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

AK wants out of Utah

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

  • #61
    Re: AK wants out of Utah

    Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
    And neither is AK for Granger. I'm still amazed at the value placed on the kid. I like him but he has done NOTHING compared to AK47.
    It wouldn't just be Granger. We'd obviously have to give more for talent and salary reasons. I'm just saying that there's no way Utah would give up AK and not expect Granger to be a major part of that deal.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: AK wants out of Utah

      Originally posted by GrangerRanger View Post
      Has anyone heard the story about this guy? He's wife is basically okay with him having sex with chicks on road games. He's a Russian Artest. (Defense, Trade requests, messed up life..)
      I don't know why! His wife's hot!
      "GIMMIE DAT!"-DANGER

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: AK wants out of Utah

        Originally posted by OnlyPacersLeft View Post
        I don't know why! His wife's hot!
        That's probably why

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: AK wants out of Utah

          Not to mention Danny hasn't ever broken down mentally during the season.


          Comment


          • #65
            Re: AK wants out of Utah

            Some news about him:

            AK wants to leave “Jazz” so much that he could play even in Europe. He told it to “Sport Express”.

            “Everything is ok for me, i just want to leave “Jazz”. It might be not the strong team with a good players (my comment: pacers - he is surely thinking about you ). I dream to become NBA champion and that's important thing which holds me here, - AK told openly. – Where i'd want to continue my career? Maybe in Russia. I want to be where i'm needed. But i could play in other Euro clubs as well. It doesn't mean that I wish to play in Europe so much, it just means that i'm ready for that.”

            About the coach he said that Sloan is kind of super coach, he
            just doesn't like his motivation scheme. He said that he kind of
            doesn't like to play hard only because he is paid millions for that.
            As i understood, he'd like to have another kind of motivation
            (like to win something, play for fans, have fun winning or similar -
            just my opinion).

            As always - sorry for my english, my translation might not be accurate.
            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


            • #66
              Re: AK wants out of Utah

              Maybe they'll buy AK out and we can sign him with those last few million separating us from the luxury tax.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: AK wants out of Utah

                To send Granger and talent for a AK47 who is not demanding a trade and has produced what his contract entails is close. But this guy is not going to play for the Jazz. His trade value is down. Frankly if I were the Jazz I would trade him for Foster, Daniels, and a 1st and be happy about it.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: AK wants out of Utah

                  looks like he is dead serious about leaving Utah. apparently he'll waive his contract if that's what it takes to get out.

                  http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3029816

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: AK wants out of Utah

                    the mysterious PF we were looking for?

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: AK wants out of Utah

                      OK, his wife is fine with him seeing another woman now and then, but lets see if she is fine with him leaving >60 million dollars on the table.
                      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: AK wants out of Utah

                        I'm sure that Utah would much rather trade him and get something in return instead of just letting him walk away and get nothing. Even if his role was diminished in comparison to previous years, he was still an important part of that team. A team hoping to contend in the Western Conference can't just lose that and hope to return to the WCF the next year.

                        With that said, who is going to want to trade for him if there's a chance that he could wake up one morning and decide that he's just going to walk away from his contract?

                        That ESPN article seems to indicate that he's leaning pretty heavily towards going back to Russia or Europe to play.

                        I'd be leery of trading for him unless he says explicitly says he would like to play in Indiana for the remainder of his contract.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: AK wants out of Utah

                          So what's best for Utah? Buying him out for pennies, or trading to get some value back?

                          It's an honest question, as I'm not sure about Utah's cap situation. If it was the beginning of the summer, I'd say take the room and sign a FA. But now, they're probably better off with a trade.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: AK wants out of Utah

                            http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/...g-AK-Back.html

                            AK to Golden State, for Al Harrington and Sarunas Jasikevicius
                            This isn't a fair trade for the Jazz, but I can totally see this as the sort of deal they'd make. Harrington's just that sort of overrated, orthodox plugger that the Jazz could throw right into that small forward slot in spite of anecdotal evidence (that probably isn't to be believed) that he's better suited for power forward.
                            He's not really suited for either position, he's not quite suited for more than 30 minutes a game; but Harrington has made a career out of deceiving people into believing he's a lot better than he is. Harrington can't rebound, but he can score without needing the ball when he wants to, and the Jazz already dominate the glass with or without Kirilenko. Jasikevicius can shoot, play either backcourt position, and essentially act as a better version of Derek Fisher.
                            Why wouldn't the deal go down? Golden State has made a point of limiting payroll bumps; and after this summer, it has become obvious that the Basketball Gods are angry with us, and they won't let us see Kirilenko dashing up and down the court with everybody's favorite Bay Area nutters.
                            AK to the Los Angeles Lakers, for Lamar Odom
                            Just about every max-player trade involves smaller parts being thrown in on both sides, and I see no reason why either team should add to this deal. No need for Sasha Vujacic to head to the Jazz, or for Utah to needlessly throw in a stud like Paul Millsap or Ronnie Brewer. In the Triangle, the holes in Luke Walton's head can be filled with the bumps in Kirilenko's; both can work at the apex, finding cutters and seeing the floor, and we know Tex Winter thinks the world of AK.
                            Problem is, Mitch Kupchak has never shown much interest in acquiring players fit for the offense that the Lakers have run since 1999. Odom can ably play small forward for the Jazz, and he shouldn't have any problem with the usual silly Salt Lake City-stereotypes once he's winning 60 games and on the road for half the year.
                            AK and Jarron Collins to Phoenix, for Shawn Marion
                            This one has been bandied about since last winter, but it bears mentioning that the Suns should much prefer paying Kirilenko's price for four years over paying (I didn't say "overpaying") Marion for two years and then having to extend his deal.
                            That said, as John Hollinger pointed out in Chad Ford's podcast yesterday, I'd be pretty nervous breaking up what could be a championship team for a player that would merely seem to fit in the system. Remember, Marion consistently nails that spot-up 3-pointer - in transition or in the half-court. As much fun it would be to see AK start (and sometimes finish) the break for Nash and the Suns, we have to remember that the always-underrated Marion already fills that role quite nicely.
                            AK to Sacramento, Mike Bibby and Francisco Garcia to the Los Angeles Clippers, Corey Maggette and Tim Thomas to Utah
                            The genesis of this deal was cribbed from Sactown Royalty poster "HrdRockTroy," and I took the liberty of adding wing depth to the Clippers and outside shooting to the Jazz in the form of Tim Thomas. Sure it leaves the Kings without a point guard, but they can always trade for Jason Williams' expiring contract in an attempt to at least lose 55 games in a more entertaining fashion.
                            AK and Paul Millsap to Chicago for Ben Wallace
                            This is assuming, of course, that Wallace shows up at training camp with headbands covering every square inch of his body. Chicago might have the league's most crowded - and, potentially, most-talented - frontcourt, so it only makes sense to add two more forwards who can do everything but shoot.
                            AK and Jarron Collins to Washington for Antawn Jamison
                            Feel like running, Washington? Here's the start of your fast-break. Feel like playing a little defense, Washington? Not really? Ok, take it easy, continue apace, but Andrei's going to go ahead and give it a try. Feel like having a power forward that hits the movers from the top of the key for easy baskets in Eddie Jordan's offense? Don't want that power forward to be Darius Songaila? Here's your chance.
                            UPDATE: Henry's proposal, probably the best of any bunch, can be found at the bottom of this post.
                            UPDATE: From reader Jonathan:
                            Scuttlebutt on a few Jazz message boards from Russian posters is that AK wants to stay in Russia. There is talk of him "Fishering" (a la Derek Fisher) his contract - that is tearing the thing up and heading back to CSKA where he is happy. This was translated from another blog post of AK by Serge on Jazzhoops.com:

                            "With Utah GM Kevin O'Connor I talked even before eurochamp, so please don't match my desire to leave Utah with our victory in the tournament in Spain. After not succesfull for me season I understood that I can't grow (be progressive) in Utah. Jerry Sloan is supercoach, who led Jazz to the NBA finals several times. Yet our understanding regarding basketball differs. I want to be occupied with the work I love and get pleasure of the game. And for the same feeling that I experienced in the NT last week there is a reason to come back and play in Russia. For russian fans. It is totally differnt emotions and feelings."
                            No way you get fair value for him. Kelly Dwyer is an idiot.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: AK wants out of Utah

                              The Jazz instructed him to avoid further interviews. (they got the message after the 3rd interview). They will have to let him go, it seems. I wonder how many teams will enter the race.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: AK wants out of Utah

                                one of his interviews he approached management but they did not respond in over a week that is why he conducted an interview. Sounds like the Jazz hurt themselves.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X