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

Dallas & the Expansion Draft

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Dallas & the Expansion Draft

    For those just seeing one of these, I'm going team by team thru the entire league & taking a closer look at each teams roster, free agent list & possible protected list for the expansion draft coming up in June.

    The info I'm using comes from the following sites.

    From NBA.com, a story on the Bobcats draft.
    http://www.nba.com/bobcats/news/expansion_draft.html

    This paragraph has the basic info.

    Charlotte will receive lists from each of the 27 teams not competing in the NBA Finals 10 days prior to the scheduled Expansion Draft (June 12) and those from the competing teams in the Finals within two days of the conclusion of the Finals. Team lists will designate a maximum of eight protected players for that team’s players under contract or restricted free agents for the 2004-05 NBA season. The unprotected players are eligible for selection by the Bobcats, who will draft a minimum of 14 players from NBA rosters.

    Free agent info from REAL GM.
    http://www.realgm.com/src_freeagents.php?year=2004

    Salary info from Hoops Hype.
    http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/dallas.htm

    Here is the roster for the Dallas Mavericks

    Antoine Walker
    Michael Finley
    Dirk Nowitzki
    Antawn Jamison
    Tariq Abdul-Wahad
    Steve Nash
    Danny Fortson
    Shawn Bradley
    Eduardo Najera
    Tony Delk
    Travis Best
    Josh Howard
    Scott Williams
    Jon Stefansson
    Marquis Daniels

    Of the 15 players on the Dallas roster, 3 fall into the free agent catagory. Jon Stefansson is listed on REAL GM as being signed thru the 07-08 season, that is a big surprise to me. The Mav's can protect 8 of the 12 on their payroll for next season.

    I've heard different reports on Nash. Hoops Hype list him as having a "player option" for next season & REAL GM kindda backs that up when they don't name him amongst the Mav's free agents. I have read where some teams (Phoenix for one) will be trying to sign him this summer. As of now I will not consider him a free agent.

    Under contract for 2004-2005

    Antoine Walker ------- $14,625,000
    Michael Finley --------- $14,609,375
    Dirk Nowitzki ---------- $12,584,688
    Antawn Jamison ------ $12,584,688
    Tariq Abdul-Wahad --- $ 6,750,000
    Steve Nash ------------- $ 5,750,000
    Danny Fortson --------- $ 5,922,078
    Shawn Bradley --------- $ 4,000,000
    Eduardo Najera -------- $ 3,809,525
    Tony Delk ---------------- $ 3,150,000
    Josh Howard -------------- $ 823,640
    Jon Stefansson ----------- Not Listed

    Free agents

    Travis Best
    Scott Williams
    Marquis Daniels

    This is almost too easy.

    Walker, Finley, Nowitzki, Jamison, Nash, Najera & Howard are the 7 that make it without question.

    I think it would be safe to say that Tariq Abdul-Wahad & Jon Stefansson won't make the list.

    The borderline guys would be Danny Fortson, Shawn Bradley & Tony Delk.

    With a payroll next season of more than $84M & Mark Cuban as the owner, money will not be an over riding factor in who gets protected & who doesn't.

    I think the skills that Delk brings to the team can more easily be covered by other players so I would make him the third of the four available to the Bobcats.

    Fortson or Bradley?

    One is protected, one is not.

    I'll give that last spot to Bradley just because at 7-6 he can change the game more than Fortson can. Bradley might cause some team to make a deal with the BobCats to get him. I don't see that happening with Fortson.

    So the guys that Dallas hangs out there for the taking are.....

    Tariq Abdul-Wahad
    Jon Stefansson
    Tony Delk
    Danny Fortson

    Tony Delk is an easy choice for the Bobcats.

    I know he makes a little more than they would like to spend but he has just two years remaining on his deal ($3,150,000 & $3,375,000).

    Like the Kevin Ollie pick up from Cleveland he is a vet that can help tutor the kids that Charlotte will be bringing in.

    The expansion draft to date.

    Atlanta --------- No Pick
    Boston --------- C Kedrick Perkins
    Chicago -------- No Pick
    Cleveland ------ G Kevin Ollie
    Dallas ---------- G Tony Delk

    Next up the Denver Nuggets

    Links to previous threads in this series.

    http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=996
    http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1038
    http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1083
    http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1122
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Dallas & the Expansion Draft

    Btown

    If you come across a link to that please let me know.

    If Nash is taken out of the protected list, Fortson would be my replacement for him.

    That would still leave Delk available for the Bobcats, so in the long run the story ends the same.

    However, I would like the info to be as accurate as possible.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Dallas & the Expansion Draft

      I'm guessing that finances are going to be a major factor in terms of who they leave off. Dallas is going to have to drop some serious coin in order to resign Nash, which will mean they'll have 5 guys making 10-15 million next year (and 4 of them will be on the books for four additional years each).

      Do you think its possible they leave off Jamison? He seems pretty close to untradeable at this point, considering the size of his contract. Although, if they leave him unprotected and the BCats don't take him, they'll have one alienated 6th man...

      What is the BCats salary cap again? 27 million?

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Dallas & the Expansion Draft

        Either way, Dallas is in good shape.
        http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/dallas.htm

        They're already stuck with almost $72 million worth of salary for 2006/2007, PLUS Nash!

        That's a little bloated, no? Regardless of how wealthy Cuban is...

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Dallas & the Expansion Draft

          Either way, Dallas is in good shape.
          http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/dallas.htm

          They're already stuck with almost $72 million worth of salary for 2006/2007, PLUS Nash!

          That's a little bloated, no? Regardless of how wealthy Cuban is...
          the guy is a billionaire several times over . . . I don't think he is sweating it, actually . . .

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Dallas & the Expansion Draft

            For those just seeing one of these, I'm going team by team thru the entire league & taking a closer look at each teams roster, free agent list & possible protected list for the expansion draft coming up in June.

            The info I'm using comes from the following sites.

            From NBA.com, a story on the Bobcats draft.
            http://www.nba.com/bobcats/news/expansion_draft.html

            This paragraph has the basic info.

            Charlotte will receive lists from each of the 27 teams not competing in the NBA Finals 10 days prior to the scheduled Expansion Draft (June 12) and those from the competing teams in the Finals within two days of the conclusion of the Finals. Team lists will designate a maximum of eight protected players for that team’s players under contract or restricted free agents for the 2004-05 NBA season. The unprotected players are eligible for selection by the Bobcats, who will draft a minimum of 14 players from NBA rosters.

            Free agent info from REAL GM.
            http://www.realgm.com/src_freeagents.php?year=2004

            Salary info from Hoops Hype.
            http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/dallas.htm

            Here is the roster for the Dallas Mavericks

            Antoine Walker
            Michael Finley
            Dirk Nowitzki
            Antawn Jamison
            Tariq Abdul-Wahad
            Steve Nash
            Danny Fortson
            Shawn Bradley
            Eduardo Najera
            Tony Delk
            Travis Best
            Josh Howard
            Scott Williams
            Jon Stefansson
            Marquis Daniels

            Of the 15 players on the Dallas roster, 3 fall into the free agent catagory. Jon Stefansson is listed on REAL GM as being signed thru the 07-08 season, that is a big surprise to me. The Mav's can protect 8 of the 12 on their payroll for next season.

            I've heard different reports on Nash. Hoops Hype list him as having a "player option" for next season & REAL GM kindda backs that up when they don't name him amongst the Mav's free agents. I have read where some teams (Phoenix for one) will be trying to sign him this summer. As of now I will not consider him a free agent.

            Under contract for 2004-2005

            Antoine Walker ------- $14,625,000
            Michael Finley --------- $14,609,375
            Dirk Nowitzki ---------- $12,584,688
            Antawn Jamison ------ $12,584,688
            Tariq Abdul-Wahad --- $ 6,750,000
            Steve Nash ------------- $ 5,750,000
            Danny Fortson --------- $ 5,922,078
            Shawn Bradley --------- $ 4,000,000
            Eduardo Najera -------- $ 3,809,525
            Tony Delk ---------------- $ 3,150,000
            Josh Howard -------------- $ 823,640
            Jon Stefansson ----------- Not Listed

            Free agents

            Travis Best
            Scott Williams
            Marquis Daniels

            This is almost too easy.

            Walker, Finley, Nowitzki, Jamison, Nash, Najera & Howard are the 7 that make it without question.

            I think it would be safe to say that Tariq Abdul-Wahad & Jon Stefansson won't make the list.

            The borderline guys would be Danny Fortson, Shawn Bradley & Tony Delk.

            With a payroll next season of more than $84M & Mark Cuban as the owner, money will not be an over riding factor in who gets protected & who doesn't.

            I think the skills that Delk brings to the team can more easily be covered by other players so I would make him the third of the four available to the Bobcats.

            Fortson or Bradley?

            One is protected, one is not.

            I'll give that last spot to Bradley just because at 7-6 he can change the game more than Fortson can. Bradley might cause some team to make a deal with the BobCats to get him. I don't see that happening with Fortson.

            So the guys that Dallas hangs out there for the taking are.....

            Tariq Abdul-Wahad
            Jon Stefansson
            Tony Delk
            Danny Fortson

            Tony Delk is an easy choice for the Bobcats.

            I know he makes a little more than they would like to spend but he has just two years remaining on his deal ($3,150,000 & $3,375,000).

            Like the Kevin Ollie pick up from Cleveland he is a vet that can help tutor the kids that Charlotte will be bringing in.

            The expansion draft to date.

            Atlanta --------- No Pick
            Boston --------- C Kedrick Perkins
            Chicago -------- No Pick
            Cleveland ------ G Kevin Ollie
            Dallas ---------- G Tony Delk

            Next up the Denver Nuggets
            another excellent job . . .

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Dallas & the Expansion Draft

              I guess I missed it. Why do you think the Bobcats would pick up Delk over Fortson? I see Fortson as being the more valuable commodity, plus he's a big man, etc.

              I think the skills that Delk brings to the team can more easily be covered by other players that the Bobcats could draft.
              This space for rent.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Dallas & the Expansion Draft

                I guess I missed it. Why do you think the Bobcats would pick up Delk over Fortson? I see Fortson as being the more valuable commodity, plus he's a big man, etc.

                I think the skills that Delk brings to the team can more easily be covered by other players that the Bobcats could draft.
                Fortson is nearly $6M per year, significantly cutting into what the Bobcats can spend next year.

                On the other hand, Delk is a little over $3M.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Dallas & the Expansion Draft

                  Tony Delk makes all the sense in the world on this one as well.

                  Fortson will not be taken, if the Bobcats do any kind of homework on the guy at all, because he has been known to be a cancer in the lockerroom.

                  On a young expansion team they will not need that.

                  Delk is a bargain & could be a solid contributer to them.

                  Atlanta - no pick
                  Boston - Jumaine Jones
                  Chicago - Chris Jeffries
                  Cleveland - Kedrick Brown
                  Dallas - Tony Delk


                  Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Dallas & the Expansion Draft

                    fortson has been a disaster everywhere he played. he's not all that big either (6'8''). the only thing he does is get rebounds. plus, he is a thug - remember the suns rookie he shoved?

                    delk is the only logical choice, if bobcats have to pick one.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Dallas & the Expansion Draft

                      Either way, Dallas is in good shape.
                      http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/dallas.htm

                      They're already stuck with almost $72 million worth of salary for 2006/2007, PLUS Nash!

                      That's a little bloated, no? Regardless of how wealthy Cuban is...
                      Read what I posted. I said they're in good shape regarding the Nash situation.
                      Agreed. I intentionally took the quote out of context to make an additional point about their status. Perhaps I should have made that clearer...

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Dallas & the Expansion Draft

                        Delk makes a lot of sense here.

                        Atlanta - No Pick
                        Boston - Kedrick Perkins
                        Chicago - No Pick _or_ Robinson + Draft Pick
                        Cleveland - No Pick
                        Dallas - Tony Delk
                        Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel

                        Comment

                        Previous template Next
                        Working...
                        X