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

Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

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

  • #76
    Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

    Does anyone really think Bird has it in him to re-build? I don't. My guess is that we try to keep PG at all costs, and then one of two things happen:

    1. PG re-signs, Bird sticks around for a while.

    2. PG leaves, Bird retires.

    My feeling is that PG is Bird's last hope as a GM, and he is waiting out his time until he can get into the ownership side of things, which is what he really desires.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

      I thought that I'd add it here since it appears to be relevant.

      http://www.libertyballers.com/2017/3...bert-covington

      Sources: Sixers made ‘significant’ offer for Pacers forward Paul George at trade deadline

      Sources told Liberty Ballers what the Sixers were willing to give up for the Pacers’ star.
      by Kyle Neubeck@KyleNeubeck Mar 21, 2017, 12:48pm EDT

      Rec

      Brian Spurlock-USA TODAY Sports

      Paul George was one of the two biggest names available on the market at the 2017 NBA Trade Deadline, and his skill set would make a lot of sense with the current members of the Sixers’ core. It should come as no surprise, then, that the team made what multiple sources described as a “significant” offer for the Olympian wing.

      Early Tuesday morning, ESPN’s Zach Lowe wrote a column about the significance of the upcoming summer for George’s future with the Indiana Pacers. He described the suitors as follows:

      Bird knows he is on the clock with George. The Lakers loom as a threat in free agency. The Pacers engaged at least the Celtics, Sixers, Hawks and Nuggets in trade talks for George at the deadline, though they never appeared serious about moving him, per league sources.

      Standoffish though Larry Bird may have been, the Sixers did indeed make an offer for the Pacers forward. Multiple sources told Liberty Ballers the Sixers offered Indiana their choice of one of the Sixers’ young bigs, Robert Covington, and at least two first round picks for his services.

      According to multiple sources, the Sixers’ preference was to keep their own future picks and move the draft rights of other teams — like those of the Lakers and Kings — in an effort to protect themselves against George leaving. However, the Sixers were not turned off by George’s reported preference to play for the Lakers, according to one member of the organization, and believed they could sell George on staying with the Sixers long-term by enticing him to play with their promising core players. As a result, their own picks beyond the 2017 Draft were not untouchable, per sources.

      Amongst the people Liberty Ballers spoke to, there was not a consensus on which big man was most prominently involved in the trade equation. One source said it was specifically Nerlens Noel being offered in the package alongside Covington and the first-round picks, but others painted a more flexible picture on the Sixers’ behalf, believing Jahlil Okafor would have been the man to go if it made the difference on Indiana’s end.

      Though one of the proposed pieces of the deal was subsequently moved on to Dallas, the Sixers could very well be involved with George again down the line, whether in trade discussions or 2018 free agency. A deal for George would have made for a significantly different deadline, and the degree of their interest in an immediate impact player should be taken seriously when assessing how they’ll approach the market this summer.
      Not gonna lie.....but if I had the option to pick from a package of Players.....I'd still be looking at what the Celtics could offer as they could offer a nice package of solid veteran Starters, prospects and draft picks....but if we had the option of going after a "young Players package".....I'd have strongly considered something surrounding Nerlens+Covington+multiple 1st round draft picks for PG13 and sending out AlJeff or Monta AT THE TRADE DEADLINE in February 2017 ( which doesn't matter anymore given that Nerlens was shipped out for a pack of gum ).

      I know that Bird wouldn't have done it since it would severely impact our Playoff prospects....but I like what the Sixers have to offer over the Lakers.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

        I'm not in favor of trading PG in most circumstances, but for the sake of that discussion, if we are trading with the Lakers... am I the only person not remotely sold on Brandon Ingram? I'd rather have D'angelo Russell and the pick. It's likely the #2 or #3 pick and you can take Josh Jackson (who I think is a MUCH better SF prospect than Ingram) His point forward game would mesh well with a big scoring PG like Russell.

        I'm not saying Ingram will totally bust. He just looks to me like a guy who won't hit his ceiling, his rookie campaign has been pretty underwhelming. A lot of his hype is that he plays for the Lakers.
        Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 03-22-2017, 12:45 PM.
        "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


        • #79
          Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

          Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
          I'm not in favor of trading PG in most circumstances, but for the sake of that discussion, if we are trading with the Lakers... am I the only person not remotely sold on Brandon Ingram? I'd rather have D'angelo Russell and the pick. It's likely the #2 or #3 pick and you can take Josh Jackson (who I think is a MUCH better SF prospect than Ingram) His point forward game would mesh well with a big scoring PG like Russell.

          I'm not saying Ingram will bust. He just looks to me like a guy who won't hit his ceiling, his rookie campaign has been pretty underwhelming. A lot of his hype is that he plays for the Lakers.
          Brandon Ingram is 19 years old and 190 lbs soaking wet. I actually like his game and think he will turn into a good player. PG good, who knows. But no doubt he has upside.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

            Originally posted by HickeyS2000 View Post
            Brandon Ingram is 19 years old and 190 lbs soaking wet. I actually like his game and think he will turn into a good player. PG good, who knows. But no doubt he has upside.
            Do you think he's a better prospect than Josh Jackson? I don't.

            Give me Russell/Jackson over Ball/Ingram any day of the week. Might make an exception if its the #1 pick and Fultz, who I think is a lot more likely to be the real deal than Lonzo Ball.
            "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


            • #81
              Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

              Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
              Do you think he's a better prospect than Josh Jackson? I don't.

              Give me Russell/Jackson over Ball/Ingram any day of the week. Might make an exception if its the #1 pick and Fultz, who I think is a lot more likely to be the real deal than Lonzo Ball.
              Jackson is a year older and has a more NBA-ready body. I think they have similar upside. It's nice that Ingram is getting heavy minutes on the Lakers team, they are the ones experiencing the growing pains.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

                Originally posted by jrwannabe View Post
                At the time, the Granger trade was a straight up business move. The glue factor was not taken into account. Granger was done for the season. On court he was no help. Trading him for a guy that looked like he could help with bench scoring (which we needed) and a big (which we also needed), was a good move on paper. Had I been in Bird's position I would have done the samething. It'd be like someone offering you a usable car for your broken down car that hasn't moved in 3 months at the time you needed a car.
                Except you've been using spare parts for the broken down car to keep your other one running well, and the usable one they trade you breaks down just when you need some more spare parts and you end up with 2 dead cars.
                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


                • #83
                  Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

                  Originally posted by BillS View Post
                  Except you've been using spare parts for the broken down car to keep your other one running well, and the usable one they trade you breaks down just when you need some more spare parts and you end up with 2 dead cars.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

                    People have some very interesting definitions of "big offers"


                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

                      Honestly, I hope Paul George qualifies for the DPE after the season is over. Next season will be a constant barrage of fake news/speculation about Paul George's contract extension, and Bird will be forced into making a tough decision by the 2018 trade deadline. To answer HickeyS2000, I could see Bird stepping down if they pull the trigger to trade Paul George. Ironically, the decision WON'T be made by him. Bird will rather take his chances next summer to resign Paul George (if he doesn't qualify for the DPE this summer) than to "admit defeat" by trading away Indiana's top player, because the possibly of him leaving for nothing will be more "real".


                      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


                      • #86
                        Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

                        Originally posted by jrwannabe View Post
                        I didn't forget them. Just saying, in order to get Hayward we'd have to find a team that thinks our pick is worth eating Al Jeff and Stuckey's contract. And if this happens, Hayward and teague are going to eat your cap space. So PG will be basically be replacing CJ, Hayward replacing PG. Now we'll need an emergency guard, i.e. Stone. Need atleast one big to replace Allen and Al Jeff. Seraphin can be the 4th big. Tyler would be a good vet, but be nice to develop Bentil or Pothyress. And we need a sg/sf for a back-up. Signing Hayward would probably make us run an 8-man rotation. If Teague/PG/Hayward/GRIII or Monta go down, you are left with Stone (or other min.)/Joe Young and Niang. Eeek

                        I think we'd be fine. Two max players is better than 3 or 4 max players. If push comes to shove you move Monta for two players. But overall, Stuckey and Miles will probably opt out. Just need to move Al.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                          I thought that I'd add it here since it appears to be relevant.


                          Not gonna lie.....but if I had the option to pick from a package of Players.....I'd still be looking at what the Celtics could offer as they could offer a nice package of solid veteran Starters, prospects and draft picks....but if we had the option of going after a "young Players package".....I'd have strongly considered something surrounding Nerlens+Covington+multiple 1st round draft picks for PG13 and sending out AlJeff or Monta AT THE TRADE DEADLINE in February 2017 ( which doesn't matter anymore given that Nerlens was shipped out for a pack of gum ).

                          I know that Bird wouldn't have done it since it would severely impact our Playoff prospects....but I like what the Sixers have to offer over the Lakers.
                          It probably wouldn't have taken me much time to accept an offer of Nerlens, Covington, plus a couple first rounders. Just think, that'd open up cap space. Sign Hayward.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

                            Originally posted by jrwannabe View Post
                            It probably wouldn't have taken me much time to accept an offer of Nerlens, Covington, plus a couple first rounders. Just think, that'd open up cap space. Sign Hayward.
                            In some situations, you have to admire Bird's confidence/patience/stubbornness. If it was me, Paul George would not have been a Pacers player after this year's 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


                            • #89
                              Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

                              Originally posted by jrwannabe View Post
                              It probably wouldn't have taken me much time to accept an offer of Nerlens, Covington, plus a couple first rounders. Just think, that'd open up cap space. Sign Hayward.
                              Why would Hayward sign here?

                              Also, Noel is getting an extension this offseason as well.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Zach Lowe: Pacers hurtling toward a wild summer

                                Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                                Honestly, I hope Paul George qualifies for the DPE after the season is over. Next season will be a constant barrage of fake news/speculation about Paul George's contract extension, and Bird will be forced into making a tough decision by the 2018 trade deadline. To answer HickeyS2000, I could see Bird stepping down if they pull the trigger to trade Paul George. Ironically, the decision WON'T be made by him. Bird will rather take his chances next summer to resign Paul George (if he doesn't qualify for the DPE this summer) than to "admit defeat" by trading away Indiana's top player, because the possibly of him leaving for nothing will be more "real".
                                If Bird remains and PG13 doesn't qualify for the DPE, I can totally see Bird try again to re-tool the Team in the hopes that we will make it deep enough in the Playoffs to convince PG13 to stay at a normal ( not DPE ) Extension. Unfortunately, I can see PG13 decide to bolt for some other Team and leave the Pacers high and dry while holding their purse in their hands ( just like when Lance bolted ). Bird is stubborn in that way IMHO...he thinks he's capable of building the Team the right way and that everything will magically fall in place.

                                Short of some miraculous 2nd Playoff run that can carry into next season or him getting that SuperMAX contract extension......I don't see how PG13 will want to stay beyond this season.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X