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

Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

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

  • Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

    Apologies if this has been posted or is in the Star (its a USA Today column)

    ---------------------------------------------------

    By Mark Montieth, The Indianapolis Star


    The NBA's new Collective Bargaining Agreement has yet to become official, and its details remain vague even to general managers and agents.
    One thing is certain, however. The changes will bring about a bustling marketplace this offseason, perhaps the most bullish in league history. (Related item: NBA free-agent list)

    With rules regarding trades and free agency liberalized, teams and players will have unprecedented opportunities to make changes and, in most cases, earn more money. While neither the league nor the union got all it wanted out of the deal, both sides should benefit.

    "They want to encourage movement," Indiana Pacers CEO Donnie Walsh said of the league. "That's good for the players, too."

    The agreement won't be put into place until July 22, and its complexities are such that some people within the league won't be surprised if a brief extension is required beyond that date.

    The most compelling change is the one that allows teams with roster payrolls that exceed the luxury tax threshold the ability to waive a highly paid player who isn't earning his salary. While still obligated to pay that player's salary, teams won't be liable for the luxury tax penalty.

    The opportunity will offer substantial savings for some teams. It also will offer some veteran players the opportunity to become free agents without losing their current contract, while offering other teams the chance to sign a proven player for a bargain price.

    "A lot of teams are stuck where they are (with high payrolls) and can't get out of the tax, and it's getting burdensome," Walsh said.

    For example, New York, with a payroll close to $100 million, can waive Allan Houston and save $40 million in luxury tax penalties over the next two seasons.

    Houston, who played in just 20 games last season because of a knee injury, could then sign with a contending team — such as Detroit, where he played the first three seasons of his career and still has ties — and receive another contract on top of his Knicks deal. The Pistons, meanwhile, would get an established player at a low salary, assuming Houston is healthy enough to contribute.

    "That was a wonderful thing," veteran agent Steve Kauffman said. "The union and the league looked at that as a win-win. I have no idea who initiated that dialogue, but it's a great opportunity for some players."

    Walsh expects most teams to wait until near the Oct. 1 deadline to release and sign players in this category. Some players, however, might offer a buyout to their current team if a more favorable team offers a contract.

    Pacers President Larry Bird is anxious to see what opportunities develop.

    "We have to look at our team and see what's out there," he said. "Some teams are going to cut high-salary players. Somebody might be out there who could really help us."

  • #2
    Re: Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

    Link: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baske...a-market_x.htm

    Its interesting that MLB and NFL have been complaining about player movement for years, because casual fans have trouble following a team that changes so much every year. It seems as though most fans of any sport prefer that teams stay mostly intact so they can root for their guys.

    Nothing much new in the article but the irony of a vastly overpaid guy getting overpaid some more is incredible.

    A guy like Houston is making $20 million a year. And now he could get cut and go sign for the MLE at $5 million. Now he is making $25 million a year. There are going to be some guys laughing all the way to the bank.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

      I didn't think that was how it worked, though. In that scenario, Houston still makes his $20 million, but the Knicks would pay $15 million of it and the team he signed with would pay the $5 million. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

        actually, until the cba is finalized, we really dont know for sure....u could make a case for both situations....this is going to be a special provision...so we dont really know all the details....does it work just like a player placed on waivers? maybe, maybe not....a player placed on waivers still counts against the luxury tax, and in this case it wont.....so this is new territory and weve been teased with bits and pieces but really dont know all the details yet....it would seem to make sense that the team has to stay on the hook for the whole amount.....yet they may want to avoid these players double dipping so they may have some sort of provision saying the players may go to the team of their choosing but they will be paid the vet min for years served....who knows...its all speculation to this point...

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

          The way I read it back when the deal was first struck I agree with you Zesty. I was under the impression it is like waiving a player now.

          When a player is waived now and they clear waivers then the original team is held accountable for the full amount of the contract minus whatever the player gets for signing with a new team.

          Say DD was paid ~9M in the last year of his contract last year. He is waived by NO and clears waivers. The Pacers then pick him up for the vet minimum pro- rated to about 500k. He is then owed 8.5M from NO and .5M from the Pacers = still making 9M.

          Outsider

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

            It makes sense to say that another team would pay a contract and that the original team would pay the rest of the original salary.

            I'm just going by what Montieth said "could then sign with a contending team... and receive another contract on top of his (current) deal."

            I should have bolded it. Either Mark is mistaken, or the rich get richer.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

              I doubt you'll see the type movement in the NBA the is witnessed in either MLB or NFL. One player per team would be alot. But just enought to stir enthusiasm and hope in the teams (yeah dude, Dudley Bradley is just what we needed to put us over the top...woowooooooo)

              Generates a whole new batch of uniform sales too (non-basketball related revenue )
              Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

                My interpretation was just the opposite. It is still up in the air, but I recall reading something about the current team being responsible for the entire amount, with the new team initiating a contract exclusive from the player's existing contract. I think it is the NBA rendition of double-dipping.

                Players must be signed to a new contact greater than or equal to the league minimum mandated by their years of service. Those players courted by multiple teams will probably command a new contract higher than the minimum.

                So, if we look at Croshere, who will get $8.91M and $9.56M for the remaining 2 years of his contract, the Pacers are obligated to pay him $18.47M.

                Now what I think would be great would be if Croshere went out and found himself another team, maybe took a buyout in exchange for exercising his option to opt out of his contract. His benefit would be that he would not have to wait until Oct 1 to be released. That way, we are out from under his contract, without exercising the amnesty clause, and then we could release another player using the amnesty clause. A bit far-fetched, but if it's allowed, why not?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

                  Under this scanario as MM interprets it, there would be no reason for AC to accept a buyout. If he were cut, he could make $30 mil over the next two years rather than $19 mil assuming he could get a MLE deal.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

                    once again....this is all speculation....we wont know til end of july....but it seems a bit hard to believe that the nba owners would agree to granting these guys that are released total unrestricted free agent status....likewise it appears the players union wouldnt likely agree to it working just as a normal waiver situation, though it probably makes the most sense....

                    thats why there will probably be some sort of new parameter....but keep in mind....it is considered waiving a player....so the end result would seem likely to resemble that of a waived player versus one that is an unrestricted free agent...after all the player will have the ability to pick his team anyway....and receive all of his original contract....i could very well see a scenario where the new team has to pay the player the vet min for years served, but unlike the normal waiving of a player, the player gets that in addition to his original contract....i just dont see the league allowing an allout bidding war starting all over again....remember, thats what started this whole mess to begin with....owners not being responsible....would seem a bit silly to allow the process to start all over again....

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

                      I read somewhere that the teams would still either have to have cap space or the exemtions to use to grab one of these guys, so I don't foresee any bidding war going on. Teams like the Pacers may look at their own players and say "Yeah, he's overpaid, but who can I replace him with...we ain't got any money to deal with" and end up keeping the overpriced player.
                      Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

                        Originally posted by foretaz
                        ....but it seems a bit hard to believe that the nba owners would agree to granting these guys that are released total unrestricted free agent status.... fficeffice" />>>

                        >>

                        the end result would seem likely to resemble that of a waived player versus one that is an unrestricted free agent… >>

                        >>

                        ...i just dont see the league allowing an allout bidding war starting all over again>>

                        Each player waived using the amnesty rule will end up being an unrestricted free agent. Even if the current waiver rule is in effect, do you really think any team will claim ffice:smarttags" />lace w:st="on">Houstonlace> for $20M per year before he clears waivers? Of course not. So each of these high-priced players would clear waivers and become an unrestricted free agent.

                        >>

                        Therefore, my guess is that the amnesty rule makes these players immediate unrestricted free agents. Any team is enabled to sign any free agent to any salary it wishes as long as the salary doesn’t put them over the salary cap or they have an exemption to use. So if one of the players is a highly desired commodity, then yes, I could see several suitors setting up somewhat of a bidding war, using whatever cap room or exemptions they have available.

                        >>

                        Any player in the league must be paid at least the league minimum for years of service. That’s the way it’s always been, so that is unlikely to be changed.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

                          Originally posted by beast23
                          Each player waived using the amnesty rule will end up being an unrestricted free agent. Even if the current waiver rule is in effect, do you really think any team will claim ffice:smarttags" />lace w:st="on">Houstonlace> for $20M per year before he clears waivers? Of course not. So each of these high-priced players would clear waivers and become an unrestricted free agent.

                          >>

                          Therefore, my guess is that the amnesty rule makes these players immediate unrestricted free agents. Any team is enabled to sign any free agent to any salary it wishes as long as the salary doesn’t put them over the salary cap or they have an exemption to use. So if one of the players is a highly desired commodity, then yes, I could see several suitors setting up somewhat of a bidding war, using whatever cap room or exemptions they have available.

                          >>

                          Any player in the league must be paid at least the league minimum for years of service. That’s the way it’s always been, so that is unlikely to be changed.

                          and as ive repeatedly said this is all speculation.....

                          and u have ur guess as to how it might play out....and i have mine...and probably most have their own as well....and fortunately we probably only have to wait about 2 week or so to find out actually what it really is...

                          till then its something to talk about, since things are slow....

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

                            taz, read the reason:


                            Owners, by waving save themselves the salary in luxury tax (or get under the cap!) in other words, they are paying 50% on the dollar.
                            The player gets compensated by addinghis new contract-income to his original, kind of to "soften teh blow" a bit

                            That is the only way players AND owners would agree to something like this.
                            So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                            If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                            Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Donnie Walsh: NBA wants more player movement

                              Couple thoughts.

                              1) A team that is way over the cap is paying 200% to some of their players. By this waive they can pay 100 cents on the dollar instead of 200.

                              2) Nobody is going to have a lot of money to throw at these guys. My guess is that a lot of teams are going to save their MLE and see who hits the luxury cap waiver wire (BTW this should be called the Allan Houston rule).

                              3) I think MM is wrong. the contacts won't stack. The Luxury cap waive will be like any other waive with the same stipulations. I actually fired off a quick e-mail to Larry Coon who hosts the great CBA FAQ that is so useful (don't have the link offhand but most of you have seen it). He sent back an e-mail saying that if a waived player was signed by another team the new contract would offset the original contract. So if Houston signed for $5 mil somewhere else the Knicks would only owe $14 mil.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X