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

Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

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

  • #46
    Re: Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

    Isn't this the same system that said Paul George isn't a top 7 SF?

    By these measurements, the Pacers are not a playoff team. How does this guy get paid for these bogus measurements?

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

      Originally posted by wintermute View Post
      And yet last year, there were stats published that showed Roy to be the absolute best interior defender in the league, despite his dismal regular season. I'm pretty sure the problem is with Pelton's WARP system, not with Roy's stats.
      Ok let me be more exact, Hibbert was statistically terrible on offense.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

        Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
        Ok let me be more exact, Hibbert was statistically terrible on offense.
        meh, he got up to 45% for the year after being at 41% before the All Star break. 45% obviously isn't great but he put up 15.7 points on almost 51% once his wrist got right, if that's what we can expect moving forward I'm more than fine with that.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

          My guess on the top 10 overall centers next season:

          *Dwight
          *M. Gasol
          *Hibbert
          *Horford
          *Noah
          *B. Lopez
          *Monroe
          *P. Gasol
          *Duncan
          *Pekovic


          Roughly in that order... I think the top 5 guys on that list are significantly more valuable than the bottom 5.

          EDIT:
          BTW, I think Al Horford is officially the most underrated player in the NBA, at any level. For a guy that is as consistently excellent as he is, you hardly ever hear anything about him. He was a 20/10 player for the second half of last season and might do that for the entire year next season.
          Last edited by spreedom; 08-10-2013, 08:44 PM.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

            Originally posted by spreedom View Post

            EDIT:
            BTW, I think Al Horford is officially the most underrated player in the NBA, at any level. For a guy that is as consistently excellent as he is, you hardly ever hear anything about him. He was a 20/10 player for the second half of last season and might do that for the entire year next season.
            Hmm, Horford has always seemed really good to me. I have thought about a wide variety of trade scenarios that it might have taken to get him to Indiana in the past. I'm happy with our current front like as-is, however.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

              These rankings are just plain stupid.

              I'm not even sure, based on last year, that Howard is the best. Gasol gets my vote on that one. Drummond is unproven and should get attention but to rate him 2nd based on summer league is just the mark of a real amateur.
              Ranking Monroe? What? OK he's not a bad guy but to rate him over some of the others is just beyond dumb.
              Javale McGee, who can't even keep his starting job? Don't think so.

              Whomever this writer is, he needs to educate himself in professional basketball. Just shows you how far down the toilet PMSESPN has gone.

              Where's Lopez and Chandler? And who WOULDN'T take them over Drummond and Monroe?

              I won't be a homer, I'll give the others their due. Roy is not the "best", although he is the best for IND.

              Based on last year:

              Gasol
              Howard
              Lopez (sorry, he had a better year than Roy)
              Roy
              Make your case for the rest.
              Last edited by WhoLovesYaBaby?; 08-10-2013, 09:09 PM.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

                Originally posted by WhoLovesYaBaby? View Post
                These rankings are just plain stupid.

                I'm not even sure, based on last year, that Howard is the best. Gasol gets my vote on that one. Drummond is unproven and should get attention but to rate him 2nd based on summer league is just the mark of a real amateur.
                Ranking Monroe? What? OK he's not a bad guy but to rate him over some of the others is just beyond dumb.
                Javale McGee, who can't even keep his starting job? Don't think so.

                Whomever this writer is, he needs to educate himself in professional basketball. Just shows you how far down the toilet PMSESPN has gone.

                Where's Lopez and Chandler? And who WOULDN'T take them over Drummond and Monroe?

                I won't be a homer, I'll give the others their due. Roy is not the "best", although he is the best for IND.

                Based on last year:

                Gasol
                Howard
                Lopez (sorry, he had a better year than Roy)
                Roy
                Make your case for the rest.

                Do you think his scoring talent makes up for Roy being better at everything else?

                Also, I would probably take Monroe over Chandler at this point, considering their respective salaries and health issues. A fully healthy Chandler is one of the 3 or 4 best centers in the league, but I don't think he'll ever be a 75+ game player again.

                Also, I forgot to add Larry Sanders, the most dynamic shotblocking center in the league (and according to the Sloan Sports Analytics Conference, the most destructive defensive presence in the league).

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

                  Originally posted by spreedom View Post
                  BTW, I think Al Horford is officially the most underrated player in the NBA, at any level. For a guy that is as consistently excellent as he is, you hardly ever hear anything about him. He was a 20/10 player for the second half of last season and might do that for the entire year next season.
                  Al is certainly a great player. It's just that he probably is a natural PF like Monroe.
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                    Al is certainly a great player. It's just that he probably is a natural PF like Monroe.
                    I actually don't think he should be anymore, considering how much teams are going with small ball these days. I think he and Monroe both make the most sense as centers today with their size, though they're both very versatile guys.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

                      Originally posted by spreedom View Post
                      I actually don't think he should be anymore, considering how much teams are going with small ball these days. I think he and Monroe both make the most sense as centers today with their size, though they're both very versatile guys.
                      They are both versatile but putting them at Center takes away their defensive utility. Neither Horford nor Monroe are rim protectors. Monroe has a 9'0.5 (which is the same with David West's) and he is not an explosive leaper. Horford has a better vertical but his standing reach is only 8'11. They don't have the tools to be rim protectors and you kinda need your Center to be a rim protector even against small ball teams.

                      What Horford and Monroe offer defensively is great agility for their size and very active hands. They are good PnR defenders and Monroe in particular is great at stealing the ball. Putting them at PF and those aspects of their skills are going to be highlighted.

                      Of course, Horford has spent so many years at C that he might have gotten used to the position by now.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by spreedom View Post
                        I actually don't think he should be anymore, considering how much teams are going with small ball these days. I think he and Monroe both make the most sense as centers today with their size, though they're both very versatile guys.
                        By that logic, David west is a center.

                        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


                        • #57
                          Re: Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

                          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                          They are both versatile but putting them at Center takes away their defensive utility. Neither Horford nor Monroe are rim protectors. Monroe has a 9'0.5 (which is the same with David West's) and he is not an explosive leaper. Horford has a better vertical but his standing reach is only 8'11. They don't have the tools to be rim protectors and you kinda need your Center to be a rim protector even against small ball teams.

                          What Horford and Monroe offer defensively is great agility for their size and very active hands. They are good PnR defenders and Monroe in particular is great at stealing the ball. Putting them at PF and those aspects of their skills are going to be highlighted.

                          Of course, Horford has spent so many years at C that he might have gotten used to the position by now.
                          Zach Lowe respectfully disagrees with your assessment of Monroe's PnR defense:

                          http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...etroit-pistons

                          Monroe is a very good offensive player, but he's a glaring liability on defense in a league getting smaller and quicker. He's a turnstile trying to contain the pick-and-roll out on the floor — a mess of bad footwork, poor timing, lazy reaches, and bad choices. When Detroit has him hang back at the foul line, ball handlers can zip around him with an easy crossover or launch wide-open jumpers as Monroe, petrified at giving up a rim run, retreats a step farther than most bigs would dare — often with his arms down. Pistons fans complained, with some justification, about Lawrence Frank's reluctance to play Monroe and Drummond together for much of last season, but Monroe's total inability to guard stretchier power forwards factored into that choice — just as it should factor into Detroit's evaluation of things now.

                          When the Pistons asked Monroe to attack the ball higher on the floor, the mess was almost worse. Point guards can juke Monroe with laughable ease by faking toward a screener, watching Monroe lurch in that direction, and then crossing over the other way and into an unpatrolled lane. Monroe is often late in jumping out above a screen, meaning his momentum is going too hard the wrong way (toward half court) as the opposing point guard revs up to turn the corner. And when Detroit has asked him to hedge sideways, as in the still below, Monroe often arrives too late to cut off the ball handler:
                          That's just a blurb, but Lowe goes into greater detail about Monroe's defense in the piece.

                          I can't define why, but when I watch Monroe he just seems like more of a center to me, even if the measurables of him and David West are comparable.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            Zach Lowe respectfully disagrees with your assessment of Monroe's PnR defense:

                            http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...etroit-pistons

                            That's just a blurb, but Lowe goes into greater detail about Monroe's defense in the piece.

                            I can't define why, but when I watch Monroe he just seems like more of a center to me, even if the measurables of him and David West are comparable.
                            I see. Well, thanks for the info

                            I guess that Kstat and shags will have to give us their opinion on this subject.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

                              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                              I see. Well, thanks for the info

                              I guess that Kstat and shags will have to give us their opinion on this subject.
                              David West has one skill I desperately want Greg Monroe to develop: the ability to hit the mid-range jumper. If Monroe can hit 15 to 17 foot jumpers consistently enough to at least become a threat out there, it will open up not only his game, but the Pistons as well.

                              Monroe doesn't protect the rim on defense. He's good for a steal per game, but I never thought his help-side defense was all that great. And Zach Lowe's as good as it gets, so I'll trust him on his PNR defense as well.

                              All of that is similar to David West. But the biggest difference is West is 6'8" and Monroe's 6'11", thus allowing Monroe to play center. But he's much better playing with a rim protector. Him at center with Smith at PF will work fine.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Projecting Top 10 Centers in the NBA (ESPN Insider)

                                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                                By that logic, David west is a center.
                                David West rarely, if ever, plays center. Horford plays the PF almost as rarely and is a better shotblocker, rebounder, and inside scorer than David. Come on now.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X