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

Would you want to rent Dwight?

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

  • Would you want to rent Dwight?

    Report: Magic pursuing 'rental' team for Howard

    By Matt Moore

    Dwight Howard is expected to be traded to the perfect spot. It'll be a team he wants to play for, since that team is the only kind he'll re-sign with this summer in free agency. It has to be a contender, or potential contender (as in the case of the Nets with Deron Williams), and a major market so he can get all the media and commercial love he desires. That's pretty clear. But the Orlando Sentinel reports that the Magic are pursuing another option. The rental game.


    The Magic are talking to more teams than the ones on Dwight Howard's wish list.

    They will listen to anybody who is willing to take a risk and give up a few good men for Howard if he can lead them to the NBA Finals as a temp.

    It's another reason why they will wait until the March 15 deadline to make a deal for Howard, after he's played 44 games in Orlando. His new team would land him for 22 games, plus the postseason.

    Far-fetched?

    Absolutely. Sounds more like a means to put pressure on the teams that Howard has approved (Nets, Mavericks, Lakers).

    But the Magic think some teams might take a flyer, hoping they can convince Howard to re-sign with them.
    via Orlando Magic: Magic to explore renting out Dwight Howard - OrlandoSentinel.com.

    No one would be crazy enough to do this, right? To actually give up assets in order to nab Howard for 22 games and the playoffs, before he likely leaves? Well, there should be. That's right. I'm advocating insanity. That's how I roll.

    Two factors to consider if you're in the hunt for a Dwight rental.

    1. You have to move contracts that have considerable money behind them. The reason being, if Dwight doesn't re-sign, you don't want to be left without the pieces you traded, without Dwight, and a large salary situation. You're basically angling for a rebuilding. Part of the complication here is the Magic will want to dump Hedo Turkoglu or other components with salary burden. But the Magic have to know that to get back more talent like they reportedly want, they can't dump salary too in a rental situation. So why would the trading team risk rebuilding?

    2. Because the odds of a title is worth it. Consider the Pacers. If you're Larry Bird, what are you really trying to accomplish, honestly? You want to make a good strong showing in the playoffs, maybe get hot and uspet some folks on the way to the eastern Conference Finals, to try and be in position to make one big move to get you over the hump and win the title in a wacky year. You know you're not going to be able to compete with Miami, Oklahoma City, Los Angeles, Chicago etc. every year. You're hoping to pull off a Pistons-esque title. The same goes for any team considering a rental. So if you're angling for one title, anyway, why not take your shot with the best defensive player in the league, an MVP candidate for 22 games and the playoffs.

    That's the reasoning. You also have to establish how long it will take you to get back to being decent, since you have to factor how much winning a title will bring you financially versus two-to-three years of rebuilding will hurt you. And then you have to measure that against your actual odds of winning the title this season.

    All of this leads to the reality that the chances are not good. You're asking GM's and owners to take a phenomenal risk with a devastating loss if they miss, and the payoff might not even be that good. Are several years of second round appearances better financially than a title and two years of lottery dwelling?

    There's no list available of teams that might be interested, but here are five teams who should consider making the jump.

    Indiana Pacers: As I mentioned earlier, the Pacers should be a team willing to make the move. Larry Bird doesn't want to do this forever. Getting Dwight gives them a chance to win the title this season, instead of waiting for years and years and years potentially without any payoff. The Pacers are deep enough to offer the Magic an option plan. Darren Collison or George Hill, Danny Granger or Paul George, and Roy Hibbert (youth, talent) vs. Jeff Foster (expiring contract, veteran experience). That's a great package and still leaves the Pacers with whoever the Magic don't take, along with David West for scoring.

    Atlanta Hawks: The Hawks have been involved in talks this week with the Magic anyway, according to ESPN. Offering to move Josh Smith or Al Horford along with Joe Johnson puts the Magic in a great position to keep making the playoffs. The Hawks would have Jeff Teague, Kirk Hinrich, and either Smith or Horford to pair with Howard to try and make a run. With Howard having been born in Atlanta, it's got some pull and a good run might talk him into it. Not really, but sure. The biggest objection from Magic fans is that the Magic would never take on Joe Johnson's contract. But this is Otis Smith who took on Gilbert Arenas and Hedo Turkoglu in one year to try and win. Meanwhile, Johnson is an All-Star, and still is an above-average-to-pretty-good player at both ends without injury issues.

    Memphis Grizzlies: The Grizzlies may wind up moving Rudy Gay anyway if this season keeps up and they have to make a move. The Grizzlies need frontcourt depth. So get Dwight Howard! Genius! OK,it's a long shot, but if moving Gay, Sam Young or O.J. Mayo, and either Marc Gasol or Zach Randolph brings in Howard, that could make the Grizzlies the best team in the West. They'd have defense and the best low-post-scoring combo in the league. Memphis is unlikely to be able to stay in contention for several years. Why not take the shot now?

    Philadelphia 76ers: The Sixers have youth, Andre Igoudala as a centerpiece, and a full compliment of picks to add in. The team would be mortgaging the long-term value they've been angling for, but coach Doug Collins has also said that eventually they want to aim to bring in a star. Make a run with Jrue Holiday, Thaddeus Young, Elton Brand, and Howard, and if it doesn't work out, move towards the future.

    Portland Trail Blazers: Paul Allen wants to avoid the luxury tax. What better way to do that than by trading for Howard's expiring contract? OK, kidding aside, the Blazers are so loaded, they can move Wesley Matthews and either LaMarcus Aldridge or Gerald Wallace. The remaining lineup would be good enough to challenge for the West.

    Are any of these teams going to take the risk? No. Because this is not a league of gambling like this. The repercussions for failure would be catastrophic. But if a team really was all about winning a title, renting Howard for 22 games and the playoffs would be the boldest move possible.

    http://eye-on-basketball.blogs.cbssp...48484/34094187

    Would renting Dwight give us a shot at a title? Would it be worth a one year roll of the dice to lose some foundation for the future?

  • #2
    Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

    If he will do my dishes, sure, I'll rent him on the cheap.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

      i doubt this even comes close to happening

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

        Would Dwight + whatever we have left after the trade even get us to the Finals? I'm far from convinced it would.

        So... hell no. I didn't sit through 6 years of rebuild just to flush this away after less than 60 games to maybe get further than the team we already have will. I'd rather have what the 90's Pacers had than that, even if the never do make/win a Finals. I'd rather have a team that can make the conference finals multiple times so at least there's an extended run where any given series could end up going your way, where you would then be right there with at least a shot at it.

        Now, if you told me I could rent a couple of top guys, then maybe I'd at least think about it, but if Miami can lose, sure as hell the Pacers can too even if they have 1 or 2 superstars on their first year together.

        So... hell no.

        Use what we have now (this roster, this cap space, picks) to get 1 or 2 more pieces and run with that for the next handful of years, tweaking if necessary.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

          Hell no. I get his reasoning, but we're not a championship team this year, regardless of who we got. Our core is too young and inexperienced, there's no individual player that would deliver us a championship this year, period.
          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

            Originally posted by drewdawg View Post
            Would renting Dwight give us a shot at a title? Would it be worth a one year roll of the dice to lose some foundation for the future?

            I like nothing about this "renting" business so my answer is an easy NO.

            The Pacers are already headed in the right direction to eventually become
            legitimate title contenders and do not need to go rocking the boat with any
            quick fixes.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
              I'd rather have what the 90's Pacers had than that, even if the never do make/win a Finals. I'd rather have a team that can make the conference finals multiple times so at least there's an extended run where any given series could end up going your way, where you would then be right there with at least a shot at it.
              Agreed.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                If I felt we could keep Howard, then it's a no-brainer, but that probability of that is far too low for it to be worth the risk.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                  Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                  If I felt we could keep Howard, then it's a no-brainer, but that probability of that is far too low for it to be worth the risk.
                  not if we have to give up everyone but D West......... very stupid trade.......

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                    If there was a way to rent him for 2 years....basically the window that we have with West and it wouldn't cost us more then Granger+Foster+DC+two 1st round picks while taking on JRich's ( not Hedo's ) contract....sure...I'd to it....but since that seems unlikely....yeah, I'd pass as well.

                    Our window is 2 years ( with the signing of West )...not 1 year. A 1 year rental makes sense for a Team like the Celtics or the Suns....but makes little sense for the Pacers unless it was for a 2 year rental and such a move allows us to keep a primary core of Players to compete for the next 2 seasons.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                      Originally posted by PacerPenguins View Post
                      not if we have to give up everyone but D West......... very stupid trade.......
                      It's not giving up everyone but David West. It's giving the Magic the choice to choose. Take Darren Collison or George Hill. Not both. Take Paul George or Danny Granger. Not both. Take Roy Hibbert or Jeff Foster. Not both.
                      "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                      -Lance Stephenson

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                        Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                        It's not giving up everyone but David West. It's giving the Magic the choice to choose. Take Darren Collison or George Hill. Not both. Take Paul George or Danny Granger. Not both. Take Roy Hibbert or Jeff Foster. Not both.
                        ok then way happens to our bench...... blah.... pass 100 time over!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                          I'm not promoting this trade but say they did accept an offer of George Hill, Paul George, and Roy Hibbert.

                          We would still have Darren Collison then, I read somewhere in another thread on PD that Darren Collison and a 1st for nash has a possibility of being accepted. So say this trade goes through as well.

                          Once again I am not supporting this trade but it is clear Memphis needs frontcourt help. I believe they would accept an offer of OJ Mayo for Tyler.

                          I'm way to committed to these current pacers and never wish to see them traded but these trades would leave us with a lineup of-

                          PG- Nash/Lance
                          SG- OJ Mayo/ Dahntay
                          SF- Danny/ Dahntay
                          PF- David West/ Amundson
                          C- Dwight Howard/ Foster

                          Our bench would be awful but I believe this team could win a championship. I am not supporting this idea because I would much rather have what the 90's pacers have but if the ultimate goal is winning an NBA championship this is a roster that could do it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Would you want to rent Dwight?

                            Originally posted by PacerPenguins View Post
                            ok then way happens to our bench...... blah.... pass 100 time over!
                            Who cares about the bench? pick some guys from the D league if you have to.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by sobleski View Post
                              I'm not promoting this trade but say they did accept an offer of George Hill, Paul George, and Roy Hibbert.

                              We would still have Darren Collison then, I read somewhere in another thread on PD that Darren Collison and a 1st for nash has a possibility of being accepted. So say this trade goes through as well.

                              Once again I am not supporting this trade but it is clear Memphis needs frontcourt help. I believe they would accept an offer of OJ Mayo for Tyler.

                              I'm way to committed to these current pacers and never wish to see them traded but these trades would leave us with a lineup of-

                              PG- Nash/Lance
                              SG- OJ Mayo/ Dahntay
                              SF- Danny/ Dahntay
                              PF- David West/ Amundson
                              C- Dwight Howard/ Foster

                              Our bench would be awful but I believe this team could win a championship. I am not supporting this idea because I would much rather have what the 90's pacers have but if the ultimate goal is winning an NBA championship this is a roster that could do it.
                              That may be one of the worst perimeter defending teams in the history of basketball..

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X