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

Chad Ford on who is still available. Fri 7/28

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

  • Chad Ford on who is still available. Fri 7/28

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/colum...2=stateChanged


    Slim pickings for teams wanting to change

    By Chad Ford
    ESPN Insider

    Well it's here. Finally. Sort of. At least we think it is.

    First the player movement moratorium (when free agents are free to actually sign deals) was supposed to be July 14. Then it was pushed back to July 22. Then to July 28. Then indefinitely.

    Now the word around the league is that the moment of truth has finally arrived. Free agents will be free to sign Tuesday. In theory, at least.

    That's great news for the 37 free agents who have already come to terms with teams. It's also fantastic for teams like the Nets, Rockets, Cavs and Lakers who have scored significant offseason additions this summer.

    But it's bad news for several teams that still have significant cap room to spend this summer. With a projected $49.5 million cap, the Hawks ($23.5 million), Bobcats ($18 million), Hornets ($11 million), Clippers ($10 million), and Sonics ($10 million) still have money under the cap to burn.

    Thirteen other teams -- the Bulls, Mavericks, Nuggets, Pistons, Warriors, Lakers, Grizzlies, Heat, Timberwolves, Sixers, Kings, Raptors and Jazz -- still have their full $5 million midlevel exceptions available. And a number of other teams still have partial mid-level exceptions available.

    Another 13 teams -- the Bulls, Nuggets, Rockets, Pacers, Lakers, Grizzlies, Knicks, Magic, Sixers, Suns, Raptors, Jazz and Wizards -- can still use their $1.7 million exception.

    In other words, there's a lot of free-agent money left to be had, but not a lot of free agents worth spending it on.

    The Hawks are expected to use a big chunk of their cap room on Joe Johnson. However, if the Suns match the offer, they could be shut out for the second straight year. Other bad teams like the Hornets, Bobcats, Jazz and Blazers also have little to show this summer.

    Still hoping that your team will make a major addition before the season starts?

    Here's a look at who's out there on the free-agent and trade markets.

    VIA FREE AGENCY

    Tyson Chandler, PF/C, Bulls
    Chandler should have an offer by now. He's got the same upside as Samuel Dalembert, and is younger and 3 inches taller. The Hawks or Hornets should take the gamble. What do they have to lose? As it stands, the Bulls are willing to give him Dalembert-type money to stay. He wants more. He probably won't get it unless he gets an offer sheet somewhere else. Of course, if he does, the word inside the Bulls' offices is that they'll match anyway.

    Eddy Curry, C, Bulls
    Having one bad heart is tough enough. But two? Curry's medical tests (and his uninsurable contract) aren't the only things scaring teams off. Teams worry whether he'll get in great shape or work hard once he has a fat, long-term contract in his hands. Hawks GM Billy Knight might gamble if he can't find anyone else to take his money, but right now it looks like he's the only one. Look for the Bulls to either re-sign Curry at a bargain price or for him to take the one-year tender and become an unrestricted free agent next year.

    Antoine Walker, F, Celtics
    It looks like the Celtics aren't going to make a strong bid to re-sign Walker -- despite the euphoria he created in his return to Boston. He's had a number of teams interested in signing him with their mid-level exceptions, but Walker wants more. The Heat, Kings and Sixers all have interest, but so far none of them has put together a sign-and-trade package that Danny Ainge is willing to swallow. Walker was in Miami Thursday, so things may be heating up there.

    Marko Jaric, PG, Clippers
    GMs love big point guards, and Jaric, who stands 6-foot-7, is as big as they come. When Jaric was healthy last season, he was pretty good. He started the season averaging 12.3 points, 6.3 assists and 2.2 steals per game, while shooting 44 percent on 3s. He ended the season with similar numbers. In between, injuries slowed him down to a crawl. If he can stay healthy, he could be a real steal in the free-agent market. But he's going to have to work out a sign-and-trade to get out of L.A. The Nuggets, Cavs and Timberwolves have shown the most interest. Can anyone make a deal with the Clippers?

    Vladimir Radmanovic, F, Sonics
    Radmanovic is a 6-10 athletic forward who can run the floor and stroke it from 3. He was the leading contender to win the Sixth Man Award before breaking his leg and missing the last six weeks of the season. He was a critical component in the Sonics' unexpected run this year, and has a lot of fans around the league. So why can't he get any love? Radmanovic wants starter's money (a starting salary at $8 million-$9 million per year) and a starting role in Seattle. That's too much for them (or anyone else right now) to swallow. An up-tempo team that gets up and down the floor could be a great fit for him.

    Earl Watson, PG, Grizzlies
    Watson isn't a big name, but his numbers were pretty close to Jason Williams' in every category but the scoring department last season. He pushes the ball up the floor, plays great defense and plays a little bigger than he looks. He's ideally suited as a top-notch backup, but on a team like the Knicks, who will now be looking for a point guard who "plays the right way," he could be a fit. Then again, if the Grizzlies find a way to trade Williams, look for Watson to end up right back in Memphis.

    Gary Payton, PG, Celtics
    Payton is no longer a superstar, but people forget that Payton averaged 6.1 assists per game for the Celtics last season and shot 46 percent from the field. Given the dearth of point guards out there and the money they're making, that's not too shabby. The Lakers are a possible destination, though his first go-around with Phil Jackson was a little shaky. A better destination? Seattle. The team needs someone to back up Luke Ridnour. But more importantly, they need the sense of identity they've lacked since Payton was running the show.

    Latrell Sprewell, SG, Timberwolves
    Maybe Latrell's going to have a problem feeding his family after all. After turning down a three-year, $21 million dollar extension offer with the Wolves last fall, Spree is finding out the market isn't as hot as he thought it would be for a soon-to-be 35-year-old shooting guard with pigtails. Still, who can deny that Spree still has some juice left in the tank. He finished strong, scoring 14.3 points per game and shooting 44 percent from the arc in April. He's no longer a go-to guy, but he still can be a lethal option off the bench.

    Damon Stoudamire, PG, Blazers
    Stoudamire has been flirting with both the Rockets and the Cavs, but hasn't been able to get a deal done. The latest looks like he's leaning toward signing a deal with the Grizzlies.




    Jason Williams, PG, Grizzlies
    The word from a source inside the Grizzlies is that Williams has a number of suitors -- including the Celtics, Heat and Knicks. With Larry Brown taking over in New York, you can scratch the Knicks from the list. The Celtics need a point guard who can push the ball. Williams will deliver that along with a lot of attitude and some volatile chemistry. A deal of Mark Blount and Marcus Banks for Williams works under the cap. The Heat offer wouldn't be as lucrative for the Grizzlies. To make a deal work, Memphis would have to send Williams and Lorenzen Wright (also on the block) for Eddie Jones. Yikes.

    Jamal Crawford, G, Knicks
    We know that with Brown running the show in New York things are going to have to change. Stephon Marbury is the obvious choice, but he won't be the first to go. Brown will try to move him to the two and prove to the world that he can make Marbury a winner. Crawford, he has very little use for. He's a skinny, no defense, jump-shooting guard with a selfish streak. Don't be surprised if he ends up in Cleveland or Portland.

    Jamaal Magloire, C, Hornets
    The one legit center on the market should be getting more suitors. The Hornets are resigned to move him and thought they had a deal done with the Raptors before the draft. The trick is getting another center (preferably one who wants to play in New Orleans) or an All-Star caliber player in return. The Hawks, Lakers, Nuggets, Pacers, Grizzlies and Raptors have shown the most interest.

    Nene, PF, Nuggets
    The Nuggets won't give Nene away. However, if they could land a top-flight two guard and a reliable backup center that could play heavy minutes whenever Marcus Camby goes down, they might be open to it. A trade for Desmond Mason, coupled with the signing of a free-agent center like Zaza Pachulia might do the trick.

    Al Harrington, F, Hawks
    With Marvin Williams and Josh Smith both playing the same position, it makes sense for the Hawks to shop Harrington. With that said, the rumor the Pistons offered Darko Milicic for Harrington was greatly exaggerated according to sources on both teams.


    Wally Szczerbiak and Sam Cassell, Timberwolves
    The Wolves have to do something and it centers around finding new homes for Cassell and possibly Szczerbiak. They've tried to use both as trade bait with the Clippers for Jaric, but the Clippers aren't biting. There was also talk earlier in the summer of a Cassell for Jason Williams swap, but that too has fallen apart.

    Drew Gooden, F, Cavs
    Now that the Cavs have Donyell Marshall (along with second-year power forward Anderson Varejao), the need to keep Gooden has lessened. For a guy that put up pretty impressive numbers, especially on the boards, his stock is pretty low. Scouts say that a lack of basketball IQ and off-the-court issues are scaring teams away. Still, for a young team in need of a rebounder, Gooden could be a big bargain.


    Michael Finley, G, Mavs
    The Mavs have a problem. Now that word is out that Finley's on the Mavs' amnesty list, teams are no longer willing to trade an asset to get him. They'd much prefer not to swallow the $51 million left on his contract and get him for the veteran's minimum. The Mavs can talk all they want about trading him, but unless they take back an awful contract in return, it doesn't look like it will happen.

    Free Agents Off the Market


    Ray Allen, Sonics (5 years, $80-85 million)

    Michael Redd, Bucks (6 years, $85-90 million)

    Larry Hughes, Cavs (5 years, $60-65 million)

    Samuel Dalembert, Sixers (6 years, $60-70 million)

    Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Cavs (5 years, $55-60 million)

    Bobby Simmons, Bucks (5 years, $47 million)

    Cuttino Mobley, Clippers (5 years, $42 million)

    Shareef Abdur-Rahim, Nets (6 years, $37-38 million)

    Udonis Haslem, Heat (5 years, $30-32 million)

    Dan Gadzuric, Bucks (6 years, $36 million)

    Stromile Swift, Rockets (5 years, $28-29 million)

    Antonio Daniels, Wizards (5 years, $28-29 million)

    Jerome James, Knicks (5 years, $28-29 million)

    Kyle Korver, Sixers (6 years, $25-27 million)

    Kwame Brown, Lakers (3 years, $22-24 million)

    Donyell Marshall, Cavs (4 years, $20-21 million)

    Raja Bell, Suns (5 years, $20-25 million)

    Willie Green, Sixers (6 years, $19-20 million)

    Brian Scalabrine, Celtics (5 years, $15 million)

    Sarunas Jasikevicius, Pacers (3 years, $12 million)

    Keyon Dooling, Magic (3 years, $10 million)

    Fabricio Oberto, Spurs (3 years, $7.5-9 million)

    Jeff McInnis, Nets (2 years, $7 million)

    Juan Dixon, Blazers (3 years, $8 million)

    Mark Madsen, Timberwolves (5 years, salary undisclosed)

    Arvydas Macijauskas, Hornets (3 years, salary undisclosed)

    Robert Horry, Spurs (3 years, salary undisclosed)

    Clifford Robinson, Nets (terms undisclosed)

    Luke Walton, Lakers (terms undisclosed

    Chris Andersen, Hornets (terms undisclosed)

    Bostjan Nachbar, Hornets (terms undisclosed)

    Nikoloz Tskitishvili, Timberwolves (terms undisclosed)

    LaRon Profit, Traded to Lakers (3 years, $2.7-2.8 million -- only the first year is guaranteed)

    Eddie Basden, Bulls (partially guaranteed multi-year contract)

    Lucas Tischer, Suns (1 year plus team option, $1.1 million -- first year is partially guaranteed)

    Matt Walsh, Heat (2 years, $1.1 million -- first year is partially guaranteed)

    Dwayne Jones, Timberwolves (2 years, $1.1 million)

    VIA TRADE

    Players Traded this Summer
    Chucky Atkins, Wizards
    Curtis Borchardt, Grizzlies
    Caron Butler, Wizards
    Bobby Jackson, Grizzlies
    Raul Lopez, Grizzlies
    Greg Ostertag, Jazz
    Quentin Richardson, Knicks
    Kirk Snyder, Grizzlies
    Kurt Thomas, Suns
    Jake Voskuhl, Bobcats
    Bonzi Wells, Kings

  • #2
    Re: Chad Ford on who is still available. Fri 7/28

    What about Radmonavic, noone has mentioned him for us.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Chad Ford on who is still available. Fri 7/28

      Still some nice players left on the board, I've always like Eddy Curry. It's too bad someone is probably going to drasticly overpay for Tyson Chandler.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Chad Ford on who is still available. Fri 7/28

        Originally posted by PacerNthaDesert
        Still some nice players left on the board, I've always like Eddy Curry. It's too bad someone is probably going to drasticly overpay for Tyson Chandler.

        Still some nice players left on the board, I've always liked Tyson Chandler. It's too bad someone is probably going to drasticly over for Eddy Curry

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Chad Ford on who is still available. Fri 7/28

          If we got Chandler or Magloire to come here, that'd be scary. We would be too good.
          You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Chad Ford on who is still available. Fri 7/28

            Originally posted by IndyPacers67
            What about Radmonavic, noone has mentioned him for us.
            Maybe cause we can't afford him.
            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Chad Ford on who is still available. Fri 7/28

              I think that all the Pacers are going to do that they haven't already done this offseason is a possible multiple player trade. We are out of the free-agent market.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Chad Ford on who is still available. Fri 7/28

                Originally posted by IndyPacers67
                What about Radmonavic, noone has mentioned him for us.

                though hes 6'10" he basically is a 3....and we got too many of those already...and they all make less than what hes wanting....hes wanting croshere type money....

                Comment

                Working...
                X