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

Going "All in" on Paul George

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

  • #16
    Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

    Originally posted by CableKC View Post
    1 ) Re-sign Teague
    2 ) Renounce CJ ( freeing up Cap Space )
    3 ) See if we can make a run at Dwight for Monta+AlJeff
    4 ) Use whatever Salary Cap Space to sign a Starting quality SG and backup SG/SF that we can get to fill the rest of the 9 man Starting/Bench Rotation
    5 ) Let Lavoy go ( freeing up more Cap Space ) and live with Seraphin and XMas as our "Break in case of Emergency" Bigs off the bench.
    6 ) Keep GRIII as the 9th or 10th Player in the rotation ( he's cheap ).
    7 ) Move Thad to the bench as the 1st PF off the bench ( where he's better suited ).
    8 ) Keep Lance where he is ( 6th Man ) and 1st Guard off the bench ( where he's better suited to play while running the point in the 2nd unit ).
    Thoughts, because this is some good stuff you have here:

    1) Yes, I think we should re-sign Teague. ASSUMING that there isn't actually any traction to those rumors that he and PG 'secretly hate each other' or whatever. Which I think is junk. Unless his price is ludicrous and/or he doesn't take what he perceives to be a better offer/situation elsewhere, you need to retain him. Absolutely.

    2) Sadly, C.J. is probably priced out of our range now, unless Mr. Simon completely says "screw it" and allows us to go way into the tax, to pay Teague and C.J. their big raises, in addition to all these other moves we're discussing. But if we CAN retain C.J., we should certainly try. But not at an unreasonable price. I like him a lot, and would be sad to see him go, but his streakiness and playoff unreliability has hurt a lot. That being said - he has also done whatever is asked of him and has won some games for us with his "3J" nights.

    3) Not crazy about Dwight being a Pacer. But if we actually managed to shed Monta and Al without giving up any other assets and got Dwight in return, I just don't see how we can say no to that.

    4) Given all the other stuff going on here, I don't see how we have the space to actually do this. I mean yes, we can sign the FA's and then re-sign our own guys (Teague and C.J. and PG with some type of extension) and we're allowed to go over the cap and into the tax to do so. But that goes back to, is Simon willing to pay?

    5) I'm totally fine with this. Seraphin and Lance have shown the ability to make an amazing tandem. Who the hell would have thought that when Lance came back?! And X25 may be raw, but he plays hard. Lavoy will occasionally have one of those games where he extends like 5-7 plays for us by tipping a contested rebound out to our perimeter guys on a missed shot. But he just as frequently is a complete no show. Again, I like him, but he may be a casualty of necessity here.

    6) Oh I don't think there is any doubt that we should retain GRIII --- In fact I think he can be a growing part of our core. And that's WITH the "ALL IN FOR PG" strategy still in place. He's a hard worker and his game has matured a lot. He can play a bigger role for us than he's given credit for, IMO.

    7) Yes, you either move him to the bench, or you utilize him in a trade as part of "PROJECT ALL-IN" - It's a real shame about his wrist, that hurt us so badly this season. I have very little doubt that had he not suffered that injury we would have been seeded higher than #7.

    8) If we retain Teague, then yeah Lance probably makes the most sense as #1 guard off the bench. But it would in all likelihood be similar to the playoffs. He comes off the bench, but he plays starter-ish minutes and usually closes games. But with Lance, it ALL depends on whether we retain Teague, and who else we do or don't bring in at the 2 guard.
    Last edited by TMJ31; 05-22-2017, 06:29 PM. Reason: formatting - typos

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

      I've given my suggestions in pieces already. My solution is not as sexy, but in part because I believe in the value of continuity. I believe part of this will happen.

      1) Acquire Brooke Lopez for Monta, AlJeff & a swap of 1st-round picks
      2) Draft Biggie Swanigan ... and Josh Hart (toughness & hustle, part of first Pacer workout group)
      3) Sign JJ Redick
      4) If George Hill will re-sign at a level pro-rated for his injury history, done! Otherwise, try to re-sign CJ on a "reasonable*" contract
      5) Re-sign Teague if he'll agree to a reasonable contract. If not (and I prefer #6) ...
      6) Acquire Ricky Rubio who, despite his 3-point shortcomings, would better offer the size & defensive tenacity KP is describing

      (* We can squabble later about the definition of "reasonable" for certain players)

      So our front court would be a rotation of Lopez, Myles, Thad & Biggie. (Methinks Lavoy is likely to be traded or released.) GRIII (and maybe CJ) would back up PGeorge. The back court would be a rotation of Redick (and/or GHill), Teague (or, better, Rubio) and Lance.

      This team would be big, strong and could offer shooting from any/all positions. Rebounding would improve from this past season. It wouldn't be the fastest squad in the league--more of an updated Memphis Grizzly look--and for LeBron & the Eastern Conference, I'd love to see what they could do.


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

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

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

        Originally posted by Rogco View Post
        You forgot your sarcasm font
        It was obviously sarcasm.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

          Originally posted by brownjake43 View Post
          I think there is a big difference of opinion between members on the board as to what the Pacers are capable of if they made absolutely no moves. Some think we'd have no shot at a first round victory some think we'd have a solid shot at the ECF. Sounds you think we are way off, where I think Wizards, Celtics, Pacers, Raptors, Bucks, Bulls are all in similar spots for next year if they all kept the rosters the same. And honestly I think we have the best playoff roster of those teams because we have PG, Teague should be better just because he's now had a year with PG and Myles and Myles should be better as well. With that said we can't get by the Cavs as it currently stands so I'd say we definitely have to make major moves to be a contender. That starts with Hayward talks, may end with a Melo trade?

          It starts with Hayward for sure. If not then a trade for someone like Melo may be necessary.
          This is kind of why I made the thread. Just to see where people think the team is and what/how much can be done to improve our outlook. You are correct on how I view the team. I think Cleveland, Boston, Washington, and Toronto are comfortably ahead of us. Toronto may fall back a bit depending on Lowry, but I think Milwaukee is likely to increase their lead on us quite a bit next season anyway. Even if we were to sign Hayward, I don't think that is enough to make us favorites in any first round matchup we are likely to have. I'm not sure if I am being a pessimist or if others are being way too optimistic, but I am glad people are posting their ideas so I can get some other perspectives.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

            Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
            Sadly, C.J. is probably priced out of our range now, unless Mr. Simon completely says "screw it" and allows us to go way into the tax, to pay Teague and C.J. their big raises, in addition to all these other moves we're discussing.
            Didn't a poster show that there pretty much wasn't any way we could cross into LT territory in the next year or two no matter what we did?
            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


            • #21
              Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

              Peeking in to see what the other camp is thinking and proposing.


              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


              • #22
                Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

                I am not convinced that going "all in" is the route to take, however, if we were to go that route, here is what we should try to do.

                Re-sign Teague.
                Sign Gordon Hayward
                Draft an athletic PF with size that can rebound.

                We star Teague/Hayward/George/Turner/TYoung. Our bench is Stephenson/GRIII/Seraphin and our 1st round pick.

                I think that lineup could get us any where from the second round in the playoffs to the NBA Finals.

                The problem with this lineup is that Hayward is not going to sign with us and I don't know if there is an athletic PF in the draft that could contribute right away.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

                  Dumb question...why is no one coming up with possible trade scenrios for Butler? I feel that they're in rebuilding or close to "blow it up" mode. Chicago being the 8th seed was more a fluke of their easy season ending schedule than talent.


                  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


                  • #24
                    Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

                    Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                    Dumb question...why is no one coming up with possible trade scenrios for Butler? I feel that they're in rebuilding or close to "blow it up" mode. Chicago being the 8th seed was more a fluke of their easy season ending schedule than talent.
                    It's unlikely that Chicago would trade Butler to another Central Division team unless they are going to clearly get the better deal.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

                      Originally posted by sav View Post
                      It's unlikely that Chicago would trade Butler to another Central Division team unless they are going to clearly get the better deal.
                      Didn't we Ron Artest from them back in the day?


                      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


                      • #26
                        Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

                        Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                        Didn't we Ron Artest from them back in the day?
                        Yeah and they clearly got the better deal. Artest destroyed our team.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

                          Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                          Dumb question...why is no one coming up with possible trade scenrios for Butler? I feel that they're in rebuilding or close to "blow it up" mode. Chicago being the 8th seed was more a fluke of their easy season ending schedule than talent.
                          Originally posted by sav View Post
                          It's unlikely that Chicago would trade Butler to another Central Division team unless they are going to clearly get the better deal.
                          Teague/Butler/PG/Thad/Myles ...

                          I think Chicago is clearly in the driver's seat on any trade for Butler. It would take Myles Turner and picks to get him. Anything less than that and we're going to the ECF. But I think Chicago has all the leverage and they don't need to trade him, so it'll take a lot. Would absolutely LOVE to get him, just don't know how it'd be possible without totally mortgaging the future.
                          It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

                            According the ESPN's trade machine

                            Turner+GRIII+Monta is a successful trade. Chicago gets serious potential in Myles, effective role player with some potential in GRIII, and cap relief in Monta since they'll be able to cut him like we did Stuckey.

                            Trade machine says it increases our win total by 7. It would eat into our cap a little, but I think we'd still be able to make a mid-level signing. Noel? Dedmon?
                            It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

                              Originally posted by pizza guy View Post
                              According the ESPN's trade machine

                              Turner+GRIII+Monta is a successful trade. Chicago gets serious potential in Myles, effective role player with some potential in GRIII, and cap relief in Monta since they'll be able to cut him like we did Stuckey.

                              Trade machine says it increases our win total by 7. It would eat into our cap a little, but I think we'd still be able to make a mid-level signing. Noel? Dedmon?
                              Thank you.

                              Man...I would want the extension from Paul George before I would do that trade to give up young talent like that. I think GR3 earned the right to get more rotational minutes.

                              Does this trade have Indiana resigning Teague?


                              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


                              • #30
                                Re: Going "All in" on Paul George

                                Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                                Thank you.

                                Man...I would want the extension from Paul George before I would do that trade to give up young talent like that. I think GR3 earned the right to get more rotational minutes.

                                Does this trade have Indiana resigning Teague?
                                I would. Since we probably won't have a chance at CP3 or Lowry, and we're able to go over the cap for Teague, he'd hafta be the best we could get with the money we have.
                                It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X