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

why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

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

  • why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

    for instance KG with the wolves (altho they say they are not interested in trading him) Or when orlando sucked they traded T-mac....wtf? is that how you rebuild? trade away your best player? why is it JOneal is getting all the blame and now he "Needs to go" ? is it because people think he isn't good enough to lead this team to the finals? why because he's been injured? or the fact that this team hasn't had ANY time to gel. So the pacers lose it must be O'neals fault...automatically we should trade him? it doesn't make sense...The nba is weird like that...trade your best player to rebuild? what!?
    I think the p's need to add pieces but not totally blow it up! keep guys like danger,fred jones,foster,AJ....get rid of guys like Tinsley,Jacko,Runi(even tho I liked sarunas)...BUT NOT YOUR STAR! wtf?
    and just think how JO feels all the stuff he's done for indiana and it's community now they want him traded!? how's he going to play with that over his head? like wtf they don't want me here? fine then...not saying he's going to act all steve francis but you know...

    So add me to the Kill the JO Trade Talk bandwagon!
    "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

  • #2
    Re: why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

    I guess the answer lies in Conrad's (answer to) question of the day and BBall's Season ending wrapup post. Imo, management is thinking that it is easier to get the transcendent leader (which isn't JO) than to form the team. Without trading JO it is hard to get the transcendent leader.

    P.S.: don't put me in the JO trade bandwagon. Like, I mentioned before - I want to see Jermain in PF. Now I have no idea about him
    I'm really sorry because of my english (which is my 3-4 language) and I really appreciate Your patience. I hope this board will make me better

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

      Jermaine has the biggest contract on the Pacers' roster. He's making $16.4 million this year, and progressively more in the years to come. If Donnie Walsh needs to cut the payroll by a lot, then Jermaine's contract is the place to start.

      But there is also the performance issue. Jermaine earns a lot, but he's an important player. You might argue that he earns his $16.4 million.

      You'd be wrong.

      I have calculated the contribution of every player on the payroll this year, and JO's cost per contribution is high.

      My calculations were simple: (minutes + points + rebounds + assists + steals + blocks) / salary. In Peja's case, I included his total year's stats rather than just since he joined the Pacers.

      The most expensive Pacer this year is Reggie Miller, who is earning $6.1 million for past contributions. He earned it, and his retirement ceremony was the highlight of the year.

      Following is every player's "dollars per performance value." The dollar value is what the franchise is paying that player to perform -- or in the case of Reggie, Bender and Walker, not to. It is, on average, what the team pays for every statistically measurable accomplishment the player leaves on the floor.


      Reggie Miller infinity ($6,100,000/zero)
      Jonathan Bender $186,842
      Samaki Walker $13,269
      Scot Pollard $5,794
      Jermaine O'Neal $5,496
      Austin Croshere $5,342
      Eddie Gill $4,705
      Jamaal Tinsley $3,178
      Jeff Foster $1,923
      Peja Stojakovic $1,762
      Sarunas Jasikevicius $1,716
      Stephen Jackson $1,298
      Anthony Johnson $863
      Fred Jones $842
      Danny Granger $501
      David Harrison $422


      Now, we agree that the Pacers need more rebounding. more scoring, more blocks, and more steals. We need players who can play minutes reliably. But those needs cannot be considered outside the financial context.

      Every Jermaine rebound costs $5,496. Every David Harrison rebound costs $422. They both count the same out on the floor.

      Where are you gonna shop?

      The intangibles are not factored into my calculations. But the intangibles are against Jermaine.

      He is the acknowledged "most over-rated player in the NBA."
      He is disappointing as a team leader.
      He is injury-prone.
      He has no upside -- he's as good as he's going to get.


      OnlyPacersLeft says there is a general tendency for teams to shop their star when things go badly. I don't know why it happens with other teams. But I think the above reasons suffice for why Jermaine is on the trade block.
      And I won't be here to see the day
      It all dries up and blows away
      I'd hang around just to see
      But they never had much use for me
      In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

        Ooo. I forget one of the big intangibles.

        The team plays better without him.
        And I won't be here to see the day
        It all dries up and blows away
        I'd hang around just to see
        But they never had much use for me
        In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

          Originally posted by Putnam
          Jermaine has the biggest contract on the Pacers' roster. He's making $16.4 million this year, and progressively more in the years to come. If Donnie Walsh needs to cut the payroll by a lot, then Jermaine's contract is the place to start.

          But there is also the performance issue. Jermaine earns a lot, but he's an important player. You might argue that he earns his $16.4 million.

          You'd be wrong.

          I have calculated the contribution of every player on the payroll this year, and JO's cost per contribution is high.

          My calculations were simple: (minutes + points + rebounds + assists + steals + blocks) / salary. In Peja's case, I included his total year's stats rather than just since he joined the Pacers.

          The most expensive Pacer this year is Reggie Miller, who is earning $6.1 million for past contributions. He earned it, and his retirement ceremony was the highlight of the year.

          Following is every player's "dollars per performance value." The dollar value is what the franchise is paying that player to perform -- or in the case of Reggie, Bender and Walker, not to. It is, on average, what the team pays for every statistically measurable accomplishment the player leaves on the floor.


          Reggie Miller infinity ($6,100,000/zero)
          Jonathan Bender $186,842
          Samaki Walker $13,269
          Scot Pollard $5,794
          Jermaine O'Neal $5,496
          Austin Croshere $5,342
          Eddie Gill $4,705
          Jamaal Tinsley $3,178
          Jeff Foster $1,923
          Peja Stojakovic $1,762
          Sarunas Jasikevicius $1,716
          Stephen Jackson $1,298
          Anthony Johnson $863
          Fred Jones $842
          Danny Granger $501
          David Harrison $422


          Now, we agree that the Pacers need more rebounding. more scoring, more blocks, and more steals. We need players who can play minutes reliably. But those needs cannot be considered outside the financial context.

          Every Jermaine rebound costs $5,496. Every David Harrison rebound costs $422. They both count the same out on the floor.

          Where are you gonna shop?

          The intangibles are not factored into my calculations. But the intangibles are against Jermaine.

          He is the acknowledged "most over-rated player in the NBA."
          He is disappointing as a team leader.
          He is injury-prone.
          He has no upside -- he's as good as he's going to get.


          OnlyPacersLeft says there is a general tendency for teams to shop their star when things go badly. I don't know why it happens with other teams. But I think the above reasons suffice for why Jermaine is on the trade block.

          Great post. The Pacers are 3-8 since JO's return. It's all about results and this team hasn't played very well since the "All Star" has returned to the lineup. It's not completely his fault but he has a hand in it.

          I've said it for a while now - JO is not the leader the team wants him to be. He is a good 2nd man but he is not a good leader. I don't see anyway he will be able to step back with this organization. Both parties need a fresh start. This team is not going to win a championship (or even come close to playing for one) as they are constituted. JO can bring the most in a trade and he is arguably the easiest to replace. I know 20/10 guys are hard to come by but when you factor in injuries and his position I think you can get 20/10 out of a Granger/Foster/Lottery Pick combination at PF by giving JO's minutes to them. You also free up a chunk of money that can be used on other areas of need. This team is in need of a major overhaul and the lack of effort they've exhibited the last few weeks will probably push Bird/Walsh over the edge.
          "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
          - Benjamin Franklin

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

            The pacers already traded away their best player... JO is not a superstar.

            over the last 3 years when Ron was out and it was JO playing this team has been sub- par/ mediocre. My feeling is, they have already blown up this team so much they might as well start over and get JO off the books and get some good players in return. The loss of Ron Reggie and AL was the downfall of this team.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

              Originally posted by OnlyPacersLeft
              So add me to the Kill the JO Trade Talk bandwagon!
              Just added myself to that to.

              I dont remember where a team have traded there star player to be any better team then they was with him.

              How many games has Artest played for us without Jermaine???? If someone could tell me our record from that I would like to know.
              My Dream Team

              PG - A.Iverson
              SG - K.Bryant
              SF - R.Artest
              PF - J.O'Neal
              C - D.Howard

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

                Originally posted by J_2_Da_IzzO
                I dont remember where a team have traded there star player to be any better team then they was with him.
                Phoenix & Stephon Marbury.

                Detroit & Grant Hill, Jerry Stackhouse.

                Those are just some quick ones that came to mind...I'm sure there are plenty more out there.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

                  Originally posted by OnlyPacersLeft
                  for instance KG with the wolves (altho they say they are not interested in trading him) Or when orlando sucked they traded T-mac....wtf? is that how you rebuild? trade away your best player? why is it JOneal is getting all the blame and now he "Needs to go" ? is it because people think he isn't good enough to lead this team to the finals? why because he's been injured? or the fact that this team hasn't had ANY time to gel. So the pacers lose it must be O'neals fault...automatically we should trade him? it doesn't make sense...The nba is weird like that...trade your best player to rebuild? what!?
                  I think the p's need to add pieces but not totally blow it up! keep guys like danger,fred jones,foster,AJ....get rid of guys like Tinsley,Jacko,Runi(even tho I liked sarunas)...BUT NOT YOUR STAR! wtf?
                  and just think how JO feels all the stuff he's done for indiana and it's community now they want him traded!? how's he going to play with that over his head? like wtf they don't want me here? fine then...not saying he's going to act all steve francis but you know...

                  So add me to the Kill the JO Trade Talk bandwagon!
                  When their superstar isn't a superstar. Sure, he has commercials ... but, he is also one of the most overrated players in the league. Taking 30 shots to score 20 points and clanking the rest to get 10 boards is not a superstar. That's just proof anyone in the league can average a double-double if given the opportunity.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

                    Originally posted by rcarey
                    Phoenix & Stephon Marbury.

                    Detroit & Grant Hill, Jerry Stackhouse.

                    Those are just some quick ones that came to mind...I'm sure there are plenty more out there.
                    Stephon Marbury and EVERY team he has left (Minnesota, New Jersey, Phoenix).

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

                      Often its the max player who wants the change. Not the team.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

                        Do the pacers have a superstar!?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

                          leave Boomer out of this, his life is hard enough having to deal with jeolous Bowser
                          Ya Think Ya Used Enough Dynamite there Butch...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: why is it...that when a team loses...they look to trade their superstar?

                            Originally posted by #31
                            Do the pacers have a superstar!?
                            THAT is the problem. JO is not the superstar that the Pacer fandom has promoted him to be. He is a very good player but he is NOT a superstar. He is being looked to and depended on to be a superstar but he isn't. Last night was a case in point. The team didn't look to him on every possession and the team played better. They didn't look to him enough imho, they took too many jumpers for my taste, but they got other players involved. This is what they did when JO was out for over 30 games the last 2 years and they had success. It is what they don't do enough when is in, which is why they struggle.

                            JO can't handle being the only option on a team. This league is dominated by wing players and slashers and JO isn't either and the sooner he and the Pacers realize he can't be the main man, but instead, ONE of the main MEN the sooner they can become a contender.
                            "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
                            - Benjamin Franklin

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X