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

Player subtractions for the next season

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

  • #16
    Re: Player subtractions for the next season

    Scott Skiles and Jamall Tinsley would work out GREAT. I think our best bet is working something out w/ the Knicks b/c we could sell them JT as being a New Yorker and a change of scenary ecspecially in his home state would work wonders for his career. Do you see Donnie Walsh buying?

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Player subtractions for the next season

      Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
      Scott Skiles and Jamall Tinsley would work out GREAT. I think our best bet is working something out w/ the Knicks b/c we could sell them JT as being a New Yorker and a change of scenary ecspecially in his home state would work wonders for his career. Do you see Donnie Walsh buying?
      If there was any other GM in the league other then DW, then I can see it happening.....but it's not a good idea to try to sell snake oil to the one guy in the league that knows up close what that snake oil is made out of for the last 4 seasons.

      The only hope that I have is that DW has a small glimmer of hope that IF Mark Jackson ends up coaching the Knicks that he could take a player like Tinsley and transform him into the type of PG that he should be.

      But honestly...I think the chances are slim that this happens.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Player subtractions for the next season

        Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
        Scott Skiles and Jamall Tinsley would work out GREAT. I think our best bet is working something out w/ the Knicks b/c we could sell them JT as being a New Yorker and a change of scenary ecspecially in his home state would work wonders for his career. Do you see Donnie Walsh buying?
        Donnie Walsh probably knows Tinsley better than any GM in the league. I'm pretty sure he's no dummy when it comes to evaluating a player he drafted and watched for 7 years.

        And he knows that if Tinsley can't help the Pacers out of their rut, it's a fat chance he's going to help the Knicks get out of theirs'.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Player subtractions for the next season

          Looking at our true shooting guard projections, I wouldn't at all be opposed to drafting Chris Douglas-Roberts. I like him more than I like any of the bigs and point guards where we're projected to pick.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Player subtractions for the next season

            In my humble opinion...

            I think we could get a nice deal done if we package dunleavy with ike, harrison and our #1 for a guy like elton brand. That would be the type of move that would make our team competitive again.

            Then to address the Tinsley situation... just buy out the remainder of his contract. It would be better for the organization. The Simons would probably agree to this as opposed to strapping the organization with a worse contract and worse basketball player. Let him go play somewhere else for cheap. At what point does his off the court problems justify voiding his contract? I just don't understand how you can all of a sudden have pissed off a coach, who completely had your back coming in to the season, so much that you have been suspended with a "left knee injury" since january.

            Keep JO, solely because our team defense is 1000% better with him in the lineup. No one else on our team can block shots on the interior.

            Here is what I would hope our lineup next year will look like (with an NBDL guy and favorite FA if we can get them cheap):

            PG- Duhon, Deiner, Earl Calloway (Arroyo, A. Carter)
            SG- Granger, Daniels, Jeremy Richardson (Ellis)
            SF- Williams, Graham, Brent Petway (Barnes)
            PF- Brand, Murphy, Elton Brown (Najera, C. Smith)
            C- O'Neal, Foster, Courtney Sims (Elson)

            I know this might seem a little outlandish with the Brand Trade. I just feel like those guys are valuable assets a team would be willing to take on. We could fill in the last five roster spots with NBDL guys. Hence the Richardson, Calloway, Petway, Brown and Sims picks.

            Duhon is a very smart player. He is terrific defensively, as is Granger and Williams on the wings. Add that to Brand at the four and O'Neal at the five. I think our team will score and defend at a highly competitve level.

            Call me crazy but if Williams gets the minutes he should, he will be a terrific ball player. Don't give up on Williams, remember he just turned 22.

            If this were our lineup, our salary cap number would be (with estimates):

            77,477,248 (5M for Duhon, 1M for each of the six fillers which is a bit overestimated) this puts us just over the estimated luxury tax threshold of 73,000,000 for next year. I think that this team would have to consider that. If by the trade deadline, we aren't competitive in the East, you have to trade Foster and Daniels for lesser salaries and a trade exception or draft picks to make sure we get under the cap.

            Sorry for rambling.
            Last edited by pacergod2; 04-30-2008, 05:27 PM.
            "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Player subtractions for the next season

              Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
              Duhon is a very smart player. He is terrific defensively, as is Granger and Williams on the wings. Add that to Brand at the four and O'Neal at the five. I think our team will score and defend at a highly competitve level.
              Grace can probably confirm for us, but doesn't Duhon have some off-the-court incidents that would raise some Flags for TPTB?

              I could be wrong...but I thought that I read somewhere that Duhon likes to go out and party alot.

              Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
              If this were our lineup, our salary cap number would be (with estimates):

              77,477,248 (5M for Duhon, 1M for each of the six fillers which is a bit overestimated) this puts us just over the estimated luxury tax threshold of 73,000,000 for next year. I think that this team would have to consider that. If by the trade deadline, we aren't competitive in the East, you have to trade Foster and Daniels for lesser salaries and a trade exception or draft picks to make sure we get under the cap.

              Sorry for rambling.
              Is the Luxury Tax limit that high ( as in $73 mil )?

              Wasn't this years Luxury Tax limit about $67-68 mil?

              Is it going to be raised about $5 mil next season? That seems rather high.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Player subtractions for the next season

                I'm not sure about Duhon's partying habits, but I could see that opinion being out there since he did not get along with skiles AT ALL. He didn't show up to practice one day because he flew down to NC to talk to Coach K and Coach K confirmed that with the Bulls. He was suspended for one game because of it. Skiles tries to be a dictator as a coach and it does not go over well. I mean Ben Wallace is one of the good guys of the game and to **** him off you have to be an "jerk". I think this guy could break out once he gets the opportunity to play after sitting behind Hinrich. Duhon has always felt like he deserved more minutes and with the way that Hinrich played for most of this year I can't disagree.

                As for the luxury tax threshold, I heard $73M from a fairly reliable source and thought the exact same thing... its going up $5M (7%)?

                Also, I think they might be raising that threshold a bit higher this year and next so that the free agency period for 2009 will have more significant cap space, due to the amount and significance of the free agents that will be available.
                "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Player subtractions for the next season

                  Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                  If there was any other GM in the league other then DW, then I can see it happening.....but it's not a good idea to try to sell snake oil to the one guy in the league that knows up close what that snake oil is made out of for the last 4 seasons.

                  The only hope that I have is that DW has a small glimmer of hope that IF Mark Jackson ends up coaching the Knicks that he could take a player like Tinsley and transform him into the type of PG that he should be.

                  But honestly...I think the chances are slim that this happens.
                  Thank you! Finally, somebody sees reason with all this speculation of trading Tinman or even JO for that matter to the Knicks. It just ain't gonna happen. DW knows the good and the bad w/these players. Why would he want to strap his new franchise down with even more bloated contracts and/or injury-prone players? Makes no sense whatsoever.
                  Last edited by NuffSaid; 05-01-2008, 01:10 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Player subtractions for the next season

                    Originally posted by NuffSaid View Post
                    Thank you! Finally, somebody sees reason with all this speculation of trading Tinman or even JO for that matter to the Knicks. It just ain't gonna happen. DW knows the good and the bad w/these players. Why would he want to strap his new franchise down with even more bloated contracts and/or injury-prone players? Makes no sense whatsoever.
                    I agree with this for Tinsley.....but waver on whether DW would be interested in bring in JONeal. If Walsh thinks that he can get JONeal for "cheap", then he may make a run for him.

                    I look at it this way....I think that DW ( like any other GM ) would have interest in a player like JONeal ( despite the history that he has ).....the question is how much they are willing to pay to get him on the roster. The key in figuring out what is a good price to negotiate with is knowing not only what the asking price that the Pacers is asking for but ALSO what the offers that the Pacers received when JONeal was shopped before the trade deadline.

                    To me, that's one of the reasons why I think it maybe a bad idea to possibly negotiate with Walsh and the Knicks....not because the Knicks don't want to take on an injured and expensive player like JONeal.....but because IMHO, we are working from an disadvantage when it comes to negotiating the "asking price" for JONeal cuz Walsh already knows what the "going rate" is for JONeal.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Player subtractions for the next season

                      Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
                      Count,
                      1. Memphis has a log jam at PG. They are looking to build for the future and do not want long term deals. Tinlsey is due 21 million over three years.
                      2. New York has several bad contracts but do you think Donnie Walsh wants a back court of Jamaal Crawford & Jamall Tinsley along w/ Nat Robinson?
                      3. Jerome James in a Pacer's uniform only helps our chance of more lottery balls in 2009.
                      4. Jared Jeffries would not be bad for Tinsley straight up but The Knick organization is looking to move Starbury (expiring contract) and probably have a team take on the salaries of one of these three (Q Richardson, Jared Jeffries, Jerome James) along with a young player Balkman/Robinson. I fell Jared Jeffries is the most tradeable of the three.
                      I don't know the Walsh is going to wan JT back with his organization. If he did, I don't mind Jeffries either. Don't know the math but getting him plus Blakman wouldn't be a bad deal at all to rid us of Tins.
                      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                      -Emiliano Zapata

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Player subtractions for the next season

                        Originally posted by count55 View Post
                        I think you're making this too complicated. We just have to be willing to take back an equally ugly or uglier contract - a la Jerome James, Brian Cardinal, or Jared Jeffries, and we'll find a taker for JT.
                        Yep. There are guys with similar money/time on their deals with teams that just have no use for them. So Tins sits there and their guy sits here and both teams hope the change improves things beyond that.

                        Maybe the Pacers can lose a year by taking on more money, or reduce cost by taking the extra year. Basically a contract structure swap. But no one is saying you are using Tinsley to improve anything. It's just an adjustment for equal value (as seen by Pacers, ie not much).

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X