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

Keeping David West

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

  • #91
    Re: Keeping David West

    Why not keep West's leadership and strength at PF and try to upgrade SG or SF? That would be my logic if I was building the team right now. I would only upgrade West if it was a very large upgrade from someone who was not viewed as a locker room killer. How many PF's are on that list? Maybe 2 or 3?


    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Keeping David West

      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post

      Didn't you want us to pick up Luis Scola this offseason? Luis is probably even less athletic than West, and is 4 months older than West. So why would we want to dump West, yet try and sign Scola when they're the same age, and play basically the same way?

      I agree with you that West will decline as he gets older. Though I think he'll put up big numbers this year, I think he would be best utilized as a 6th man type PF off the bench after this season. Idk if he would want to go for that, but I think it'd extend his career, allow him to finish up as a Pacer (I've heard his family likes it here) and allows the team to utilize what skills he has left, while not having to fully rely on an aging, average defender/rebouder from the starting PF spot.
      Scola was pretty much there for free that's the reason why I wanted him, not only that but he could have been a pretty good option off the bench replacing Tyler, I don't think Scola makes the Pacers championship contenders either.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Keeping David West

        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
        Why not keep West's leadership and strength at PF and try to upgrade SG or SF? That would be my logic if I was building the team right now. I would only upgrade West if it was a very large upgrade from someone who was not viewed as a locker room killer. How many PF's are on that list? Maybe 2 or 3?
        Because West is the older player that is also going to be a free agent? yes his leadership is nice but you still need talent at that position, I get that many of you put leadership in front of talent for some reason but as we all know talent triumphs over leadership every time.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Keeping David West

          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          Scola was pretty much there for free that's the reason why I wanted him.
          3yrs/13M is pretty much free?

          EDIT: And in reality, Phoenix is giving him closer to 3/14M, so the Pacers or any other team would have needed to put in an even pricer bid to get him.
          Last edited by Since86; 10-10-2012, 12:01 PM.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Keeping David West

            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
            Because West is the older player that is also going to be a free agent? yes his leadership is nice but you still need talent at that position, I get that many of you put leadership in front of talent for some reason but as we all know talent triumphs over leadership every time.
            You are looking at this way too black and white IMO. Yes he is older and yes he is going to be a free agent, but that doesn't mean that a situation won't present itself where you could upgrade the 2 or the 3 and keep West on a reasonable deal. Saying welp, he's a free agent and older so we might as well just throw our hands up in the air and let him walk is not problem solving, that's just accepting the situation.


            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Keeping David West

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              3yrs/13M is pretty much free?

              EDIT: And in reality, Phoenix is giving him closer to 3/14M, so the Pacers or any other team would have needed to put in an even pricer bid to get him.
              4.3mil a year for Scola is pretty much free, 4.3mil for a guy like West would also be pretty much free, having either player for that amount of money to come off the bench is a good deal in my opinion.
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Keeping David West

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                You are looking at this way too black and white IMO. Yes he is older and yes he is going to be a free agent, but that doesn't mean that a situation won't present itself where you could upgrade the 2 or the 3 and keep West on a reasonable deal. Saying welp, he's a free agent and older so we might as well just throw our hands up in the air and let him walk is not problem solving, that's just accepting the situation.
                The thing to me is that West is not part of the future, why remove either PG or Danny so you can keep him? I think the Pacers need to go younger, they should aim to have multiple players hitting their prime at the same time, without a superstar that is the only hope a team like the Pacers have, Hill, Roy and Paul George are going to hit their primes pretty much at the same time, why not get two young players that can do the same thing?

                Many here talk about the "Detroit way" but forget to mention that the reason why they were so good was because their whole starting unit hit their prime at the same time, that to me is the way to do it.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Keeping David West

                  I guess I didn't realize that almost 10% of the salary cap is pretty much free.
                  Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right. ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Keeping David West

                    I think we keep West. I think it is our full intention of keeping him and I believe that we will sign him to a three year deal for roughly $24M. Daivd West has a game that translates extremely well as he ages. He can play Center minutes as he gets older as well.

                    His rebounding and defense aren't nearly as bad as what is being conveyed. He is an excellent team defender with his rotations and always making the right decisions. He lacked lateral quickness last year, which hurt him more than anything, but that is more a result of his knee injury and improves with time. He isn't going to block a ton of shots either. But he is light years better than Troy Murphy on defense and more conducive to our team concept on offense as well. Troy was never in DWest's ball park. David West is a good rebounder, but he is better for our team as a rebounder. We have long wings who rebound well. And we have a giant in the middle who rebounds high up. What we get from West is the tough rebounds where he bodies guys out of the lane. He frees up the other guys for rebounds a lot that he doesn't get credit for in the box score.

                    What he does is fit our team perfectly style wise. He runs that high to low post game wonderfully well on offense. He passes very well and moves without the ball to compensate for defensive rotations. He fills the lane. He hits the outside jumper that none of our other bigs can. He bodies up other players on defense better than anyone else on our team. Did you see Lebron James trying with all of his might to fight against West in the post? He might be a bit slower than he used to be, but speed has never been a great skill of his. He is strong and tough and that is the primary thing we need from the PF spot as this team is constructed.

                    David West is worth more to this team than he would be to other teams because of the way he fits the roster. He covers skill sets that we wouldn't other wise have. We would be dumb as a franchise to not pursue signing a very capable player who CHOSE US AS A FREE AGENT! We all complain about that, and we are a franchise that needs to convey loyalty. I'm not saying make all decisions on loyalty per se, but I think it would be a slap in the face to other free agents who would even consider Indy. He is mature and a family man. That can't be stated enough. He fits Indy. He isn't some young hot shot who wants to go get laid at 5 in the morning at clubs with skanky women. Those guys play in NYC and LA and Miami.

                    The only way I don't see us re-signing him is if he gets injured this year and we trade his expiring contract.
                    "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


                    • Re: Keeping David West

                      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post

                      Didn't West get offered more guaranteed money by the Celtics already? 3 years, 27 million? And he turned it down...so...

                      Also, I think Battier is a much better defensive player than Bosh, and Bosh would have been guarding Hibbert anyway as he was for all of game 1 before his injury.
                      off topic, but are you sure it was 27 mil? i was under impression it was 8 mil per

                      Comment


                      • Re: Keeping David West

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        The thing to me is that West is not part of the future, why remove either PG or Danny so you can keep him? I think the Pacers need to go younger, they should aim to have multiple players hitting their prime at the same time, without a superstar that is the only hope a team like the Pacers have, Hill, Roy and Paul George are going to hit their primes pretty much at the same time, why not get two young players that can do the same thing?

                        Many here talk about the "Detroit way" but forget to mention that the reason why they were so good was because their whole starting unit hit their prime at the same time, that to me is the way to do it.
                        Rasheed was hitting his prime the same time as the rest of Detroit's starting 5?


                        Comment


                        • Re: Keeping David West

                          Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                          off topic, but are you sure it was 27 mil? i was under impression it was 8 mil per
                          I don't remmeber for certain, but I thought it was 9mil per.


                          Comment


                          • Re: Keeping David West

                            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                            Rasheed was hitting his prime the same time as the rest of Detroit's starting 5?
                            Not hitting his prime but he was in his prime, he was 29 years old when he went to Detroit.



                            edit: And the Celtics offer to West was 27/29 mil for 3 years but the deal didn't go through because the Celtics were not able to find a taker for JO's expiring contract, if the Celtics would have found a taker West would be a Celtic and not a Pacer.

                            http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/e...48484/33779836
                            Last edited by vnzla81; 10-10-2012, 12:30 PM.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Keeping David West

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              Not hitting his prime but he was in his prime, he was 29 years old when he went to Detroit.



                              edit: And the Celtics offer to West was 27/29 mil for 3 years but the deal didn't go through because the Celtics were not able to find a taker for JO's expiring contract, if the Celtics would have found a taker West would be a Celtic and not a Pacer.

                              http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/e...48484/33779836
                              In spite of your link, IIRC didnt West go on record saying he didnt have anything done with Boston and that he was coming here regardless? Wasn't that why Ray Allen got mad or whatever?

                              Comment


                              • Re: Keeping David West

                                Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                                In spite of your link, IIRC didnt West go on record saying he didnt have anything done with Boston and that he was coming here regardless? Wasn't that why Ray Allen got mad or whatever?
                                That's my memory of it as well.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X