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

Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

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

  • Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

    I live in Southern California and I was in the car about an hour ago when I heard a potential deal being discussed on 570am. There was no mention of a source for the rumor - I only heard it in passing - so it may be nothing more than just that, a rumor.

    Anyhow, the deal was for Al Harrington to move to the Lakers in exchange for Andrew Bynum, Smush Parker and a 2007 1st round pick. I'm skeptical that salaries would work out on this deal, however, it does make sense for the Hawks because they would be receiving very reasonable contracts, the first round pick that they want, and a young big man with a lot of up-side. Just thought I'd let you guys know.

  • #2
    Re: Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

    I think there was a thread about this same rumor a day ago or something. Or is this a new rumor

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

      THe money is not even close. Also, I don't think that the Lakers are ready to give up on Bynum yet. Finally, how does it make sense for the Lakers to acquire Al. They just signed Radmanovich to play the 3 and Odom will move to the 4. They have even less use for Al than the Pacers do.
      Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
      http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

        Can we sign Al and trade him for Bynum? Please?
        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

          There's too much smoke here for there to be nothing. I'm not confident about Al being a Pacer anymore.
          Play Mafia!
          Twitter

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

            I'm not buying this.

            If it were true, someone else would've picked it up by now. The article about the Lakers and Bobcats was PURE SPECULATION, and now some radio host has picked up the story and ran.

            If you read what some Laker fans have to say, the guy who made the story up is not credible.

            But at anyrate, if Al doesn't come to the Pacers, I don't really care anymore. Donnie will do something else with the TE to make us all forget about Al.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

              Does anyone really think there are THAT many options regarding the TE? I mean i was under the assumption that Donnie pretty much got this TE expecting to use it on the Al deal. It all seemed to be in place.

              Let me know if anyone knows of any possible scenarios, but isn't the TE just used for us to trade someone with a lower salary for someone with a higher salary. Normally lower salary players aren't as good as higher salary ones....

              I am going to be really worried if we dont get Al, we don't have that many other options and I doubt too many players in the league are dying to come to Indiana.

              Al is a good player in this league and he seemingly wants to come here. If we don't get Al we better get Bonzi. You need GOOD players to win.
              *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

                How much say does Al have in all this? I know NBA trades can be very complicated and I'm not really sure how it works. If he has the final say I don't see why he would go anywhere else. I also don't see why Atlanta would suddenly start looking to take contracts on after all this huff about not wanting to get players in return. I really hope this all just a rumor. Even if they got us someone else of equal value to Al I would be VERY disapointed. On a side note, the Hawks should get a great pick in next year's draft when they finish in the bottom 5.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

                  yeah - it was Hacksaw Hamilton on local radio - and let's just say that Hacksaw does not have a good reputation when it comes to NBA. He knows things about football training camp - NASCAR - etc - but basically oblivious when it comes to NBA.

                  A general rule of thumb around the Laker fan communities is to discount anything this guy says.

                  In theory if a deal was in the works - LA could do Bynum + Smush + McKie and Von Wafer (non-guaranteed) and that would be enough to get Harrington enough money.

                  That said - I don't see LA giving up Bynum for Harrington - and certainly not Bynum\Smush AND a #1 - may as well just throw in Kobe while they're at it . . .

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

                    Wouldn't it make more sense for the Lakers to be after a point guard than another forward?

                    -Phil

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      I think there was a thread about this same rumor a day ago or something. Or is this a new rumor
                      UB - I believe this is a new one. I posted an article by Eric about the bobcats playing the third team in helping the lakers land Al.

                      This space for rent

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

                        Wow, this trade is actually worse than the one from yesterday. As I said there, the Lakers are thin at PG and C. Why they would give up their only prospect at C and their best PG for what will amount to a backup starting at 7 million is beyond me.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

                          Lakers have 3 centers - Kwame, Mihm + Bynum - Kwame is unable to play the 4 in the triangle and he has shown an ability to be a top notch man defender. Of course Kwame can't block any shots - but he's pencilled in as the starting center. Bynum is considered the future - they hope to get him 12-15 mpg this year. There's not much burn available for Mihm.

                          The Lakers just brought in 2 guards - Shammond Williams and Mo Evans - plus Kobe - and then you have Smush and Sasha Vujacic. They also want to sign Laron Profit, Devin Green and draft pick JR Pinnock. Also on the roster are McKie and Von Wafer.

                          The Lakers are flat out overloaded with guards - mind you other than Kobe none that should be starting or are particularly good - but they're apparently done on that front.

                          The team has also talked about moving Odom to the backcourt . . .

                          At the 3/4 they have Odom, Vlad, Walton, Cook and Turiaf - with Cook the most expendable.

                          Everyone figured they'd try to get a starting guard but they went and used their BAE on Shammond Williams.

                          The rumors that have been leaking about LA have all been about them trying to land one more forward - be it a 3 or 4.

                          They love David West (unavailable), tried earlier to get Al Harrington, may be eyeing Gooden, etc. Boozer has been a target for a couple of years now.

                          I think the hope is to send out 3-5 players to bring in 1-2 - like Mihm, Cook, Wafer (non-guaranteed), McKie, etc - add forward depth to try Odom at the starting one.

                          Frankly it gives me a headache.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

                            Originally posted by Eindar View Post
                            Wow, this trade is actually worse than the one from yesterday. As I said there, the Lakers are thin at PG and C. Why they would give up their only prospect at C and their best PG for what will amount to a backup starting at 7 million is beyond me.
                            You really don't need a true point to run the triangle. You just need guys that can handle the ball and make the right decision. I'm sure Phil would much rather get a Ron Harper/Brian Shaw-type guy to bring the ball up when Kobe doesn't want to. Odom is pretty capable of handling this role if need be, and I guarentee Phil could give a flying flip if Smush Parker is on the team or not. He just wants talent.

                            Giving up on Bynum seems like backing out early, but LA is a win-now city and Al is a lot more valuable in the next year or two than Bynum will be.

                            My guess is that both Phil and Kupchak just want some talent, and given their cap situation and lack of "chips", Bynum might have to be another team's "project" to either go bust or jackpot with.

                            I'd take Bynum in a minute though. Kid will be nice.
                            Read my Pacers blog:
                            8points9seconds.com

                            Follow my twitter:

                            @8pts9secs

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Potential Laker Deal for Al Harrington

                              On a side note, how happy are you guys with Bynum?

                              In the very few times I've seen him on the floor I just can't help but get the idea that this guy will one day be a monster in this league.

                              Long arms, big NBA but & great size.

                              Plus you guys have done it right by having Kareem tutor the guy. I would love to think that in 5 years that Bynum & Harrison will be one of the premier center battles, however after last season & so far this off-season I am a little down on David at the moment.

                              Do you guys expect this guy to explode or just be a good NBA center?


                              Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X