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

Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

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

  • Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market


    It looks like Atlanta is getting scared they are going to lose Horford. I bet he wants to test the free market and see what he could get. I hope he doesn't sign a new contract before next summer.

    Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

    The Hawks would prefer that Al Horford doesn't hit the free agent market
    next summer.
    Horford can become a restricted free agent after the 2010-11 season.
    "The Hawks would prefer he not test the market because they know full well he'd be coveted from sea to shining sea," wrote the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
    The issue is that Jamal Crawford is looking for a contract extension and there have been reports that he'll request a trade if he doesn't receive one.


    Read more: http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_ar...#ixzz0y70QUw6G

  • #2
    Re: Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

    lol do they have enough money to retain him after giving JJ such a ridiculous contract?
    follow me @TruenoPanda - lets talk Pacers!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

      Trade him here. BAM. Problem solved

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

        If we really want a good power forward this is bad news for us.

        I am very anxious how horford performs this year. He has progressed nicely every year and I think will be a absolute stud here in a season or two.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

          The Hawks realize he is the backbone of their team. Take Horford away (and not add anything to replace him) and they don't make the playoffs.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

            The Hawks don't want Al Horford to hit the free agent market? Really?

            In other news, water is wet and boobs are good.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

              Do you blame them? He certainly is a player they would want to keep. If he did test the market he would get offers that might push beyond what Atlanta can afford. I like him a lot, he is a great player, would love for him to play for the Pacers.
              Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

                Here's the full blog from AJC.com ( which gives more context when it comes to what to do with Crawford and therefore indirectly affecting Horford ):

                http://blogs.ajc.com/mark-bradley-bl...k_bradley_blog

                Mark Bradley
                Another Hawks dilemma: Pay Jamal Crawford or dump him?
                7:44 am August 30, 2010, by Mark Bradley


                An unsatisfying offseason has the potential to turn unsavory. In the same summer the Hawks made Joe Johnson the priciest free-agent signing and Larry Drew the cheapest head-coaching hire, they must now deal with Jamal Crawford. This isn’t what any doctor — from Dr. J to Dr. Jack Ramsey — would have ordered.

                According to Gary Washburn of the Boston Globe, Crawford and his agent are expected to meet with general manager Rick Sund this week. Crawford is thought to want one of two things: To sign a contract extension before the new season commences or to be traded forthwith. Given that his was the happiest Hawks story of a season that ended unhappily, Crawford must be taken seriously. Given that these are the Hawks, who are so cheap they haven’t yet fleshed out their roster, he shouldn’t hold his breath.

                Yes, cheap. Even after sinking $120 million into Joe Johnson, the Hawks keep giving us reason to doubt their long-avowed Commitment To Excellence. They could have hired an established NBA head coach to replace Mike Woodson and wound up promoting Drew, who’d been Woodson’s assistant all along. They could have spent significant money to find another big man, and instead they’ve attempted to make do with Josh Powell and another episode of the Jason Collins Saga. (For late tuners-in, Collins was on the Hawks’ roster all last season, though not so you noticed.)

                It’s unclear what Crawford really thinks is apt to happen if he does deliver a pay-me-more-or-trade-me-now demand. Because the Hawks aren’t apt to pay anyone more. Public statements notwithstanding, the Atlanta Spirit seems uninterested in paying one in-the-red cent of luxury tax. Beyond that, there’s a more pressing matter: What to do with Al Horford, who means even more to this franchise?

                Horford can become a restricted free agent at season’s end. The Hawks would prefer he not test the market because they know full well he’d be coveted from sea to shining sea. If any Hawk is apt to receive a contract extension before Halloween, it’s Horfy. There’s almost no chance two Hawks will be offered preseason extensions at this late date.


                So, if Sund doesn’t hand Crawford a new contract, what does the GM do? Trade him? Even though any attempt to shed a disgruntled player creates a buyer’s market? Even though the Hawks would be pressed to get anything comparable to Crawford in return? Even though the strength of this team headed into 2010-11 figured to be its continuity?

                On the other hand … do you want a disgruntled player in a locker room not overrun with vocal leaders? (Horford is the Hawk most apt to speak, and if he chooses not to accept an extension he’ll be facing contractual issues of his own.) The issue of Johnson’s impending free agency became a major story last season, and Crawford is 10 times more talkative than J.J.

                Yes, the Hawks did draft a shooting guard in Jordan Crawford, but 26 players were taken ahead of him and there’s no assurance he’s not the 21st Century Roy Marble. This rookie cannot be seen as rotation-ready, meaning the Hawks can’t just trade one J. Crawford and hand his workload — the NBA’s sixth man of the year averaged 31 minutes a night — to another J. Crawford.

                There was a time when the Hawks seemed a rousing success story: A team of young guys growing up together and learning to win. What we’re seeing is that NBA success carries a higher and higher price. A franchise cannot hold its core together for years on end without paying dearly, and paying dearly essentially means overpaying. The Hawks overpaid Johnson because they had no real alternative: To lose him would have meant losing much of the credibility they’ve spent the past decade trying to re-establish.

                The price for credibility, alas, was flexibility. The Hawks have almost none. To give Jamal Crawford what he wants would be throwing more big money at a shooting guard already past 30 in the same offseason that has seen them lavish a six-year contract on a 29-year-old who plays the same position. To trade Crawford would be to weaken the team he helped lift from 47 victories to 53. There might be a happy ending to this latest Hawks tempest, but I’ll be darned if I see it.
                To me, this is an easy dilemma to fix. Trade Crawford for another Expiring contract and whatever assets they can get and then ( if prompted to by Horford ) give an extension to Horford while hoping that you don't low-ball him enough to leave him open to "testing the market".

                Anything short of a "Near MAX" contract extension coming from the Hawks and you'd think that Horford would simply say "thanks, but no thanks...I'll take my chances on the 2011-2012 FA Market". I know that many of you don't think that he's worth a MAX Contract....but I'm pretty sure that some Team will offer him a Near MAX to MAX level contract if he becomes a FA. Other then the Pacers, I can see the Knicks offering him a Near MAX to MAX level contract. He'd be a solid fit next to Amare and could fit into D'Antoni's offense/defense.

                I doubt it happens...but I'm hoping that the Hawks buckle and give an extensino to Jamal Crawford....it would just make it that much more difficult for them to offer Horford an extension...much less match anything that any other Team can offer.
                Last edited by CableKC; 08-30-2010, 02:56 PM.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

                  How much does Crawford want? He is price is probably more than we would want to spend. He is like 30 years old, but he can score.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

                    Originally posted by pacers74 View Post
                    How much does Crawford want? He is price is probably more than we would want to spend. He is like 30 years old, but he can score.
                    He wants more then we can afford to pay. I don't know if the Hawks are cheapskates....which I suspect that they are now that they have tied up a huge amount of $$$ with Joe Johnson....but if a Player wanting an extension ( something every Player pretty much wants before the potential 2011 Lockout ) doesn't think that he's getting paid what he thinks he's worth....then it's a safe bet to assume that he thinks he's worth more then he really is. Crawford is a solid scorer....but he's more of a SG then he is a PG. I wouldn't pay him more then the going rate for a "1st Guard off the bench on a Playoff level Team" or a "Decent Starting SG on a lottery Team" on the Free Market....maybe $5 to 6 mil a year for 3 or 4 seasons?

                    Regardless, I wouldn't want him.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

                      I think he making something like 10 mil this year.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

                        I'd be offering the max if I were the Pacers and Al should know that someone will offer that going into any talks with Atlanta.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

                          This all comes down to players wanting contracts before next season's impending bargaining agreement which will surely lower player contracts and years on the contracts I'm sure for teams to cover their own asses. The worst that could happen for the players is that the owners decide they seriously want it to become like the NFL where contracts aren't guaranteed by the team.

                          So I could see Horford getting an extension before the season starts for that reason, Crawford not so much, hes much more expendable.
                          "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                          ----------------- Reggie Miller

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

                            Horford can become a restricted free agent at season’s end. The Hawks would prefer he not test the market because they know full well he’d be coveted from sea to shining sea. If any Hawk is apt to receive a contract extension before Halloween, it’s Horfy. There’s almost no chance two Hawks will be offered preseason extensions at this late date.

                            Al we promise if you come here we'll make sure our writers never call you "Horfy"

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Hawks Don't Want Horford To Test Market

                              I still don't think Horford is a realistic option, but seeing as how he is by far the most attractive potential free agent next season, I can't help but wonder if it would be worth it to offer him the max in the hopes that Atlanta wouldn't match. I don't think he is a max player, but he would be such a great fit for the Pacers. Solid defender, a true PF who can easily slide over and eat minutes at C, good rebounder, high character guy, winner. He's also a guy I wouldn't expect to dog it once he gets paid.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X