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

2004-02-26 [Read at your own risk]

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

  • 2004-02-26 [Read at your own risk]

    Lakers' run could be coming to an end
    By Chad Ford
    NBA Insider
    Send an Email to Chad Ford Wednesday, February 25
    Updated: February 26
    10:54 AM ET

    Begin dream sequence: It's July 14, 2004.

    Kobe Bryant has just announced he'll be leaving the Lakers to sign with the
    cross-town rival Clippers.

    Phil Jackson, unable to get the big bucks he wants in his contract extension,
    hops on his Hog and rides off into the sunset toward Jackson Hole, Wyo.
    Gary Payton and Karl Malone already have fled for the hills. Both took huge pay
    cuts to come and play for a potential world championship in Los Angeles. With
    Phil and Kobe gone, both guys begin their quest for a team with more money and a
    better shot at a title in 2005.

    The once-mighty Lakers now look something like this: Derek Fisher at the point,
    Kareem Rush at the two, Devean George and Rick Fox at small forward, Brian Cook
    at the four and the mighty Shaquille O'Neal looking bewildered in the middle of
    this crap.

    The phone rings ... it's Shaq. He isn't happy.

    End dream sequence, with Lakers owner Jerry Buss waking up in a cold sweat.


    Buss' beloved Lakers once looked destined to run roughshod over the NBA this
    season. The combo of Payton, Kobe, Malone and Shaq gave the Lakers one of the
    most dominant starting fives in the history of the NBA. They had power, speed,
    athleticism and veteran leadership. But a season of injuries, controversy and
    uninspired play have destroyed any notion that the Lakers are locks for the NBA
    title.

    Kobe's eyes are wandering, should he ever get out of his legal mess in Colorado.
    Phil seems in desperate need of a pick-me-up from Dr. Phil. Payton is calling
    L.A. a circus. The Mailman hasn't delivered in months. And Shaq is starting to
    look a little human as his body struggles to handle the pounding of the NBA
    season.

    How quickly the best of times disintegrate into the worst of times.

    As the Lakers Turn

    The Lakers' problems have been well documented this season and seemingly get
    rehashed, by the Lakers themselves, daily.

    Wednesday, Kobe told reporters in Denver that "at the end of the season I'm
    really going to sit down and evaluate every option, break down every team.
    Denver is one of them."

    He also threw some love in the direction of Nuggets GM Kiki Vandeweghe after
    Vandeweghe pled with Nuggets fans to go easy on Kobe.

    "I appreciate that," he said. "I appreciate his support. That is something that
    he didn't have to do, but he did it. That shows a lot of support on his part. I
    really appreciate that. It goes a long way with me."

    Shaq was in rare form as well, criticizing Lakers GM Mitch Kupchak for not
    giving him an extension at Shaq's going rate. The two sides reportedly are
    nearly $10 million per season apart on the contract.

    "The general manager we have needs to take notes from me," Shaq said. "It's a
    fact. Because if I was general manager, with a team like this, there'd be no
    problems. No problems with the Diesel, no problems with the coach, no problems
    with the Kobester, no problems with the owner."

    Did we mention that Jackson on Sunday began laying out the conditions upon which
    he might leave the Lakers this summer?

    "My deal all along with this club has been how willing are the players to work
    under the duration of how long I stay and coach?" Jackson said. "It's reciprocal
    in that direction. If these guys are willing to do the work that's necessary for
    me to coach, then I have no problem. If they make it difficult for me to coach,
    then I don't want to put up with it."

    Did anyone bother to tell the Lakers there are still 25 games to go in the
    regular season?

    Trade Shaq?

    Let's just go ahead and fast forward to the future. There is a very good chance,
    if you listen to those close to Kobe, that he'll flee the Lakers this summer in
    an effort to find himself and prove he can win a title without Shaq. There's
    also a very good chance, if you listen to Phil, that he, too, may be at the end
    of his rope. The constant turmoil in L.A. has taken his toll. If Jackson still
    wants to coach, why not do it somewhere more peaceful?

    If Kobe and Phil bolt, what happens next has been less speculated. Payton and
    Malone already are giving indications they may leave the Lakers this summer --
    even if Kobe and Phil stick around. The constant pain of dealing with the media
    circus has worn them raw. Going from the serene hills of Salt Lake to the smoggy
    press in L.A. was probably enough to put Malone on the IL without the knee
    injury.

    If Kobe, Phil, Payton and Malone are all gone -- and that's a lot more likely
    than you want to believe, Laker fans -- Buss has a serious problem.

    He'll be left with Shaq, still the most dominant player in the NBA, but no real
    players or cap space.

    Shaq makes so much money ($28 million next year) that he almost single-handedly
    puts the Lakers over the cap. Even once you trim Kobe, Payton and Malone from
    the roster, the team is still a paltry $700,000 under the cap this summer. It
    will be difficult -- no, impossible -- to replace the three Lakers' starters
    with that.

    Figure in Shaq's desire for an extension, without a pay cut, and his declining
    production brought on by age and injuries, and the Lakers will be stuck with the
    most difficult decision a team has had to face in the last decade -- is it be
    time to trade Shaq?

    I can tell you this. GMs already are circling the Staples Center like vultures.
    Many of them have seen the writing on the wall and believe the future will
    unfold much as we have just written here.

    GMs already are laying plans to woo Kobe, based on intel they're getting from
    Kobe's camp. A few other GMs already are dreaming about what it may take to pry
    away Shaq.

    Are we getting ahead of ourselves here? Would Buss ever trade him?

    "He'd be crazy to," one league executive told Insider. "I think there are only
    two or three players in this league that are untradeable, and Shaq is one of
    them. We had these same questions in Chicago when it was clear that the Bulls
    dynasty was at an end. I still believe that Shaq is the piece that you build
    around. If you can find one more good piece, you're right back on the road to a
    championship."

    You can clearly make an argument that Shaq, alongside any supporting cast, is
    good enough to get a team to the playoffs. He remains the one player in the
    league for whom no team has an answer. But with no cap room, a low draft pick
    and few, if any, tradeable assets, can Shaq do it alone?

    Another GM has a very different take. "Shaq's trade value begins slipping every
    year now. He's getting older, his body has all kinds of aches and pains, and his
    motivation just isn't what it was. I think you trade him now, while he can still
    bring you a young all-star or two in return. Otherwise, if things get worse in
    L.A., you're going to be stuck."

    Nowitzki for Shaq?

    What could you get for Shaq? Would the Mavs give up Dirk Nowitzki and Steve
    Nash? Laugh all you want Mavs fans, but a combo of Michael Finley, Antoine
    Walker, Antawn Jamison and Shaq would still be enough to easily make the Mavs
    favorites for the NBA crown.

    Would the Pacers trade a much younger Jermaine O'Neal and perhaps a young player
    like Al Harrington or Jonathan Bender in return for Shaq? Before you scoff at
    it, Pacers fans, Larry Bird would be the first to tell you the move would
    install the Pacers as favorites to win a championship in the next two or three
    seasons.

    Would the Kings hand off Chris Webber, Mike Bibby and Vlade Divac for Shaq?
    Would the Nets give up Kenyon Martin and Richard Jefferson? Would the Grizzlies
    give up Pau Gasol, Bonzi Wells and Mike Miller? Would the Nuggets part ways with
    Carmelo Anthony, Nene and Marcus Camby?

    The possibilities are endless and here's why:

    "With a healthy, motivated Shaq, you're one really good player away from winning
    an NBA title," another GM told Insider. "I really believe that. The Lakers may
    be the only team in the league who wouldn't have the flexibility to pair Shaq
    with someone else if Kobe and those guys all leave. Everyone else, assuming you
    could keep one good player on your roster, becomes the team to beat. That's how
    dominant he is. And that's how hungry everyone is to bring home a NBA title."

    Begin dream sequence ...

    While thoughts of Shaq playing in Dallas, Indiana, Sacramento, New Jersey and
    Memphis dance inside GMs' heads ... Buss is having a different dream.

    The Lakers have just won an NBA Championship. Kobe looks around and decides that
    playing with the Lakers -- not the Clippers, Suns, Spurs or Nuggets -- is where
    he really belongs. Phil signs on to be the ring leader a few more years. Gary
    and Karl, basking in the glow of their first NBA championship, see their
    sacrifice rewarded with that coveted ring. Shaq follows Kevin Garnett's lead and
    takes a hefty pay cut to ensure Laker dominance for the rest of the decade.

    Everyone lives happily ever after.

    Sleep tight Jerry. We won't bother waking you until it's over.


    Around the League

    McDyess a Net? Antonio McDyess will be an unrestricted free agent this summer.
    From the sound of things, he may already know where he wants to play next.
    McDyess has a great relationship with Jason Kidd and said Wednesday he'd love to
    hook up with Kidd again.

    "That would be great, definitely would be great," McDyess told the N.Y. Daily
    News. "Who wouldn't want to play with Jason Kidd, who I'd say is the best point
    guard in the league? To play with him again would be great; to get up the court
    with him, getting easy baskets. It just makes things so much easier. It would be
    good if it ever happens."

    The Nets won't have cap room to sign a free agent straight away, but they could
    throw all or a part of their mid-level exception (roughly $5 million next year)
    his way. It's unlikely McDyess, with his history of knee troubles, will command
    anything more than that on the open market.

    Negotiations with restricted free agent Kenyon Martin are expected to turn ugly
    this summer, and McDyess could be the insurance Rod Thorn needs to take a hard
    line on Martin.

    Will Damp opt out? One of the bigger questions heading into free agency this
    summer surrounds Warriors center Erick Dampier. Dampier has two more years, at
    more than $8 million per, left on his contract, but he can opt out this summer
    and become an unrestricted free agent.

    With as many as six teams now looking at $9 million-plus in cap room, there
    seems to enough cash in the market for Dampier to get a better deal. But
    questions about his creaky knees and his lack of inspired play before this
    season will make GMs think twice before inking him to a big deal.

    So does Damp play it safe and collect the last two years of his contract, or
    does he take the advice of new agent Dan Fegan and opt out?

    Dampier claims that at this point in his career the most important thing is
    winning.

    "I haven't been to the playoffs, and I'm not getting any younger," he told the
    Indianapolis Star. "I'm to the point now where I want to win games."

    Dampier claims if he does opt out, he'd like to return to the Eastern
    Conference, where the trees in the middle are little easier to cut down.

    "I'd have a chance to be an All-Star," he said. "How many centers are there in
    the East? Not to take anything away from Jamaal Magloire. But he made the
    All-Star team in the East, so I know I can definitely (succeed)."

    Who would have the money to pay Dampier? The Hawks, Bobcats and Pistons are the
    only Eastern Conference teams with enough cash to give Dampier the type of deal
    he's looking for. Unfortunately the Hawks and Bobcats won't give him the playoff
    appearances he's looking for, and the Pistons have all their off-season money
    earmarked for Mehmet Okur and Rasheed Wallace.

    In the West, the Jazz, Nuggets, Clippers and Spurs will have a lot of cash, and
    there figures to be interest from all four teams.

    If Dampier was willing to take a paycut (to the $5 million, mid-level exception)
    to play for a contender (unlikely when you consider who he just hired as his
    agent) then teams like the Pacers, Mavericks and Knicks quickly move into the
    picture.

    Hawks dump Glover: The Hawks continued their housecleaning Wednesday when they
    waived Dion Glover. Glover asked to be released after practice on Wednesday. He
    was upset about losing his starting job to rookie Boris Diaw after the Hawks
    traded away Shareef Abdur-Rahim and Theo Ratliff.

    A source close to the Hawks told Insider recently that Glover, along with point
    guard Jason Terry, were among the most disruptive players on the team. Glover
    should clear waivers by Friday and be free to join a team of his choosing.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


  • #2
    Re: 2004-02-26 [Read at your own risk]

    Once BYC's clear, JO + Al + JB = Shaq in salary, fyi.

    That would leave us as something like this:

    Tinsley/Johnson
    Miller/Jones
    Artest/J.Jones
    Foster/Croshere
    O'Neal/Pollard

    Umm.... as awful as that trade sounds, we could still win a title pretty easily. Our backcourt is the same, we still have Artest, and we have SHAQ.

    I mean, you wouldn't know until you saw it on the floor, but...

    Imagine the cartwheels this coaching staff would be doing playing the percentages game with SHAQ

    I don't know.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 2004-02-26 [Read at your own risk]

      So we get 40 games next year out of Shaq (since he's rapidly becoming the league's single largest p****). Then we're also admitting that were making a one-year-run since Reggie won't last any longer than that, and we wouldn't have any trade or payroll flexibility with Shaq. We're also handing away the young core of our team, all of which should have trade value if we ever decided to trade them. Plus, I doubt he would have any motivation to play here, so you would be lucky to even get 40 games. I'll pass.
      I agree. You offer me Shaq three years ago I take it in a heart beat. The thing that gives me hope with the Pacers chances in the years to come, Is that they are pretty much done rebuilding right when Shaq's production is starting to fall off a cliff. I think he will retire in a couple of years.

      Of course he could get motivated and decide to loose weight and storm the NBA again. I am just not willing to bet the farm on it.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 2004-02-26 [Read at your own risk]

        NO.. I HATE THE GUY. I would NOT cheer for the pacers again.
        Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

        Comment

        Working...
        X