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

Michael Redd

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

  • Michael Redd



    The article implies Milwaukee wants to build around Yi and Bogut, and presumably other players of the same age. I wonder if they'd bite on something like Granger, Foster (expiring), and an unprotected 1st for Redd?

    A top 5-10 scorer, possibly the best shooter in the league. This guy would be brilliant in Jim O'Brien's system. He'd be a legit #1 option (something we don't have now), allow Dunleavy to move back to his natural SF position, and would free up more minutes for Shawne in the process. That's the type of "retooling" I could live with.

    I don't know if they'd do it, Redd will be in high demand, but Larry Bird should at least give it a try.

  • #2
    Re: Michael Redd

    Not sure you can sell Milwaukee on Granger and a mid 1st for their only all-star.

    You'd definitely have to take bobby simmons' albatross deal off their hands if you aren't offering any blue chip young talent.

    Besides, Im pretty sure Foster has an option year left on his deal...

    really tough to see a way for Indiana to get Redd. They'd certainly get better offers elsewhere. Indiana doesn't have the expiring deals or the young talent.
    Last edited by Kstat; 01-05-2008, 04:07 AM.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Michael Redd

      this team is going nowhere regardless...the best thing for the franchise to do would be to just tank it this season, attempt to acquire a pick or two by trading jo, foster, and/or granger, and rebuild through the draft(s)...

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Michael Redd

        Originally posted by Kstat View Post

        really tough to see a way for Indiana to get Redd. They'd certainly get better offers elsewhere. Indiana doesn't have the expiring deals or the young talent.
        I agree that it would be really tough for Indiana to get Redd.

        But say they would trade JO for a Laker package that includes Brown, they could then include him along with Granger and a pick (in a 3 way) and I think the Buck's would have interest. I didn't check to see if that works. (I hate when others suggest trades that they have no idea if it works) I'll check it out.

        But if you are saying Indiana doesn't have ANY young talent, I disagree.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Michael Redd

          Okay, I got one to work but it would add $6m to the Pacers payroll. That will never happen with the way our attendance is right now.

          Milwaukee Bucks


          Incoming Players
          Danny Granger
          Salary: $1,516,800 Years Remaining: 2
          PTS: 16.6 REB: 5.7 AST: 1.9 PER: 14.66
          Kwame Brown
          Salary: $9,075,000 Years Remaining: 1
          PTS: 4.4 REB: 5.3 AST: 1.4 PER: 11.29
          Shawne Williams
          Salary: $1,470,360 Years Remaining: 1
          PTS: 7.5 REB: 3.0 AST: 1.0 PER: 13.45



          Los Angeles Lakers


          Incoming Players
          Jermaine O'Neal
          Salary: $19,728,000 Years Remaining: 2
          PTS: 15.9 REB: 7.6 AST: 2.8 PER: 16.70


          Indiana Pacers

          Incoming Players
          Michael Redd
          Salary: $14,520,000 Years Remaining: 4
          PTS: 23.4 REB: 4.9 AST: 3.8 PER: 20.98
          Lamar Odom
          Salary: $13,248,596 Years Remaining: 2
          PTS: 14.1 REB: 8.9 AST: 2.3 PER: 13.78

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Michael Redd

            I don't necessarily think adding 6 mil to the payroll should be a killer. What does an injection of life and a notable name do to the bottom line? One thing the Pacers (management) are absolutely lousy at is creating any electricity in fandom. That might be something they need to start changing ASAP and look for ways to do it.

            Would a trade that brought a Michael Redd here create that buzz? Probably... or at least go a long ways toward it... But giving up Granger, Williams, -and- JO is probably the killer in your scenario. That might be enough to balance out the good PR buzz of a big trade and make it a wash in the PR battles.

            2 of those players, with JO being one is probably OK. Certainly I think JO and Williams would be OK (considering Williams isn't getting much PT these days). But I don't think fans are ready to wave goodbye to Granger just yet unless we keep Williams around and hype him (and then he lives up to it) as needing the minutes that Granger was taking from him.

            Fans might bite on that long enough to get some people looking. Then -IF- the team performs and shows -something-, they might stick around and reverse the attendance trend we are seeing now.

            BTW... How old is Michael Redd?

            (EDIT: Upon further review the Al Harrington return did create some buzz. But then several people were saying it wasn't a smart move and would blow up because it was all about the buzz (fan pacifier) without any real substance for the team in general). My point is that the move needs to make sense on BOTH fronts or it will fizzle out... if it even gets off the ground in the first place).

            -Bball
            Last edited by Bball; 01-05-2008, 05:23 AM.
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

            -John Wooden

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Michael Redd

              Originally posted by Bball View Post
              I don't necessarily think adding 6 mil to the payroll should be a killer.

              BTW... How old is Michael Redd?
              Aug,24,1979, he's 28


              Several years ago I would have agreed with you but not now. Now the Pacers are so concerned with the bottom line they keep cutting Sims.

              As for the deal I wanted the Lakers to add Javaris Crittenton to be sent to the Pacers but it didn't work. That would be what the rumor was that the Lakers were offering for JO over the Summer. (Brown, Odem, Crittenton) Some rumors even had the Laker's adding a #1.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Michael Redd

                Interesting thought Kofi. That's the only type deal worth considering
                with changing things THIS year in mind. Otherwise, I'd say let's just
                wait until late Spring and do something to grab a Lottery pick and
                hopefully, one of the elite G's who come out this year (Gordon, Bayless,
                etc.).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Michael Redd

                  Too bad the Bucks don't need JO so a 3rd team is indeed necesarry. But Granger is going nowhere, we need at least one capable wing defender next to a Tinsley/Redd backcourt.
                  Maceo Baston's #1 fan on Pacers Digest!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Michael Redd

                    It would be nice to get a shooter like Redd. But doubt it is possible. Though I would love to see something happen. Even though we won last night, I know our chances of making any noise in the playoffs are slim. Would like to keep Danny in any deals. I still think he is going to be a great player down the road.
                    Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Michael Redd

                      Originally posted by Alpolloloco View Post
                      Too bad the Bucks don't need JO so a 3rd team is indeed necesarry. But Granger is going nowhere, we need at least one capable wing defender next to a Tinsley/Redd backcourt.
                      Yeah, I agree with this. While Granger's D isn't stellar we would have no one even remotely capable of guarding the better wing players with Tins, Redd, and Dun as our starters. We'd have to do something to solve that. How is Bobby Simmons's D these days? I know he's been a disappointment, but can he be a solid defensive player off the bench for us?


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Michael Redd

                        A deal I proposed on the Bucks forum: http://www2.jsonline.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=54896

                        INDIANA TRADES
                        Danny Granger
                        Jeff Foster
                        Marquis Daniels
                        2008 1st Round Pick (unprotected)

                        MILWAUKEE TRADES
                        Michael Redd

                        Granger is one of the finest young small forward in the league. He's averaging 17 points, 6 rebounds, and 2 assists per game. He's also a very solid defender, and averages a steal and a block per game.

                        Bucks new front court: SF Granger - PF Jianlian - C Bogut

                        That's a very young and talented front court with the potential to be one of the leagues best for the next decade. You'd then have your own 1st rounder and Indiana's to draft your back-court to go along with them. The 2008 draft will likely be loaded with guards, so it's certainly plausible. (Rose, Gordon, Mayo, Collison, Lawson, etc.)

                        Jeff Foster is a very solid center who can defend and rebounds like a mad man. He has a player option at the end of the year, it's iffy whether he'll accept or not. Marquis Daniels' contract ends in two seasons, the same time as Bobby Simmons', and the same time Bogut, Granger, and Villanueva will need resigned . Quis is a solid, underrated player (good per-minute production) and can help fill Redd's void at shooting guard.

                        Since Larry Bird seems so dead-set on winning now and saying screw you to the future, this deal would help accomplish that. Michael Redd is a legit All-Star and one of the top scorers in the league. He's arguably the leagues best shooter, as good as he is in Milwaukee I think he could be even better in Jim O'Brien's offensive system. We can also move Dun back to the SF position, and also free up some more minutes for Shawne as the backup at small forward. I'd prefer to keep Jeff, but if moving him could help us land an All-Star SG than bye bye.

                        Starters: PG Tinsley - SG Redd - SF Dunleavy - PF O'Neal - C Foster

                        Backups: PG Diener - SG Rush - SF Williams - PF Diogu - C Murphy

                        I could live with that. That's a team that could actually make some noise.

                        I'd also be ok with working something out with J.O. for Redd. Reading around, it's been mentioned on other forums and most seem to be ok with it. You could expand the deal and include Diener (Wisconsin native) and Charlie Bell. Bell's a noted perimeter defender, something we could definitely use.
                        Last edited by Kofi; 01-05-2008, 01:16 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Michael Redd

                          Originally posted by Kofi View Post
                          A deal I proposed on the Bucks forum: http://www2.jsonline.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=54896




                          Since Larry Bird seems so dead-set on winning now and saying screw you to the future, this deal would help accomplish that. Michael Redd is a legit All-Star and one of the top scorers in the league. He's arguably the leagues best shooter, as good as he is in Milwaukee I think he could be even better in Jim O'Brien's offensive system. We can also move Dun back to the SF position, and also free up some more minutes for Shawne as the backup at small forward. I'd prefer to keep Jeff, but if moving him could help us land an All-Star SG than bye bye.

                          Starters: PG Tinsley - SG Redd - SF Dunleavy - PF O'Neal - C Foster

                          Backups: PG Diener - SG Rush - SF Williams - PF Diogu - C Murphy

                          I could live with that. That's a team that could actually make some noise.

                          I'd also be ok with working something out with J.O. for Redd. Reading around, it's been mentioned on other forums and most seem to be ok with it. You could expand the deal and include Diener (Wisconsin native) and Charlie Bell. Bell's a noted perimeter defender, something we could definitely use.
                          How would Foster be a starter, he's in your trade? I wouldn't do it by the way.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Michael Redd

                            Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                            How would Foster be a starter, he's in your trade? I wouldn't do it by the way.
                            Me neither.
                            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


                            • #15
                              Re: Michael Redd

                              Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                              How would Foster be a starter, he's in your trade? I wouldn't do it by the way.
                              Oops.

                              I think some of you are underrating Michael Redd a lot. He's a 25/5/3 guy and a lights out shooter. He's about on the same level now as Ray Allen was in his prime. I'm all for the future, but this guy is a legitimate All-Star, something Danny Granger most likely will never become. If we must play for the now, then I'd be all over a deal like this.

                              Fun Fact: Michael Redd's birthday is August 24th, the same as Reggie Miller. He was meant to be a Pacer and Reggie's true successor.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X