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

ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

    What is the Pacers' ceiling?
    Without a star addition, Indiana could settle into NBA's upper-middle class

    The Indiana Pacers entered the weekend in the thick of the battle for the third seed in the Eastern Conference, which is a little bit like being the fourth Stooge, the fifth Beatle or the sixth man on the Fab Five. Nevertheless, the Pacers have been one of the league's most improved teams, and their coach, Frank Vogel, has risen from being Rick Pitino's video coordinator in Boston to a coach of the year candidate in his first full season as the head honcho in Indianapolis.

    The Pacers have established themselves as rising powers in the East, but they have a lot at stake over the last four weeks of the regular season. Indiana has a slightly better point differential than Orlando, the current 3-seed, but the Magic has faced a tougher schedule. Indiana also has to worry about the cluster of teams behind it, a mixed bag of squads including Atlanta, Boston and Philadelphia. The Pacers could finish anywhere from third to seventh in the final playoff standings.

    Still, the Pacers are winning at a rate that equates to 49-33 over a full season, quite a step up from the 37-45 mark that squeezed them into the postseason last year. While the playoff berth was mostly a function of a shallow conference -- of 532 playoff teams since the ABA merger, only nine posted a lower winning percentage -- Indiana did put up a spirited battled against the top-seeded Bulls in the first round.

    Pacers president Larry Bird seemingly has his club in an enviable position. Despite the additions of veterans David West, George Hill, Louis Amundson and Leandro Barbosa since the end of last season, Indiana is still about $7 million under this season's salary cap figure. Bird has constructed one of the league's deepest rosters and has a solid core of players who should just be entering their prime seasons. During the offseason, Bird will have to make decisions on restricted free-agents-to-be Hill and Roy Hibbert, but the recently acquired Barbosa comes off the books and there should be plenty of cash on hand.

    However, as promising as the outlook in Indiana may appear right now, the Pacers do run the risk of getting trapped in the NBA's upper-middle class -- close to contender status, but not quite on the level of the league's elite -- if they can't add a star talent.


    Indiana's rebuilding project has been different from those of the Oklahoma City Thunder and Chicago Bulls. After the Ron Artest-Reggie Miller-Jermaine O'Neal Pacers topped out at 61 wins in 2003-04, Indiana went on a seven-year run of mediocrity. The Pacers won between 32 and 44 games each season, made the postseason three times and won just one playoff series. There was plenty of bad payroll, with the team locked into long-term contracts to middling players like Troy Murphy and Mike Dunleavy Jr. The team was thoroughly mired in the league's no-man's-land -- the middle -- and attendance waned accordingly.

    While wrestling with a difficult cap position, Bird managed to draft well even though the Pacers haven't had a single-digit draft pick in 23 years. (The last was George McCloud, taken seventh in 1989.) Bird added Paul George (10th in 2010), Tyler Hansbrough (13th, 2009) and Danny Granger (17th, 2005) from uninviting draft slots, and sent O'Neal in a 2008 post-draft trade to Toronto for Hibbert. Darren Collison was brought in from New Orleans in a four-team deal that got Murphy off his books. Bird built this young base while avoiding further bad investments, setting up the current cap windfall.

    Bird followed more of a Chicago model of rebuilding than the OKC version, albeit with one key difference. Before their current ascension, the Bulls waited out some iffy contracts while building a young base of talent that included Joakim Noah, Luol Deng, Tyrus Thomas, Ben Gordon, Thabo Sefolosha and Chris Duhon. As the young chips were moved around, a careful eye was kept on the free agent-rich summer of 2010. While Chicago missed a chance at the big guns from that class, its Plan B fell into place nicely as team architects John Paxson and Gar Forman built the team's deepest and most versatile roster.

    Of course, in both the cases of Indiana and Chicago, the depth-over-stars approach was a product of necessity. The Pacers had to take this path because of their consistently middle-of-the-road draft position and the fact that top free agents haven't conspired to play in Indianapolis. If either club had been able to add a Kevin Durant through the draft or LeBron James through free agency, they would have leaped at the opportunity.

    You might think we've overlooked a key facet of the Bulls' rebuilding efforts. We haven't. When you compare the Bulls and Pacers, the biggest difference is that Derrick Rose plays for the Bulls. Chicago parlayed an injury-riddled and underachieving 33-49 record in 2007-08 season into the top pick of the next draft. The Pacers were just three games better that season, yet selected 11th and took Jerryd Bayless.

    That's why, even though the Pacers are enjoying their best season in years, you have to wonder whether they are in danger of settling into the league's upper-middle class. That might be better than lower-middle class, but it's still the middle, and in the NBA, it's easy to get lulled into acceptance of a second-round upside. Indiana looks exceptionally strong at roster spots 3-10, perhaps even 2-10 depending on how you view Danny Granger. It's that centerpiece, that ornament atop the tree that is lacking, and it's awfully hard to acquire it once you've improved beyond a certain point.

    The Bulls got lucky, but they still managed to construct a roster not only perfectly suited to work with Rose, but one that has proved it can win consistently even when their reigning MVP is injured. The Thunder may have been the smartest guys in the room as their dynamic roster was built, but it still started with the No. 2 pick that yielded Durant. That's the step that Indiana skipped while wallowing in the middle all those years.

    [+] Enlarge
    Glenn James/NBAE/Getty Images
    Paul George, 22, has tremendous potential, but some of the Pacers' other big-time contributors are getting older.
    The Pacers aren't as young as you think. Their weighted-minutes age places them firmly in the middle of the league pack. George leads the team in WARP and is just 22 years old, while Hibbert is right behind him at 25. However, Granger turns 29 next month and his career trajectory has leveled out at a tier or two below All-Star level. Fourth in team WARP is David West, who is nearly 32.

    In interviews, Vogel has insisted that his roster "has no ceiling." George has plenty of room to grow, but he's likely on an Andre Iguodala path where he dominates in most categories but isn't an offensive centerpiece. Hibbert is a solid player at a position of scarcity, but may be nearing the upper limits of what he can produce. Beyond these players, you have solid role contributors, but no one who is going to push the team into the elite.

    While the Pacers aren't generally considered to be a likely landing point for franchise-type free agents, there may be a couple of opportunities to leverage hometown ties to bring back available players who were once won the coveted Indiana "Mr. Basketball" award: Eric Gordon and Greg Oden.

    After Gordon rejected New Orleans' offer of a contract extension in January, rumors ran rampant that the Pacers would pursue the Indianapolis native this summer. That may be true, but it's difficult to pry a top-notch restricted free agent from a club that really wants to keep him. (Remember DeAndre Jordan?) The Hornets are likely to match any offer Gordon gets.

    However, while complicated, it's possible to work a sign-and-trade deal with a restricted free agent. If you assume that Gordon is the centerpiece player you want -- and it's far from given that he's that kind of player -- then perhaps the Hornets would take Granger and some sweetener in return. Then you could move George back to small forward. But would the Hornets want a 29-year-old to head up a rebuilding effort? In seems likely that the Pacers would have to give up George, which makes the whole much less palatable.

    The second player the Pacers might look at is Oden, who was released recently by Portland and has been said to be interested in returning to Indiana. If he's interested in doing so under a team-friendly deal, it's a no-brainer. While the odds of Oden becoming the game-changing defender and rebounder he once seemed destined to become are long, there is absolutely no downside to bringing him on as a 15th man to rehabilitate from his latest pair of surgeries. The potential gain is immense, and at the very least it would be a popular move with the fan base.

    The Pacers won't be an easy out in the postseason this year, but it would be shocking to see them beat either Miami or Chicago in a seven-game series. Then what? How does Bird take the next step? Franchise players don't grow on trees, and unless Larry Legend can somehow pluck one from the ether, Pacers fans might as well get used to this season. Because it's exactly like the one they'll enjoy for the next three to four years.

    Bradford Doolittle is an author for Basketball Prospectus. Follow him on Twitter @bbdoolittle.
    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story...r-middle-class

    Thought I'd post this for those of you who don't have Insider.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

    Make a huge recruitment push at Derron Williams...
    "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

      I mean, the analysis is right on. What is there to say? If Paul doesn't become a superstar, it's hard to see us doing any serious damage.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

        Actually nothing there that hasn't been discussed on here already.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

          Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
          Actually nothing there that hasn't been discussed on here already.
          This. Good article though and thanks for posting.
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

            Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
            This. Good article though and thanks for posting.
            Yeah, I knew most of this had been discussed on here. I just thought I'd share with the people who aren't able to read it.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

              Originally posted by PGisthefuture View Post
              Yeah, I knew most of this had been discussed on here. I just thought I'd share with the people who aren't able to read it.
              And for this reason I thanked your initial post
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

                i agree with everything that has been said. paul george is a HUGE factor of how good we'll be in the future. something i'd like to see next year is frank vogel making king george our go-to guy in our offense. as of now granger still holds that role.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

                  One thing I would like to add. We are 6th in point differential. That's an indicator that we are already one of the better teams in the NBA. Yet we are 30th in assists. How good would this present team be if it signed a really good point guard?

                  I really think that's all we need to contend, because this team as is will get much better.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

                    Isn't Oden done? Why would we take a chance on him?

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

                      Originally posted by pacers74 View Post
                      Isn't Oden done? Why would we take a chance on him?
                      Because it would be basically for free.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

                        I can't say that I disagree with much in the article. We are a good team that isn't yet a threat for the title. Even though he brings up our current cap space, I think he discounts our cap space this summer.
                        It's easy for a celler dweller team to have the cap space to sign a max contract player, it's rare for a good team full of young improving players to have this kind of cap space. I think we stand a good chance to improve a lot through free agency this summer. If we land Williams or a combination of Nash and Kamam, we're contenders. That's 2 combinations that could get us there and the only other good team with cap space is Dallas.
                        Bird will get something done.
                        Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

                          What jumped out to me is how the writer compares the rebuilds of the Pacers and the Bulls. Not absolutely certain but I think Noah, Deng, Tyrus, and Ben Gordon were all to 10 lottery picks. The Pacers haven't had a top 10 pick, besides Paul, since forever.

                          Considering where we stand now, as legitimate threats to both MIA and CHI, I'd say that Larry (and Morway) are a hell of a front office tandem when it comes to team building and talent evaluation.

                          Talent all around, money to spend and a huge welcome mat. I honestly can't see a better situation for a player like D Will If he wants to win now and deep into his career. If its about the money, by all means he should stick with the Nets and suck for as long as possible.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

                            It's dead on though about our luck in the draft... going 23 years without a top-10 pick is nuts. And unfortunately, that's how you get the really good players.
                            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

                            • #15
                              Re: ESPN Article: What is the Pacers' ceiling?

                              That was a great article that really drives home where are team is right now. I would like to be optimistic and hope that this team can evolve into a lock #2/3 East team as is, but I don't think the chances are very good unless PG and Hibbert take huge steps this off season. We have to pursue Dwill, but I highly doubt it will happen.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X