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

Overpaid Pacers.

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

  • Overpaid Pacers.

    There has been a lot of banter about how Dun and Murph are overpaid. True, Murph knocks down some pretty good cash for his output. However, if you put it into perspective, JO is more overpaid then these two.

    This past season JO made $18.084 million, Murhpy-8.285 and Dun- 7.438. That figures out that JO made roughly 2.2 times more than Murph and 2.4 times as much as Dun. However his numbers weren't 2.2 or 2.4 times better.

    The only number that exceeds the ratio is blocks. JO's numbers:

    PPG....19.4---1.39 times more than Dun (14.0), Murphy (11.1)--1.75 times more.

    Rebounds......9.6---1.68 times more than Dun (5.7), Murphy (6.1)--1.57 times more.

    Assists....JO-2.0.....0.77 times as much as Dun (2.6), Murphy (1.6) 1.25 times more.

    Dun had 1.1 steals versus JO's .7 and Murphy's --0.6.

    JO had 2.9 turnovers, Dun 1.8 and Murphy 1.2.

    Blocks is the only stat that JO exceeds Murph and Dun in output compared to salary.

    So, if you want to use raw output, JO is vastly more overpaid than Murphy or Dun.

    Everything is relative and compared to JO's salary Murph and Dun are steals. There are overpaid players on almost every roster so the Pacers aren't unique in that department.

    I could go the other route and show what JO's numbers should have been if you took them and multiplied by 2.2 (Murph) and 2.4 (Dun). They would be consistently higher than what his numbers actually were.

    I've just heard too much junk about how overpaid those two guys are, when in reality they are not.
    .

  • #2
    Re: Overpaid Pacers.

    All NBA players are overpaid but yes, JO is grossly overpaid. But what is the normal salary of a GOD?
    Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Overpaid Pacers.

      Originally posted by Alpolloloco View Post
      All NBA players are overpaid but yes, JO is grossly overpaid. But what is the normal salary of a GOD?
      I don't know but there's only one God that I believe in that should start with a capital "G". That's as deep as I intend to get with religion.
      .

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Overpaid Pacers.

        It's not a linear progression... there's no formula that says points are worth $3, rebounds $2.50, and you lost $.50 per turnover.

        There are a lot of guys who can give you what Murphy gives you, and most make less than him. That's what makes him underpaid. There are only a few guys that give you what JO gives you, and all of them are max players. So JO's salary is par for the course for an elite big man, while Murphy's is high for a third-tier big man that can't defend. And don't even get me started on Dunleavy.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Overpaid Pacers.

          This biggest flaw in your argument is that Jermaine is much more consistent and tends not to disappear in the 4th quarter or in important games like Murphyleavy.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Overpaid Pacers.

            Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
            This biggest flaw in your argument is that Jermaine is much more consistent and tends not to disappear in the 4th quarter or in important games like Murphyleavy.
            JO is a big choke artist in the waning minutes of a tight game.
            .

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Overpaid Pacers.

              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
              It's not a linear progression... there's no formula that says points are worth $3, rebounds $2.50, and you lost $.50 per turnover.

              There are a lot of guys who can give you what Murphy gives you, and most make less than him. That's what makes him underpaid. There are only a few guys that give you what JO gives you, and all of them are max players. So JO's salary is par for the course for an elite big man, while Murphy's is high for a third-tier big man that can't defend. And don't even get me started on Dunleavy.
              I'd have to do a little research to see what the average player makes with similar numbers as Dun and Murph. I don't know, but I'm betting you'd be very surprised.
              .

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                Yes Jermaine is overpaid. But just because he makes 2.2 times Dunleavy or Murphy doesn't mean he is going to average 2.2 times the points. It's not all in stats.

                Other big man around Jermaine's level, Elton Brand for instance, is making just 14 million. The difference is that when Jermaine and Elton signed their deals (in the same summer I believe) Brand had never led the Clippers to the playoffs. Jermaine had been to the playoffs and was still developing as a star.

                Big man are always overpaid though. Nene got a 60 million dollar contract. Sammuel Dalembart got 50 million. Eric Dampier got 60 and Adonal Foyle got 40-50 I believe. So big man are always going to be overpaid if they are a star like Jermaine or a roleplayer like I just mentioned above.

                You can come up with all the figures in the world, that isn't going to make Dunleavy or Murphy less overpaid than Jermaine. Part of the reason Dunleavy and Murphy put up the numbers that they do is because of Jermaine. Jermaine is somewhat overpaid but not to bad.

                Lets put this simple. Jermaine would be by far easier to trade because not only is he better, but he is less overpaid.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                  Originally posted by Roferr View Post
                  I don't know but there's only one God that I believe in that should start with a capital "G". That's as deep as I intend to get with religion.
                  Ginobili?
                  This is the darkest timeline.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                    Originally posted by Roferr View Post
                    I could go the other route and show what JO's numbers should have been if you took them and multiplied by 2.2 (Murph) and 2.4 (Dun). They would be consistently higher than what his numbers actually were.
                    That's just a ridiculous method of determining a players worth that has no analytic value aside from the fact that you just thought it up right now.

                    You overpay for high-level talent because there's a premium on it and that's the way the economics of the NBA work. When the Pacers had to re-sign Jermaine O'Neal, they had to offer more than his exact production would suggest he's worth because there were at least a dozen other teams ready to make him a max offer. The Pacers had to exceed that number if they wanted to keep their best player. So they did.

                    That's how it works...Supply and Demand...We needed our best player to stay on our team and the supply was 1 guy. So we paid a premium for that.

                    Was it the right decision? I don't know...that's a whole different debate. But the fact that his salary has increased each year, and he's gotten injured a lot, and he probably isn't quite as good as we hoped has nothing to do with trading for two overpaid role players who have a combined $88 million dollars left on their deals.
                    Read my Pacers blog:
                    8points9seconds.com

                    Follow my twitter:

                    @8pts9secs

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                      The best way to look at JO and his value is look at who else is making that kind of money. He sure gives the Pacers more than Houston is giving the Knicks, but at the same time his salary puts him in a class with KG, AI, Kobe, Duncan and Shaq. He doesn't belong in that class because he doesn't garner the same interest outside of the basketball circle as those guys do. People will put money down to go see AI and KG. The mere mention of the name Shaq or Kobe anywhere in the world automatically brings those two faces to mind. The same cannot be said of Jermaine O'Neal. His production and celebrity puts him more in line with Pierce, Carter and Brand or around 5-6 million dollars less per season.

                      The NBA is littered with studs and duds. Some make too much, some are just right and some are actually outperforming their salaries.

                      The Pacers problem is they have $30 million tied up in 4 bench/rotational players next season. Troy Murphy, Mike Dunleavy, Marquis Daniels and Jeff Foster are bench players. They wouldn't unseat an incumbent if sent to another team. Although I won't agree, some of you will even include Jamaal Tinsley in that group. That just helps prove my point. The Pacers have more than half the salary cap # tied up in a few players who are each overpaid by a few million per season. That few million turns into a #2 option pretty quickly.

                      The Pacers enter the summer with eleven guaranteed contracts and a salary over 62 million. They don't have much room to even fill out the roster because they are overpaying role players.
                      I'm in these bands
                      The Humans
                      Dr. Goldfoot
                      The Bar Brawlers
                      ME

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                        And don't even get me started on Dunleavy.

                        I must be blind because I wasn't disappointed in Dunleavy at all. Yes, Murphy gives me nightmares on what we're going to do with him, but Dunleavy showed me enough I expect he's going to be a good contributor to this team and will improve.
                        You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                          Originally posted by RWB View Post
                          I must be blind because I wasn't disappointed in Dunleavy at all. Yes, Murphy gives me nightmares on what we're going to do with him, but Dunleavy showed me enough I expect he's going to be a good contributor to this team and will improve.
                          I expect the same. The difference, though, is that he is what he is: a backup SF playing SG. That's fine, and I appreciate his effort at playing a role outside his skillset. But there are a lot of guys making far less that would be much better for us as starting SGs, or for that matter as backup SFs.

                          Basically, Dunleavy is the most overpaid because there are so many quality wings in the NBA.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                            Originally posted by rommie View Post
                            Other big man around Jermaine's level, Elton Brand for instance, is making just 14 million. The difference is that when Jermaine and Elton signed their deals (in the same summer I believe) Brand had never led the Clippers to the playoffs. Jermaine had been to the playoffs and was still developing as a star.
                            Nope. The difference is that Jermaine had 4 more years in the league. Elton got a max contract after his rookie contract, while Jermaine got one after his second contract. Both got as much as they could.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Overpaid Pacers.

                              Originally posted by Anthem View Post

                              Basically, Dunleavy is the most overpaid because there are so many quality wings in the NBA.
                              Good Point. He's getting paid like Rip or Prince. There are a few other 2/3 guys making roughly the same as MDJ......Caron Butler, Mike Miller,Manu, Cuttino Mobley...who I'd rather have too.
                              I'm in these bands
                              The Humans
                              Dr. Goldfoot
                              The Bar Brawlers
                              ME

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X