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

Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

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

  • Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Based on talk out of Indiana and New York, the Heat soon could be facing two decisions in its convoluted situation at point guard.



    With Indiana's Jamaal Tinsley, the situation is pretty basic. If the Pacers are willing to take on Marcus Banks, a deal quickly could be consummated. If the Pacers remain focused on Udonis Haslem, the conversations will remain cursory.



    With New York's Stephon Marbury, the issue is a bit more clouded. Unlike Indiana, which insists it will not buy out Tinsley at anything short of pennies on the dollar, New York apparently is moving closer to an outright release of Marbury, at least that's the latest from The New York Times.



    If Marbury is waived, the Heat would be first in position to make a waiver claim, because of its league-worst 2007-08 record. Of course, lacking the cap space or financial interest in such a move, the Heat, like each of the other 28 remaining teams, would have to wait until Marbury clears waivers.



    Adding Marbury in free agency would mean also remaining on the hook for Banks' three remaining seasons, as well as having four point guards in camp, when counting Marbury, Banks, Mario Chalmers and Chris Quinn.



    Common sense would say that if Marbury truly wants to regain his stature, the Heat would be the most logical landing point. Where else, perhaps beyond Indiana, would he have as solid a chance to emerge as an opening-night starter?



    Yet is that where a team of the future should be headed? It's a tough call. At a point in the post-Shaq era when the Heat is trying to get everything to again be about team, is adding a veteran trying to resurrect his personal star the way to go?



    A tough call? Certainly. But one the Heat soon might have to make.

    http://blogs.sun-sentinel.com/sports_basketball_heat/

  • #2
    Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

    Would anyone be willing to take Banks for Tinsley? There would have to be other players involved (for salary cap reasons) and Miami needs a big too. Any thoughts?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

      This article loses credibility when the author suggests that Marbury would have a shot at the starting PG job in Indiana. That's as much hogwash as I've ever read. I'm not even sure that Crean would take him at IU.
      "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

      - Salman Rushdie

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

        Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
        This article loses credibility when the author suggests that Marbury would have a shot at the starting PG job in Indiana. That's as much hogwash as I've ever read. I'm not even sure that Crean would take him at IU.
        Yep that is stupid for him to say Marbury would start here.

        Otherwise, the Pacers would really have to think about a a Banks deal (I think he basically has 3 years 13.3 million left) and expiring contract(s).

        Then they'd have the option to waive Banks (maybe even wait until after this season) and then it's essentially like buying out Tinsley for

        -one year of Banks on the team
        -plus 9 million (what is left on the last two years of Banks contract.
        -plus the expiring one year deal of a expiring player for like 3 million (you could keep that player or not, really)

        So its like buying out Tinsley sort of, but you save some money and some future cap space and maybe Banks becomes a better asset than Tinsley after a year.

        Not the best thing in the world since Banks will still be on your books 3 years from now, but for only 4.7 million v. 7.5 for JT.

        Again, not the best thing in the world, but it gets Tinsley out of town and you save some money/capspace. Plus JT on Southbeach is worth it all by itself.

        edit, Smush Parker is a free agent now (not available to be expiring contract fodder), I guess, at least according to Wikipedia so it has to be true.
        Last edited by Speed; 09-19-2008, 03:50 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

          A Tinsley for Banks trade does not work salary wise. The likely he is referring to is Blount and Banks coming here since he said forget Haslem.

          Going to the Heat would be Tinsley and either Nesterovic or Foster. I want no part of Blount. Mark Blount is owed 16 mil over the next 2 seasons while Nesterovic and Foster are both expiring contracts.

          Any savings in the Tinsley / Banks part would be lost due to Blount's 8 mil , 2nd year of his deal.

          Smush Parker has signed to play overseas next season.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

            Why do they want to get rid of Banks beyond his contract? I thought I'd heard/seen before that he was a bad egg of some sort, too?

            Also, if you add Maceo Baston in, you could trade him and Tinsley for Banks and Haslem.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
              Why do they want to get rid of Banks beyond his contract? I thought I'd heard/seen before that he was a bad egg of some sort, too?

              Also, if you add Maceo Baston in, you could trade him and Tinsley for Banks and Haslem.
              They want to get rid of Banks because he still has 3 years left on his deal and he's just not that good of a player.

              I don't see the Heat giving up Haslem in any deal with the Pacers. Haslam has been a solid guy for them for awhile now and he's signed to a reasonable deal. He's basically their Jeff Foster.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

                The Heat would take on Marbury without a second thought.

                If all Financially considerations are equal.....Marbury is less injury prone, is as good as Tinsley is on Defense, a better scorer then Tinsley is and would probably be considered equal as a Lockerroom presense.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

                  Thats ok. We don't need to send him to the Heat. Let Marbury screw that team up for the next 3-5 years. See the NY Knicks. Wait until a starting PG goes down and they have no viable options. There will be a team whose PG goes down. Think Alston in Hou, Nash in Pho, Fisher in LA, Rondo in Bos, or Kidd in Dal. I dont think it would be the end of the world if Tinsley doesnt get traded until sometime into the season.
                  "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

                    I guess what I'm going to start telling myself is that the worst case scenario is he's an expiring contract in 2011 to shop.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

                      Originally posted by diamonddave00 View Post
                      A Tinsley for Banks trade does not work salary wise. The likely he is referring to is Blount and Banks coming here since he said forget Haslem.

                      Going to the Heat would be Tinsley and either Nesterovic or Foster. I want no part of Blount. Mark Blount is owed 16 mil over the next 2 seasons while Nesterovic and Foster are both expiring contracts.

                      Any savings in the Tinsley / Banks part would be lost due to Blount's 8 mil , 2nd year of his deal.

                      Smush Parker has signed to play overseas next season.
                      Wouldn't we be able to do the Tinsley for Banks deal utilizing the JO trade exception?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

                        Originally posted by QuickRelease View Post
                        Wouldn't we be able to do the Tinsley for Banks deal utilizing the JO trade exception?
                        You can't combine Trade Exceptions with Players.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

                          Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                          Why do they want to get rid of Banks beyond his contract? I thought I'd heard/seen before that he was a bad egg of some sort, too?

                          Also, if you add Maceo Baston in, you could trade him and Tinsley for Banks and Haslem.
                          I'm thinking the same thing as well. For a team that is limited in point guard options, I think it's telling that they're looking to jettison someone that has Bank's talent.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

                            It's all good in my opinion.

                            Marbury should be a great role model for Beasley. To be sure, Marbury at the helm should keep them out of legitimate contention for years. What a mix that would be down there. It reminds me of the failed pile-up of talent in Denver...that amounted to nothing in the playoffs.

                            The alternative is Tinsley out the door. Another good move in my book. If Banks and Blount keep their nose clean, they are welcome to sit and clap for the rest of the team. It would be better than seeing Tinsley there.
                            Lance is finally home. Whether he becomes our starting PG or he's 6th man, he's getting big minutes and he's here to stay. #llortontnia

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Tinsley or Marbury a tough call for the Heat ?

                              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                              You can't combine Trade Exceptions with Players.
                              I thought the trade exception allowed you to take back less incoming trade value. Am I mistaken in thinking we could do Tinsley for Banks straight up due to the $2 million+ TE?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X