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

The case against being active in the free agent market

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

  • The case against being active in the free agent market

    Let's be honest, we're probably not going contending for the championship next year. The lack of star talent in this year's free agency period only cements our fate even further. So I'm begging Bird and Vogel to keep our starting 5 the same and give them starter minutes. If we look beyond Granger, each starter has shown tantalizing glimpses of what type of player they could be. Look at each starter's (minus Granger) best month statistically.

    Collison-32.1 MPG .459 FG% .897 FT% 6.1 APG 15.2 ppg (1 yr in NBA)
    Hansbrough- 30.3 MPG .498 FG% .750 FT% 7.1 RPG 16.8 PPG (1 yr but really a rookie)
    Hibbert-29.3 MPG .491 FG% .738 FT% 9.4 RPG 15.6 PPG (2yrs in NBA)
    George-18.0 MPG .527 FG% .333 3P% .750 FT% 3.1 RPG 0.9 SPG 9.1 PPG (20 yr old rookie, playing out of position, and already one of the best defenders on the team)

    So let these guys work and improve their game over the summer knowing they have their coach and president's confidence. Whenever the next season starts back up, we will see who becomes a go-to-guy, a solid starter or rotation material. Then the following summer, the Pacers can address those problem positions. In the meantime, the guys can develop some genuine chemistry and get to know each others' game, something that could be invaluable if this team does become a contender in the following years.

    (First time writer, long time reader. nice to meet ya)

  • #2
    Re: The case against being active in the free agent market

    I hope we save some bullets for the 2012 free agency class. We'll have a chance to be a big player in a market with higher quality players.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The case against being active in the free agent market

      Originally posted by Madsen's dancing skillz View Post
      Let's be honest, we're probably not going contending for the championship next year. The lack of star talent in this year's free agency period only cements our fate even further. So I'm begging Bird and Vogel to keep our starting 5 the same and give them starter minutes. If we look beyond Granger, each starter has shown tantalizing glimpses of what type of player they could be. Look at each starter's (minus Granger) best month statistically.

      Collison-32.1 MPG .459 FG% .897 FT% 6.1 APG 15.2 ppg (1 yr in NBA)
      Hansbrough- 30.3 MPG .498 FG% .750 FT% 7.1 RPG 16.8 PPG (1 yr but really a rookie)
      Hibbert-29.3 MPG .491 FG% .738 FT% 9.4 RPG 15.6 PPG (2yrs in NBA)
      George-18.0 MPG .527 FG% .333 3P% .750 FT% 3.1 RPG 0.9 SPG 9.1 PPG (20 yr old rookie, playing out of position, and already one of the best defenders on the team)

      So let these guys work and improve their game over the summer knowing they have their coach and president's confidence. Whenever the next season starts back up, we will see who becomes a go-to-guy, a solid starter or rotation material. Then the following summer, the Pacers can address those problem positions. In the meantime, the guys can develop some genuine chemistry and get to know each others' game, something that could be invaluable if this team does become a contender in the following years.

      (First time writer, long time reader. nice to meet ya)
      WELCOME!!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The case against being active in the free agent market

        I've said all along that we're more likely to use that cap space to make lopsided trades than sign free agents.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by imawhat View Post
          I hope we save some bullets for the 2012 free agency class. We'll have a chance to be a big player in a market with higher quality players.
          Even if we spend ALL our cap space in the offseason (doubtful), we still have over $10 million coming off the cap in 2012. We'll still be pretty big players in that market - I'm assuming we'll save enough space to make a run at least one of the big names in that free agent class.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The case against being active in the free agent market

            Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
            I've said all along that we're more likely to use that cap space to make lopsided trades than sign free agents.
            This would be the best way to get a big time player as the FA class isn't too special this off season. I don't think they will spend it all just to spend it.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The case against being active in the free agent market

              I agree with keeping low in the free agent market. Try to find a veteran PF/C, and maybe a veteran back-up PG (I like AJ, but I'm not sure if having 2 young PGs is a good thing). Beyond that I just want to see 1 year filler type players.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The case against being active in the free agent market

                xBulletproof is right.

                -If we can't get a 4 who can score WITHOUT the ball in his hands (Like a Paul Milsap or Josh Smith), rebound, and block shots, than don't look to upgrade that spot as it would be a waste of money. Try to fleece ATL or Utah for their power forwards.

                Carl Landry, Jeff Green, etc. isn't going to cut it. They are free agents and they are not going to get us over the hump.

                -Go for a starting 2 that is versatile, meaning that he can score both with the ball in his hands, and can come off of screens. A lot like a Jamal Crawford or OJ Mayo. Try to pull off a lopsided trade for OJ Mayo.

                Try to plug in the holes in free agency. Get a backup point guard, a backup four, and get a backup C unless if we re-sign Foster.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The case against being active in the free agent market

                  I think your plan requires more definition. Where are the additional players to fill out the roster going to come from?

                  The following players are under contract going into next season: Granger, Posey, DJones, Hansbrough, Hibbert, Collison, Price, George, Rush and Stephenson. These salaries total 34.9M.

                  Dunleavy, Foster, SJones, McRoberts and Ford are free agents.

                  So, assuming that the salary cap still exists and it is close to this year's cap, say 58M, that leaves about 23M in cap space. An additional 4-5 players are still required to fill out the roster. Under your plan, I presume we would signt a first round draft choice. If the second round draft choice is good enough to make the team, that would bring the roster to 12 players.

                  But, if you look at how the roster is composed, it will have a significant number of holes that must be filled in order to continue to progress forward. Without acquiring some additional talent, I don't believe the team can be as competitive as it has been during the current season. We could re-sign Dunleavey, Foster and McRoberts at reasonable salaries to fill out the roster, giving us essentially the same roster that we have this season. And that might be about the cheapest way we could go. But we would lose ground to the other teams in the Eastern Conference.

                  I personally don't see how any plan looking at short-term or long-term improvement of the team that considers financial well-being of the franchise can possible succeed without committing dollars from out cap space towards one or two free agent signings this summer.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The case against being active in the free agent market

                    Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                    I've said all along that we're more likely to use that cap space to make lopsided trades than sign free agents.
                    Yep. Nobody is holding a gun to our heads forcing us to sign free agents out of a sub par free agent class... that also doesn't mean you do nothing.

                    Being under the cap allows you to make trades without matching salary. It's like having expiring contracts, except better. You can offer the team you are trading with immediate cap relief by taking their contracts.

                    This is why our number one "free agent" target this summer should be Josh Smith. He fits both need (impact defensive player) and position (PF). He seems to be available, and his current team is looking to get out of his salary. The Pacers are in a perfect position to make a trade happen here.

                    On another note, I hate the idea of pursuing Al Jefferson. Jefferson and Hibbert would make a TERRIBLE defensive front court. Josh Smith makes way more sense.
                    "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                    - ilive4sports

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: The case against being active in the free agent market

                      Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                      xBulletproof is right.

                      -If we can't get a 4 who can score WITHOUT the ball in his hands (Like a Paul Milsap or Josh Smith), rebound, and block shots, than don't look to upgrade that spot as it would be a waste of money. Try to fleece ATL or Utah for their power forwards.

                      Carl Landry, Jeff Green, etc. isn't going to cut it. They are free agents and they are not going to get us over the hump.

                      -Go for a starting 2 that is versatile, meaning that he can score both with the ball in his hands, and can come off of screens. A lot like a Jamal Crawford or OJ Mayo. Try to pull off a lopsided trade for OJ Mayo.

                      Try to plug in the holes in free agency. Get a backup point guard, a backup four, and get a backup C unless if we re-sign Foster.
                      I don't necessarily agree with your assessment of Landry. It just depends on what the Pacers decide to do with the 4 and 5. For example, if they decide to continue with Hansbrough as the starter and re-sign McRoberts as primarily the backup 5 with a few minutes at the 4, then I could see the signing of Landry at reasonable dollars as a means of adding depth to the 4 position.

                      Under no circumstances would I sign a player like Crawford or Mayo at the 2 if we do not significantly strengthen the frontcourt defensively. If we do bring in a much better defensive starter at 4, then this team will NOT move forward unless we bring in a much better defensive starter at the 2.

                      Crawford and Mayo do not cut it defensively in my book and although both are offensively gifted players, as far as I'm concerned each would be a downgrade defensively at 2 as compared to George or even Dunleavy.

                      The starting unit must be strengthened defensively. If it is not done at the 4, it absolutely must be done at the 2.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: The case against being active in the free agent market

                        Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                        But, if you look at how the roster is composed, it will have a significant number of holes that must be filled in order to continue to progress forward. Without acquiring some additional talent, I don't believe the team can be as competitive as it has been during the current season. We could re-sign Dunleavey, Foster and McRoberts at reasonable salaries to fill out the roster, giving us essentially the same roster that we have this season. And that might be about the cheapest way we could go. But we would lose ground to the other teams in the Eastern Conference.

                        I personally don't see how any plan looking at short-term or long-term improvement of the team that considers financial well-being of the franchise can possible succeed without committing dollars from out cap space towards one or two free agent signings this summer.
                        I don't understand how not signing a FA automatically means the team is standing still and everyone else is getting better. Players are constantly changing skill level, sometimes the best the thing to do is just sit still and let your players get better, especially for a young team. I'm not saying this team shouldn't sign anyone, but not signing anyone doesn't automatically mean every team gets better and we don't.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: The case against being active in the free agent market

                          Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                          I think your plan requires more definition. Where are the additional players to fill out the roster going to come from?

                          The following players are under contract going into next season: Granger, Posey, DJones, Hansbrough, Hibbert, Collison, Price, George, Rush and Stephenson. These salaries total 34.9M.

                          Dunleavy, Foster, SJones, McRoberts and Ford are free agents.

                          So, assuming that the salary cap still exists and it is close to this year's cap, say 58M, that leaves about 23M in cap space. An additional 4-5 players are still required to fill out the roster. Under your plan, I presume we would signt a first round draft choice. If the second round draft choice is good enough to make the team, that would bring the roster to 12 players.

                          But, if you look at how the roster is composed, it will have a significant number of holes that must be filled in order to continue to progress forward. Without acquiring some additional talent, I don't believe the team can be as competitive as it has been during the current season. We could re-sign Dunleavey, Foster and McRoberts at reasonable salaries to fill out the roster, giving us essentially the same roster that we have this season. And that might be about the cheapest way we could go. But we would lose ground to the other teams in the Eastern Conference.

                          I personally don't see how any plan looking at short-term or long-term improvement of the team that considers financial well-being of the franchise can possible succeed without committing dollars from out cap space towards one or two free agent signings this summer.
                          You're partially right. We probably do need to fill a few positions for role players this offseason. I wouldn't mind signing a player like Dunleavey or McRoberts for a reasonable price. What I don't want to see is the Pacers signing someone this summer who would eat a lot of our salary cap space while demanding starter minutes. The whole point of my argument is that we have a very young starting five (in terms of NBA experience) and we should give the current starters a chance to work on their game, give them significant playing time and see what emerges. They all have shown potential to be very good players in this league. Have the front office and coaching staff give them a chance to get to the next level before we make a play for major talent in 2012.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: The case against being active in the free agent market

                            Everything comes down to the new cba now. We have everything to gain and nothing to lose with a hard cap that is lower then the current LT threshold. If this goes through the cba has to give a way out for teams that are way over the cap which may be a grandfather clause, or slow implementation of the cap. I think it's more likely that an exception would be giving to wave 1 player in a buyout but not count that against the cap similar to the Alan Houston rule that came out with the last cba.
                            No team is going to cut their franchise player but if this happens we may see more talent available then we know about now. We may also be in a unique position to take advantage of a buyers market by taking on salary.
                            I really hope for a tough CBA.
                            No matter what I don't see our young group of players developing into a title contender without adding some talent. If the talents not their during this off season then I agree with you that we should wait until the trade deadline or next off season.
                            Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: The case against being active in the free agent market

                              Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                              Yep. Nobody is holding a gun to our heads forcing us to sign free agents out of a sub par free agent class... that also doesn't mean you do nothing.

                              Being under the cap allows you to make trades without matching salary. It's like having expiring contracts, except better. You can offer the team you are trading with immediate cap relief by taking their contracts.

                              This is why our number one "free agent" target this summer should be Josh Smith. He fits both need (impact defensive player) and position (PF). He seems to be available, and his current team is looking to get out of his salary. The Pacers are in a perfect position to make a trade happen here.

                              On another note, I hate the idea of pursuing Al Jefferson. Jefferson and Hibbert would make a TERRIBLE defensive front court. Josh Smith makes way more sense.
                              While I would love to have Smith on our team, I'm not sure I would make that signing this summer. What if Hansbrough makes that leap, gets his jump shop down, gets to the foul line more? What if Hansbrough averages 17 and 8 next year while Roy remains relatively stagnant? Wouldn't it make more sense to use our cap space on a strong, defensive-minded center the following year? You can make the same argument with George at SG. We keep gushing over our players' potential, but it's of no use if the Pacers don't give them an opportunity to actually fulfill it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X