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

Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

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

  • Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

    A Sam Smith article so really so just throwing things out there.

    Sam Smith
    On Pro Basketball


    Big Ben could use this helper
    Time may be ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers' O'Neal


    October 16, 2006


    I'm not even sure about this one. So let's think about this together. What if the Bulls made a run at Indiana's Jermaine O'Neal in a package that would include Luol Deng and the Bulls' rights to New York's first-round draft pick next year?

    This presumes that the troubled Pacers would change course and go for a major rebuilding in the face of the strip-club ruckus at which Stephen Jackson fired a gun into the air. Jackson was booed by the home fans Saturday night in his first game since the incident that resulted in felony charges.

    Jackson, his disguise not working—he shaved his head—said he merely was protecting his teammates. That would be a more reasonable explanation had he not said the same thing when he went into the stands in Auburn Hills, Mich., two years ago and attacked fans.


    There's no question the Pacers have big image problems in a community growing embarrassed by its team. For now, it appears they'll forge ahead with their team as comprised, if not compromised. But they may have to reach a compromise.

    It's becoming increasingly hard in conservative Indiana to embrace Jackson and Jamaal Tinsley, whose car was found to contain marijuana the night of the incident. If the team also starts slowly, it's quite possible it could look to trade. O'Neal would be the only player who could bring them value to rebuild.

    If a team is going to rebuild through the draft, 2007 may be the year. Pacers general manager Larry Bird knows about the Boston Celtics' success through the draft with Bill Russell, Dave Cowens and then himself.

    This next college class could be one of the best ever for big men. Eligible players include Indianapolis native Greg Oden from Ohio State, Spencer Hawes from Washington, Joakim Noah and Al Horford from Florida, Tyler Hansbrough from North Carolina and Josh McRoberts from Duke.

    Giving up a season by going into the lottery always is painful. But a team can come out with talent that can carry the team for a decade. It's hard to see how these Pacers, with a core of O'Neal, Jackson and Tinsley, can be much more than a .500 team on the edge of the playoff race. It's the road to nowhere the Pacers were on in the 1980s.

    And perhaps no one could offer a better package then the Bulls, for both talent and financial relief.

    O'Neal, a perennial 20-point and 10-rebound low-post threat, makes $18 million this season. The Bulls would have to match salary, which would require Deng, P.J. Brown, Michael Sweetney and probably Chris Duhon. The only true core player lost would be Deng, and the Bulls will have to make a decision at some point on that issue.

    Does anyone really believe that Andres Nocioni, who will be one of the most sought-after free agents next summer, will re-sign with the Bulls to be a backup?

    This is a good problem to have, but inevitable when a poor team begins to emerge as a power after years of top draft picks. It's just a matter of making the right decisions. If you don't, you become the old Clippers. O'Neal would replace Brown at power forward and Duhon probably is the fourth guard, anyway, with the addition of the impressive

    Thabo Sefolosha. Brown and Sweetney are in their final contract seasons, and Duhon has only one more left, giving the Pacers substantial salary-cap relief to pursue free agents.

    The Pacers also would get the right to swap picks with the Knicks, which the Bulls have from the Eddy Curry deal last year. That means the Pacers, assuming they miss the playoffs, could have two lottery picks to begin rebuilding and Deng, an emerging young star.

    Sure, one could argue that Deng and Nocioni could play together for the Bulls. But that would make for an awfully small lineup with Ben Wallace, none of them exceeding 6 feet 9 inches. And, sorry, but the Knicks look like they'll be better. Whomever the Bulls could get for that pick probably wouldn't help much until Wallace is done.

    Watching the unbeaten Bulls in the brief exhibition season thus far, a low-post presence opposite Wallace would look awfully good. Why not go for it all now while Wallace still is Big Ben?

    The Bulls look like a 50-win type regular-season team. But what about in the slower playoff games? Wallace figures to be at his best only for the next year or two. Why not try to add an offensive force to complement him now instead of waiting for Tyrus Thomas to emerge, and perhaps add another young big man in the draft?

    One issue could be O'Neal, not generally known for his work ethic. But maybe that could change by being around the Bulls and Wallace, who always has scared O'Neal, and having a chance to finally win a championship. Certainly, it's something for both teams to consider

    Chicago Tribune

    Why Not Us ?


  • #2
    Re: Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

    Did he forget about Al? How can you write about the Pacers and not mention him as part of the group around which the Pacers plan to build?
    Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

      Well, I like the idea of moving JO on. I have for a long time. But there'd be no way in hell I trade him to a division rival for Luol Deng and a 1st round pick. That would be more dumb than signing Stephen Jackson to a lifetime contract.

      Now I would trade JO for Kirk Hinrich and their new rookie so fast it would make your head spin.
      House Name: Pacers

      House Sigil:



      House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

        Sam Smith may actually be a worse sports writer then Jay Marrioti...

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

          Its Monday, isn't it.

          Time for Sam's one-sided, if I were GM of the Bulls, what would I do column.

          Next Monday, I'll bet he explains why Ben Wallace plus Sweetney and PJ Brown for Kobe Bryant is a good trade for the Lakers because it gives them more size inside.
          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
          And life itself, rushing over me
          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

            I enjoy Sam Smith, he's been covering the NBA for a lot of years and he knows the league very well.

            But unless the Bulls first include Hinrich, I wouldn't consider trading to the Bulls about JO.

            If the Bulls would trade Hinrich, Deng, Tyrus Thomas and the Knicks first round pick then I'd consider trading JO to the Bulls.

            I would not consider trading JO unless we get a future allstar point guard. Hinrich is IMo a future allstar, so is Shawn Livingston

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

              Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
              Its Monday, isn't it.

              Time for Sam's one-sided, if I were GM of the Bulls, what would I do column.

              Next Monday, I'll bet he explains why Ben Wallace plus Sweetney and PJ Brown for Kobe Bryant is a good trade for the Lakers because it gives them more size inside.
              Thank you. I forgot about Sam's patterns. However, forgetting about Al, a free agent in which the Bulls had interest, is just lazy on his part.
              Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
              http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

                We don't need Deng with Quis and Granger on the team. I would trade JO for Hinrich, the draft pick (or Thomas) and filler. Hinrich would resolve our PG problems for years to come. Thomas will be a solid player in this league and next year's draft is gonna be awesome. The Bulls could win a championship with JO and Big Ben, but we would be moving up.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

                  There are probably very few people out there that are higher on Luol Deng than I am. I think the kid is going to be really, really good for some time.

                  But is this guy aware that we just drafted Danny Granger, who pretty much brings all the exact same skills to the table? Not to mention we just signed Al Harrington and traded for Marquis Daniels. And we're supposed to trade our franchise player for a guy who may end up being the 3rd best SF on our team?

                  This may have been the worst article I've ever read. Can't wait for the next one about trading Tyrus Thomas and Chris Duhon for Elton Brand.
                  Read my Pacers blog:
                  8points9seconds.com

                  Follow my twitter:

                  @8pts9secs

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

                    Danny Granger? I mean, clearly the Pacers are rebuilding around JO/Harrington/Granger.
                    The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                    http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                    RSS Feed
                    Subscribe via iTunes

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

                      Train wreck!!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

                        jay mariotti is worse, no question.

                        i dreaded when i lived in chicago and he would be on the local sports radio. terrible. his speaking made his columns seem bearable in comparison.

                        i actually am not a huge sam smith guy either, but...BUT...this article was really interesting to me. i dislike the trade, but thought it was interesting at the same time.

                        three things jump out:

                        one...he mentions that JO is known for a poor work ethic. When you add in that he didn't work with the team's training staff before, and he wasn't always on site, i think you get to it being true.

                        two...i know i am biased here as a fan...but...i think danny granger is a three that you build around. given that nocioni is still taking minutes from deng, why would we take a guy that hasn't even gotten his minutes straight?

                        three...as enamored as i am with oden, horford, noah, hawes,etc...i would prefer JO for the next 4 years. in year 5, i probably would go with fresh blood, but for now, i still think we are a quality PG away from a championship building around al/granger/jo. true, i feel shaky about SG, but i think we have talent. if we can ship out tinsley, jackson, foster and turn it into a PG, great. if we can terminate a contract and use that space on a pg, great. but shipping JO for a pu pu platter, while still having no point, makes no sense.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

                          If Ben Gordon was included in the trade I might concider it, but I probably wouldn't end up doing it.
                          I think KP is a Captain Planet fan. He believes that the collective will of five decent starters can outweigh the power of top-level talent. Too bad Herb won't cut the check for their Planeteer rings.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

                            Originally posted by indyman37 View Post
                            If Ben Gordon was included in the trade I might concider it, but I probably wouldn't end up doing it.
                            I would take Hinrich over Gordon, but I would still do a Gordon/Thomas/Filler for JO trade. I think that would be a good move for the Bulls. Not as sure for us. Gordon would give us 3pt shooting and he can play PG. He is also clutch. Thomas is a future star IMO.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Sam Smith: Time may be Ripe for Bulls to deal for Pacers O'Neal

                              It would be almost impossible to trade JO to the bulls... they don't have enough players that make money.
                              This space for rent.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X