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

NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 9
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 template Next
  • #1

    NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

    I hope Jermaniac doesn't read this. But if you believe this "insider", Rick, Peja and Granger are staying and maybe no one else.

    I've highlighted the part about the Pacers and brought it to the front of the column.


    http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ba...p-355845c.html

    New York Daily News - http://www.nydailynews.com
    The No. 1 Priority

    Sunday, May 28th, 2006


    Like Larry Brown, Indiana's Rick Carlisle is currently involved in pre-draft workouts. But the difference is that while Brown is going to depart whenever Jim Dolan gives the word, Carlisle, who was on thin ice this past season, is apparently staying on. The Pacers' massive housecleaning plan includes exporting Jermaine O'Neal, Stephen Jackson, Jamaal Tinsley and just about everybody else. Two players staying, barring a change, are Peja Stojakovic and Danny Granger.


    One possible destination for Indy's O'Neal: Golden State, in a package starting with Troy Murphy. "A lot of teams out there like our players," said Golden State GM Rod Higgins. Besides Murphy, the Pacers like Ike Diogu and Mickael Pietrus.






    We witnessed the dawn of a new era in the NBA this past week - and we're not talking about the dethroning of the San Antonio Spurs. For the first time in the Toronto Raptors' inglorious history, they won the draft lottery.


    "Normally, we go backwards," said Jim Kelly, the team's long-time player personnel director. "We were just hoping we wouldn't lose ground, for once."

    Hey, everybody gets lucky once in a while. The Raptors were barred from getting the No. 1 pick when they came into the league in 1995 and have never drafted higher than No. 2 (Marcus Camby in 1996). But now they can accelerate their rebuilding campaign. With the draft bereft of a franchise player who can make an immediate impact - that comes next year with Indianapolis high schooler and Ohio State recruit Greg Oden, ineligible for this year's draft - the Raptors are prime candidates to trade the pick.

    They'd like to move down to No. 4, currently occupied by Portland, which owned the worst record this season and came up the big lottery loser. Gonzaga's Adam Morrison would help Portland turn around its fortunes, on and off the court. But Morrison probably won't be available at No. 4, so the Raptors might have themselves a trading partner. If Toronto can get a pick in next year's draft, already being touted as better than this June's, that would be ideal.

    "There's no clear-cut No. 1 player this year, and if you asked three or four teams who they'd take at No. 1, you might get three or four different answers," Kelly said. "So we expect some action if we decide to move it."

    At this early stage, Toronto doesn't know how far it will move down. But the Raptors are sending out strong signals that they'd like to get UConn's point guard Marcus Williams. The best pure point in this draft, Williams has drawn comparisons to Mark Jackson, but is considered faster than the ex-Knick.

    The new man in charge in Toronto, Bryan Colangelo, wants a playmaker who looks to distribute the ball first to Chris Bosh and Williams' ex-UConn teammate Charlie Villanueva. Incumbent Mike James, a free agent, will be moving on this summer. So, unless it's a smokescreen, Williams is Toronto's leading choice to fill the role.

    The Raptors would even take Williams as high as No. 4, a reach on most other team's draft boards. But as the Suns' GM, Colangelo sometimes took players higher than other teams had them projected, most notably Shawn Marion, at No. 9 in 1999.

    The Bulls and Bobcats, drafting second and third, respectively, are set at point guard, with Kirk Hinrich and Raymond Felton. So they have no need for Williams.

    "Williams isn't a jet like Chris Paul," said Kelly, referring to the Hornets' Rookie of the Year. "But he has good size and strength and he has a presence on the floor. He can deliver the ball to your big people. And he has a lot of big-game experience."

    The Raptors haven't played in many big games. But who knows? In this new era, they could find themselves back in the playoffs next season after a four-year hiatus.

    Cuban off the Mark

    It's not really a new era for Dallas, even if Mark Cuban was saying as much after his Mavs ended the Spurs' bid for their first repeat title on the strength of Dirk Nowitzki's landmark series and an ill-advised foul at the end of regulation in Game 7 by Manu Ginobili.

    "I told Dirk, did you see that? It just ran out of the door. The monkey that's been our back for so long, it's gone," Cuban said.

    He wishes. This isn't Isiah Thomas' Pistons finally dethroning Larry Bird's Celtics, or even Michael Jordan's Bulls finally getting past Detroit. In each of those instances, the old kings were never heard from again. Boston never got past the second round in Bird's last four seasons, and the Pistons made it to only one more playoff series with Thomas, losing to the Knicks in the first round in 1992.

    The comparison, used by TNT and elsewhere, falls short in an even more critical area. When Detroit ousted the Celtics in 1988, Bird was old and banged up at 32, Robert Parish was 35 and Kevin McHale was 31. The Celtics were limping and done. In the case of Detroit being supplanted by Chicago, the Pistons' mainstays were getting up there - Thomas was 30, Bill Laimbeer was 34 and Vinnie Johnson nearly 35 - while Jordan was 28 and primed to start his dynasty.

    But the Spurs aren't ready to be carried out on their shields. Tim Duncan, described after the series by Nowitzki as "unguardable," turned 30 last month. Ginobili will be 29 in July. Tony Parker is 24.

    "I listen to (people say) how athletic Dallas was and how we couldn't handle it, and it just makes me smile," Spurs VP Gregg Popovich said after the Spurs' run ended. "If you win, there's all kinds of things you did well. If you lose, there's got to be reasons why you lost. So if they're more athletic, I need to figure out how much more to win by a point. How much more athletic is that?"

    Not much. Any tinkering the Spurs do is not going to be mistaken for some sort of radical makeover. They don't need one.

    "Let's face it, that Dallas series could have gone either way," said Dan Majerle, the former Phoenix Suns guard. "Tim Duncan is going to continue be a great player for a while. Parker is still a young guy. So they're not going anywhere. The way it looks, the Spurs are still going to be the team that everybody will have to go through for a long time to come."


    Slam Dunks



    Like Larry Brown, Indiana's Rick Carlisle is currently involved in pre-draft workouts. But the difference is that while Brown is going to depart whenever Jim Dolan gives the word, Carlisle, who was on thin ice this past season, is apparently staying on. The Pacers' massive housecleaning plan includes exporting Jermaine O'Neal, Stephen Jackson, Jamaal Tinsley and just about everybody else. Two players staying, barring a change, are Peja Stojakovic and Danny Granger.


    One possible destination for Indy's O'Neal: Golden State, in a package starting with Troy Murphy. "A lot of teams out there like our players," said Golden State GM Rod Higgins. Besides Murphy, the Pacers like Ike Diogu and Mickael Pietrus.


    Minnesota brought back assistant coach Randy Wittman, a Kevin McHale favorite who could slide into the No. 1 seat if Dwane Casey gets off to a rough start in Year 2 with Kevin Garnett. You don't hear Garnett's name in trade talks — yet — but the T-Wolves would love to move oft-injured Troy Hudson.


    Kenyon Martin will have to reach some sort of buyout with the Nuggets before Rod Thorn even considers bringing him back to the Nets.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

    Originally posted by Unclebuck
    Like Larry Brown, Indiana's Rick Carlisle is currently involved in pre-draft workouts. But the difference is that while Brown is going to depart whenever Jim Dolan gives the word, Carlisle, who was on thin ice this past season, is apparently staying on. The Pacers' massive housecleaning plan includes exporting Jermaine O'Neal, Stephen Jackson, Jamaal Tinsley and just about everybody else. Two players staying, barring a change, are Peja Stojakovic and Danny Granger.

    One possible destination for Indy's O'Neal: Golden State, in a package starting with Troy Murphy. "A lot of teams out there like our players," said Golden State GM Rod Higgins. Besides Murphy, the Pacers like Ike Diogu and Mickael Pietrus.
    Good Lord. If we absolutely have to trade JO (and I really don't think we do) it sure as hell better not involve Troy Murphy.

    With Murphy and Peja, we would be VERY soft at the forward positions. They'd get lit up night in and night out.

    This only makes sense if we plan to move towards a Phoenix-style of basketball. But then having Carlisle as the coach makes absolutely no sense. And considering we have no playmaker (that can stay healthy for more than 20 games at a time) in the backcourt, this makes even less sense.

    I hope this "insider" is just making stuff up.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

      I call . Seems too far-fetched.

      And if we trade JO for Troy Murphy...well...it's called "going PFFL." That is all.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

        I think Murphy would be part of a much larger package. I don't don't know

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

          That article was from Mitch Lawrence. Does he ever get anything right thats not already obvious?

          Peter Vecsey should have a column soon denying the O'Neal trade. He always punches holes in Lawrence's columns.

          Most posters on here have a better handle on what is going on with the Pacers than Lawrence.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

            Mitch Lawrence is probably the worst insider there is. Some of you think Vescey is bad Mitch is hardly ever right.

            But it is still interesting to consider what he's saying

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

              I was just looking over salaries, and in order to make it work, GS would have to send us Murphy AND Diogu AND Pietrus AND 1-2 other players. And I would want their first-rounder this year as well.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

                Troy Murphy for Jermaine O'neal, I really pray that Larry Bird and Donnie Walsh are not that stupid. If they are that stupid and think that this trade would make the Pacers some how a better team then Godbless their poor soul's.

                Troy Murphy SMFH.

                Peja staying over Jermaine, that is just great. But whatever you know how Larry Bird likes his players.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

                  Originally posted by Shade
                  I was just looking over salaries, and in order to make it work, GS would have to send us Murphy AND Diogu AND Pietrus AND 1-2 other players. And I would want their first-rounder this year as well.
                  No, next years first rounder!

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

                    Ohh and on Rick coming back, HELL YEAH BABY.

                    One more year of David Harrison being treated like ****, Danny Granger losing PT over Austin Croshere. The new rookie NEVER playing. Dumb **** offense that minimizes the talent our players have, Anthony Johnson being allowed to shoot 45 times a game. Lose every single double digit lead we get, and never win a close game.

                    Rick Carlisle for God.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

                      I dont think that our problems begin and end with Rick, but IDK if Rick can take the next step in this new age quick paced NBA, He just does not want to change.


                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

                        troy murphy i'll kill myself

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

                          I'm ok with Jackson, Tinsley being out of here. But for no reason should JO be gone. That's just plain stupidity right there. Especially with the mock trade in the article.

                          Yeah, that's a great trade.

                          If they trade JO, I will be highly pissed.

                          If they trade JO for crap, which is what they'd be doing if they do this Golden State trade. (They'd get like one or two "decent" players in the deal.) They'd lose even more fans. I refuse to believe Donnie and Larry are that stupid.
                          Super Bowl XLI Champions
                          2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

                            Originally posted by Jermaniac
                            Ohh and on Rick coming back, HELL YEAH BABY.

                            One more year of David Harrison being treated like ****, Danny Granger losing PT over Austin Croshere. The new rookie NEVER playing. Dumb **** offense that minimizes the talent our players have, Anthony Johnson being allowed to shoot 45 times a game. Lose every single double digit lead we get, and never win a close game.

                            Rick Carlisle for God.
                            Yeah, I'm not looking forward to another year like that. If Rick is back, he needs to change a little, too.
                            Super Bowl XLI Champions
                            2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: NY Daily News: Rick staying, JO, Jax, Tinsley among others going

                              The Pacers are not trading Jermaine O'Neal. Why? Because when you combine his salary and talent, it is hard to get a player you want. Just look at what the Lakers got for Shaquile O'Neal, the Pacers would get even less than that from whoever they trade Jermaine to.

                              Now Tinsley and Jackson are guys who could go.

                              But everyone else like Foster, Croshere, and Freddie could either go or stay. Depending on what Donnie and Larry want and can do.

                              Pretty much Jackson and Tinsley are the only ones who are for sure gone this summer, other than them, who knows?

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 template Next
                              Working...
                              X