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

Trade targets

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

  • Re: Trade targets

    Originally posted by Grimp View Post
    I doubt Larry makes a blockbuster at the deadline. Now if Cousins or Butler shake loose he might change his mind. But to land an expiring player like Nick Young, Milsap, Ibaka or a few others wouldn't take much. Those teams won't get a pick unless the player is sure to re-sign with his new team. So those are the trades Larry should target. I also think Seth Curry and players like Dion Waiters on small salaries would be targets as well.

    For example in Dallas? They have Yogi Ferrell now signed until 2019. Add him to Devin Harris, Deron Williams, JJ Barea, Seth Curry, Wes Matthews. That's a lot of guards. I am sure Dallas will part with one or two of them. Miami is in a more interesting scenario though. They don't have to trade Waiters, but Riley will have to pay Josh Richardson next Summer, who's currently making under $1 million dollars. This after paying Tyler Johnson last Summer. Not sure if Riley is ready to back the truck up for Waiters this Summer. When he could just start Tyler next season. Er go trading Waiters for some sort of return before the deadline makes sense. BUT.... Miami is also not that far out of the 8th seed in the playoff race. So it's complicated.

    Atlanta's situation is different. They are paying Howard a lot of money. Just paid Bazemore, Schroeder just got an extension. They will have to max Milsap out this Summer. Which means they won't be able to afford Tim Hardaway Jr. should he get a robust offer sheet from someone. Hawks also need to decide if a team with Maxed Milsap, Howard, Schroeder, and Bazemore can compete in the east for years to come. Both Howard and Milsap are over 30. Two aging bigs. I imagine Atlanta even though they're in the top 5 in the East. Will have to deal Hardaway Jr. and or Milsap before the deadline. Or lose both for no return.
    We have no reason to try getting better this season as no trade will make us any kind of a serious contender. Giving up any long-term assets for a rental player would be really stupid and if we take anyone good (read expensive), we would then need to appreciate him enough to re-sign him INSTEAD of Teague.

    If PG is extended to super-max and if Teague will command a max.contract (he is regrettably playing his way to one right now), we will have very limited money left outside those two contracts. They would put us around 95 mil with just 6 contracts (PG13, Teague, Thad, Monta, AlJeff, Turner)

    Comment


    • Re: Trade targets

      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
      Not that it matters too much....but when I look at Hoopshype, it shows that Seraphin, XMas and Niang have guaranteed Contracts ( 3 Players ). Buckets and GRIII have Team Options ( which will likely be picked up ).

      http://hoopshype.com/salaries/indiana_pacers/

      Hoopshype doesn't include info about guarantees. Just because there are no options involved, does not make "fodder-contracts" guaranteed. Our end-of-the-salary-list guys are ALL unguaranteed for next season except Xmas, who has 50,000 bucks guarantee (no more). basketball-reference.com is very good on these...

      If they are waived after the season, we don't owe a penny for Seraphin/JoeYoung/GRIII/Niang...

      Comment


      • Re: Trade targets

        Originally posted by PetPaima View Post
        We have no reason to try getting better this season as no trade will make us any kind of a serious contender. Giving up any long-term assets for a rental player would be really stupid and if we take anyone good (read expensive), we would then need to appreciate him enough to re-sign him INSTEAD of Teague.

        If PG is extended to super-max and if Teague will command a max.contract (he is regrettably playing his way to one right now), we will have very limited money left outside those two contracts. They would put us around 95 mil with just 6 contracts (PG13, Teague, Thad, Monta, AlJeff, Turner)
        How would you feel about possibly taking a step back this season via trade in order to acquire an additional first-rounder or first-contract player of high potential? Do you think a mix of first-contract talent with our max-contract players is the way to go?


        "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

        - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

        Comment


        • Re: Trade targets

          Originally posted by PetPaima View Post
          Technically true. However, Paul's "super-max" will be more money than the difference between salary cap & luxury tax. I can't see Simon agreeing in paying tax so that causes some limits.
          That's a good point. I don't think Paul's raise will take up all of that money. Paul is due to make 19.5 next year, and if the cap comes in at projected the 35% max looks to be at 33.5 next year. So that's a 14 million raise for Paul, and there's 20 million between the salary cap and luxury tax.

          But those projections also have to deal with the difference between Teague's cap hold and his contract. If Teague gets the max, that's 13.3 million over his cap hold (26.5 total). Obviously he could also get less, but his final contract will likely be at least 6 million over his cap hold. So the Pacers are going to have set aside at least a couple million of their cap space to deal with Paul and Teague to ensure they don't go into the tax.

          Comment


          • Re: Trade targets

            Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post
            That's a good point. I don't think Paul's raise will take up all of that money. Paul is due to make 19.5 next year, and if the cap comes in at projected the 35% max looks to be at 33.5 next year. So that's a 14 million raise for Paul, and there's 20 million between the salary cap and luxury tax.

            But those projections also have to deal with the difference between Teague's cap hold and his contract. If Teague gets the max, that's 13.3 million over his cap hold (26.5 total). Obviously he could also get less, but his final contract will likely be at least 6 million over his cap hold. So the Pacers are going to have set aside at least a couple million of their cap space to deal with Paul and Teague to ensure they don't go into the tax.
            True. I was thinking about whole contract value, but obviously it is only the raise which figures in...

            Ditto to difference between Teague's cap hold and new contract. And I could see at least Brooklyn offering him full max. They lack a point guard (Lin is not really a full-time starter) and they have ample cap room while already having 12 players under the contract for next year.

            Comment


            • Re: Trade targets

              Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post
              That's a good point. I don't think Paul's raise will take up all of that money. Paul is due to make 19.5 next year, and if the cap comes in at projected the 35% max looks to be at 33.5 next year. So that's a 14 million raise for Paul, and there's 20 million between the salary cap and luxury tax.

              But those projections also have to deal with the difference between Teague's cap hold and his contract. If Teague gets the max, that's 13.3 million over his cap hold (26.5 total). Obviously he could also get less, but his final contract will likely be at least 6 million over his cap hold. So the Pacers are going to have set aside at least a couple million of their cap space to deal with Paul and Teague to ensure they don't go into the tax.
              I hadn't really looked at our cap position for the summer yet. It looks like we can pay PG the supermax assuming he qualifies which I think he will, and pay Teague the max but it leaves us with no cap space at all.
              We have CJ and Stuckey with player options. I think CJ will opt out but Stuckey may be doubtful depending on how the rest of the year goes for him.
              No matter how you look at it we're not going to be very active in the free agent market this summer unless we lose PG or Teague.
              Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

              Comment


              • Re: Trade targets

                Didn't see this posted anywhere, but in Kevin Pelton's Insider column on ESPN about trades he wanted to see, he mentioned this:

                http://www.espn.com/nba/insider/stor...llsap-more-nba

                Pacers get Serge protection

                Indiana Pacers get: Forward Serge Ibaka

                Orlando Magic get: Guard Rodney Stuckey, forward Lavoy Allen, Indiana's 2018 first-round pick (lottery protected)

                The Pacers certainly aren't an obvious destination for Ibaka, given that their starting frontcourt of Myles Turner and Thaddeus Young has been solid this season. But in trying to figure out how to upgrade their struggling second-team frontcourt, I hit on the idea of bringing in Ibaka to play with both Turner and Young, as well as backup center Al Jefferson. His floor spacing would be useful to open things up for Indiana's perimeter duo of Paul George and Jeff Teague.

                Given the Magic gave up a lottery pick and a solid young prospect (Victor Oladipo) for Ibaka just eight months ago, this price would be a steal for the Pacers, who also get out of the final season of Stuckey's contract. Yet I'm not sure Orlando will do much better for Ibaka, who will be an unrestricted free agent this summer, unless the Celtics and Raptors join the bidding.

                Comment


                • Re: Trade targets

                  Originally posted by cdash View Post
                  Didn't see this posted anywhere, but in Kevin Pelton's Insider column on ESPN about trades he wanted to see, he mentioned this:

                  http://www.espn.com/nba/insider/stor...llsap-more-nba
                  I remember when similar deals (first rounder & solid expiring player plus filler) for Oladipio were thought to be laughable. Magic might have been better off had it went down that way.....

                  Comment


                  • Re: Trade targets

                    Trever booker would be a nice pickup

                    Comment


                    • Re: Trade targets

                      I don't like Thad and Serge because it creates controversy on who starts and finishes games, they both are good enough to start but Thad just doesn't fit with Myles. I don't think the Pacers would make a big change like this until after the season, but if they wanted to gamble they could trade Thad pretty much straight up, might even get an asset out of the Magic for the gamble that Serge doesn't stay.

                      Booker I think is a better fit and doesn't cost as much.
                      "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


                      • Re: Trade targets

                        Booker seems like the most realistic trade acquisition for the Pacers.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Trade targets

                          Originally posted by Cactus Jax View Post
                          I don't like Thad and Serge because it creates controversy on who starts and finishes games, they both are good enough to start but Thad just doesn't fit with Myles. I don't think the Pacers would make a big change like this until after the season, but if they wanted to gamble they could trade Thad pretty much straight up, might even get an asset out of the Magic for the gamble that Serge doesn't stay.

                          Booker I think is a better fit and doesn't cost as much.

                          Thad and Ibaka just want to win. They aren't primadonna's. I doubt having both on our team would cause any strife. The most huffy players are point guards by the way. Too many of those can really rock the house. Just ask the Suns.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Trade targets

                            No thanks to Ibaka, he's not putting us over the top. I want Bird to make a pick in this draft.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Trade targets

                              Originally posted by granger4mvp View Post
                              Trever booker would be a nice pickup
                              Originally posted by cdash View Post
                              Booker seems like the most realistic trade acquisition for the Pacers.
                              The caveat is that he's owed $9 mil a year guaranteed for this and next season.

                              Statistically, he's been putting up solid #s in Brooklyn....but would he be Starter material at the PF spot that is more complementary with Myles?
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Trade targets

                                Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
                                No thanks to Ibaka, he's not putting us over the top. I want Bird to make a pick in this draft.
                                In the past......Ibaka was more of a Low Post shot blocking Rebounding Center that deferred to the perimeter and all around offense that surrounded him in OKC ( way back when ) alongside Westbrook/Harden/KD.

                                But isn't Ibaka's game closer to the offensive and defensive game that Myles provides?

                                Both are shotblocking Bigs that are decent rebounders, can hit their FTs and are now more of a "Face the Basket" type shooting Big Men?

                                I'm not so sure that both would complement each other.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X