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

Tbird topics: Kudos to Ron Hunter, JT in purgatory, and Team USA's hidden weakness

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Tbird topics: Kudos to Ron Hunter, JT in purgatory, and Team USA's hidden weakness

    Hello again Pacer nation! It is good to find some time today to write....it has been far too long. I have alot on my mind today, so let me get right to the topics at hand.

    At its very core, sports are supposed to be avenues for learning life lessons. Sports are supposed to be ways to educate, to enlighten, and to bring together peoples from varied backgrounds in order to make lives better. Far from the NBA world of sponsorships, endorsements, and winning at all costs, there still remain people who look at sports in that way....as a way to build a bridge and to make the world a better place.

    Our modern day Olympic games really don't provide that as much anymore, with the sponsors and influence of big money permeating the games, and with political intrigue and turmoil among superpowers always bubbling just underneath the surface.

    Our modern media emphasizes the depressing and the criminal and the soap opera-esque nature of our sports heroes, giving the publicity to those who engage in dogfighting, big money hold outs, messy divorces and affairs, or other such repugnant behavior. Like life in general, what usually makes the news is the morbid, the sensational, and the controversial, where in reality great things are happening all around us in many different ways, and yet that goes unpublicized. That is a shame for all of us, and today I want to commend and comment on a great teaching moment and gumanitarian gesture, happening right in our own backyard, by a man with an office just a few blocks west of our beloved Conseco Fieldhouse.

    He will probably never win an NCAA title, He probably will never coach an Olympic team, and he will probably never coach an NBA team. He probably will never be famous, have a big endorsement deal, or write a best selling book. But recently Indiana's own Ron Hunter, head coach of the IUPUI Jaguars, continued to teach his players life lessons, and provide an awesome example of how sports can help lives of those in tough unfortunate spots, by making a trip to the impoverished nation of Peru. Coach Hunter volunteers his time for a group called "Samaritan's Feet", which is a charity that provides shoes to young children in the poorest of countries all across the globe.

    The article written about his trip is now on ESPN.com, written by Dana O'Neil. Those of you who are good at such things can probably provide a link, since I'm too computer illiterate to do so.

    It is the great teaching moments that Hunter provides to his players and staff on this trip for charity that touch me so, and which tell me that Ron Hunter truly understands what being a teacher and a coach is all about. At their core, sports is about something bigger than winning and losing, instead they should be about trying to push your limits, and to be the very best athlete and person that you can become. In a profession that is rife with egomaniacs, big money endorsement deals, network television committments, and glad handing fat cat boosters, Ron Hunter from Indianapolis is a shining light among the darkness that sometimes sports news becomes.

    I hope the Pacers somehow honor Ron Hunter this season for his great acheivements, but even more than that I hope Jim Morris and the Simon's can help him and his chosen charity provide the 10 million in shoes for children worldwide they have as a goal. Perhaps we should allow the IUPUI Jaguars to use Conseco Fieldhouse for a game to help raise money.....there are a million different ways the Pacers could help Coach Hunter with this.

    Not to go off on a tangent here, but what if Shawne Williams had had an influence in his life at the college level like Ron Hunter, instead of the shyster/slickster John Calipari? Shawne Williams or Jamal Tinsley, need to grow up? Maybe a trip to the jungles of South America might give you a different perspective on things.

    Coach Ron Hunter of IUPUI, kudos to you for being the type of teacher, coach, and man that we all want our sports figures to be.


    .................................................. ..................................................



    Speaking of Jamal Tinsley, it looks like it continues to be difficult for the Pacers to find a quality "fit" for him as a trade partner. Some teams that may have mild interest seemingly arent a match in what they have in return to trade us back....as I am sure the Pacers do not want a longer or more expensive contract in return.

    Tinsley in purgatory is crippling us in making other moves too, since we don't have any idea of how our financial picture looks in terms of future contract obligations. This effects how you want to structure a future signing of Danny Granger, not just in total dollars but in how you want to divide the money per year. What I mean by that is, I think if I were the Pacers I wouldn't want to sign Granger to a traditional contract that begins slightly lower with maximum raises every year. I think if I am David Morway or Larry Bird I'd want to either make Granger's contract a "flat amount" (same amount every year, no raises) or even do like the Bulls did with some of their deals and "frontload" Grangers deal to pay him a DESCENDING amount of money for the 5 years. For instance, A Granger deal could look something like this, assuming for a moment a 5 yr, 60 Million deal or so.

    Year 1: 16 million
    Year 2: 14 million
    Year 3: 12 million
    Year 4: 10 million
    Year 5: 8 million

    This type of structure could fit our needs better long term, as we'd have more money to play with as our overall team got better and we got closer to a championship level, requiring more money each year to stay competitive in the marketplace for signing new players to add to the roster.

    This type of manueverabilty makes it imperative to have Tinsley's situation resolved before we try anything as outside the box as this.

    I'm not saying the Pacers have this plan or one similar in mind, but regardless, you need cost certainty in your future moves, so waiting to resolve Tinsley before you do anything else only makes sense. Unfortunately, it puts us in limbo land until every other available point guard ends up someplace, so we can see what team got caught without a seat when the music stops.

    Like I said, I don't see a direct trade partner that makes sense. I think moving Jamal Tinsley basically is going to have to include a 3rd, 4th, or even a 5th team, and will likely involve multiple players and moving parts. Fortunately, there are still teams out there with players they want to get rid of somehow, and there are teams who might want Tinsley in the right circumstances. They just dont all match up with us. Here is a partial list of teams with players who might be involved off the top of my head:

    Pheonix could move Boris Diaw.
    New York could move Jered Jeffries, Jerome James, Zach Randolph, or Marbury.
    Milwaukee could move Mo Williams or Charlie Villanueva.
    Golden State could move Al Harrington.
    Miami could move Mark Blount or Marcus Banks.
    Chicago could move Kirk Hinrich or Ben Gordon.
    Denver might move Linus Kleiza or Kenyon Martin.


    There are other teams out there who might like Jamal Tinsley, as unbelievable as that is to me personally: Houston I think is a possibility now that Rafer Alston has some issues. Oklahoma City might do something involving Tinsley if it were beneficial to them financially. Detroit wouldnt take Jamal, but they'd be willing to get involved in a bigger deal I bet. Charlotte might roll the dice with someone who gets along with Larry Brown better than what they have chemistry wise.

    Regardless, the point is I believe looking for a direct deal involving Jamal Tinsley is unlikely now. We probably need to be thinking in terms of a multiple team trade.

    .................................................. .................................................. .

    Team USA is rolling so far in China, but I see storm clouds up ahead. Everyone can see the lack of perimeter shooting and size as problems easy enough, but I see another issue looming as a bigger weakness: Lack of patience on both ends of the floor.

    The game plan to beat us is easy to figure out. Slow the game down. Throw the ball inside to attack us inside out. Spread the floor and shoot from the outside. Run the screen/roll. Make it a half court game whenever possible. Play zone against us and make us shoot from the outside. Foul us and allow no dunks, make us make foul shots. Play physical, attack our lack of defensive rebounding size.

    Where I really am worried about us though is in the area of the game that is geting great praise from all the other analysts so far, and that is our pressure defense. True, we are really attacking the ballhandlers of the opponent very well so far, wearing them down and creating easy offensive chances of of turnovers.

    But this defensive philosophy also lends itself to a lack of DEFENSIVE patience. Are we willing and able to defend complex offensive schemes when we have to guard longer than 20 seconds consistently? Will we not break down and go for reckless gambles, leaving us open to being backcut to death? Can we stay disciplined enough not to foul if we have to guard against a 5 -7 pass possession, giving up easy points from the line?

    Coach K's Duke teams often play with a lack of patience defensively, and the elite teams they play make them pay for it. By trying to assert such intense pressure, they allow themselves to be vulnerable to being beaten off the dribble, and to giving up "penetrate and pitch" opportunities for three point shots. Even the Chinese, a basically bad team, had success doing this for spurts.

    I hope the USA wins no question, and Ive enjoyed the excellent athleticism Ive witnessed so far, but we are far from perfect as a team. Can we change gears and play a different way if we need to win a game in some other way? Can we win a slower paced game if need be? Can we ever make some threes to beat a team playing zone? Can Coach K adjust to the opponent quickly enough when our initial gameplan doesnt work? If we play a team who only turns it over less than 15 times against us, can we beat them anyway? Can we guard a sophisticated team with multiple big guys in the half court well enough to win?

    I love the enthusiasm and unselfishness we play with, but there are some real problems we could face before this tournament is over.

    .................................................. .................................................. .

    As always, all the above is just my opinion.

    Tbird
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Tbird topics: Kudos to Ron Hunter, JT in purgatory, and Team USA's hidden weakness

    Thanks, tbird...it's just picking nits, but the most Danny's contract could start at would be about $14.5mm (the max starting salary for someone with his experience).

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Tbird topics: Kudos to Ron Hunter, JT in purgatory, and Team USA's hidden weakness

      Ron Hunter is great!!!
      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

      -Emiliano Zapata

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Tbird topics: Kudos to Ron Hunter, JT in purgatory, and Team USA's hidden weakness

        I loved it when he floor burned right through the knees of his suit pants when they finally made the tournament.
        Turn out the lights, this party's over!

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Tbird topics: Kudos to Ron Hunter, JT in purgatory, and Team USA's hidden weakness

          Ron Hunter is absolutely the best. His enthusiasm is contagious, his dedication beyond reproach and the commitment to the shoe program is inspiring. I hope I have the opportunity to shake his hand sometime.
          The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Tbird topics: Kudos to Ron Hunter, JT in purgatory, and Team USA's hidden weakness

            Originally posted by count55 View Post
            Thanks, tbird...it's just picking nits, but the most Danny's contract could start at would be about $14.5mm (the max starting salary for someone with his experience).
            Fair enough. How about this?

            Year 1: 14 million
            Year 2: 13 million
            Year 3: 12 million
            Year 4: 11 million
            Year 5: 10 million

            Here is another question. If you were Danny Granger, would you sign a 5 year deal at all, or would you sign something like a 3 year deal, so you could reach free agency again 2 years sooner? I think if I were Granger's agent, I'd recommend signing a shorter deal, say a 3 yr deal for 35-40 million, then take my chances again in the free agent market when Granger is 2 years younger than he would be otherwise. In the long run, I think Granger most likely makes more money that way.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Tbird topics: Kudos to Ron Hunter, JT in purgatory, and Team USA's hidden weakness

              It's just too easy to have your career ruined completely (Bender etc) or partially (Grant Hill etc) with a knee injury to sign a shorter deal, I really can't see any of these guys wanting anything less than the max length whenever they can get it.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Tbird topics: Kudos to Ron Hunter, JT in purgatory, and Team USA's hidden weakness

                Originally posted by thunderbird1245 View Post
                Fair enough. How about this?

                Year 1: 14 million
                Year 2: 13 million
                Year 3: 12 million
                Year 4: 11 million
                Year 5: 10 million

                Here is another question. If you were Danny Granger, would you sign a 5 year deal at all, or would you sign something like a 3 year deal, so you could reach free agency again 2 years sooner? I think if I were Granger's agent, I'd recommend signing a shorter deal, say a 3 yr deal for 35-40 million, then take my chances again in the free agent market when Granger is 2 years younger than he would be otherwise. In the long run, I think Granger most likely makes more money that way.

                I'm sure that Danny would sign a 5-year deal, but ask for an Early Termination Option after the third, fourth, or both years. That covers him on both accounts...if he's doing great, he can look for the increase. If something happens (injury, whatever), he's got the extra two years of security.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Tbird topics: Kudos to Ron Hunter, JT in purgatory, and Team USA's hidden weakness

                  I think you're correct re Tinsley. Odds are that it will take 3 teams, and Miami and Marcus Banks will probably be involved. But it's still a waiting game with all sides maneuvering to maximize their leverage.

                  As far as the Olympic team is concerned, you bring up some interesting scenarios, but I would maintain that our overall strategy of steamrolling everyone will work. No other team in the world can bring a Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Chris Bosh, Mike Redd, etc. off the bench. That's obviously oversimplifying things because we do have a real plan that the team buys into this time, but it ultimately comes down to talent, and as long as this team continues to accept their roles I think our talent advantage will be too much for any team to overcome.

                  Comment

                  Previous template Next
                  Working...
                  X