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

What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

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

  • What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

    Diamond Dave got me to thinking. What players would you trade artest for

    I want names. Assume salaries don't matter, assume we know all there is to know about Ron


    here is my list. Of who I would trade Ron. There a few no brainers

    1) Duncan
    2) Garnett
    3) Kobe
    4) McGrady
    5) Shaq - even though he is getting older
    6) Kidd -

    I call those the no-brainers. The next group is where it gets interesting

    Pierce - no
    Dirk - No
    Nash - no
    Baron Davis - no
    Lebron James - maybe he deserves to be in the no-brainer group - yes
    Iverson - no
    Mello - no
    Wade - maybe
    Manu - no
    Ben Wallace - no
    Rip Hamilton - no
    Marbury - no way
    Yao - maybe
    Francis - no
    Stoudamire - no
    Ray Allen - no
    Redd - no

    I know I am forgetting a lot of players. but I count 7 yes and 2 maybe. That is how valuable I think Artest is

  • #2
    Re: What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

    Diamond Dave got me to thinking. What players would you trade artest for

    I want names. Assume salaries don't matter, assume we know all there is to know about Ron


    here is my list. Of who I would trade Ron. There a few no brainers

    1) Duncan
    2) Garnett
    3) Kobe
    4) McGrady
    5) Shaq - even though he is getting older
    6) Kidd -

    I call those the no-brainers. The next group is where it gets interesting

    Pierce - no
    Dirk - No
    Nash - no
    Baron Davis - no
    Lebron James - maybe he deserves to be in the no-brainer group - yes
    Iverson - no
    Mello - no
    Wade - maybe
    Manu - no
    Ben Wallace - no
    Rip Hamilton - no
    Marbury - no way
    Yao - maybe
    Francis - no
    Stoudamire - no
    Ray Allen - no
    Redd - no

    I know I am forgetting a lot of players. but I count 7 yes and 2 maybe. That is how valuable I think Artest is

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

      I basically agree with your list. I'd put Pierce on the Maybe list and if something were added to Allen I'd look at that.

      I would like to add that if it looked like McGrady were going to be traded (and I think it does) the Pacers should make a serious run at him especially if it looked like he was going to an EC team.

      Outside of that possiblity I would say that trading Al for a 2 who would undoubtable (not Leonard) start over Reggie would be the best choice. (Q Richardson would be my first choice because it would give me a reason to watch Clipper games again.)
      "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

      "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

        T mac, Kobe, KG, Duncan, Lebron, Yao, I guess you gotta throw Shaq in there also, thats it.
        Follow me on Twitter! https://twitter.com/Hookjaw_Rox

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

          I hit the button before I made my comment...sorry....

          Ben Wallace -yes
          Baron Davis -yes
          Carmelo -yes
          Rip -yes

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

            Although T-Mac intrigues me, I think a package of Ron + Austin could bring back a great player or perhaps even better: two very, very, very good players, so that could be an effective way to re-balance the Pacers roster. Could Ron + Austin net Dampier + Jason Richardson? (UB, would that cause you to consider suicide?)

            Since we all agree Austin is overpaid, pairing him with a relative 'bargain' like Ron makes him easier to move.

            Just a thought...
            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


            • #7
              Re: What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

              All of your no brainers, except Jason Kidd. Would not trade Artest for Kidd, however I would trade Artest for the following:

              Michael Redd
              Lebron
              Wade
              Darko.......just kidding
              Hamilton
              Yao

              and probably a few others but I gotta go. Work is over
              House Name: Pacers

              House Sigil:



              House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

                I didn't think Ron was a shoe-in for a top 10 player. He is only an all NBA third team (top 15) player. But after you reading this post, there are only 7 no brainers. Maybe if we could fill 2 positions with his loss, that would be ideal.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

                  Duncan only!
                  ...Still "flying casual"
                  @roaminggnome74

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

                    It's interesting, even fun, to play "what ifs".

                    But the problem that I had with the other threads where folks say something like, "Hell yes. I'd trade Ron for T-Mac" for example, is that it is NOT possible to make the trade.

                    Ron is a young player, on his second contract and is far from having a max salary. And just about any player that you really might want to trade Ron for is making substantially more per year than Ron is.

                    At the other end of the spectrum you have players on their rookie contracts, for example Yao, who looks so promising to his own team that they would never be willing to trade him. Not even for Ron Artest.

                    So I basically see suggestions like let's trade Ron for T-Mac and I just start laughing. Folks, it isn't going to happen!!! By the time Larry and Donnie would get done throwing in the other players, their response would be something like, "Geez, we really don't want to trade Ron straight up, now we got to throw in all these other guys, too?".

                    Buck, I know your thread is merely hypothetical, just to see what kind of value most of our members put on Ron. I just have a hard time even considering a straight up $6M Ron for $14M T-Mac trade when I know that it would involve signficantly more impact on our team than what is on the surface.

                    And that is something that many of the others don't seem to be grasping in the other threads.

                    Bottom line is, there probably isn't a player with a comparable salary that I would trade Ron straight up for. He's about as good as you can get for SF at his price.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

                      It's interesting, even fun, to play "what ifs".

                      But the problem that I had with the other threads where folks say something like, "Hell yes. I'd trade Ron for T-Mac" for example, is that it is NOT possible to make the trade.

                      Ron is a young player, on his second contract and is far from having a max salary. And just about any player that you really might want to trade Ron for is making substantially more per year than Ron is.

                      At the other end of the spectrum you have players on their rookie contracts, for example Yao, who looks so promising to his own team that they would never be willing to trade him. Not even for Ron Artest.

                      So I basically see suggestions like let's trade Ron for T-Mac and I just start laughing. Folks, it isn't going to happen!!! By the time Larry and Donnie would get done throwing in the other players, their response would be something like, "Geez, we really don't want to trade Ron straight up, now we got to throw in all these other guys, too?".

                      Buck, I know your thread is merely hypothetical, just to see what kind of value most of our members put on Ron. I just have a hard time even considering a straight up $6M Ron for $14M T-Mac trade when I know that it would involve signficantly more impact on our team than what is on the surface.

                      And that is something that many of the others don't seem to be grasping in the other threads.

                      Bottom line is, there probably isn't a player with a comparable salary that I would trade Ron straight up for. He's about as good as you can get for SF at his price.
                      I don't think anyone in the Pacers organization would have a problem with throwing in Croshere to make the salaries match. Now, you can say Orlando wouldn't want him, which is probably true. But that doesn't mean we wouldn't make the trade.

                      [edit] Of course, I forgot Ron's BYC, which F's everything up. Still, we could just throw in Pollard too, and if Orlando has to throw some junk in, so be it. I still don't see the Pacers having a problem with that. Orlando might, be we don't care what they think.
                      Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

                        Kegboy -

                        I suppose that is true. And, I'll admit that you never know what a GM will do when forced into a corner. After all, look at our trade last summer.

                        I would respond with what I would do. But that would get us off-topic from Buck's intentions. I just couldn't sacrifice Ron.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

                          Bolded are the players I deem wantable () for Ron Artest:

                          1. Tracy McGrady (Orlando Magic)
                          2. Predrag Stojakovic (Sacramento Kings)
                          2. Kevin Garnett (Minnesota Timberwolves)
                          4. Kobe Bryant (Los Angeles Lakers)
                          5. Paul Pierce (Boston Celtics)
                          6. Baron Davis (New Orleans Hornets)
                          7. Vince Carter (Toronto Raptors)
                          8. Tim Duncan (San Antonio Spurs)
                          9. Dirk Nowitzki (Dallas Mavericks)
                          10. Michael Redd (Milwaukee Bucks)
                          11. Shaquille O'Neal (Los Angeles Lakers)
                          12. Carmelo Anthony (Denver Nuggets)
                          13. LeBron James (Cleveland Cavaliers)
                          14. Corey Maggette (Los Angeles Clippers)
                          15. Stephon Marbury (New York Knicks)
                          16. Jermaine O'Neal (Indiana Pacers)
                          16. Zach Randolph (Portland Trail Blazers)
                          18. Sam Cassell (Minnesota Timberwolves)
                          19. Shawn Marion (Phoenix Suns)
                          20. Jason Richardson (Golden State Warriors)
                          21. Michael Finley (Dallas Mavericks)
                          22. Richard Jefferson (New Jersey Nets)
                          23. Mike Bibby (Sacramento Kings)
                          24. Ron Artest (Indiana Pacers)
                          25. Stephen Jackson (Atlanta Hawks)
                          26. Rashard Lewis (Seattle SuperSonics)
                          27. Pau Gasol (Memphis Grizzlies)
                          28. Richard Hamilton (Detroit Pistons)
                          29. Yao Ming (Houston Rockets)
                          30. Eddie Jones (Miami Heat)
                          30. Jamal Crawford (Chicago Bulls)
                          32. Lamar Odom (Miami Heat)
                          33. Juwan Howard (Orlando Magic)
                          34. Chauncey Billups (Detroit Pistons)
                          35. Jason Terry (Atlanta Hawks)
                          35. Latrell Sprewell (Minnesota Timberwolves)
                          37. Joe Johnson (Phoenix Suns)
                          38. Steve Francis (Houston Rockets)
                          39. Andrei Kirilenko (Utah Jazz)
                          40. Shareef Abdur-Rahim (Portland Trail Blazers)
                          41. Keith Van Horn (Milwaukee Bucks)
                          42. Cuttino Mobley (Houston Rockets)
                          43. Carlos Boozer (Cleveland Cavaliers)
                          44. Zydrunas Ilgauskas (Cleveland Cavaliers)
                          45. Andre Miller (Denver Nuggets)
                          45. Antawn Jamison (Dallas Mavericks)
                          47. Donyell Marshall (Toronto Raptors)
                          47. Eddy Curry (Chicago Bulls)
                          47. Tony Parker (San Antonio Spurs)
                          50. Gary Payton (Los Angeles Lakers)

                          Elton Brand

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

                            Shoot, I'd trade Ron for a 140-hour TiVo, but I don't think anybody would recognize my authority to do it....... :P
                            PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: What player in return would it take for you to trade Ron Artest

                              Shoot, I'd trade Ron for a 140-hour TiVo, but I don't think anybody would recognize my authority to do it....... :P
                              I love Ron, but I'd probably trade him a 140 hour TiVo too!!
                              "I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post."

                              --Jack Nicholson as Colonel Nathan Jessup in A Few Good Men

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X