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

Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis#11: Draft night strategy as I see it

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

    Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis#11: Draft night strategy as I see it

    Just around 5 hours before draft night 2014 begins as I post this.

    Some truths to remember for tonight:

    1. Tonight's moves or picks are just the beginning of the off season journey, not the journey itself.

    2. Larry Bird and company have to weigh the dual possibilities that Chicago makes a major jump to true championship contention in just a few well done moves, but also it is somewhat possible that Miami may regress or implode or reload....all those possibilities are in play.

    3. No other East team, with the possibility of Atlanta, seems genuinely a threat in 2014-15 if we just stood pat and kept our powder dry.

    4. Picking at #57 is a huge disadvantage tonight, and moving up from that to target a player you particularly like seems wise, as long as the price for the future isn't too high. I personally would rather give up current assets ahead of future ones unless it is a major move for a potential long term near star level player at a critical position.

    5. Staying at #57 means you likely won't get a player who makes your team or even joins your roster for a while if you pick a European stash player. Given the choice, I'd rather stash someone over seas over taking a player who can't help us, but the guy we stash doesn't necessarily HAVE to be a foreigner. I would assume that Bird/Pritchett/Walsh have contacted the agents for several players to see if they would be ok with playing overseas for a year or 2 if we draft them, like what we did with Antonio Davis years ago.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As I see it, here are the team weaknesses we could POTENTIALLY help with or solve with the right move tonight. For me, these are the Priorities IN ORDER of what I feel I'd like to have. Obviously we can't solve all of these needs tonight, but solving at least one of them would be ideal....it is very possible that others would put these priorities in a different order, but this is how I personally see it:

    1. We could definitely use a big time defensive wing, who could guard the opponents biggest wing threat when he is in the game, so Paul George and Lance Stephenson wouldn't have to....thereby keeping our best 2 offensive players a bit fresher and focused on scoring.

    2. We also could use a big time outside shooter at the wing position, somebody who doesn't need the ball to be effective....someone to space the floor and produce points. If #1 and #2 could both be solved by the same player eventually, then THAT is a guy worth targeting and moving up for.

    3. We could definitely use a cheaper back up center, enabling us to move Ian Mahimni to someone with cap space to help us reconfigure our bench and maybe re-sign Lance Stephenson or make some other type move.....4 million is too much for a small market team to play a limited back up center, in my view.

    4. If we could make a MAJOR trade up for a future big time point guard I would do that, and as I have mentioned I love the potential of Elfrid Payton......though this is mostly a pipe dream.

    5. A more athletic and dynamic/well rounded 4 man who could change the geometry of the floor when he plays would be a good target, so he could eventually at least back up David West and if he is good enough, someday replace him. Someone who is athletic, aggressive, and runs the floor, and has potential to improve and grow as a player.

    6. A back up point guard with speed and defensive ability, even if he was a project, to be used against specific opponents in difficult matchups for our other 2 veteran returning point guards.

    And I believe it goes without saying (but I am saying it anyway) that this pick would ideally fit the culture and ethos of the organization, which are someone who is team oriented, tough minded, and plays the game the right way with both an intelligence and passion. We need to take a gym rat, someone who may not be great or even good right now, but who has the ability to improve and the drive to make it happen.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As you know, I did 9 full draft profiles of guys I thought would be excellent targets that could solve some of these issues listed above. Here is a list of who I profiled, and which "category of needs" I think they could solve:

    -Russ Smith, solves problem #6.

    DeAndre Daniels, potentially solves problem #2, and solves problem #1.

    Davion Berry, potentially solves problem 6 if he develops, with maybe a 20% chance to be better than that.

    Patric Young, solves problem #3

    Thanasis Antetokounmpo, solves problem #1, potentially solves #2, and provides substantially more upside if he hits his ceiling.

    Nick Johnson solves problem #6, and potentially could solve problem #2.

    CJ Wilcox solves problem #2, with about a 50% chance of providing substantially more upside than that.

    Dwight Powell potentially solves problem #5, and maybe in a few years solves problem #3, though I'd say that is about a 20% chance.

    Spencer Dinwiddie potentially solves problem #2, and perhaps eventually becomes a cheaper back up point guard option in addition to that.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    So as I said, all of those guys have merit, and I wouldn't complain about any of these 9 guys being selected. Any of those 9 I believe would make our team and fill potentially a specific hole on the roster.

    That being said, if available, I'd rank them in this order: Thanasis Antetokounmpo, CJ Wilcox, DeAndre Daniels, Patric Young, Dwight Powell, Spencer Dinwiddie, Nick Johnson, Russ Smith, Davion Berry.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With that list of priorities and draft order of guys I like, now Indiana just needs to read the texture of the board and how the draft is flowing, and make the appropriate move necessary to position us to get one of those 9, or perhaps a foreign draft and stash player that I haven't studied or broken down.

    Any other move to go up into the first round and get a KJ McDaniels maybe or perhaps an Elfrid Payton, would be great, but what have to be weighed by whatever the cost would be. Likely the cost would be exhorbitant on Payton, who everyone seems to love after watching him eat up every guard in this draft in the workouts and with Team USA. McDaniels looks available, as teams in the 20's seem to be willing to move those picks in certain conditions.

    As I said before, remember that tonight is only the first chess move of the off season. So no matter what Larry Bird does tonight, let's keep in mind that other minor moves are to follow we would think.

    Lets also keep in mind that Solomon Hill played so little for us that he is like having another pick this year. While I was not a fan of Hill at all and still don't think that highly of him, it is obvious that Indiana's front office feels differently. I didn't factor him in at all in my analysis, because I don't think he can play...but perhaps Indiana thinks he can solve one of the team needs I listed above.

    So, that is how I see it for tonight! Enjoy the draft everyone! Remember, if we select someone who I have tape availability on, I'll have a breakdown of said player sometime over the weekend or early next week.

    Tbird
    Last edited by thunderbird1245; 06-26-2014, 02:34 PM.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis#11: Draft night strategy as I see it

    What do you think of Jarnell Stokes as a backup to David West if the Pacers trade up? He seems to have the work ethic and is younger than most Sophomores in this draft.
    Last edited by Pacersalltheway10; 06-26-2014, 02:29 PM.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis#11: Draft night strategy as I see it

      The Pacers needs are many with so little options to fullfil them. This draft and off season is going to be Bird's hardest and most trying. It's going to be a time to see if Bird has the ability to pull off what is necessary in order to win a ECF and challenge for a CHAMPIONSHIP.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis#11: Draft night strategy as I see it

        Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
        5. Staying at #57 means you likely won't get a player who makes your team or even joins your roster for a while if you pick a European stash player. Given the choice, I'd rather stash someone over seas over taking a player who can't help us, but the guy we stash doesn't necessarily HAVE to be a foreigner. I would assume that Bird/Pritchett/Walsh have contacted the agents for several players to see if they would be ok with playing overseas for a year or 2 if we draft them, like what we did with Antonio Davis years ago.
        Just a note on this. DX was reporting that a lot of teams in the late first and early second were looking for stash candidates. So that might actually push some guys who are unwilling to be stashed down to us (yeah wishful, thinking). Hope this happens though and we get some guy who's ready to contribute.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis#11: Draft night strategy as I see it

          Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
          What do you think of Jarnell Stokes as a backup to David West if the Pacers trade up? He seems to have the work ethic and is younger than most Sophomores in this draft.
          He is a beast on the boards, and work ethic is very good. No reliable jumpshot yet. Unclear how good he is on defense, since his main goal last year was staying out of foul trouble. If you can get a high second round pick, I'd be happy to use it on him. Could play 5 in a pinch.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis#11: Draft night strategy as I see it

            Originally posted by dal9 View Post
            He is a beast on the boards, and work ethic is very good. No reliable jumpshot yet. Unclear how good he is on defense, since his main goal last year was staying out of foul trouble. If you can get a high second round pick, I'd be happy to use it on him. Could play 5 in a pinch.
            Also Scott Agness just posted his list of players who have worked out for the Pacers. Stokes is the only guy that is projected late 1st early 2nd to be included.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis#11: Draft night strategy as I see it

              Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
              1. We could definitely use a big time defensive wing, who could guard the opponents biggest wing threat when he is in the game, so Paul George and Lance Stephenson wouldn't have to....thereby keeping our best 2 offensive players a bit fresher and focused on scoring.
              We've already got #1 covered, according to Frank:

              The coaching staff already likes Hill’s defensive ability; if he can become even a modest offensive threat he could earn meaningful minutes.

              “I’m really excited about what Solomon Hill can do for us,” Frank Vogel said. “I think if he was pushed into a situation where he had to play 15-20 minutes a game all year he could’ve been a difference in our playoff run. He’s got the ability to be an elite defender – an elite defender, not just an average defender.
              http://blogs.1070thefan.com/2014/06/...pe-hill-ready/

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis#11: Draft night strategy as I see it

                Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
                Also Scott Agness just posted his list of players who have worked out for the Pacers. Stokes is the only guy that is projected late 1st early 2nd to be included.
                Oh wow, interesting. I didn't realize he had a workout.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis#11: Draft night strategy as I see it

                  Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                  Oh wow, interesting. I didn't realize he had a workout.
                  However, Agness did say that the Pacers shut out the media for some workouts so there could possibly be more late 1st early 2nd round guys on the official list of players who have worked out for the Pacers.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis#11: Draft night strategy as I see it

                    Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
                    However, Agness did say that the Pacers shut out the media for some workouts so there could possibly be more late 1st early 2nd round guys on the official list of players who have worked out for the Pacers.
                    http://www.vigilantsports.com/2014/0...out-attendees/
                    Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis#11: Draft night strategy as I see it

                      To expand on BornReady's post....here is Pacersalltheway10 original post:

                      http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...=1#post1877917


                      The 12 players involved, including two local favorites, were:

                      Davion Berry
                      DeAndre Daniels
                      Will Sheehey
                      Russ Smith
                      Xavier Thames
                      Kendall Williams
                      Keith Appling
                      Andre Dawkins
                      James Michael McAdoo
                      Jake Odum
                      Ronald Roberts
                      Scottie Wilbekin

                      The following is an unofficial list of other guys that have worked out for the team:

                      Austin Hollins
                      Khem Birch
                      Tarik Black
                      Taylor Braun
                      Tyler Stone
                      Asaugn Dixon-Tatum
                      Nick Kellogg
                      Mike Moser
                      Roscoe Smith
                      Eric Moreland
                      David Stockton
                      Bryce Cotton
                      Karvel Anderson
                      Jordan McRae
                      Lamar Patterson
                      Jarnell Stokes
                      Markel Starks
                      Unfortunately, the only Players that TBird profiled is Russ Smith, DeAndre Daniels and Davion Barry.

                      Given that there is a high probability that the Pacers only draft who they have worked out......I am curious to see what TBird, p4e and everyone else's opinion of the above list of Players.

                      The only Player that I recognize is Khem Birch and Eric Moreland....both rebounding and shotblocking Big Men. But I keep on hearing ( from many here ) that Birch isn't as great as his #s suggest.

                      To all that know more about these NCAA prospects than I do ( which is pretty much everyone ), please provide your comments/analysis of those Players.
                      Last edited by CableKC; 06-26-2014, 04:32 PM.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Tbird 2014 NBA Draft analysis#11: Draft night strategy as I see it

                        I disagree with point 3... the Wizards are very much a threat against standing pat. Wall and particularly Beal are only going to get scarier.

                        Comment

                        Previous template Next
                        Working...
                        X