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:
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

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

Kwame Brown traded to LA

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Kwame Brown traded to LA

    Lakers Agree to Get Brown

    Team will give up Butler and either Atkins or George to acquire the former overall No. 1 pick from the Wizards.

    By Mike Bresnahan, Times Staff Writer

    The Lakers have taken another bold step to remake their roster, agreeing in principle on a trade that would bring forward-center Kwame Brown from the Washington Wizards and would send Caron Butler and likely Chucky Atkins to Washington.

    Brown, 6 feet 11, was drafted No. 1 overall in 2001 and fell on hard times last season with the Wizards, but he has the potential to be an impact post player.

    Laker General Manager Mitch Kupchak and Wizard President Ernie Grunfeld declined to comment Wednesday, but sources said the components of the deal were in place involving Brown and Butler. The Wizards could choose small forward Devean George instead of Atkins to complete the deal.

    NBA teams cannot announce free-agent signings or sign-and-trade transactions until a league moratorium is lifted July 22.

    Brown, 23, received two guaranteed years with a third-year option held by the team. The Lakers will not be parting with the 2006 first-round pick they received from the Miami Heat in the Shaquille O'Neal trade last July.

    In 2001, Brown became the first high school player taken with the top pick in the draft, but he has been erratic and enigmatic throughout his first four seasons.

    Last season, he was suspended before Game 5 of the Wizards' first-round series against the Chicago Bulls and missed seven playoff games because he had groused as his playing time decreased, claiming a stomach illness and missing a practice.

    Brown was also suspended for a game last December because he reportedly walked away from the huddle during a timeout as Wizard Coach Eddie Jordan questioned his failure on a defensive assignment.

    In his first two seasons, Brown clashed with aging guard Michael Jordan and former Wizard coach Doug Collins.

    Brown showed traces of improvement in his third season, averaging a career-best 10.9 points and 7.4 rebounds, but he broke his right foot during a pickup game last summer and started the 2004-05 season on the injured list.

    Brown was out of shape most of last season, playing only 42 games and averaging seven points and 4.9 rebounds. He was booed at home numerous times.

    Off the court, Brown has been troubled, getting arrested in 2002 for driving 120 mph and again in 2003 for driving under the influence.

    The Wizards are interested in Butler in the wake of losing unrestricted free-agent guard Larry Hughes to the Cleveland Cavaliers. Butler, who played small forward and shooting guard last season, was one of the Lakers' most consistent players down the stretch, averaging 21.9 points over his last 15 games.

    Butler, 25, was one of three players acquired from Miami in the O'Neal trade. If the Lakers waive Brian Grant to save $30 million in luxury taxes as part of a one-time amnesty provision under the new collective bargaining agreement, Lamar Odom would be the only Laker left from the O'Neal trade.

    Atkins, 30, averaged a career-best 13.6 points last season for the Lakers but his lack of size made him a poor fit for a triangle offense that has historically worked better with taller guards under Phil Jackson.

    With the addition of Brown, the Lakers would have under contract Kobe Bryant, Odom, Chris Mihm, Jumaine Jones, Brian Cook, Slava Medvedenko, Sasha Vujacic, Luke Walton, Andrew Bynum and Ronny Turiaf. Atkins or George would also be under contract.

  • #2
    Re: Kwame Brown traded to LA

    Can't believe the Lakers did this to be honest


    • #3
      Re: Kwame Brown traded to LA

      Ah that's to bad that LA is in the position of hoping they will get lucky. I feel so really bad for them. Really, really, bad. Really I do!

      Does anyone believe me? If so I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale . . . cheap.


      • #4
        Re: Kwame Brown traded to LA

        maybe Zen is just what Kwame needs....

        it very well could work out as a steal for the lakers....if kwame ever lives up to some of his potential...

        if not...they give up two players that dont fit into their its no major loss anyway....

        he has two years to get it right...


        • #5
          Re: Kwame Brown traded to LA

          Wow! There are only 2 legit starters on that roster unless you want to include Mihm due to the lack of talent at his position. If Phil gets that squad to the playoffs he should get COY. They are going to suck with a capital S-U-C-K.

          At least Kobe will get his 35 ppg on 30 shots/game and continue to stake his claim as the unquestioned "leader" of the Lakers.


          • #6
            Re: Kwame Brown traded to LA

            This trade makes some sense both ways. Caron Butler was best when Kobe was out. There just probably isn't enough room for another offensive-minded swingman with Kobe in charge, so his value to LA is less than it is to others.

            Butler seems a great fit for Washington, replacing Hughes.

            Kwame was out of shape last year after the broken foot. If he stayed fat then this is a disaster for LA. If he got back in shape, he can be a good player if he has no lingering foot issues. Phil has a history of helping the headcases fit in. I can actually see him being a 15-8 guy in 2-3 years.

            Also now Odom may play more SF and cause matchup problems. He's too thin to defend at PF.
            The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).


            • #7
              Re: Kwame Brown traded to LA

              Also now Odom may play more SF and cause matchup problems. He's too thin to defend at PF.[/QUOTE]
              Good for the Wizards bad for the Lakers. You know Odom might be to
              thin to defend but he is a Laker so there shouldn't be to much problem
              there. Plus he would be to slow to defend the SF's of the world.
              EFF+ 20.52

              I would say this is better than K Brown any day of the week.


              • #8
                Re: Kwame Brown traded to LA

                This a pretty good trade for Wiz. After losing Hughes, they get Butler. They still have pretty much the same team, without Kwame.
                AKA Sactolover05


                • #9
                  Re: Kwame Brown traded to LA

                  Didn't Brown hate playing with Jordan?

                  How happy can he be knowing he is joining Kobe?
                  House Name: Pacers

                  House Sigil:

                  House Words: "We Kneel To No King"


                  • #10
                    Re: Kwame Brown traded to LA

                    Great trade for the Wiz. Now they get to join every other team in the league with the exception of us, the Spurs, Pistons, and Heat in a desperate struggle for a quality big man.
                    House Name: Pacers

                    House Sigil:

                    House Words: "We Kneel To No King"


                    • #11
                      Re: Kwame Brown traded to LA

                      I don't really like the trade for either team. I thought that Washington was better off developing their young players like Hayes and Blake rather than bringing in another perimeter guy. On the plus side I couldn't believe that they got a player as good as Butler for Brown.

                      I guess they are hoping for the next JO. But JO never got the minutes that Brown has nor had been kicked off the play off roster. I do think that Brown has talent but I don't believe that he is a winner or brings many intangibles to the table. I can't believe that is all the Lakers could get for Butler.
                      "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                      "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."


                      • #12
                        Re: Kwame Brown traded to LA

                        I can believe they did worst....the guy is a 8ppg/8rpg type of guy or the next <<< shudder >>> JONeal waiting to get out of the dog house. The good thing about going to the Lakers is that ( although he has a contract to live up to ), he won't be the main guy in LaLaLand......he has Kobe to run next to. But the bad thing about going to the Lakers is that....he has Kobe << cough cough......the "Real GM">> to run next to. Kobe ( although demanding with the ball ) and may be the closest thing we have to a modernday MJ....but he won't be as demanding and ( likely ) hard on Kwame as MJ was.

                        I really won't be surprised if he does become a standard Double-Double type of guy....he may not fully live up to his potential as a #1 pick....but he'll probably be a solid PF/C for years to come.

                        But you never know....if he thinks the spotlight in Washington was bad...wait til the LakerFans start demanding that Brown conforms to the Triangle offense.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.


                        • #13
                          Re: Kwame Brown traded to LA

                          This isn't a bad trade for the Lakers. Kwame should be better than Slava or Brian Grant.

                          I don't really like it for the Wizarads though. Caron will not be replacing Larry Hughues. Caron is a forward who can play some SG in spot minuates. If I were them I would rather let Kwame walk and go after Flip Murry.


                          • #14
                            Re: Kwame Brown traded to LA

                            What the trade means is Jamison is moving back to power forward. I would have gone after just about any big man to keep Jamison at the 3.
                            "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                            "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."


                            • #15
                              Re: Kwame Brown traded to LA

                              I would not be the least bit surprised if Kwame wins MIP this season.
                              Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!