. That would cost them big time, though; Monta Ellis would be part of the Magic’s compensation

      Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/more_...#ixzz1nh56Hghb
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

        Wow. Now we are talking. That is probably the most interesting thing I have heard in regards to the Dwight rumblings. Everything else is a major sports personality throwing out ideas and trade proposal rumors like we do on here, only with the criteria that Dwight only ends up in LA.

        Ellis seems like the perfect type of player that Otis Smith would want in return. I just don't understand what they would do with Jameer Nelson and Hedo Turkoglu. Would Turk go to NJ? Whose salary does Golden State pick up? Is there a fourth team? Monta makes sense, but when you throw David Lee into the mix and pair Monta with Nelson, it loses sensibility for me.

        Ellis to Orl, Lopez to GS, Dwight to NJ, first round picks from NJ to ORL? I would think that Ellis for Lopez would be a pretty even swap, but I could be wrong. Ellis is better than Lopez, but Lopez is a more valuable big.
        "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


        • #94
          Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

          To me Ellis for Lopez doesn't make sense because they have Lee, GS needs a big guy that can play D and rebound, Lopez is also too slow to pair him with Lee, not a good deal.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #95
            Would love to see DC and Tyler have big games tonight! Might be enough to tempt the Warriors front office!

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

              Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
              I'm sorry, I just can't agree with you. Collison is far from a pass first point guard in my opinion, but we obviously disagree.
              You'd have to define what you think a pass-first point guard is. My (crude) definition is a point guard who averages at least one assist for every two shot attempts. Collison fits this criteria, Ellis does not, not even close.

              A much better metric could probably be formulated by working with USG% and AST%, but that's for another day.

              Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
              I love Darren, don't get me wrong, but for me to think that Monta is not a complete upgrade from Darren I would have to change the way I see the game.
              I just don't see the value in an inefficient chucker who's turnover prone. I think you're looking too much at the raw stats, 22 & 6, which look very impressive, and too little at how those stats were acquired: A ton of shots and using up nearly one-third of Golden State's offensive possessions. Give pretty much any player a third of his team's offensive possessions, and that player will put up huge numbers.

              The Monta Ellis Game Plan:

              • Shoot (Miss)
              • Shoot (Miss)
              • Shoot (Make)
              • Turnover
              • Shoot (Make)
              • Shoot (Miss)
              • Pass
              • Turnover
              • Lose the Game

              That wont win you many games. If you don't believe me, just check out Golden State's record over the past four years or so.

              Maybe Ellis would stop being a blackhole chucker here, but that's a very risky maybe considering his price tag (salary and what it would cost to acquire him) and how well our team is playing.

              Let's rape the Warriors for Stephen Curry instead.
              Last edited by Lance George; 02-28-2012, 11:56 AM.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                To me Ellis for Lopez doesn't make sense because they have Lee, GS needs a big guy that can play D and rebound, Lopez is also too slow to pair him with Lee, not a good deal.
                I'd assume that the preference is to get a defensive and rebounding Center....but Brook is better than Biedrins in the lineup to pair next to Lee. The Warriors have the Wing Players to make up ( at least for this season ) for the loss of Monta but could fill a hole that they have at the Center spot.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                  I defend Collison a lot on this place, but even I'm not touching the idea of defending him over Ellis.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                    Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                    I defend Collison a lot on this place, but even I'm not touching the idea of defending him over Ellis.
                    What kind of numbers do you think Collison would produce if we played him 40 minutes a night while allowing him to use nearly one-third of our possessions?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                      Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                      What kind of numbers do you think Collison would produce if we played him 40 minutes a night while allowing him to use nearly one-third of our possessions?
                      12-21
                      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                      Comment


                      • Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                        Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                        Maybe Ellis would stop being a blackhole chucker here, but that's a very risky maybe considering his price tag (salary and what it would cost to acquire him) and how well our team is playing.
                        This is the biggest concern anybody should have when talking about obtaining Ellis. Is he capable of adapting his game to the team around him? I absolutely think he can, with the way he played recently without Curry. That also gives him the incentive to shoot more as well, considering how much Curry shoots when he is there. I am not saying Monta is efficient, but what we lack is a go-to scorer and a guy that can round out our team's skill set. I think with as efficient as most of the rest of our roster is, that he would actually compliment them, by taking pressure off of them offensively. I also think he would pass a lot more with our players than the ones he plays with currently, which is purely speculative.

                        Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                        What kind of numbers do you think Collison would produce if we played him 40 minutes a night while allowing him to use nearly one-third of our possessions?
                        I don't think Collison is good enough to play 40 minutes a night on most NBA rosters. Especially not a playoff team. I think Darren Collison's best role is to be the best backup PG in the league. He pushes the tempo for 20 minutes a night and can be very effective. You give him more minutes than that and he kills you defensively. Collison might average 20 ppg if he played 40 mpg, but he would give up 40 ppg on a nightly basis with his poor defensive play. Monta is a guy that even if he gives up 25 points defensively, you know night in and night out that he has a great chance to outscore his defensive lapses. I can't say that about Collison. That is also why he gets put at SG. Plus, I think Curry is a terrific passer, which is the biggest reason why I would put Ellis at SG in GS. I still think Ellis' best position is PG. It minimizes his defensive weaknesses and you still get his ability to score and force defenses into rotation.
                        "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: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                          Granger for Ellis!!!! Do it Bird! Granger as our #1 is going to get us nowhere. Ellis is a scoring machine! Granger can't even dribble! Ellis could drop 40 on any night! When Granger is off he is off!

                          Comment


                          • Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                            Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                            What kind of numbers do you think Collison would produce if we played him 40 minutes a night while allowing him to use nearly one-third of our possessions?
                            To be blunt. Crappy ones.

                            Ellis shot over 50% his first couple seasons in the NBA because defenses weren't keying in on him. As time has passed he's settled down in the 45% area which isn't horrible. 50% for a guard is rare air though.

                            Yet, as we stand here today Collison shoots near 45% without that attention. If defenses keyed in on him it would be a nightmare if he was shooting that much. Where Ellis and Collison are comparable in efficiency numbers, it wouldn't be that way for long if Collison got the attention Ellis does. Wouldn't even be close.

                            You make it sound as though if you just extrapolate Collisons numbers and double his touches everything around him stays the same as his numbers balloon. It doesn't work that way.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                              Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                              What kind of numbers do you think Collison would produce if we played him 40 minutes a night while allowing him to use nearly one-third of our possessions?
                              Antoine Walker may be the modern-day king of using a combination of big minutes and high usage rates to produce inflated numbers.

                              http://www.basketball-reference.com/...walkean02.html

                              Who's that putting up 23/9/6 on the Celtics? Is it a reincarnated Larry Bird? LeBron James doppelganger?

                              Nope. It's just Antoine Walker putting up some inflated stats on a 36-win team.


                              Some other big minutes, high usage inflated seasons in recent NBA history:

                              Jerry Stackhouse, 2000-01: 40.2 mpg, 35.2 USG%, 29.8 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 5.1 apg, 32 wins

                              Antawn Jamison, 2000-01: 41.4 mpg, 27.9 USG%, 24.9 ppg, 8.7 rpg, 2.0 apg, 17 wins

                              Ricky Davis, 2002-03: 39.6 mpg, 27.6 USG%, 20.6 ppg, 4.9 rpg, 5.5 apg, 17 wins

                              Jalen Rose, 2002-03: 40.9 mpg, 27.4 USG%, 22.1 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 4.8 apg, 30 wins

                              Monta Ellis, 2010-11: 40.3 mpg, 28.1 USG%, 24.1 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 5.6 apg, 36 wins


                              How about this analogy? Current Monta Ellis is to Derrick Rose as prime Jerry Stackhouse was to Kobe Bryant. Sounds about right to me.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Report: Warriors demanding star for Ellis

                                Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                                You'd have to define what you think a pass-first point guard is. My (crude) definition is a point guard who averages at least one assist for every two shot attempts. Collison fits this criteria, Ellis does not, not even close.

                                A much better metric could probably be formulated by working with USG% and AST%, but that's for another day.



                                I just don't see the value in an inefficient chucker who's turnover prone. I think you're looking too much at the raw stats, 22 & 6, which look very impressive, and too little at how those stats were acquired: A ton of shots and using up nearly one-third of Golden State's offensive possessions. Give pretty much any player a third of his team's offensive possessions, and that player will put up huge numbers.

                                The Monta Ellis Game Plan:

                                • Shoot (Miss)
                                • Shoot (Miss)
                                • Shoot (Make)
                                • Turnover
                                • Shoot (Make)
                                • Shoot (Miss)
                                • Pass
                                • Turnover
                                • Lose the Game

                                That wont win you many games. If you don't believe me, just check out Golden State's record over the past four years or so.

                                Maybe Ellis would stop being a blackhole chucker here, but that's a very risky maybe considering his price tag (salary and what it would cost to acquire him) and how well our team is playing.

                                Let's rape the Warriors for Stephen Curry instead.

                                Someone is obviously NOT a Monta Ellis fan lol.

                                Personal opinions aside (I am NOT a fan of DC) I don't see how anyone could ever say that DC is anywhere near as good as Monta Ellis. DC looked impressive over a 40 game span with NO, I will give you that. But he hasn't been anything close to that since. Ellis meanwhile has proven to be one of the best scorers in the league.


                                Ellis has proven to be less of a ball-dominant teammate when GS defeated DAL in the playoffs. Ever since then, he hasn't played with a consistent scorer aside from Curry. GS isn't all that good to begin with, but if Ellis doesn't score, then they don't even have a chance to be competitive.

                                I honestly don't see much of the risk in trading for him. He's young, and his contract is extremely reasonable for his production. In spite of our 4 game winning streak, we aren't exactly playing "lights-out" (we struggled to beat NO and NJ at home)

                                So what would it cost to get him? If we did a straight GS/IND swap, it would require at least DG or PG+picks. Whether or not that's fair value is a completely different argument.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X