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

Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

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

  • #31
    Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

    I have no idea what is dumber, drafting a PG or trading for a Hinrich. The Pacers have several holes to fill and should draft the best player available. Trading Jermaine and his contract for two players with longer deals is not what this organization needs right now either. The Pacers need some money to resign Danny Granger (How much is that going to take?)

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

      Who would be worth trading Hinrich for? Hinrich would have to be traded for a big. I'm sorry, JO doesn't warrant trading for Hinrich, unless the Bulls just want to clear salary. Stoudamire, Bosh, and Howard aren't going anywhere. So if Chicago takes Rose, they're stuck with backcourt players with no post players. They'll be going backwards in my oppninion.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

        Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
        Trading Jermaine and his contract for two players with longer deals is not what this organization needs right now either.
        Hughes' deal runs out the same time as JO's does and Hinrich has a front loaded deal that drops from 10 to 9.5 to 9 to 8 mil over the next 4 years. I think that's a pretty good deal.

        I think a better deal would be taking Gooden instead of Hughes though.
        Last edited by Manguera; 05-21-2008, 01:10 PM.
        A healthy man takes a crap every day. A smart man does it on company time.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

          Originally posted by Manguera View Post
          Hughes' deal runs out the same time as JO's does and Hinrich has a front loaded deal that drops from 10 to 9.5 to 9 to 8 mil over the next 4 years. I think that's a pretty good deal.

          I think a better deal would be taking Gooden instead of Hughes though.
          Drew Gooden? I want the Pacers to make the playoffs next year. I believe Jermaine helps our team more than Gooden/Hinrich/Hughes do in that department.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

            Originally posted by Rajah Brown View Post
            UB-

            Understood. Agree with all that. He's definitely an upgrade. But
            who's he gonna run the pick and roll with ? Do we have a big
            who can run it with both the 'roll' (and finish in the lane) and
            'pop' options available.

            You can obviously run it out high w/o both options (see the Pacers'
            ham-handed running of it w/ Foster in recent years). But it works best
            with a big who can do both.
            Dunleavy and Foster run it pretty well, although the good defensive teams can stop it if and when they focus on it. Murphy can be a decent pick and pop player.

            Good to see a post from you Beast23 - and I agree, the Bulls could play Kirk at shooting guard without any problems - he can guard almost all of them anyway

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

              Not that big on Hinrich. However, if you can get him plus either Nocioni or Gooden for JO, I would do it. At that point, I'd still consider drafting Augustine at 11 though. This is b/c I don't think Hinrich is a true point, but could play some minutes there and some valuable minutes at 2 and maybe even eventually become the main SG.

              All that said, I still have my doubts about JO's trade viability. Can he really be worth even this much? Frankly, I think pretty much any of the deals mentioned in this thread for him would be steals for us.
              I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

              -Emiliano Zapata

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

                screw hinrich. i would rather sign duhon as a free agent for less than half the money. i know we dont have much money to burn in free agency, but he will be more affordable than most other situations where we get the same level of skill from our PG position. I would love to trade Daniels for Chris Wilcox. A few small moves is what we are looking at this offseason because it is going to be extremely difficult to pull off something major with the roster we have.

                I am of the school of thought to keep JO until his contract expires. Trade our expirings in Foster and Quis for young talent or draft picks (not including foreign players with foreign contracts). Hopefully we can get rid of Tinsley to a team in need of a point guard and give them a second rounder for their bum (think Jerome James and save a year off of Tinsley's contract).

                Most importantly, JOB needs to trust the young talent we have on our roster to play more minutes next season. I know that might mean a few bumps in the road, but we need to look at teams like detroit and the spurs who infuse their young talent into the rotation so they can improve. how can we let talent ROT on the bench, when our current, talent-deprived rotation can't win 40 games.

                my team next year:

                duhon, deiner
                granger, graham, 2nd round (combo guard)
                williams, dunleavy
                wilcox, ike, 1st round (athletic, rebounding pf/c)
                oneal, murphy, harrison
                "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


                • #38
                  Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

                  i would love to make a trade such as hinrich for murphy and a second rounder. but not JO. we need his expiring contract in two years and post defense.
                  "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


                  • #39
                    Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

                    Hinrich is an overpaid good backup, mediocre starter. I'd pass on him. I'd much rather take my chances on Augustine or Westbrook.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

                      I really don't think the Bulls are going to trade Nocioni. Trust me, the Pacers DO NOT want Chris Duhon. If you do sign him you might as well include directions to Club Rio and Cloud 9 in his contract because he's going to end up there anyway. He'll probably also use the same alarm clock that Shawne Williams does.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

                        Originally posted by iPACER View Post
                        How about Hinrich and Gooden for JO?

                        Would you do it and would the Bulls?
                        That's a great deal for the Pacers but I doubt the bulls would do it unless the Pacers also threw in their #11 pick or a future first rounder. Gooden's expiring contract adds extra value on the Bulls side of the table. That being said, when healthy, JO is the best player in this deal so it's probably the best deal possible for both teams.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

                          Originally posted by Joker View Post
                          I still think Kirk could look very good playing for Jim O'Brien.
                          Well, wasn't there this same speculation from JOB himself about Tins? UGH!
                          The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

                            Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
                            Drew Gooden? I want the Pacers to make the playoffs next year. I believe Jermaine helps our team more than Gooden/Hinrich/Hughes do in that department.
                            Um... how has that worked out for us the last 2 years? Aside from the defense, Gooden had similar numbers to JO last year and is waaaay more durable. Plus he expires after a year anyway. And we would be getting a PG that would fill one of our most glaring weaknesses (Perimeter D) while allowing us to draft our future PF (Love, Randolph, Speights).
                            A healthy man takes a crap every day. A smart man does it on company time.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

                              Originally posted by Joker View Post
                              Woah, woah, woah. This will not be a great defensive team after that trade. It might appear a little better because of the major increase in perimeter defense, but you're also trading our best post defender away.

                              Now, if you're comparing the post-trade team to the JO-less team, then yes that's big improvement. I really don't want Hughes, though. It'd be nice if we got their 2009 first rounder for taking him.
                              Hughes is a strong perimeter defender and a slasher, two things we really need.

                              One other thing I forgot to mention is that in my plan, we draft a bigman to replace JO at 11. I think Mareese Speights is perfect, 6-10 245 PF/C, and unlike a lot of other raw big prospects is highly skilled, with both post up skills and a nice face up game and highly developed shooting mechanics, also a shot blocker. Make him our post presence and defensive anchor.

                              The downside is that our contract situation still sucks, in fact it is worse. However the improvment to the team would make it worth it.
                              "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                              - ilive4sports

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Kirk Hinrich or draft a point guard

                                My initial answer is yes on a JONeal for Hinrich+Hughes trade. I think that this move would allow us to be competitive for the next couple of seasons while allowing us to build a good foundation for along with a core of Granger/Dunleavy/Diener/Murphy/Shawne and whatever players we draft.....which is what I think Bird still wants to do.

                                I don't agree with the notion that Hinrich won't improve our team that much. Even for this last season, I really think that if we had a Starting quality PG ( Flip does not count ) that could run the offense ( even if it was Tinsley ) for a full season along with a Healthy JONeal....we would have made the Playoffs. Hinrich won't be a player that pushes us over the top in a single season....unfortunately, there is no player that can do that. But IMHO...he's a better Starting PG option then what we have now in Tinsley and Diener.

                                When you look at the Salary cap impact for a JONeal for Hinrich+Hughes, in the 2008-2009/2009-2010 season.....JONeal is owed the same amount as Hinrich+Hughes ( combined ) is owed.....$23 mil per season over the next 2 seasons. The true impact is that Hinrich will add 9mil per year in the 2010-2011/2011-2012 seasons...which to me, would be an acceptable cost IF we were to get the type of Combo-Guard that I think that Bird and JO'B like to have at the Starting PG spot. However, judging from Grace's comments and reading on the Bulls RealGM forum, it appears that Hinrich isn't that good of a leader for the team. But with JONeal gone....I'm looking to Granger to be the Team leader on the floor and in the Locker-room and think that Hinrich would suit our needs for a Starting quality Guard that can help pressure the opposing PG who could also compliment Diener while running the point.

                                As for adding Hughes to our GF rotation, I don't consider players like Marquis/Flip/Kareem as factors in the future. I could care less about resigning Flip or Kareem and I think ( or at least hope ) that Marquis will be shopped in the offseason with Ike and/or Tinsley to help add to the Frontcourt depth. I would live with Hughes for the 2008-2009 season and then look to shop him in the 2009-2010 season.

                                Unfortunately, pursuing Hinrich also depends on what TPTB decide to do with Tinsley. If I were to believe that Tinsley would somehow be moved in this offseason and we would somehow have the resources to resign Granger by the 2008-2009 season, then I would do it.
                                Last edited by CableKC; 05-21-2008, 03:25 PM.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X