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

Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

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

  • #31
    Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

    Originally posted by Grimp View Post
    It would take some convincing but if Larry calls him and works some of that magic. Then he chats with Paul, I don't see how he could not at least consider waiving the NTC.
    Because he wouldn't want to leave his current situation for a mediocre team, in a small market. He has absolutely no reason to come here IMO

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

      If PG looks at Anthony and thinks that he's the guy that can help get the team over the top, I'd have to question PGs judgement.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

        Originally posted by I Love P View Post
        Also Big Al's final 3rd year is a team option...so next season he's essentially an expiring contract. Nice trade chip. We're setting ourselves up for big time cap space in 2019.
        WRONG! Big Al's 3rd year is partially guaranteed, not an option. If he is waived in preceding summer, the team only owes him 4 M. But it is not an option. I don't have the date when it becomes fully guaranteed...

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

          CJ will opt out.

          Stuckey will opt in.

          PG will be on the team. I don't see Bird trading him because we won't be able to find another star to replace him. The only way we are going to be able to sign a star FA is if we are contenders and that does not appear to be happening in the near future.

          In my opinion, our best moves would be to resign Teague and try to trade for a starting 3 & D wing...and obviously figure out how to get rid of Jefferson, Stuckey and, if possible, Ellis.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

            Los Angeles Lakers : A paranoid case of a team. On one hand, they have maybe the worst pair of contracts in NBA in Deng & Mozgov – an average of annual 34 million invested in two players who are constant DNP-CDs already now but still have 3 full years to go contract-wise.

            And yet, due to huge influx of young players with rookie contracts Lakers are nevertheless in a reasonable position for free agency market with some 20 million available under the cap and no troublesome extension to be decided on just yet. Laker-land must hope that Magic is not as reckless in throwing that money around as Buss/Kupchak were...

            Free agents available : SwaggyP, Tyler Ennis, MWP, Thomas Robinson

            Salary dump candidates : Obviously Deng & Mozgov, but Lakers are not yet desperate for extra salary room so they probably won't give you a fortune for taking these duds off their hands. Good deals available for a trade partner, robbery deals not.

            And using a stretch provision for either one of these is HIGHLY unlikely at this point. F ex in case of Mozgov, Lakers would need to pay an annual 6.9 mil for 7 years. A mil more every year in case of Deng. No, you don't stretch with 3 years remaining – they MAY stretch in Summer'18 if they are really hungry for f ex PG13!


            Memphis Grizzlies : Here comes a strong fellow candidate for the worst contract of NBA in form of Memphis & Chandler Parsons. 3 more seasons to go at average of 24-some millions for a player who hardly gets to the court due to chronic injuries ans is a liability when he does...

            Unlike Lakers, Memphis will be hurt by that catastrophical deal already this summer. With close to 75 million committed to Conley/Parsons/M.Gasol alone, they will a) not be able to play a role in free agency acquisitions, b) be in tough spot if anyone gives a solid offer for RFA Jamychal Green and c) possibly struggle even to retain team icons Tony Allen & Z-Bo.

            Free agents available : Z-Bo, Tony Allen, Vinsanity, Jamychal (as RFA). Memphis will have about 20 million total under the luxury tax to retain some combo of these guys. That makes it likely that someone slips although there may be some loyalty discounts.


            Miami Heat : What will happen with Bosh? Only known facts are that Miami is going to pay his remaining salary (2 years, total of 52 million) and he will never don the Heat uniform again...

            Miami has started the process of removing Bosh's salary from their salary cap figures (that is possible with a premanent retiree – you still pay but it doesn't hit the cap)... Failing that they might stretch it (which opens an extra 15 million to use elsewhere). Tough to analyse Heat with this item unsolved...

            What we do know is that Dion Waiters & Willie Reed have player options on their low-price deals and both will surely opt out as UFAs. James Johnson will also be an UFA straight out of career season and so will (for much lesser interest) Luke Babbitt. McBob though will likely not opt out with his player option as he is coming out of wasted injury-ridden season and is a warning-signal question mark going forward...

            Without some way of getting Bosh payload lessened, Miami can only try to resign players mentioned above. But their target is to open up 30 million bucks of salary room by removing Bosh from equation. That would make them a player for high-end wing scorers out of free agency (Gallinari, Hayward) or out of salary dumps (Tobias Harris, McCollum, Beal). Don't count Miami out of Millsap-business either.

            Free agents available : Career-rescuers Waiters & J.Johnson + a solid back-up big in Willie Reed are all going to generate interest and to earn clearly bigger paycheck. Miami would surely like to retain them but will have to do it inside the salary cap as they only have non-Bird rights on this trio and that exception will be too small in money.


            Milwaukee Bucks : While Greg Monroe is expected to opt out (no such hope for that useless lump called Spencer Hawes) and leave Bucks 10 Mil under the cap, they will likely not make any aggressive moves as they need to retain room for Jabari Parker's contract in summer 2018. Tony Snell will complete his rookie contract years and is a RFA this summer. With Middleton back he is unlikely to be a priority retainee either. All in all, a conservative outlook for summer in Milwaukee.

            Free agents available : Greg Monroe looking for a Max, Tony Snell, Michael Beasley... ...won't Jason Terry retire already for god's sake?

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

              Originally posted by Grimp View Post
              Here's a question for you guys. Would you be willing to offer Al Jefferson, Monta Ellis, and our 2018 1st to the Knicks for Carmelo Anthony in the Summer?
              Absolutely not. Carmelo Anthony might be the most overrated player in NBA history. He can't score to the same degree he used to, has always sucked in the playoffs, and is bad at everything that isn't scoring.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

                Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                Absolutely not. Carmelo Anthony might be the most overrated player in NBA history. He can't score to the same degree he used to, has always sucked in the playoffs, and is bad at everything that isn't scoring.
                Ignoring that such a trade would never happen......on paper and in theory....if we had to option to trade Melo for Monta and AlJeff, I'd do it just to dump Monta and AlJeff's contract beyond the 2017-2018 season.. Monta has a Player option and AlJeff is partially guaranteed in 2018-2019. Melo could opt out and be off the books by then.

                In such a NBA 2k17 trade scenario, the Pacers would have guaranteed to have cleared out $23 mil in Salary by the 2018-2019 season.
                Last edited by CableKC; 03-14-2017, 12:36 PM.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

                  Best option: let Teague walk, he ain't worth it, trade PG, he ain't taking us to the promised land, stop trading away draft picks and try to actually assemble some young talent.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

                    Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                    Ignoring that such a trade would never happen......on paper and in theory....if we had to option to trade Melo for Monta and AlJeff, I'd do it just to dump Monta and AlJeff's contract beyond the 2017-2018 season.. Monta has a Player option and AlJeff is partially guaranteed in 2018-2019. Melo could opt out and be off the books by then.

                    In such a NBA 2k17 trade scenario, the Pacers would have guaranteed to have cleared out $23 mil in Salary by the 2018-2019 season.
                    Well sure, but Grimps proposal had us trading a first too. Not to mention, Monta and Al have started to take a backseat. Carmelo still thinks he is THE GUY.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

                      Originally posted by I Love P View Post
                      Havent read over this entire thread but the posts I am reading has PG on the team next season. I don't think that's going to happen. Can we talk about where we'll be if we do in fact trade Paul before the draft? How would our cap space look this summer and going forward? Much better than having a non-superstar on some mega deal in a small market like Indiana. I'd love to keep PG for the right price but overpaying for him is something we cannot afford

                      Also Big Al's final 3rd year is a team option...so next season he's essentially an expiring contract. Nice trade chip. We're setting ourselves up for big time cap space in 2019.
                      Honestly, the DPE will be the deciding factor. If he qualifies, then I think he signs without question. If he doesn't qualify, then you'll probably get the best Paul George next season, because he would have to be on a mission to qualify for the DPE next season. However, the risk of him walking without getting nothing in return raises exponentially. If a trade happens with Paul George, it will happen before the next trade deadline.


                      Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

                        Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                        Honestly, the DPE will be the deciding factor. If he qualifies, then I think he signs without question. If he doesn't qualify, then you'll probably get the best Paul George next season, because he would have to be on a mission to qualify for the DPE next season. However, the risk of him walking without getting nothing in return raises exponentially. If a trade happens with Paul George, it will happen before the next trade deadline.
                        If George walks next season, we won't be losing him for nothing. Granted we won't be trading a player or picks for him, but we will free up $30 million in cap space to use in Free Agency or to make a trade and take salary off the hands of another team.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

                          Originally posted by cdash View Post
                          Unless we trade him, PG's salary is what it is next year--even if he signs a max or supermax extension that won't go into effect until 2018-2019.
                          You are correct about the extension.

                          However, cap space can be used to renegotiate an existing contract upwards. The deal presented to PG would then be an extension starting from 2018-19 combined with a renegotiation (raise) in 2017-18.

                          This isn't a hypothetical btw. Westbrook and Harden already signed similar deals.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

                            I can certainly see us dropping Brooks, he is simply a free agent so not even an option to drop. I do not see us dumping CJ or Stucky unless they do not take their options and ask for a really massive pay hike which could certainly happen but then our team is worse not better. We need to move Monta he has a player option for 18/19 and he just does not fit. I also think we need to move Al Jefferson the two of them would free up 20 million. Add the couple of million for Brooks and we have enough to go after a pretty good player before re signing Teague with Bird rights.

                            I would drop Lavoy as well. Keep Christmas keep GRIII they can probably let Young go but maybe run it by PG just in case and he is cheap enough that its worth keeping since he can score and may turn into a productive NBA player yet. If you have dumped Lavoy and Brooks you now have 25 million or so and can get a very good player if we can sign one.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

                              Originally posted by PetPaima View Post
                              As soon as season ends, Teague's current contract of 8,8 Mil transforms to a cap hold of 13,2 Mil. That takes care of what we are currently under the cap...

                              The rest of your writing is rose-coloured joke which Portland/Brooklyn/Philadelphia would laugh out of the door.

                              Btw, Crabbe's contract has a 15 % trade kicker which would make him even more overpaid at 21 mil plus. (22 plus M for 2018-19)

                              The trade kicker in AC contract is bad news. I guess we'd be better off signing Waiters or Tim Hardaway Jr.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Free agency of 2017 - analysis for every team (in six separate posts)

                                Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
                                I can certainly see us dropping Brooks, he is simply a free agent so not even an option to drop. I do not see us dumping CJ or Stucky unless they do not take their options and ask for a really massive pay hike which could certainly happen but then our team is worse not better. We need to move Monta he has a player option for 18/19 and he just does not fit. I also think we need to move Al Jefferson the two of them would free up 20 million. Add the couple of million for Brooks and we have enough to go after a pretty good player before re signing Teague with Bird rights.

                                I would drop Lavoy as well. Keep Christmas keep GRIII they can probably let Young go but maybe run it by PG just in case and he is cheap enough that its worth keeping since he can score and may turn into a productive NBA player yet. If you have dumped Lavoy and Brooks you now have 25 million or so and can get a very good player if we can sign one.


                                If Larry has any sense he would dump CJ and Stuckey. CJ is gonna opt out for sure. Stuckey's last year can easily be moved to a team looking to dump salary. My perfect scenario trade is still sending Stuckey to the Blazers with our 2017 2nd round pick for McCollum or Crabbe. We'd just need to be in position to take back the salary in full.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X