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

Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

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

  • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

    Originally posted by CableKC View Post
    [/B]
    Why do you think that?

    Every Team that is interested in him will be offering them the MAX. What is different with the Pacers that isn't any different with any other Team that can offer them the same while having only 2 real core Players and a new HC?
    I said that I think either player would want to seriously consider playing with us, not that it's a slam dunk. I know it's still Indiana but we have just as good a chance as any team and better than most to be a destination this summer. If all else is equal on the money then the player is going to look at his future team mates and having Paul George will be huge in tipping the scale our way. If Horford for example has an offer from the Warriors he's going to take it but if it's us or the Lakers or Nets who is he going with. There aren't 29 other teams that have us beat out as a destination. There's no reason to settle for overpaying second tier players and not even try to do better.
    Last edited by Pacerized; 05-27-2016, 08:54 AM.
    Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

    Comment


    • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

      Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
      I said that I think either player would want to seriously consider playing with us, not that it's a slam dunk. I know it's still Indiana but we have just as good a chance as any team and better than most to be a destination this summer. If all else is equal on the money then the player is going to look at his future team mates and having Paul George will be huge in tipping the scale our way. If Horford for example has an offer from the Warriors he's going to take it but if it's us or the Lakers or Nets who is he going with. There aren't 29 other teams that have us beat out as a destination. There's no reason to settle for overpaying second tier players and not even try to do better.
      Not to be an ***..., but I think especially the Lakers would be the wrong example as I see them as a huge destination with regards to "extra-curricular commercial opportunities'' (LOL) for athletes. But, I get what your saying, between chosing the Pacers or the Kings we should have a very legit chance.
      2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

      2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

      2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

      Comment


      • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

        Why does it seem like so many people want someone with magic assist numbers when we don't have guys who can consistently hit shots once they get the ball? Let's get some efficient catch-and-shooters in here and I think the assist numbers for our existing facilitators will go up.
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment


        • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

          Originally posted by BillS View Post
          Why does it seem like so many people want someone with magic assist numbers when we don't have guys who can consistently hit shots once they get the ball? Let's get some efficient catch-and-shooters in here and I think the assist numbers for our existing facilitators will go up.
          People put too much emphasis on individual assist per game averages.

          The 3 years we won championships, our assist leaders were as follows:

          1970-Roger Brown 4.7
          1972-Freddie Lewis 4.7
          1973-Billy Keller 4.3

          Our starting point guard for all 3 seasons was Freddie Lewis. He averaged 3.6, 4.7 and 4.0 assists per game those 3 seasons.
          Last edited by sav; 05-27-2016, 10:32 AM.

          Comment


          • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

            Originally posted by BillS View Post
            Why does it seem like so many people want someone with magic assist numbers when we don't have guys who can consistently hit shots once they get the ball? Let's get some efficient catch-and-shooters in here and I think the assist numbers for our existing facilitators will go up.
            I don't disagree with you, but lets consider a few things. PG has to generate so much offense for himself...

            Leonard is assisted on 52.6 percent of his two-point field goal attempts, and George only 30.3 percent. Likewise, more of George’s three-point attempts come from his own means (65.9 percent assisted to 94 percent for Kawhi).
            http://bballbreakdown.com/2015/12/21...s-paul-george/

            That is just staggering.

            Now we know PG is a good player, at least decent shooter, so imagine how good he could be if he could be assisted at the rate Kawhi is? Who know if it's system or point guard, but a change in assist for PG is a boon right there.

            Second, consider how much PG had to generate for others this season in our offense. He is the offense really. Not a strong dribbler, great vision and playmaking but often makes careless passes. This has to affect the team's shooting as well.

            I know we're just looking at all the open shots missed, but it would also be interesting to see how many open shots we get compared to other teams and how late we're taking jump shots in the shot clock. The offense often lacked rhythm and was stagnant, which even when open, can stifle a shooter.

            Like I said, not saying your wrong. Maybe our guys just can't shoot. But PG may prove we can shoot, our players just need to be in a better position to score. A better point guard , using the point guards we have better, a better system, or some combo of all 3 could fix that.
            Last edited by freddielewis14; 05-27-2016, 10:42 AM.

            Comment


            • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

              Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
              I don't disagree with you, but lets consider a few things. PG has to generate so much offense for himself...



              http://bballbreakdown.com/2015/12/21...s-paul-george/

              That is just staggering.

              Now we know PG is a good player, at least decent shooter, so imagine how good he could be if he could be assisted at the rate Kawhi is? Who know if it's system or point guard, but a change in assist for PG is a boon right there.

              Second, consider how much PG had to generate for others this season in our offense. He is the offense really. Not a strong dribbler, great vision and playmaking but often makes careless passes. This has to affect the team's shooting as well.

              I know we're just looking at all the open shots missed, but it would also be interesting to see how many open shots we get compared to other teams and how late we're taking jump shots in the shot clock. The offense often lacked rhythm and was stagnant, which even when open, can stifle a shooter.

              Like I said, not saying your wrong. Maybe our guys just can't shoot. But PG may prove we can shoot, our players just need to be in a better position to score. A better point guard , using the point guards we have better, a better system, or some combo of all 3 could fix that.
              Those are all valid points, but I don't think they necessarily apply.

              We've watched Paul hold the ball before he drives on someone - that's not going to be an assisted basket no matter what.

              Modern offenses are to get the ball at the perimeter and only drive if the 3-pointer isn't available. Therefore, not some warped system forcing PG not to do something he does well.

              Should Paul, with his ball handling issues, be someone expected to catch the ball while moving toward the basket? I don't think that will work in most cases because all the defense would have to do is force the ball to be passed (by defending the passer) or caught (by blocking easy passing lanes) to Paul in an awkward position. Avoiding that will take a point guard who not only is capable of threading the ball perfectly through defenses but also a play style that gets the ball back into that player's hands before or during the cut to the basket by PG. That's multiple high-level changes to make up for a deficit Paul has in his game.

              Finally, the reason more of Paul's shots are not assisted is because he very, very seldom is a catch-and-shoot player. He nearly always has to take a position after getting the ball and that usually involves putting the ball on the floor.

              Bottom line is that there are a lot of ways we can improve getting the ball to our players, but few of them will result in actual assist numbers.

              I am only using Paul here because you are talking about him as the example of someone who would be improved by an assist leader, not because I think these are some kind of flaw that makes him a bad player or to blame him in any way. I don't see anyone else on our team who is in any better position for improvement from such things, either.

              We would do better to have shooters who can shoot when the get thew ball instead of having to adjust position (allowing a defender to get to them as well) and who are aware of others on the floor who are open when they are defended (something I think Paul has done well, by the way, as shown by his own assist numbers). The latter will improve team assists but an assist specialist is neither going to improve that himself nor will his assist numbers on the Pacers as currently constructed with minimal change be as good as they might have been with his original team.

              ETA: And Kawhi is definitely a catch-and-shoot guy who also benefits from having other strong catch-and-shoot (or positional immediate shot, like guys strong in the post who can get the ball and maintain position for a layup) players on his team.

              EATA: clarify by substituting "point guard" for "PG"
              BillS

              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

              Comment


              • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

                I'm agreeing with all the points about why Batum would be a great fit in Indy, but besides the money question there's the question about whether or not Monta would accept a 6th man role. It's easy just to say that it doesn't matter, he doesn't get to make decisions like that, but having an unhappy Monta with his trade value already so low could really put a damper on any team goals.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

                  Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                  .......but having an unhappy Monta with his trade value already so low could really put a damper on any team goals.
                  How do we know he has a low trade value?

                  I don't recall the team putting him on the market, so is it just a guess based on your view of his performance?

                  Comment


                  • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

                    I believe Nic Batum is represented by Bouna Ndiaye, who is Ian's agent as well. I wonder if that would give us any kind of negotiating leverage?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

                      If Biz gets 17 million, I wonder what the OJ Mayos of the world get. Monta could have good value at 11 mill.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

                        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                        What I like about Batum is his fit with not only Paul, but with Hill and or Monta as well.

                        Since he is more of a playmaker, it will allow Hill/Monta to look to score more. This helped open things up for Kemba and Lin in CHA.

                        Defensively, Batum can matchup with other guys no matter the size. A defensive trio of Hill, Batum and Paul is absolutely deadly. Would probably be the best defensive 1-2-3 lineup in the league.

                        There are certainly major pros and cons to adding Batum.

                        Edit: I don't see any redundancy to Paul at all in Batum. You can never have too many long athletic defenders
                        I get all that, Batum would be a good addition. It's more a question of roster balance. How can we justify spending max money on a wing (our strongest area) when we have gaping holes in other areas of the roster?

                        Unless you suggest Batums playmaking would negate our need for a true point. I could get behind it in that case, I just don't know if I believe in his playmaking quite that much, but I haven't watched the player a ton to be honest.
                        "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                        - ilive4sports

                        Comment


                        • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

                          Paul would be considerably more efficient offensively if he did focus more on getting open for catch & shoot 3's. He is better at that than many give credit but I think his overly ball dominant mindset gets in the way.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

                            Originally posted by BillS View Post
                            Why does it seem like so many people want someone with magic assist numbers when we don't have guys who can consistently hit shots once they get the ball? Let's get some efficient catch-and-shooters in here and I think the assist numbers for our existing facilitators will go up.
                            I sometimes wonder if this forum is haunted by the ghost of Troy Murphy. The aversion to stretch 4s is a tad illogical. Everyone agrees the team desperately needs to add a pure shooter... And given the roster makeup and the way the league is trending... All signs point to a stretch 4 making a ton of sense.

                            I think you need an athletic 4/5 who can rebound off the bench as well, preferably someone who could play with Myles or this theoretical stretch 4 (versatility). Still a stretch 4 seems like an obvious part of the equation to me.
                            "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                            - ilive4sports

                            Comment


                            • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

                              Originally posted by Tom White View Post
                              How do we know he has a low trade value?

                              I don't recall the team putting him on the market, so is it just a guess based on your view of his performance?
                              And the fact that he didn't have a whole lot of suitors when he signed.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Ranking of 2016 Free Agents to be

                                Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                                True, could be a bit injury prone though. So, Im a tad reluctant.
                                When it comes to Terrence Jones.....I don't think that he will command a huge contract. He himself and the Rockets didn't do him a favor in the last season where he was in and out of the lineup....but I recall that he did put up good #s when he was playing consistent minutes. He's on a rookie contract that I do not think that the Rockets will match....so, I'd have no problem offering him the equivalent of a 2015-2016 Pre-Revenue contract that is comparable to something in the $7 mil range ( which would probably translate into more of a $8 to 9 mil contract in the post 2016-2017 Post-Revenue Salary Cap world )?

                                But keep in mind, the impression I get from Terrence Jones is that he doesn't have much range outside of the paint. He's not a Stretch 4 or any Big that can step out and hit the mid-range jumper. He's mostly a janitor-like Big Man that scores on tip-ins, scoring in the low post and than rebounding and hustle.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X