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

Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

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

  • #61
    Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

    Originally posted by shags View Post
    What I mean though is that the Pacers will use $4 to $5 million of their cap space to give Hill an increase on his $8 million salary next season, and then give him the max raises for 2 to 3 additional years.

    It depends on what kind of season Hill has.
    I don't think you're allowed to do that but I may be wrong. I think that there is a max raise that a player can sign in an extension that's far less then what they can sign as a free agent.
    I looked it up and this is what I found.
    Hill could only sign up to 3 years for an extension as opposed to 5 years as a free agent. The worst issue would be that the extension is limited to 107.5% of his 8 mil salary from the prior year. He'll get a lot more then that as a free agent IMO so I doubt if he'd be willing to sign an extension.



    Under the current system, Curry would only be eligible for an extension on the third anniversary from when the contract was signed. However, he would never do so because a) he could only extend for three years rather than getting a new five-year contract as a free agent and b) the extension could only start at 107.5 percent of his prior salary, approximately half of the maximum he will likely be able to earn on a yearly basis by 2017 with the cap increases. Under the current system, Curry has no choice but to actually reach free agency, at which point anything could happen. http://www.basketballinsiders.com/how-to-reform-nba-contract-extensions/
    Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

      Originally posted by docpaul View Post
      The press session with Bird said so much in so few words/comments. Another fantastic example of how Bird is so transparent in his plans. Anyone talking about him as tricky, indirect, or evasive baffles me.

      Solo had the proverbial keys to the car dropped in his lap last year. He wasn't fully ready for that. To come out from this most recent offseason, ill-prepared and clearly not conditioned to take that next leap says that he either doesn't have it in him, or doesn't want to be on this team any longer. This was essentially what Bird alluded to.

      Time to cut bait, straight up.

      Feels like BRush all over again.


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
      Perhaps you might want to compare his quotes in my signature to what he actually did a few weeks later.
      Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

        Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
        Perhaps you might want to compare his quotes in my signature to what he actually did a few weeks later.
        Check the tense of what he said. The quote referred to his decisions at the start of last season, not his sentiment at the time necessarily... at least that's how I read it.



        Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

          Originally posted by docpaul View Post
          Check the tense of what he said. The quote referred to his decisions at the start of last season, not his sentiment at the time necessarily... at least that's how I read it.



          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
          He may have been talking about the prior summer with the word "wanted" but everything else is obviously referring to this past summer. He certainly isn't being transparent or honest in saying that he liked his guys then talking about what was a current win streak at the time (March 25th 2015) of the comments in that they're playing well and we'll be right back where we where if Paul comes back healthy. If you read the article he's talking about keeping the team together. Then he goes in a completely different direction. Prior to this past summer I would have agreed with your comments in that you could take Bird for his word. I don't know what to expect from what he says now.
          Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

            Originally posted by docpaul View Post
            The press session with Bird said so much in so few words/comments. Another fantastic example of how Bird is so transparent in his plans. Anyone talking about him as tricky, indirect, or evasive baffles me.

            Solo had the proverbial keys to the car dropped in his lap last year. He wasn't fully ready for that. To come out from this most recent offseason, ill-prepared and clearly not conditioned to take that next leap says that he either doesn't have it in him, or doesn't want to be on this team any longer. This was essentially what Bird alluded to.

            Time to cut bait, straight up.

            Feels like BRush all over again.


            Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
            I also thought that the writing on the wall was obvious in Solo's case. Oh well. A wasted first rounder is never a good thing, even a low first rounder, but win some lose some.

            I agree with LG33 that picking up Little Dog probably was a factor in letting Solo go. A prospect they like better playing the same position... Solo wasn't going to get any more developmental minutes. Not that I feel that sorry for Solo. He got a ton of minutes last year, and still couldn't cement his place on the team.

            I'm just a little surprised that we haven't tried Solo more as a 4, in the same role that CJ is now playing. Or maybe we did in practice and it wasn't working.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

              Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
              Sounds like it is a sign of TPTB don't think Solo is ever going to learn to shoot.
              Solo is good shooter, But the thing he lacks is jump shooting. He is good shooter when shoots from the ground, but he is too short to shoot like that and it makes him too uncomfortable to shoot at high level against long armed wing defenders.

              Jimmy Butler shoots decent because of his jump shooting despite similar frame with Solo.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

                Still don't understand the logic on this one. That option was cheap. Doesn't look like Solo's being a locker room problem, the guys gave him a lot of love when he came out.

                If he'd hit that three from the corner, the roof would have come off.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

                  Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                  Still don't understand the logic on this one. That option was cheap. Doesn't look like Solo's being a locker room problem, the guys gave him a lot of love when he came out.

                  If he'd hit that three from the corner, the roof would have come off.
                  Just a guess, but it is simply the fact that Solo cannot make the 3. And doesn't show any sign of ever being able to do so. With the Pacers making an emphasis of spacing the floor, the rest of his skill set is not enough.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

                    Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                    I'm just a little surprised that we haven't tried Solo more as a 4, in the same role that CJ is now playing. Or maybe we did in practice and it wasn't working.

                    Worked pretty good last night on Mirotic.
                    {o,o}
                    |)__)
                    -"-"-

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

                      Originally posted by owl View Post
                      Worked pretty good last night on Mirotic.
                      Well, if he can continue to that, as well as work on his outside shooting, he'll have a spot in the league. Maybe here or maybe somewhere else. Btw declining his option doesn't mean that we can't sign him to a new contract.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

                        If they had faith in Whittington or Christmas were ready then Solo would not have seen the floor and that's with saying Jordan Hill is still out. The other 3's are better (well Budinger and GR3 anyway) and he got minutes because he could play the 4 in a pinch. I'm not sure what sort of timeline is on Rakeem, if it's later this season or next season but I'm guessing that's where Solo's spot goes.
                        "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

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

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

                          I realize there aren't a lot of people living on Solo island with me, but I really like him as a player. Even with Chase improving his play a bit of late, I still prefer Solo get those minutes. Solo reminds me of McKey quite a bit in that he seems to just make under the radar plays that help the team win games.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

                            Originally posted by Wage View Post
                            I realize there aren't a lot of people living on Solo island with me, but I really like him as a player. Even with Chase improving his play a bit of late, I still prefer Solo get those minutes. Solo reminds me of McKey quite a bit in that he seems to just make under the radar plays that help the team win games.
                            I like Solo, but it is clear he has a diminishing role with us. He is decent against big lineups if we are dealing with injuries, but aside from this he is an odd man out.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

                              Mark Stein says Solo is on the market.

                              The Pacers, amid their stunning 12-5 start, have made swingman Solomon Hill available via trade, according to league sources. A first-round draftee as recently as 2013, Hill is out there after falling out of favor in Indiana despite playing in all 82 games last season and averaging 29.0 minutes in 2014-15 for the old, plodding Pacers
                              http://espn.go.com/blog/marc-stein/p...o-olympics-cut

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Prediction time: Solo's 4th year option

                                If Bird is able to steal something of value for Solo, I'd be both shocked and amazed.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X