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

The Kawhi Leonard trade

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

  • #46
    Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

    Leonard is indeed more comparable to a Paul George level talent. I love the armchair GM's who would've picked him in the top five where professionals who do this for living picked him at #15. You win some you lose some we got Paul George and Danny Granger they got Leonard.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

      It's going to haunt us forever. We'll always see Kawhi and think what could have been.

      But.

      In the end I can't blame the Pacers front office. Really.

      If Danny never got injured? I have zero doubt in my mind the Pacers would have won the championship in 12-13. They would have. And if they had? No one could look back at and say, "bad move."

      But. Like I said. Sucks. Oh well.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

        Originally posted by BigMac View Post
        Every time I see his name about doing anything well or receiving an award or winning something I get mad. Then I think about who we got in return and I'm no longer mad. Can you imagine this team without George Hill? When I do I don't see the success we are having. Anyone else think the same when thinking about the trade?
        We didn't totally screwed and at least got enough asset in return. I think GH isn't far behind from Kyle Lowry. Calm down man we all have that kind of feeling such as mine about picked Tyler Hans over Jeff Teague or Jrue Holiday.
        Last edited by funk31; 04-25-2015, 11:50 AM.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

          Originally posted by funk31 View Post
          We didn't totally screwed and alt least got enough asset in return. I think GH isn't far behind from Kyle Lowry. Calm down man we all have that kind of feeling such as mine about picked Tyler Hans over Jeff Teague or Jrue Holiday.

          Or picking Plums over Green. But I totally agree, the Hans pick ranks up there with the Williams and White picks. B. Rush is probably there also. Williams probably wouldn't have been bad if he would have stayed out of trouble.


          Ideally what would have been nice would have been to keep KL and sign G. Hill the following year. Oh the dream.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
            There are indeed worse contracts than George Hill. He's pretty fairly paid IMO.

            As for his year, it was very good...but Hill played half the year, was extremely well rested and was the #1 option on the team when he did play. Guys like Teague and Conley...who got their numbers in the context of far more competitive games while sharing the ball with players like Zbo, Horford, Gasol and Millsap....were not the #1 option on their teams.

            Dragic averaged over 20ppg last year when he was the #1 option. This year Dragic had to share the ball with DWade, Bosh and Deng yet still somehow scored over 16ppg. I just don't believe Hill scores like that in the same situation.

            Not saying I don't like George Hill. I just don't think he's quite where Dragic is offensively and I don't think he's at Teague's level. Conley is probably better but a pretty decent comparison to Hill.
            I dont went to drag down this thread, but I'll just say if you look at the shot attempts per game between the guys I just mentioned, they're all about the same - only seperater by decimal points. So they were all about the same when it comes to offensive opportunities. The other guys had a luxury of getting better looks while the defense was occupied with other options.

            The fact that we won at a .600 clip when George played, I 100% disagree with dismissing his season because of our record. But I understand why you would, because it supports your bias.

            I won't day anything else on the matter here though, because its not the place.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

              Originally posted by imawhat View Post
              For the 1,000th time, the Pacers were going to select Leonard. It was not done just for San Antonio, and that's been repeated ad nauseam (or at least I thought it had been). The Pacers really struggled with whether or not to keep Leonard.

              I love George Hill, but I hated the trade then and I still hate it. I was as certain that Leonard would be successful as I have been for anyone. I don't buy the Spurs development argument at all. He would've been very good/great no matter where he went.

              Who cares that we had Granger and Paul George. We're a small market team that can't afford to turn away talent, no matter how much overlap there is. Plus strategically, it made so much more sense to have Leonard to guard LeBron.
              You must have seen something that basically nobody else saw. If you look in most places, his favorable NBA comparison was Gerald Wallace.

              Yes it was easy to see his defense translate over. But he played a lot of 4 in college and there were questions how well he would fare offensively

              NBAdraft.net:http://www.nbadraft.net/players/kawhi-leonard

              Gerald Wallace/Much Richard Mbah a Moute

              Draft express.com: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Kawhi-Leonard-5821/.

              They were closer with the comparison to Shawn Marion

              http://walterfootball.com/nbascoutin...11kleonard.php

              This one says Trevor Ariza.
              Last edited by Ace E.Anderson; 04-25-2015, 12:31 PM.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

                Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                You must have seen something that basically nobody else saw. If you look in most places, his favorable NBA comparison was Gerald Wallace.

                Yes it was easy to see his defense translate over. But he played a lot of 4 in college and there were questions how well he would fare offensively

                NBAdraft.net:http://www.nbadraft.net/players/kawhi-leonard

                Draft express.com: http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Kawhi-Leonard-5821/.

                They were a bit closer with the comparison to Shawn Marion

                http://walterfootball.com/nbascoutin...11kleonard.php
                It's pretty clear that Leonard has turned into a much better pro then what was expected. Draft is always a crapshoot, and you never know how players will translate as NBA players
                Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

                  Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                  I dont went to drag down this thread, but I'll just say if you look at the shot attempts per game between the guys I just mentioned, they're all about the same - only seperater by decimal points. So they were all about the same when it comes to offensive opportunities. The other guys had a luxury of getting better looks while the defense was occupied with other options.

                  The fact that we won at a .600 clip when George played, I 100% disagree with dismissing his season because of our record. But I understand why you would, because it supports your bias.

                  I won't day anything else on the matter here though, because its not the place.
                  Fair enough. When George cracks 20ppg or he produces 16ppg on a contender, he will get into the all-star conversation and fans across the league will take notice. That's what it took for Teague and I think that holds for any player. The fact I don't consider him an all-star (which he is not) doesn't mean I don't like him as a starter on the Pacers (which I do). Peace-out.
                  Last edited by BlueNGold; 04-25-2015, 12:50 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

                    Leonard is only 23 years old. Hill turns 29 in a couple weeks. While I do not fault the Pacers and they picked up a good asset at #15, it's obvious that was a huge win for the Spurs. All I know is that only a few players will get that kind of reaction from LeBron while entering the game.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

                      pls Larry choose another unknown great talent like PG, Kawhi, Jeff Teague in June.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

                        Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                        This is a completely fair question, and I love having Hill.

                        But I sure as hell would've liked to have been able to find out if Kawhi could become this here.
                        Oh absolutely. I love what George Hill has done here. But if I have a time machine I'm going back to undo that trade LOL.

                        I just don't get the revisionist history that Kawhi was some obvious superstar that somehow dropped to #15 (meaning basically half the league missed on him). He wasn't. It's a testament though to both his own work ethic/innate talent, as well as the Spurs' development process, that he's the player that he is today. People who crave high draft picks please take note. It IS possible for a player to become much more than what he is on draft day.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

                          One thing that I think people miss: Kawhi isn't the most durable guy. I think on a lot of teams he might have missed more time because they would let him play with minor injuries more often.

                          But over the past 4 years Duncan and Parker have played more games than him. Ginobili has played only 20 games fewer than Kawhi. So their 23 year old is essentially playing at the pace of their guys 10 years and older, but missing more time than all but the most injury prone one.

                          And a healthy Duncan played 77 games this season, so factor in the games missed due to rest to about 5.
                          Time for a new sig.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

                            Originally posted by yoadknux View Post
                            It's true, even though Kawhi won the Finals MVP and DPOY, George Hill managed to lead us to the 9th seed, tremendous success. It makes up for it big time.

                            I like reading the excuses here, "both teams won the trade", "we didn't need him". The bottom line is that we traded for a player who ended up our 4th (or 5th) most important starter (on the team that actually meant something) and they traded for a player who would excel when they needed him the most and develop into one of the better two way players in the league, slowly closing in on our great Paul George.

                            Truth be told, we did have Paul George as the flashy prospect and Danny as the star of the team, so at that time we did not have a need for Leonard. We probably drafted him because the Spurs told us to to complete the deal. With all that, saying the trade worked for us like it did for the Spurs is delusional.
                            Ummmmm...did I miss something? Is Kawhi the superstar or a damn good player on a team that's well oiled and coach?

                            Not to take anything from the player, but Pop is one hell of coach.


                            Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

                              Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                              Ummmmm...did I miss something? Is Kawhi the superstar or a damn good player on a team that's well oiled and coach?
                              Being the Finals MVP after going head to head vs. Lebron and being the best player on a team that has a good chance to repeat their championship qualifies you as a superstar.

                              Pop is great, but lets not pretend that every good/decent player he's coached has turned anywhere near what Kawhi has turned into.
                              Last edited by d_c; 04-25-2015, 05:08 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: The Kawhi Leonard trade

                                Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                                One thing that I think people miss: Kawhi isn't the most durable guy. I think on a lot of teams he might have missed more time because they would let him play with minor injuries more often.

                                But over the past 4 years Duncan and Parker have played more games than him. Ginobili has played only 20 games fewer than Kawhi. So their 23 year old is essentially playing at the pace of their guys 10 years and older, but missing more time than all but the most injury prone one.

                                And a healthy Duncan played 77 games this season, so factor in the games missed due to rest to about 5.
                                And durability is a fair criticism of Leonard. It's the reason he hasn't made an all star team.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X