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

Beasley not going #2?

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

  • Beasley not going #2?

    From espn.com
    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2...ory?id=3459696


    If the Miami Heat's recent activities are any indication, they are not going to select Kansas State forward Michael Beasley with the No. 2 pick in Thursday's NBA draft.

    With the first selection, the Chicago Bulls are leaning strongly toward drafting Memphis point guard Derrick Rose. While the Bulls say they won't announce their decision until draft night, Bulls GM John Paxson admits that Chicago is "probably leaning a certain way."

    ESPN.com has been reporting since the draft lottery that Heat president Pat Riley has reservations about Beasley. While Beasley is a talent, Riley seems to be uncomfortable with his personality and seems dead set on finding a point guard to pair in the backcourt with Dwyane Wade.

    To that end, Riley staged two separate secret workouts in Miami on Tuesday. The first, a source told ESPN.com, was for Arizona point guard Jerryd Bayless. The second was for USC guard O.J. Mayo, who confirmed to ESPN.com that he worked out for the team.

    In conjunction with the workouts, the Heat have been actively shopping the second pick in the draft with an eye on selecting Mayo or Bayless lower while acquiring another asset.

    If the Heat don't find any takers, sources told ESPN.com's Andy Katz on Tuesday night that Mayo was told by Heat brass -- which included Riley, general manager Randy Pfund and coach Erik Spoelstra -- that he is in contention to be selected outright at No. 2.

    After the Heat were informed that Shawn Marion would not opt out of his contract, sources said Riley began calling teams looking for serious offers for the second pick.

    The Heat then brought in Mayo and Bayless. Both workouts lasted about 90 minutes. It's the second time the Heat have worked out Bayless and Mayo, and according to sources, Riley believes both are special talents.

    Bayless had an "amazing" workout, according to the source. He "shot the lights" out and performed even better than he had in his first workout for the Heat. They believe he can be a full-time point guard in the pros, similar to Chauncey Billups.

    The source said Mayo was also "great," and in addition to shooting the ball well, he performed well in some of the ballhandling drills. The Heat believe Mayo could be a Gilbert Arenas-type point guard.

    The same source said Riley is enamored of Mayo's and Bayless' shooting ability and believes Mayo, like Bayless, can be a point guard in the NBA.

    In addition to any questions about attitude, a number of high-ranking NBA sources told Katz that one of the main reasons the Heat wouldn't select Beasley is the hope that they will land Utah's Carlos Boozer in a year when he can opt out of his contract. Boozer has a home in Miami.

    With the Heat now identifying two lottery picks that they would be comfortable with, and with questions about Beasley, it's looking more and more likely like they are going to trade their pick.

    So the question is ... who is going to win the Michael Beasley sweepstakes? After talking to numerous sources around the league, here are the top four contenders:

    1. Memphis Grizzlies


    The Grizzlies have a huge hole at the power forward position (since trading away Pau Gasol) and see Beasley as an elite talent to pair up with Rudy Gay.

    The Grizzlies can offer a number of deals that could entice Miami. They could include the No. 5 pick, Mike Miller and the Heat's choice of either Kyle Lowry or Mike Conley. Adding Miller and a point guard would allow the Heat to be very flexible with who they draft at No. 5. They could add another guard like Bayless or they could go big with a player like Brook Lopez or Kevin Love.


    2. Los Angeles Clippers


    The Clippers can offer the Heat someone Riley desperately covets: Elton Brand. A swap of the No. 2 pick and Marion for Brand and the No. 7 pick works under the salary cap and helps both teams with their needs. Why would Riley pull the trigger on that trade now, when he could just make a run at Brand in free agency next summer? Sources said the Heat would like to get Brand to Miami as soon as they can and lock him up to a long-term extension this fall. At No. 7, it's possible the Heat could still get Bayless.

    The Clippers like Marion and Beasley, but they could actually use the No. 2 pick to grab Mayo. Mayo has been coveted by the Clippers for a while.

    The Heat would have to weigh their interest in Brand against their desire for Boozer in 2009 in this scenario, however.


    3. Seattle SuperSonics


    Kevin Durant covets Beasley as a teammate. They were best friends growing up and want to play together. The Sonics think he's the perfect complement to Durant. They'd be willing to take back more salary to make it happen.

    Sources say the Sonics are offering the expiring contract of Chris Wilcox, Johan Petro and the No. 4 pick to Miami for the No. 2 pick and Mark Blount. The move would save the Heat some serious money, putting them well below the cap in the summer of 2009.

    The Heat would prefer Jeff Green in the deal instead of Wilcox and Petro, but it doesn't appear the Sonics are willing to go that far, even if the Heat dropped Blount from the equation.

    A source close to Seattle told Katz that Miami hasn't called about a deal as of Tuesday.


    4. Minnesota Timberwolves


    The Wolves have been hoping and praying that Beasley somehow falls to them at No. 3. While he's not a perfect fit, they could move Al Jefferson to the 5 and have one of the highest-scoring front lines in the league. However, Beasley falling to No. 3 looks unlikely -- unless the Heat do pull the trigger on Mayo outright at No. 2. Can the Wolves put together a package that works if Beasley doesn't fall?

    The Wolves have a few assets that could entice Miami. They actually hold the Heat's 2009 first-round pick, which is top-10 protected. They also have a player that the Heat have interest in: last year's lottery pick, Corey Brewer. If the Wolves really want Beasley, perhaps a return of the Heat's first-round pick and/or Brewer could make it happen.

    A source close to Minnesota told Katz, however, that the Heat and the Timberwolves have talked but there was no deal that worked for both teams as of Tuesday night. Sources close to both Seattle and Minnesota also said that they would take Mayo if he was on the board when they selected.
    Turn out the lights, this party's over!

  • #2
    Re: Beasley not going #2?

    I know Beasley is a stud, but can you imagine if the Memphis deal went through? They could end up with Miller, Conley, #5! Possible starting roster: Wade, Conley, Marion, #5 (Alexander, Lopez, Love, Gallinari)

    Or they could still go guard with Bayless or Mayo and shore up that position far into the future!
    Turn out the lights, this party's over!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Beasley not going #2?

      Good info......but i still think its a smokescreen.

      The Seattle and Minnesota trades make no sense at all.

      The Clips trade works if Bayless is actually available at #7 but even then, Miami has to feel like they can get Brand or Boozer next year with no comp, so why trade Beasley to take Brand now............especially since marion is included as well.

      Which circles us back to our friends the Griz. Conley and Miller and #5 seems like a great deal for Miami especially if they are concerned about Beasley for any reason. But is Conley really the player riley wants at PG ?? And would he still draft Bayless at #5 if he already has Conley ??

      Of all those options only Memphis makes any sense. Conley could be traded for something else or kept if the Heat likes him in which case they could draft Kevin Love or possibly Lopez (although I think he goes at 4).

      That would give the heat:

      Conley or Bayless or both
      Wade
      Miller
      Marion and Haslem
      Free agent and/or Kevin Love

      If they love Bayless at 5 then they could trade Banks and Conley to us for Foster and 11............and then draft Hibbert which would probably make for a great roster for the next decade.

      Its an interesting debate.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Beasley not going #2?

        Originally posted by Plax80 View Post
        Good info......but i still think its a smokescreen.

        The Seattle and Minnesota trades make no sense at all.

        The Clips trade works if Bayless is actually available at #7 but even then, Miami has to feel like they can get Brand or Boozer next year with no comp, so why trade Beasley to take Brand now............especially since marion is included as well.

        Which circles us back to our friends the Griz. Conley and Miller and #5 seems like a great deal for Miami especially if they are concerned about Beasley for any reason. But is Conley really the player riley wants at PG ?? And would he still draft Bayless at #5 if he already has Conley ??

        Of all those options only Memphis makes any sense. Conley could be traded for something else or kept if the Heat likes him in which case they could draft Kevin Love or possibly Lopez (although I think he goes at 4).

        That would give the heat:

        Conley or Bayless or both
        Wade
        Miller
        Marion and Haslem
        Free agent and/or Kevin Love

        If they love Bayless at 5 then they could trade Banks and Conley to us for Foster and 11............and then draft Hibbert which would probably make for a great roster for the next decade.

        Its an interesting debate.
        That's why life is sweet if you have one of the top two picks. There's really no bad scenerio here for the Heat. *jealous*
        Turn out the lights, this party's over!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Beasley not going #2?

          Ya, that MEM deal sounds pretty damn juicy. Conley will probably
          never be a star at PG. But he's a winner who knows how to play
          the game and make guys around him better.

          As for Bayless, I think that folks are way too convinced he can
          easily make the transition to PG. He may well do so. But it'll take
          him years to get to the point that Conley is in terms of his 'feel'
          for the position/game at that level.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Beasley not going #2?

            I am not entirely sold on Conley with Wade. Both are slashers that need shooters to kick out to. Gerald Wallace and Richardson did not work out in Charlotte. They would have to have shooters in the frontcourt (Love and Marion) which could put them as the worse defensive frontcourt in the East. But if Wade and Conley are guarding the backcourt correctly then they may not put those players on an island. Either way Miller off of the bench would really be good for them. If I were Miami I would try to get a Camby/Dalembert/Sheed to shore up defensively.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Beasley not going #2?

              If Pat Riley is concerned about Beasley's character, that's a huge red flag.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Beasley not going #2?

                What does this thread have to do with the title?

                It seems like this is about Beasley going #2 to a team other than Miami. If Miami trades down to #4, Beasley still goes #2.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Beasley not going #2?

                  If the Heat don't find any takers, sources told ESPN.com's Andy Katz on Tuesday night that Mayo was told by Heat brass -- which included Riley, general manager Randy Pfund and coach Erik Spoelstra -- that he is in contention to be selected outright at No. 2.
                  I would guess that this is why there's a question mark in the title. "Miami not taking Beasley" would have probably fit the article better, but it might not be the better headline to draw attention.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Beasley not going #2?

                    Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                    What does this thread have to do with the title?

                    It seems like this is about Beasley going #2 to a team other than Miami. If Miami trades down to #4, Beasley still goes #2.
                    That was the title of the espn.com article by Chad Ford when I first read it. They think Miami will try to find a deal they like for the pick, but the article also said the Heat might pick Bayless or Mayo at 2 if they can't find a good trade. I doubt the second scenerio would happen, but that's what Ford was reporting.
                    Turn out the lights, this party's over!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Beasley not going #2?

                      Originally posted by 2minutes twowa View Post
                      That was the title of the espn.com article by Chad Ford when I first read it. They think Miami will try to find a deal they like for the pick, but the article also said the Heat might pick Bayless or Mayo at 2 if they can't find a good trade. I doubt the second scenerio would happen, but that's what Ford was reporting.
                      You mean you weren't trying to pull a fast one on all us unsuspecting forum readers with a juiced up title?



                      I'll tell you this: I liked the title. I want to give it a Pulitzer.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Beasley not going #2?

                        I bet there's a pretty good chance Beasley goes #2 on Thursday.

                        Second line.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Beasley not going #2?

                          So, sounds like the rub is, Riles wants Mayo, Minny has nothing he
                          wants and moving down below #3 risks losing Mayo to Minny.

                          I wish we had that dilemma !

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Beasley not going #2?

                            I'm really shocked by the lack of constipation jokes.
                            "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


                            • #15
                              Re: Beasley not going #2?

                              Originally posted by Arcadian View Post
                              I'm really shocked by the lack of constipation jokes.
                              How immature.

                              Not many people get a chance to go #2 on national TV. Beasley just might tomorrow. He's worked his entire life for this. He's been eating right, working out frequently. Once in a lifetime opportunity and hopefully his dreams come true. And we should consider ourselves lucky to see someone - if not Beasley - have such a joyous day in their life getting to go #2 with their family, their country, and even the world watching. It's going to be a moving experience.
                              Last edited by btowncolt; 06-25-2008, 01:02 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X