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

Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

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

  • #16
    Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

    "All he brings over Tinsley is shooting"

    That seems like an awful lot to me considering the way this team is built. First, a PG capable of spotting up and hitting consistently would be huge when the ball goes into JO in the post. Secondly, do you realize how much more effective the high pick & roll is when you have a Mike Bibby. Jamaal creates pretty well off the pick, but he's never a threat to come off it and hit the 18 footer. Obviously Bibby isn't as good at getting into the lane and creating his own shot, but this team desperately needs a perimeter scorer with ability to catch fire at anytime.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

      Be careful for what you wish. There would be probably 20 some teams scrambling to get at Foster. No way should he be considered a luxury. How many teams have a hustler like him who only wants to rebound, defend and keep the ball live for another brick to be hoisted up and set a ton of picks while doing it?

      It's true, he hurts us offensively but he more than makes up for it in other aspects of the game. He should be playing when we have two strong go to guys so that he isn't a liability.

      The only way I would want him traded is if the other team demanded him included in a trade to swing the deal for a good PG. JO and Granger probably are the only two players with more trade value.
      .

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        No, it isn't time to move Jeff. He's the type of player that once he is traded almost everyone will within a few weeks will be begging to get him back.

        One of the Pacers biggest problems is their lack of energy players and as much as I like Dun, Murph and Ike - those players are not energy players at all.

        I worry about Ike's defense I saw somethings last night that was almost David Harrison like - very concerning to me. So I hope we aren't too eager trade Jeff
        I am slowly moving into agreement with UB. I have always liked Jeff, but always wanted more. Right now, we are lucky to have what we've got in Jeff. He's one of the few we can be sure will not be in the next bar fight. He's one who never complains. He brings solid effort and energy every night. He will not turn off the fans. ..and he's really not even that old yet.

        Let's just say there are other players we should be looking to move.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

          Originally posted by bnd45 View Post
          UB: How would you feel if Foster was included in a deal that netted us Earl Watson?
          Although I am not UB....I figure I would give my

          I agree that Foster would likely be the only player that we could use to somehow move Tinsley. But I...like some of the PD members...think that Foster's value is too much to give up...just to make a lateral move from Tinsley to Earl Watson. If Foster were to be moved with Tinsley....we better be getting a clear cut improvement at the PG spot.

          I like Watson....but not at the cost of Foster.

          As DaSmash suggested....despite his matador defense.....I could possibly be convinced to do a Bibby+Filler ( either Ronnie Price or Justin Williams ) for Tinsley+Foster just to get a better scoring PG.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

            Absolutely mystifies me that the third most mentioned "must be moved" after Jackson and Tinsley seems to be Foster. Why!?! Foster stays. He does more with what he has than anyone on this team - maybe ever.
            The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

              I know that Foster is an offensive liability....but match him up with a scoring Big Man like JONeal, Murphy and ( most notably ) Ike....and any shots that he ( as a 5th player ) would usually take....could all go to our Big Men.

              I really want to see Ike play more with Foster when JONeal and Murphy are off the floor. I think the rebounding/defense that Foster provides complements Ike's interior tenacity and "blackhole" offensive game.

              The way I look at it...the less shots Foster takes....the more shots will be available to JONeal/Murphy/Ike to take.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                I know that Foster is an offensive liability....but match him up with a scoring Big Man like JONeal, Murphy and ( most notably ) Ike....and any shots that he ( as a 5th player ) would usually take....could all go to our Big Men.

                I really want to see Ike play more with Foster when JONeal and Murphy are off the floor. I think the rebounding/defense that Foster provides complements Ike's interior tenacity and "blackhole" offensive game.

                The way I look at it...the less shots Foster takes....the more shots will be available to JONeal/Murphy/Ike to take.
                But you have to factor in that JO/Murphy/Ike are getting double teamed when Foster is out there.

                Im uncertain on trading Foster. I love his rebounding and defense but he limits us a lot on offense. Not only by not being and offense threat at all but also allowing another big man to go after JO.

                If we would get a PG who could play defense and hit a shot occasionally i would be okay with trading him. When i say occasionally i just mean i want a pass first PG that will take the shot a few times or when he is open instead of forcing things.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

                  Originally posted by maragin View Post
                  Foster isn't the problem.

                  This is'nt about Foster being the problem. It is about making this team better. If you can make the team better by offloading Foster, or Tinsley, or Harrison or anyone then you need to do it.

                  We do have a log jam in the PF/C positions and Foster is probably one of the more desirable players at the moment. It definately needs to be explored.
                  I would not like to see him go but if we could make the team better in the process then it needs to be done.
                  Haggard's Blog: Can't Buy a Basket. Covering the highs and lows of the NBL

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

                    Ok I don't know how the whole restrictions and what not play out but lets say we traded boston and they definately had the number 1 pick.

                    Trade them Jermaine O'Neal + Jamaal Tinsley for Paul Pierce + Delonte West + 1st Round Pick

                    that would clear up a considerable amount of cap space wouldn't it? Then try and get Chauncey Billups in the free agent market this upcoming year? I don't know if this is possible but that would give our team a look of somethin like this

                    PG - Billups
                    SG - Pierce
                    SF - Granger
                    PG - Ike
                    C - Odin

                    PG - West
                    SG - Quis
                    SF - Williams
                    PF - Murphy
                    C - Jeff

                    ....a guy can dream lmao

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

                      Originally posted by JO4MVP2006 View Post
                      But you have to factor in that JO/Murphy/Ike are getting double teamed when Foster is out there.

                      Im uncertain on trading Foster. I love his rebounding and defense but he limits us a lot on offense. Not only by not being and offense threat at all but also allowing another big man to go after JO.

                      If we would get a PG who could play defense and hit a shot occasionally i would be okay with trading him. When i say occasionally i just mean i want a pass first PG that will take the shot a few times or when he is open instead of forcing things.
                      JONeal and Ike ( from now on ) are going to get double-teamed everytime they get the ball regardless of whether Foster is in there or not. Although my hope is that they will be able to get the ball to Foster to make a simple basket, I would prefer that Tinsley, Dunleavy, Marquis, Granger or whoever is smart enough to recognize the double team and get into a spot on the floor where JONeal or Ike can pass to. I know its inefficient...but I would much rather give the ball to a player that can shoot ( cuz that's what he's paid for and is best at doing ) as opposed to one who simply isn't good at it while keeping a player like Foster.

                      Don't get me wrong...I agree with you that Foster should be used as trade bait to move Tinsley for another PG...but only if we get one that is worth it. I don't want to trade Tinsley...and include Foster...just to move him for any PG.

                      Unless we get a quality starting PG that is worth it....which is probably unlikely...the only other type of trade that I could accept where Foster was moved with Tinsley to get a "lateral move" starting PG would be if could get a quality starting SG that can shoot.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

                        Originally posted by Adrian View Post
                        Hey guys, stop considering Harrison an option or even a future talent. This is his 3rd year in NBA and he did not improved AT ALL since he started. Same knuklehead, wild, foul prone, terrible FT shooter.
                        But I do agree that Murphy does everything Foster does, only better (except maybe offensive rebounds).
                        And DaSMASH, have you watched Bulls? They are in my opinion the best jump shooting team in the NBA. They stop on fast break at 15 feet to take the jump shot!
                        Ehmmm... are you SURE Troy would defend Duncan or a host of other big men as well as Jeff does? Because, that's about the last thing I believe. And I like both of these two players.
                        2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                        2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                        2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

                          I think we may (sadly) have to package Jeff with one of the players we want to ship out to make a deal happen.

                          But otherwise, I'd try to keep Jeff around for another 5+ years.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

                            Originally posted by skyfire View Post
                            Ergh, not Mike Bibby. All he bring over Tins is shooting, something we need but we also need leadership and defense from the PG position, neither of which Bibby can deliver. That and his contract is horrible, he can opt out at the end of the season aswell.
                            He doesn't even bring shooting.

                            Jamaal's shooting percentage and 3pt % are higher this season. He scores more because he plays about 5 more minutes a games and shoots more. Tinsley gets more assists and steals. They're the same age and Tinsley costs less than half of what Bibby does.
                            I'm in these bands
                            The Humans
                            Dr. Goldfoot
                            The Bar Brawlers
                            ME

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

                              You unload low character players not the high character players. I guarantee you that if the P's got rid of Foster, you'd see major changes in our results because he does all the LITTLE things that no one ever seems to notice, however those LITTLE things all add up to BIG.
                              "I'd rather be hated for what I am, than loved for what I am not".--Bushwick Bill

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Its Time To Move Jeff Foster

                                we do have a glut of big men. none of them very good, outside of jermaine, but all pretty serviceable and could serve as trade bait.

                                in truth, murphy and foster both seem like backups on a good team. we continue to start one or the other by default, but if diogu continues to develop, then it's likely that we'll see a j.o.-diogu frontcourt sometime in the future, relegating one of murphy/foster to the bench and the other to spot minutes.

                                so, i think either murphy or foster would be expendable. foster is probably more attractive to other teams, but for the same reasons he will be the one we try to keep. my feeling is that we'll try to move murph and his large contract as soon as possible (which is next summer). foster, imo, won't be traded unless we get a really good offer.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X