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

Possible NJ-Dal-Portland Trade

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

  • Possible NJ-Dal-Portland Trade

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3223513

    Obstacles in way of deal that sends Kidd back to Dallas

    By Marc Stein
    ESPN.com





    The growing feeling among league executives that the Dallas Mavericks are the most likely winners in the Jason Kidd trade sweepstakes is even stronger now.

    Reason being: Within 24 hours of Kidd saying that it's time for him and the New Jersey Nets "all to move on" in separate directions, New Jersey and Dallas engaged in advanced trade discussions with Portland on a three-way deal that would land Kidd back with the team that drafted him in 1994.



    Such a trade would involve at least a dozen players, cash sweeteners and future draft picks. In a breakdown of the most noteworthy principles, Portland would land Mavericks guard Devin Harris and possibly Mavs forward Brandon Bass, New Jersey would receive draft and financial considerations, Dallas' Jerry Stackhouse and a trio of young prospects from Portland (Travis Outlaw, Channing Frye and Jarrett Jack) while the Mavericks would score Kidd.


    The talks were very active Tuesday, as reported Tuesday night on ESPN2's "NBA Coast to Coast" by ESPN The Magazine's Chris Broussard. But dialogue between the three clubs had cooled Wednesday to the point that sources close to the situation described them as "pretty much dead."
    But another source insisted that the deal still has life and noted that the "pretty much" disclaimer leaves open the possibility that the dialogue can be reheated to Tuesday's levels, especially since the league's Feb. 21 trading deadline is still three weeks away. And what most observers considered to be one of the biggest obstacles for New Jersey and Dallas to either moving or acquiring Kidd -- finding the third team they needed to broaden the deal -- might be less of an impediment than anticipated if Portland could be recruited so quickly.

    Some reluctance from the Blazers, sources said, is one of the factors that has stalled the talks. In addition to the short-term concerns about the ankle injury that has sidelined Harris, Blazers general manager Kevin Pritchard told The Oregonian newspaper last week that "we're not making any trades" to break up a roster of youngsters that rebounded from Greg Oden's season-ending injury to rank as the biggest surprise team so far in a league filled with surprise teams. Sources say Portland has been shopping Jack on his own, but parting with three or four players is something else, with guard Sergio Rodriguez also potentially involved. Outlaw's development, furthermore, is one of the stories of the Blazers' season.

    The Mavericks, meanwhile, might also have some hesitation, even knowing that Kidd has made it clear behind the scenes that a return to Dallas and the opportunity to play alongside Dirk Nowitzki is his preferred outcome, ahead of a move to Cleveland to play with Team USA teammate and close friend LeBron James.

    Sources say Dallas is resigned to the fact that it won't be able to reacquire Kidd -- 1994-95's co-Rookie of the Year with Grant Hill as a Mav but who left town in acrimonious circumstances less than two seasons later -- without parting with Harris, who's a fan and Mark Cuban favorite as well as a 24-year-old point guard having by far his best season.
    The initial scenarios discussed by the teams, however, also would require Dallas to part with either Bass or center DeSagana Diop. Both are critical role players in the Mavericks' system. Bass ranks as the most effective backup Nowitzki has ever had and Diop operates as one half of the center tandem with Erick Dampier that has been successful against San Antonio and Tim Duncan.

    The Mavs, if the deal goes through, would be undertaking the aggressive renovation that many critics have been calling for since they followed up a 67-win regular season with a first-round exit to Golden State last season. Although there would obviously be some risk giving Harris' job to a quarterback who will be 35 in March, Dallas is undoubtedly seduced by the idea of enhancing the scoring abilities of Nowitzki and Josh Howard. Kidd's arrival would likewise address Dallas' team IQ and mental toughness issues after back-to-back epic collapses in the playoffs, first to Miami in the 2006 NBA Finals and then to Golden State.

    Yet another potential snag here is that the Nets naturally hope to come out of a Kidd deal with at least one young star. The closest thing to a young star in the scenarios discussed so far -- Harris -- would be going to Portland.

    But Outlaw is on the rise, too. Outlaw and Frye, furthermore, are athletic prospects who come with salary cap-friendly contracts in addition to the two future first-round draft picks New Jersey would also likely receive. It's believed that the Nets would immediately buy out Stackhouse and release him if the proposed deal wound up going through.

    Yet it seems safe to expect that a Kidd deal involving these three teams will likely happen quickly or fade to all the way dead sooner rather than later. New Jersey has been dealing with speculation about Kidd's future dating to last February's trade deadline, when Kidd was nearly dealt to the Los Angeles Lakers. "But Dallas and Portland," said one source, "won't want this [trade speculation] to linger because then it starts affecting their teams."




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

    From a Pacers perspective, I hate this trade. Mainly because there are two players I really like (Jack and Harris) who are apparently available and not coming our way.
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

  • #2
    Re: Possible NJ-Dal-Portland Trade

    Very interesting deal. Devin Harris is the young point guard Portland needs, and they land him without losing a lot. Net's get great value for washed up Kidd. I'm not sure about Dallas. Harris is coming into his own and is just 24. I guess if they feel Kidd takes them to the next level they have to do it, but if they still fail and Harris becomes a Tony Parker-level All-Star in Portland, they'll be sorry.

    If this turns out to be true, looking at what the Net's will be getting for 34 (35 in March) year old creaky-kneed Kidd gives me hope for any J.O. move will may make.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Possible NJ-Dal-Portland Trade

      ...and Portland just keeps getting better...

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Possible NJ-Dal-Portland Trade

        Originally posted by Kofi View Post
        Very interesting deal. Devin Harris is the young point guard Portland needs, and they land him without losing a lot. Net's get great value for washed up Kidd. I'm not sure about Dallas. Harris is coming into his own and is just 24. I guess if they feel Kidd takes them to the next level they have to do it, but if they still fail and Harris becomes a Tony Parker-level All-Star in Portland, they'll be sorry.

        If this turns out to be true, looking at what the Net's will be getting for 34 (35 in March) year old creaky-kneed Kidd gives me hope for any J.O. move will may make.
        Irony at it's finest, considering that the Mavs let Nash go because of his age.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Possible NJ-Dal-Portland Trade

          Why is Jack available?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Possible NJ-Dal-Portland Trade

            Originally posted by Shade View Post
            ...and Portland just keeps getting better...
            Surprised they're not standing pat?

            -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


            • #7
              Re: Possible NJ-Dal-Portland Trade

              When you look at what the Blazers are giving up in this trade....they ( at worst ) would be making a lateral move at the PG spot, they lose Travis Outlaw ( who is is probably considered redundant given all the GFs that the Blazers have ) and Frye ( who plays in the same rotation alongside as Oden...eventually....Pryzbilla and Aldridge ).

              At best...they get a decent upgrade at the PG spot while losing some quality players that can be replaced.

              The only thing that I would think is a concern is what affect this will have on the "chemistry" of the team.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Possible NJ-Dal-Portland Trade

                I'm suprised Portland is in this.

                They have no reason to make a move right now.

                Devin Harris is an upgrade over any of their 3 point guards but not by that much. He isn't Chris Paul or Deron Williams.

                Travis Outlaw has done very well for Portland this year. They are doing very good with their 3 points guards, all of whom are still young and will get better. Why not just wait and see?

                Besides all of that if New Jersey is trading by far the best player in this trade wouldn't they want Devin Harris? He is by far the best prospect in this trade. Only makes sense IMO.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Possible NJ-Dal-Portland Trade

                  Originally posted by rommie View Post
                  I'm suprised Portland is in this.

                  They have no reason to make a move right now.

                  Devin Harris is an upgrade over any of their 3 point guards but not by that much. He isn't Chris Paul or Deron Williams.

                  Travis Outlaw has done very well for Portland this year. They are doing very good with their 3 points guards, all of whom are still young and will get better. Why not just wait and see?

                  Besides all of that if New Jersey is trading by far the best player in this trade wouldn't they want Devin Harris? He is by far the best prospect in this trade. Only makes sense IMO.
                  Portland roster is full and they have a lot of picks this coming draft so it's time to upgrade if possible.

                  Devin is a much better PG than what they have now.

                  Outlaw is good and so is Frye. I doubt we know what all the real trade is and that we're only getting half of the info, if that.

                  NJ is very happy to hand the reigns over to Marcus Williams as their PG of the future. They've stated that they don't need a star/starting PG back in a Kidd trade. Hence they pick up Frye for FC helpto pair with Boone and Williams. Outlaw is a quality backup to RJ and the 6th man - spark off the bench - Might open a VC trade as it allows to move RJ to SG and Outlaw to starting SF for the Nets. Jack would be a quality backup PG for the Nets behind Williams.

                  I'm betting Portland gets some future draft picks or gets someone to take a bad contract or something.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X