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

2017 Free Agent Targets

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

  • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    I'd rather toss a bag of money at Hardaway.
    I'll agree with that, Hardaway would be a great addition.

    Comment


    • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

      After Hayward, there's not a free agent I want more than Luc Mbah A Moute. He's arguably the best defender in the NBA and I'd start him day 1 along Paul George. Ian Clark would be a nice under the radar shooter as well. Honestly, I'd sign those 2 with Teague and try to keep Miles and call it a summer. Draft a PF who can rebound, defend the perimeter well, and knock down a mid range jumpshot and a 3 and D wing with both picks and you have a solid foundation for a team (assuming Stuckey opts out ) Basically I just want a team like the Hawks except with Paul George and a budding Myles Turner on it. Defense, excellent shooting, and crisp ball movement are the keys to winning in this league.I hope once this team sheds Ellis and Stuckey that Nate will construct a cleaner offense that doesn't rely on messy drive and kicks and muddied pick and rolls because defenders don't have to guard Ellis or Stuckey close.
      Last edited by Pacersalltheway10; 03-06-2017, 04:33 AM.

      Comment


      • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

        Originally posted by brownjake43 View Post
        I think Lavoy is the best of those 3 and 3.5m is nothing when you're working to build a 14 man roster on 122m.
        Other than Lavoy the Pacers really have no one to guard strong physical rebounding bigs, so if his knees are ok you keep him
        {o,o}
        |)__)
        -"-"-

        Comment


        • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

          Originally posted by brownjake43 View Post
          I think Lavoy is the best of those 3 and 3.5m is nothing when you're working to build a 14 man roster on 122m.
          It is 4,3 mil, but I agree that it is cheap for a rotation player in nowadays' market.

          Pick up the option if

          a) you don't need ALL money available for some big free agent acquisition.
          b) you need extra roster spots open dearly.

          If we plan & succeed in re-signing Teague (and we need a replacement anyway if we don't), we only have ONE roster spot open to start with (Aaron Brooks' one).

          CJ likely will go to free agency so that is the 2nd spot.

          But two spots are basically taken by draftees alone (you can use 2nd-rounder for Euro-stash).

          So, if we want to do anything in free agency, we basically have to trade guys OR waive guys OR not to pick up Lavoy's option.

          Waiving is easier 'cause we have a lot of non-guaranteed ones in GRIII/Xmas/JoeyBuckets/Niang/Seraphin

          Comment


          • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

            Hayward is a full inch shorter than PG and has much shorter wingspan. No way he would be matching up against 4's with any regularity. In fact he would be taking the smaller of the two wings most nights.

            If the Pacers could somehow figure out a way to sign Gordon they should but it would be an interesting fit. I think offensively GH would have to take on a larger part of the driver/creator role and PG would have to be willing to score more in catch & shoot situations.

            Comment


            • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

              Originally posted by jrwannabe View Post
              Exactly. Unless you draft a PF, there is no reason not to pick up Allen's option. Not going to find too much talent out there that is usable daily for 3.5 mil
              Or unless we pursue a staring front court player in free agency instead of a wing. I couldn't pass on Hayward if we could work out that miracle but I don't think that's possible since he's getting the max and we won't have that kind of cap space after extending Paul. Outside of Hayward I'd much rather see Larry find a way to bring in a bigger physical front court player to start beside Turner. Favors will be available at a much lower price than Hayward and I'd be fine is Larry chose to go after a defensive minded center as as well.
              Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

              Comment


              • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

                Originally posted by Cousy47 View Post
                For the folks wanting to go after Hayward in the off season, do you see him playing the 3 with Paul going back to the 2? Or would Gordon play the 2? Would either of them consider moving to the 4 and what would that do to their game? If GR3 is the SG of the future the question would be even more important.
                I think you just take your advantage at the wing. Play George at 2, Hayward at 3. Want Turner to hit his peak? I think you want excellent athletes on the wings. Very different player than Hibbert, but similar in the best thing I think you can do for either one is pump up your perimeter D. (Outside of Player X from PD lore)

                As much as "Wings are a dime a dozen" this league is driven by the position. The versatility in skill sets at the position, and the tweener stature (A lot of guys at the wings are combo guards, a lot could be considered stretch 4s) means that you can cover up a lot of holes if you have the right 2-3 players on the wing.

                Of course there are different things a coach could do with the lineup, including play small with PG or Hayward at the 4 and GR3 in the game. There's probably 10-15 minutes or so a game you could get away with running PG or GH at the spot.

                No reason to think of GR3 as some annointed "SG of the Future" it's the NBA, SG of the future needs to be SG of a championship team, or we need to keep getting better. Just saying, he's no future part of a "big 3" even though I like his game.
                "man, PG has been really good."

                Comment


                • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

                  We keep talking about Hayward who I seriously doubt would want to leave Utah after they've finally built a competitive team around him where they're 4th in the West but even if we did pull out that miracle how do we clear up enough cap space to sign him? The very first order of business is to try to extend Paul which adds 13 mil to the cap for next year and you can't do that unless you're under the cap. We can hold off on Teague if he agrees to wait so we can sign some talent but that's a huge risk since he's going to have plenty of offers coming his way but even in doing that it doesn't leave us in a position to bring in another max player.
                  If you start with 71 mil for next year
                  add in 12 mil for Teagues cap hold
                  add in 13 mil for PG extension
                  subtract 4 mil for losing CJ
                  That leaves us with 92 mil so what about 8 mil to work with in free agency.

                  The only way we become big players in free agency is to trade Paul which I hope to god doesn't happen or find a way to dump Ellis or Al for cap space.
                  Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

                    Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                    We keep talking about Hayward who I seriously doubt would want to leave Utah after they've finally built a competitive team around him where they're 4th in the West but even if we did pull out that miracle how do we clear up enough cap space to sign him? The very first order of business is to try to extend Paul which adds 13 mil to the cap for next year and you can't do that unless you're under the cap. We can hold off on Teague if he agrees to wait so we can sign some talent but that's a huge risk since he's going to have plenty of offers coming his way but even in doing that it doesn't leave us in a position to bring in another max player.
                    If you start with 71 mil for next year
                    add in 12 mil for Teagues cap hold
                    add in 13 mil for PG extension
                    subtract 4 mil for losing CJ
                    That leaves us with 92 mil so what about 8 mil to work with in free agency.

                    The only way we become big players in free agency is to trade Paul which I hope to god doesn't happen or find a way to dump Ellis or Al for cap space.
                    We need to get rid of Stuckey, Ellis and Jefferson.

                    While it would be great to bring in a "name" free agent, I don't see it happening. Fortunately we have some young players that could improve and help a lot...Turner, GRIII and possibly Christmas could be a good player off the bench.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

                      Originally posted by sav View Post
                      We need to get rid of Stuckey, Ellis and Jefferson.

                      While it would be great to bring in a "name" free agent, I don't see it happening. Fortunately we have some young players that could improve and help a lot...Turner, GRIII and possibly Christmas could be a good player off the bench.
                      The only one of those that I could us moving without giving up an asset is Jefferson. I don't want Larry to give away future picks just to dump salary.
                      Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

                        Originally posted by brownjake43 View Post
                        I think Lavoy is the best of those 3 and 3.5m is nothing when you're working to build a 14 man roster on 122m.
                        I think developing Bentil would be the best option. Guy is a young, athletic stretch 4.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

                          Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                          I think developing Bentil would be the best option. Guy is a young, athletic stretch 4.
                          Think Bentil is still a Mav at least for now.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

                            Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                            I think developing Bentil would be the best option. Guy is a young, athletic stretch 4.
                            Bentil falls similar to Thad. You only give up Allen for another bruiser. I don't see another bruiser we can get for 4 mil. Letting Niang go for Bentil I can see. Would give us another option at the 4 if we play a small team. Wish we could drop Al (Think Seraphin is a better keep than Al)

                            I was originally for drafting a rebounding forward but I'm happy with the Christmas/Allen combo. With losing CJ, I think we need to look at drafting a true SG with our first and finding a defensive SF in the 2nd round or in Free agency ie Tucker

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

                              Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                              We keep talking about Hayward who I seriously doubt would want to leave Utah after they've finally built a competitive team around him where they're 4th in the West but even if we did pull out that miracle how do we clear up enough cap space to sign him? The very first order of business is to try to extend Paul which adds 13 mil to the cap for next year and you can't do that unless you're under the cap. We can hold off on Teague if he agrees to wait so we can sign some talent but that's a huge risk since he's going to have plenty of offers coming his way but even in doing that it doesn't leave us in a position to bring in another max player.
                              If you start with 71 mil for next year
                              add in 12 mil for Teagues cap hold
                              add in 13 mil for PG extension
                              subtract 4 mil for losing CJ
                              That leaves us with 92 mil so what about 8 mil to work with in free agency.

                              The only way we become big players in free agency is to trade Paul which I hope to god doesn't happen or find a way to dump Ellis or Al for cap space.
                              A team at or above the salary cap may not be allowed to renegotiate a contract. They can renegotiate even if they're just $1 million under the cap so they can still be able to use their extra cap space of around $22.27 million which includes the draft picks and Teague's cap hold. So to be able to offer a max contract, still only one of Al Jefferson or Monta needs to be dumped (this is assuming Stuckey, Miles, and Allen are all let go).

                              The order would be
                              1.) Use available cap space to sign free agents
                              2.) Save a fraction of space to stay below the cap and renegotiate Paul George's contract
                              3.) Sign Jeff Teague to a new contract

                              Also, assuming the Pacers keep both draft picks and do not waive any non-guaranteed players, there would need to be only one roster spot filled to meet the new league minimum of 14 players.
                              Last edited by Pacersalltheway10; 03-06-2017, 03:35 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2017 Free Agent Targets

                                While I'd love to get Hayward, I'd also have no problem in breaking up the max contract money to sign Dion Waiters and Tim Hardaway Jr.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X