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

reason for these trades

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

  • reason for these trades

    IMO these recent trades, (excluding the Al deal and Daniels deals), but more specifically the AJ, freddie deals will be what the rest of the off season looks like for the pacers. What it appears they are doing is reshaping roster with Daniels, Harrington, Danny as a starter and Williams and White, and in doing that making minor trades to receive cash and draft picks without taking players back to clear room for playing time and development of new squad.

    IMO after Freddie deal, i doubt we make many more moves...maybe a sign and trade with Pollard similar to freddie's deal. So here is our depth chart for this season: with the 1st player being the projected starter at each position

    PG- Tins, Sarunas, Greene
    SG-Sjax, Daniels, White
    SF- Danny, Al, Williams
    PF -Al, JO, Williams
    C- JO, Foster, Harrison

    That looks like a pretty solid lineup. I know many of you hate Tins and Jackson, but I truly think they are Pacers next year due to their lack of trade value and the fact they still provide us the best chance of winning this year.

  • #2
    Re: reason for these trades

    I am also thinking that this is it for us.

    I still feel as if re-signing Pollard or getting a third big man wouldn't be a horrible idea because Foster should be backing up the 4 and Harrison the 5.

    Also, for all the "too many swingmen" talk, Danny is our only pure SF. Jack and Al can play the 3 but they start. If we are talking straight up backups then I guess there really isn't much.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: reason for these trades

      I think we have plenty of moves coming. Jax and Tins will yet be traded.

      I think we're trying to sign Al outright. Atlanta probably demanded that we include next year's first - and we probably and correctly said Hell No. So, we're trying to avoid sign and trade altogether.

      Why else would we have recently rescinded Fred's qualifying offer? We're trying to scrape under the cap to get to whatever starting salary number Al agreed to in the original sign and trade, probably somewhere around 7.5 mil.

      If the AJ trade is a complete cash dumb, and Fred's 3 mil qualifying offer is now off the books, my best guess (which is not a good one) puts us with about MLE-esque money available under the cap. So, we'd need one more cash dump for all this to work and to sign Al.

      Maybe Saras? Maybe it's not what we're doing
      You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: reason for these trades

        interesting thought on the Harrington deal...very possible if Atl is demanding a first rounder....but that still makes my point that we will use money on AL and wont do much else...I just dont see us getting anything near value for Tins and Jax...when I say value I mean by skill wise what they can still provide here versus what other teams would give us for them.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: reason for these trades

          Soup, if we get under the cap, we can't use the exceptions. Right now we can use the MLE, and separately, the LLE. If, say, we get a million under the cap, that's all we can spend, $1M. I don't think Al will take that.
          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: reason for these trades

            Originally posted by Kegboy
            Soup, if we get under the cap, we can't use the exceptions. Right now we can use the MLE, and separately, the LLE. If, say, we get a million under the cap, that's all we can spend, $1M. I don't think Al will take that.
            I know. I think we were already about a mil or so under. I think I remember someone saying that we'd renounce the remaining room in order to use the exceptions.
            You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: reason for these trades

              I don't think Jax and Tins are going anywhere. They're both good players to have in the type of system we're trying to run. I think if we can get Al for just a first rounder and/or the TE without giving up an actual player, we might have made our offseason complete.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: reason for these trades

                I agree ... not I particularay like Tins and Jax but I am willing to bet Larry does not want to just give them away for crap in return based on their talent alone. I know us fans would make some trades for a box of cereal in return but it is still a business and they have to do what makes sense

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: reason for these trades

                  Originally posted by indy diego
                  I am willing to bet Larry does not want to just give them away for crap in return based on their talent alone. I know us fans would make some trades for a box of cereal in return but it is still a business and they have to do what makes sense
                  Why? I am even more convinced that we will dump them for nearly nothing, if it comes to that. Look at what we just did with AJ.
                  You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: reason for these trades

                    AJ was a move to clear a glut at PG....I dont see moving either Sjax or tins as a glut removal as we would be relying on only daniels and white then....they only way we trade them is if we get decent quality in return.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: reason for these trades

                      A box of sugar coated Frosted Flakes for Tinsley would be a heckuva deal. I'd take it and I also feel confident that Tony the Tiger wouldn't change his stripes.

                      There may be some chemistry issues in the litterbox between Tony and Boomer but getting rid of Tinsley would be worth it.

                      I'd say overall that move would be Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrreat!

                      -Bball
                      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                      ------

                      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                      -John Wooden

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: reason for these trades

                        Tinsley will be a Pacer this season. Count on it. He'd be too perfect for our playing style to give him up, plus he tends to make our team very fun to watch whenever he plays. That goes a long way for selling tickets.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: reason for these trades

                          Originally posted by Ev_eezy
                          Tinsley will be a Pacer this season. Count on it. He'd be too perfect for our playing style to give him up, plus he tends to make our team very fun to watch whenever he plays. That goes a long way for selling tickets.
                          The thought of Tinsley coming back didn't sell any tickets to me... unless you mean Colts' tickets...

                          -BBall
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: reason for these trades

                            Originally posted by Ev_eezy
                            Tinsley will be a Pacer this season. Count on it. He'd be too perfect for our playing style to give him up, plus he tends to make our team very fun to watch whenever he plays. That goes a long way for selling tickets.
                            Key point. People say that all the time and don't seem to understand exactly what they're saying.

                            IndyToad
                            Practice your dancing

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: reason for these trades

                              Originally posted by SoupIsGood
                              I think we have plenty of moves coming. Jax and Tins will yet be traded.

                              I think we're trying to sign Al outright. Atlanta probably demanded that we include next year's first - and we probably and correctly said Hell No. So, we're trying to avoid sign and trade altogether.

                              Why else would we have recently rescinded Fred's qualifying offer? We're trying to scrape under the cap to get to whatever starting salary number Al agreed to in the original sign and trade, probably somewhere around 7.5 mil.

                              If the AJ trade is a complete cash dumb, and Fred's 3 mil qualifying offer is now off the books, my best guess (which is not a good one) puts us with about MLE-esque money available under the cap. So, we'd need one more cash dump for all this to work and to sign Al.

                              Maybe Saras? Maybe it's not what we're doing
                              Your scenario isn't plausible, for one very big reason. We just paid money to get a $7.5 million trade exception. To get under the cap as you suggest we would have to renounce all of our exceptions.

                              http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#19
                              20. How do exceptions count against the cap? Does being under the cap always mean that a team has room to sign free agents? Do teams ever lose their exceptions?

                              If a team is below the cap, then their Disabled Player, Bi-Annual, Mid-Level and/or Traded Player exceptions are added to their team salary, and the league treats the team as though they are over the cap. This is to prevent a loophole, in a manner similar to free agent amounts (see question numbers 29, 30, 31, 32). A team can't act like they're under the cap and sign free agents using cap room, and then use their Disabled Player, Bi-Annual, Mid-Level and/or Traded Player exceptions. Consequently, the exceptions are added to their team salary (putting the team over the cap) if the team is under the cap and adding the exceptions puts them over the cap. If a team is already over the cap, then the exceptions are not added to their team salary. There would be no point in doing so, since there is no cap room for signing free agents.

                              So it is not true that being under the cap necessarily means a team has room to sign free agents. For example, assume the cap is $49.5 million, and a team has $43 million committed to salaries. They also have a Mid-Level exception for $5 million and a Traded Player exception for $5.5 million. Even though their salaries put them $6.5 million under the cap, their exceptions are added to their salaries, putting them at $53.5 million, or $4 million over the cap. So they actually have no cap room to sign free agents, and must instead use their exceptions.

                              Teams have the option of renouncing their exceptions in order to claim the cap room. So in the example above, if the team renounced their Traded Player and Mid-Level exceptions, then the $10.5 million is taken off their team salary, which then totals $43 million, leaving them with $6.5 million of cap room which can then be used to sign free agent(s).


                              Starting January 10 of each season, the Mid-Level, Bi-Annual, Larry Bird, Early-Bird and Non-Bird exceptions begin to reduce in value. For example, if there are 180 days in the season, then these exceptions (if they are still unused) reduce by 1/180 of their initial value each day starting January 10. If a team uses their $5 million Mid-Level exception on February 1, then the exception is actually worth $4,361,111.


                              The Disabled Player, Bi-Annual, Mid-Level and Traded Player exceptions may be lost entirely, or the team may never receive them to begin with. This happens when their team salary is so low that when the exceptions are added to the team salary, the sum is still below the salary cap. If the team salary is below this level when the exception arises, then the team doesn't get the exception. If the team salary ever drops below this level during the year, then any exceptions they had are lost.

                              For example, with a $49.5 million salary cap, assume it's the offseason, and a team has $41 million committed to salaries, along with a Mid-Level exception for $5 million, a Traded Player exception for $2.5 million, and an unrenounced free agent whose free agent amount is $2 million. Their salaries and exceptions total $50.5 million, or $1 million over the cap. What if their free agent signs with another team? The $2 million free agent amount comes off their cap, so their team salary drops to $48.5 million. This total is below the cap so the team loses its Mid-Level and Traded Player exceptions.

                              There is logic behind this. The whole idea behind an "exception" is that it is an exception to the rule which says a team has to be below the salary cap. In other words, an exception is a mechanism which allows a team to function above the cap. If a team isn't over the cap, then the concept of an exception is moot. Therefore, if a team's team salary ever drops this far, its exceptions go away. The effect is that a team may have either exceptions or cap room, but they can't have both.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X