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

Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

    sorry if already posted-- didn't see it

    I hate that last line

    By Skip Bayless
    Page 2

    That tremor you just felt wasn't "King Kong" opening. It was the NBA's balance of power shifting.

    Two charades just ended, in Indiana and Miami. Ron Artest, going. Pat Riley, returning. Both developments were inevitable, and have been in the works for weeks.

    But only one makes sense: Riley's.

    That's because Artest blew the whistle on Pacers general manager Larry Bird, while ex-Heat coach Stan Van Gundy basically swallowed his whistle when forced out by Riley.

    I'll explain.

    Pat Riley makes the Heat better -- there's just no way around that.
    But here's the upshot: The Heat suddenly get a real coach -- one of the NBA's top five. And some lucky team gets to steal a top-10 player: Artest, who could turn any of six Western Conference teams into a championship contender.

    The San Antonio Spurs -- until this week easily the NBA's best team -- now have to worry about facing Artest's team in the Western Conference playoffs and Riley's in the NBA Finals. Yet both these moves have been underestimated because of two media-driven stereotypes: Stan Van Gundy, "good guy." Ron Artest, "bad guy."

    Look deeper.

    When Riley stepped down -- or up -- to become Heat GM, he chose a career assistant to replace him because: (1) He didn't want a proven coach to make him look even worse by having far more success, and (2) he wanted a coach he could control.

    Yes, Van Gundy is a good guy and a media favorite, but he was a lousy hire. He's nothing more than a glorified assistant, a seat-warmer, a follower to Riley's leader, a guy who often sweated more than his players. Especially after Riley pulled off one of the top two or three trades in league history -- stealing Shaquille O'Neal from the Lakers -- Van Gundy was overmatched.

    No way Shaq ever looked at Van Gundy and thought anything but: "You're kidding me." As Heat games turned into celebrity-studded events, Van Gundy looked more and more like a guy who had won a backstage pass in a radio station contest. Van Gundy coaching South Beach's team always felt something like "The King of Queens" hosting a Grammys after party.

    During the offseason, Riley basically rigged the roster for Van Gundy to fail or quit. Van Gundy could sooner juggle chainsaws than the nitro egos of newcomers Antoine Walker, Gary Payton and Jason Williams, mixed in with Shaq and Dwyane Wade. Worse, Riley stated publicly that he wanted to coach again.

    Riley finally put poor Van Gundy out of his misery just as -- what a coincidence -- Shaq was returning from an ankle injury. Van Gundy, NBA lifer that he is, took the high road, insisting he was quitting to spend more time with his family. Yet he remains employed by the team and will collect a large portion of his reported $3 million salary this season and next.

    This is basically hush money.

    Van Gundy is being paid to participate in a charade that will help keep his reputation and Riley's image intact. He agreed not to criticize Riley, even though he would have been justified in going down with his guns blazing. He remains a "good guy" -- a very respected (and hire-able) member of the NBA's assistant coaching fraternity -- while Riley doesn't look quite so Machiavellian.

    Still, all that really matters here is that Riley just made a move almost as great as trading for Shaq. There's only one coach capable of cracking the whip on this roster and this overweight superstar. That coach is the GM who assembled this team: Riley.

    Shaq fears and respects Riley. Riley knows that Wade still needs to play Robin to Shaq's Batman if the Heat are going to conquer Gotham City again. If Riley gets Shaq back in shape and in sync -- the Very Big Fella needs to lose 20 pounds while getting at least 20 shots a game -- look out, all you Jokers and Riddlers.

    The Heat just went from the East's third-best team, behind Detroit and Indiana, to potentially the favorite.

    Indiana, on the other hand, is about to become playoff fodder.

    Now it comes clear: That sly fox Bird was running a little con game on the league when he agreed to pose for the cover of Sports Illustrated's NBA issue standing literally behind his man Artest.

    Bird was quoted as saying: "Like me, he plays the game to win. Because of his intensity and desire to win, Ronnie's a guy I would pay money to watch play. … Look, Ronnie made a horrible mistake going into the stands [in Detroit last season], but he tucks his shirttail in and comes to battle every day. That makes me proud."

    This isn't to suggest that Bird didn't believe those words. He still does. But he also was trying to rebuild Artest's trade value.

    If Bird's two prized offseason additions proved to be as good as he anticipated, he obviously planned to quietly shop Artest in December. Sarunas Jasikevicius, Bird's Euro-toughened, 29-year-old rookie shooter, immediately looked like an NBA veteran, while rookie forward Danny Granger soon looked like a 17th-pick steal.

    Yet together, these two won't ever measure up to the impact Artest can have.

    Some team is gonna get a big boost when it adds Artest.
    He rivals Bruce Bowen as the league's best on-the-ball defender. Yet Bowen is more of a pest. Artest is a 6-foot-7, 255-pound bully. Bowen irritates you. Artest scares the hell out of you.

    Artest makes all his teammates feel a little tougher. Artest gave the Pacers a defensive identity, as well as an overpowering offensive option. Artest could manhandle most of the two guards or small forwards who try to guard him. He knows all the low-post tricks and he has made himself into a pretty good outside shooter.

    He's not the greatest athlete or leaper, but he plays basketball the way Brian Urlacher plays football: all-out. He can score 30 while holding the opponent's top scorer to 15. Artest is a difference maker.

    So why in the name of, well, Bird, would Bird trade him? He's a bargain All-Star who's signed for four more years at team-friendly salaries ranging from only $6.8 million to $7.5 million.

    One explanation making the NBA rounds is the "knucklehead" theory. One GM said: "Most people in the league believe that you can get away with having one knucklehead on your team, but not two. The Pacers have Artest and Stephen Jackson -- and sometimes you wonder about Jermaine O'Neal.

    "So maybe Bird decided he needed addition by subtraction. Maybe he decided that as much as he likes Artest, a cloud would always hang over him with the Pacers and that he and the team just needed a change of scenery."

    So, apparently, Bird explored some trade options. That's what keeps getting overlooked. Artest's initial "I want to be traded" salvo came in response to a rumor that Indiana and Sacramento had discussed an Artest-for-Peja Stojakovic trade.

    Artest can act dumb, but he ain't basketball-stupid. He called out Bird and coach Rick Carlisle, loudly wondering why he has been phased out of the offense even though he often has mismatches.

    Good question. But obviously, you can't ask it publicly without alienating your coach and teammates. Unlike Van Gundy, Artest took the low road.

    Then again, is it fair to condemn Artest by saying, "The Pacers stood behind him through last year's suspension. How could he turn on them?"


    Once again: Artest didn't land a single punch when he went into the stands after the cup-thrower in Detroit. The only ones he threw were at the guy who was sucker-punching him from behind.

    The only one he landed was on the jaw of the idiot who squared off with him after he had returned to the playing floor.

    And for that he was suspended for the rest of the season: 73 games. That was excessive. Yet Artest stayed in superb shape and looked like an MVP candidate in the preseason.

    Terrell Owens will always be more trouble than he's worth. Not Artest.

    Yet Artest undercut Bird's plan to trade him by demanding a trade. Now he looks like a "bad guy" again. Now Indiana's leverage falls. Now Bird is backed into a position of basically having to give away a difference maker.

    This bridge is on fire from both ends. According to GMs who have called about Artest, Pacers CEO Donnie Walsh is saying Artest will be traded by the weekend.

    The Pacers will not be as formidable without Artest.

    But some team is about to get scary better. Walsh has been telling GMs that he's leaning toward trading Artest to the West.

    Artest would immediately give the Suns, Mavericks, Rockets, Clippers, Grizzlies and Timberwolves a defensive identity they don't have and make them threats to the Spurs. That, of course, would depend on what they had to give up for Artest.

    Yet even worse for the Pacers, his salary is so low that they'll have to package other contracts (Austin Croshere? Jeff Foster?) to get back a high-paid, star-quality player and make the deal work under the cap. So the Pacers could really get the worst of this if getting rid of Artest requires a three-for-one swap.

    I spoke Wednesday night with a Western Conference GM who said: "I hate the thought of having Artest on my team, but he's just what we need. You're gambling he'll be on his best behavior and maybe want to prove something to the Pacers, but I'm going to make an offer for him."

    In fact, this GM was considering offering an All-Star for Artest
    "because it isn't very often that a player of this caliber comes on the market and could come with a Croshere or a Jeff Foster."

    The Pacers will regret trading Artest. And they'll miss him most when they're eliminated early in the playoffs by Riley's Heat.

    Skip Bayless can be seen Monday through Friday on "Cold Pizza," ESPN2's morning show, and at 4 p.m. ET on ESPN's "1st & 10." His column appears twice a week on Page 2. You can e-mail Skip
    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!).

  • #2
    Re: Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

    Rashard Lewis ?

    I don't know but he was an allstar last season. First name that came to my mind. Wo else were on the WCAS team.


    • #3
      Re: Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

      hmm... well...yea...nevermind...
      Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!


      • #4
        Re: Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

        Assuming we're talking current All-Star, here were last seasons All-Stars that are currently in the West:

        Ray Allen
        Rashard Lewis

        Lewis seems the most likely of those to me.


        • #5
          Re: Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

          This is interesting too:

          "According to GMs who have called about Artest, Pacers CEO Donnie Walsh is saying Artest will be traded by the weekend. "
          Here, everyone have a : on me


          • #6
            Re: Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

            I'd imagine it was Cuban. They have ZERO defensive stoppers, and he's always willing to make a gamble.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.


            • #7
              Re: Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

              Thanks for the wonderful and specific news, Skip.
              “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

              “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird


              • #8
                Re: Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

                If you go back two years, you can add these guys to the list:

                Sam Cassell
                Brad Miller
                Baron Davis
                Kenyon Martin


                • #9
                  Re: Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

                  The only Mavs allstar is Dirk. Could it be. No way. Do the Mavs have another former Allstar.


                  • #10
                    Re: Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

                    Oops... already posted

                    2004 Allstars:

                    "Ray Allen (Seattle) G 6-5 205 4
                    *Kobe Bryant (L.A. Lakers) G 6-6 220 6
                    Sam Cassell (Minnesota)** G 6-3 185 1
                    *Tim Duncan (San Antonio) F 7-0 260 6
                    *Steve Francis (Houston) G 6-3 200 3
                    *Kevin Garnett (Minnesota) F 6-11 240 7
                    Andrei Kirilenko (Utah)** F 6-9 225 1
                    Brad Miller (Sacramento) C 7-0 261 2
                    Dirk Nowitzki (Dallas) F/C 7-0 245 3
                    Shaquille O'Neal (L.A. Lakers) C 7-1 340 11
                    Peja Stojakovic (Sacramento) G 6-10 229 3
                    *Yao Ming (Houston) C 7-6 310 2 "

                    Here, everyone have a : on me


                    • #11
                      Re: Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

                      Originally posted by btowncolt
                      I bet it's Kenyon Martin he was talking about.

                      I could se that. Although he's injured and I've read some things that he is showing some wear and tear.


                      • #12
                        Re: Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck
                        The only Mavs allstar is Dirk. Could it be. No way. Do the Mavs have another former Allstar.


                        • #13
                          Re: Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

                          Lewis/Collison for Artest/Pollard works. I'd love to put Bender in instead of Scot, though.

                          Martin/Lenard for Artest/Pollard [or Bender] also works.


                          • #14
                            Re: Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

                            Originally posted by Since86
                            I'd imagine it was Cuban. They have ZERO defensive stoppers, and he's always willing to make a gamble.
                            FWIW, the Mavs play-by-play guy was on Full Court Press today, and he said no way would the Mavs make a play for Artest.

                            Now how much inside info the play-by-play guys have, I don't know. Maybe there's somebody on here who could give some insight into that?
                            PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731


                            • #15
                              Re: Skip Bayless, ESPN page 2: western GM considering offering an all-star for Ron

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck
                              I could se that. Although he's injured and I've read some things that he is showing some wear and tear.
                              Say no to KMart....ignoring that he plays the PF position.....if we want to steer clear of injury ridden players.....then KMart is not the answer.
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.