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

Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

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

  • Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

    Tuesday, September 23, 2008
    Report: Knicks prepare to waive Marbury by end of week

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ESPN.com news services

    Stephon Marbury may be in shape physically to join the Knicks on the court, but the Knicks might finally be ready mentally to part ways with their chaotic point guard.


    The Knicks are preparing to put Marbury on waivers by the end of the week, several sources with knowledge of the situation told Newsday. The team must await the go-ahead from Madison Square Garden chairman James Dolan, however, because it would involve eating another large chunk of money in a buyout, Newsday reported.


    Trying to make a good impression, Stephon Marbury showed up at new coach Mike D'Antoni's news conference in May.


    Marbury is entering the final year of his contract, worth $21.9 million.


    Once Marbury clears waivers and a buyout is agreed upon, he would be free to sign with any team. Reports in Newsday and the South Florida media have mentioned the Miami Heat, which is in need of a point guard, as having interest.



    According to Newsday, Marbury has recovered from January's left ankle surgery, which was needed to remove bone spurs, and has worked out all summer in Southern California, trimming his weight to 200 pounds.


    He did not join the other Knicks veterans for scrimmages at the team's training center until Monday, even though the informal workouts had been going on since last week.


    Marbury's best performance statistically in 4½ seasons with the Knicks was in 2004-05, when he averaged 21.7 points and 8.1 assists a game. Since then, his numbers have declined, even as his feuding with his bosses and his teammates increased.


    Marbury had numerous conflicts with former Knicks coaches Larry Brown and Isiah Thomas. The low point may have been in November 2007, when Marbury left without permission and returned to New York while the team was in Phoenix for a game.


    The Knicks signed guard Anthony Roberson in July, a further indication that they were ready to jettison Marbury. Roberson played 36 career NBA games with Memphis and Golden State, but spent last season in Turkey and Israel. The Knicks signed him to a deal after he averaged 14.8 points in five games for their summer league team.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3604025


    Print 'em!

  • #2
    Re: Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

    Mistake. Not that I'm a Marbury fan - anything but.

    But he's gone at the end of the year and he's an expiring contract that might make finding someone to take on Zach or Curry a little easier. Or, next summer, if he has a decent season, use him in an S&T (for much less $$$) for someone.

    Just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

      Agreed with rimfire.

      He's a huge expiring contract. Aren't those supposed to be valuable?

      We'll give you Murphy and Tinsley for him.
      You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
      All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

      - Jimmy Buffett

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

        I think Donnie just reasoned that they wouldn't trade him (they were just gonna let him expire) and that (like JT) he was going to be a negative influence in the locker room, so they got rid of him.

        I do agree that they probably could have sent him to a team desperate for cap space (like Memphis) and get a couple of 2010 expirings and possibly a pick for the favor, if not a decent player.

        This expands the desperation PG market, which is bad for us. Donnie caving and waiving this guy probably is sending out signals that the Heat and other teams were right to wait on Marbury (and Tinsley, if they are interested). Unfortunate precedent.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

          Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
          Mistake. Not that I'm a Marbury fan - anything but.

          But he's gone at the end of the year and he's an expiring contract that might make finding someone to take on Zach or Curry a little easier. Or, next summer, if he has a decent season, use him in an S&T (for much less $$$) for someone.

          Just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
          thats a MAJOR expiring contract to tag with zach's or curry's. where could you send marbury's $21mil expiring and zach's $14.6mil (not to mention the two extra years for $32mil)?

          a team looking for an expiring around the $21mil range is probably hoping to dump salary which makes taking on zach's $47mil not very likely.

          it is the same reason why we probably weren't going to be able to just like JO ride out until his final year and try to move murphy or tinsley with him - no team wants to make those types of financial deals ... then you've got to consider the added starbury/zbo nonsense.
          This is the darkest timeline.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

            Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
            it is the same reason why we probably weren't going to be able to just like JO ride out until his final year and try to move murphy or tinsley with him - no team wants to make those types of financial deals ... then you've got to consider the added starbury/zbo nonsense.
            This is the reason that I never believed that JO's value would go back up simply because he was an expiring. There's a law of diminishing returns on expiring contracts, and JO and Starbury are well above it.

            Neither the Knicks, nor the Pacers, were going to take back $20+mm in Non-expiring contracts, and neither were going to get $20+mm of player value for guys like JO and Starbury if the other team was just looking at them as an expiring contract.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

              Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
              Mistake. Not that I'm a Marbury fan - anything but.

              But he's gone at the end of the year and he's an expiring contract that might make finding someone to take on Zach or Curry a little easier. Or, next summer, if he has a decent season, use him in an S&T (for much less $$$) for someone.

              Just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
              I was thinking the same thing.....especially when there are teams out like the Heat and Warriors that are just waiting for them to waive him so that they can pick him up cheap.

              I suggested this to the Knicks RealGM board....and other the typical Knicks Fans response.....most of them were tired of Marbury, couldn't care less that other teams were interested in him ( and therefore is a viable trading asset ) and simply wanted to move on.

              The second that Marbury hits the market....he's going to the Heat. I just hope that he holds out and signs some 3 year deal...and not for cheap.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

                Does this make his shoes any cheaper?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

                  It looks as though Golden State could offer Marbury more money than Miami could. It seems as though Miami could offer right around 2.1M while GS could offer 2.8M. I would think that might come into play. Considering those are the only two teams probably willing to sign the bas tard. Ideally for us, he signs with Golden State. I realistically could see his agent asking for more money from GS and then having Miami offer a two year deal to go back to Golden State and ask for a bigger two year deal. Miami is our only hope for getting rid of Tinsley at this point. But as the season goes on we may have more suitors than people think. Patience may be our biggest virtue, because someone may be more desperate for a PG than we are to get rid of Tinsley and then we actually have leverage.
                  "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


                  • #10
                    Re: Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

                    Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
                    thats a MAJOR expiring contract to tag with zach's or curry's. where could you send marbury's $21mil expiring and zach's $14.6mil (not to mention the two extra years for $32mil)?
                    There are about a dozen ways to do it. You've never heard of 3 or 4 team trades? Believe it or not, they have happened.
                    The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

                      Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                      It looks as though Golden State could offer Marbury more money than Miami could. It seems as though Miami could offer right around 2.1M while GS could offer 2.8M. I would think that might come into play. Considering those are the only two teams probably willing to sign the bas tard. Ideally for us, he signs with Golden State. I realistically could see his agent asking for more money from GS and then having Miami offer a two year deal to go back to Golden State and ask for a bigger two year deal. Miami is our only hope for getting rid of Tinsley at this point. But as the season goes on we may have more suitors than people think. Patience may be our biggest virtue, because someone may be more desperate for a PG than we are to get rid of Tinsley and then we actually have leverage.
                      Moneywise......the amount is minimal IMHO for a guy with a $20 mil buyout waiting to happen.....I would think that for Marbury....it's about where he plays where he can get the most minutes and chance to make the Playoffs.

                      With GS, he's waiting for Monta to retun to take minutes away from him at the PG spot...whereas with the Heat....there is no one on the team that can take away minutes from him.

                      With the right moves....the Heat can make a decent run at the Playoffs in the East.....and by next 2 seasons...they could be in the hunt for at least 2 very solid Top-Tier FA.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

                        Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
                        Mistake. Not that I'm a Marbury fan - anything but.

                        But he's gone at the end of the year and he's an expiring contract that might make finding someone to take on Zach or Curry a little easier. Or, next summer, if he has a decent season, use him in an S&T (for much less $$$) for someone.

                        Just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
                        Agreed. I see absolutely no benefit to releasing him, other than just not wanting him to be around the team.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

                          Nobody was going to trade for Marbury.

                          Nobody.

                          The Knicks were not going to be willing to take back $20mm of salaries, a large chunk of which (if not all) would've had to extend beyond this year in order for Marbury's expiring to have any value.

                          If they had no intention in playing him, and they likely realized that there was exceedingly unlikely that they were going to get a trade to their liking, then why not get him the hell out of town?

                          What's the value in having him sit around the team when he's proven to be a problem in the past?

                          BTW...I'm not entirely convinced that he'll ever play again. I simply don't see him being a guy taking a small paycheck to be a part of a good team.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

                            Cable you have a very valid point. I figured that but was making a point I guess. Great thoughts.

                            Also, there is no realistic way for the Knicks to trade Marbury. Seriously. To take on more than one year of salary at 22M worth of salaries back means you are taking on extra money. Who gives a damn if he doesn't play for you. What you would get back in return could be no more than **** players with bloated contracts. Just like Marbury. If they are all expiring you would have extra players on your roster you don't figure to build around anyway. There is really no point in making the effort to trade him. Buy him out in his last year is like letting him expire anyway. That is the most beneficial thing the Knicks can do from a management standpoint. Waive him and try to agree on a buyout where you can save double the money off his contract and whatever the luxury tax savings would be.
                            "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


                            • #15
                              Re: Report: Knicks to waive Starbury by end of week.

                              And just to reinforce the fact that NY media is completely clueless:

                              http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3605502

                              Pouring water on widespread speculation that the Knicks will waive Stephon Marbury, president Donnie Walsh said the controversial point guard will be with the team when it begins official workouts next week.

                              "He's coming to training camp," Walsh said of Marbury in a telephone interview Tuesday evening.

                              A newspaper report out of New York Tuesday morning said the Knicks are planning to waive Marbury by the end of the week. The move, which has been speculated about for months in the media, would eventually lead to a buyout of the $21.9 million Marbury is owed in the final year of his contract.

                              "This thing is initiated in the press and then I have to ask questions about it," Walsh said, sounding somewhat perturbed. "I haven't approached [Marbury] about a buyout."

                              When asked whether he's reached out to the point guard to alleviate concerns about his status with the team, Walsh said, "I talked to Stephon once and he seems okay about all of this."

                              Marbury is coming off the worst season of his 12-year career. He had a famous falling-out with his coach, president and one-time mentor Isiah Thomas, played in only 24 games because of injury, underwent surgery on his left ankle, and averaged career-lows in points (13.9), assists (4.7), rebounds (2.5) and minutes (33.6).

                              But at 31 years old, Marbury is still fairly young, and reports are that he spent the summer getting in the best shape he's been in in years.

                              Walsh also said former Knicks guard Allan Houston will probably join the team at training camp. He said Houston, 37, has been working out with the Knicks at their practice facility and that his shooting touch is as smooth as ever.

                              Walsh is going to meet with Houston on Wednesday to further discuss the situation. He would not guarantee Houston a spot on the roster, though.

                              "I don't know the answer to that," Walsh said, when asked whether Houston would definitely play for the Knicks this season. "But as far as putting the ball in the basket, he absolutely can still shoot. He has to be in more intense situations."

                              Houston, who averaged 17.3 points over his 12-year career, was forced to retire in 2005 because of an arthritic left knee. He returned briefly last season before bowing out during the Knicks training camp.

                              Walsh said it will be different this time around.

                              "In that case, he hadn't worked out that much," Walsh said. "He just came in and started playing. Now, he feels like he's in better position to go out and play. I accept that."

                              The question is will New York still accept Marbury.
                              That's good - there are 21 million reasons to keep him through the season, plus without him NY doesn't have a starting-quality PG. We're gonna suck anyway and if there are problems you can buy him out any time.
                              The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X