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

Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

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

  • Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

    The Indiana Pacers have seven players going into free agency right now, and they have to decide who to sign and not. These players are the following below:

    • F/C, Maceo Baston
    • G/F, Marquis Daniels
    • G, Travis Diener
    • F/C, Josh McRoberts
    • F/C, Rasho Nesterovic
    • G, Jarrett Jack

    There are only three players I believe that the Pacers can keep. Let's go ahead and break everything down, why some players just have to go and why these players have to stay.

    Maceo Baston

    I think Baston just has to go, due to the fact the Pacers really didn't use him a lot during the rebuilding year of the 2008-2009 season. The 6'11" power forward averaged closed to three points, about one rebound, and 0.3 assists per game.

    Baston is also aging as well, as he just turned 33 years old about two weeks ago. The Pacers can manage to keep him but I just don't think he will stay. It's better if he just moved on towards a different team. Baston is a good basketball player, but he just has to go.

    Stay or Not? Not

    Marquis Daniels

    Daniels had his best year of his six-year career. The 28-year-old had close to 14 points, close to five rebounds, and two assists per game in the 2008-2009 season. Although, 6'6" was a backup, he made strong contributions towards the squad of Indiana.

    Daniels is now going into his prime and is becoming a fabulous player for Indiana. After some pretty good years in Dallas, he is getting better over the years in his time with Indy. He has helped Indy well and he looks help them further in the 2009-2010 season.

    Stay or Not? Stay

    Travis Diener

    Diener didn' play as much as the two guys in front of him (Jarrett Jack and TJ Ford) but he did play well at the ending of last season. He had close to four points, close to two rebounds, and two assists last year.

    The 6'1" point guard had his career-highs in the 2007-2008 season as he played solid in his backup position, but last year was a little of a disappointment. Diener wasn't much of a contributor last year and I really don't see him coming back.

    Stay or Not? Not

    Josh McRoberts

    McRoberts didn't do that much last year, mostly just playing the final games of the season. He had two points, two rebounds, and close to one assist per game. McRoberts never started a game last year, as he was stuck behind Roy Hibbert, Troy Murphy, Jeff Foster, and Maceo Baston.

    The 6'10" power forward from one of the best college basketball colleges in the NCAA (Duke) looks to stay but I just can't stand him staying. I'd rather just see him go because the Pacers probably won't use him next year as well.

    Stay or Not? Not

    Rasho Nesterovic

    Nesterovic played well last year in the Pacers lineup at center. The ten-year pro had close to seven points, close to four rebounds, and close to two rebounds per game.

    The seven-foot center was pretty good last year with the skills he brought towards Indy. If he continues to play like he has been, which is being solid, I can see him staying for a couple of more years with the roster.

    Stay or Not? Stay

    Jarrett Jack

    Ah, we are now at the ending of this article. And surely, Jack is going to stay with Indiana no matter what. Jack had 13 points, close to four rebounds, and four assists with the Pacers last year. Jack and TJ Ford made a pretty good one-two punch in the point-guard system.

    Now with a possible chance of drafting Tyreke Evans, Eric Maynor, or even Brandon Jennings in the NBA Draft, Ford and Jack can be valuable mentors. And with Jack's great performance last year, I can see him staying more with the franchise.

    Let this 6'3" point guard stay, he can be very good with the team.

    Stay or Not? Obviously, Stay.

    So that concludes that. If you care to agree/disagree with me, I'd be happy read it. I respect everyone's opinions.

  • #2
    Re: Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

    I almost disagree with every single one of your picks, lol. Baston can go. McRoberts and Jack stay a reasonable price. Daniels go, at least at the $7 or so million he is owed. Way too much for a backup wing on this team. Rasho can go and don't look back. Diener can stay.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

      Originally posted by rocksballer58 View Post
      • F/C, Maceo Baston
      • G/F, Marquis Daniels
      • G, Travis Diener
      • F/C, Josh McRoberts
      • F/C, Rasho Nesterovic
      • G, Jarrett Jack
      Buh-bye.
      Buh-bye.
      Keep.
      Keep.
      Buh-bye.
      Keep.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

        I never liked Maceo as a guy and definitly not as a player. I'm happy to see him go once again.

        Anyone else notice his career in the NBA was TOR, IND, TOR, IND?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

          F/C, Maceo Baston - LET GO
          G/F, Marquis Daniels - LET GO
          G, Travis Diener - RE-SIGN
          F/C, Josh McRoberts - RE-SIGN
          F/C, Rasho Nesterovic - LET GO
          G, Jarrett Jack - Likely can't afford, LOOK TO SIGN-AND-TRADE
          “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

          “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

            The 2 I really want to keep are definitly Jack and McRoberts.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

              Rasho was a stiff after the first 20 games. Stiff does not equal solid.

              Baston is not going to chose to leave, he is gone. McRoberts is a FA come July 1st. But which one is working out at Conseco.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

                Originally posted by TroyMurphy3 View Post
                I never liked Maceo as a guy and definitly not as a player. I'm happy to see him go once again.

                Anyone else notice his career in the NBA was TOR, IND, TOR, IND?

                Care to tell us why you just don't like him as a human being?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

                  Originally posted by Burtrem Redneck View Post
                  Care to tell us why you just don't like him as a human being?
                  I'll be happy to.

                  I was at a Pacers road game in Philadelphia and I saw Maceo just standing there doing nothing and was inactive that night I think drinking Gatorade. So I yell MACEO!!!!! and he goes give me a second alright in a nasty, quiet voice.

                  I just found it funny that he's probably the worst player on the Pacers and I was a fan on the road and I actually knew who he was.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

                    Hum, the thread states the Pacers have 7 FA and only lists and discusses 6. For those that don't know who the 7th is, it's Graham. So what's the verdict on him rocksballer 58?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

                      Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                      Hum, the thread states the Pacers have 7 FA and only lists and discusses 6. For those that don't know who the 7th is, it's Graham. So what's the verdict on him rocksballer 58?
                      Oh yeah Graham. How could I forget good old Steve.

                      Yeah he won't re-sign I don't think.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

                        Originally posted by TroyMurphy3 View Post
                        I never liked Maceo as a guy and definitly not as a player. I'm happy to see him go once again.

                        Anyone else notice his career in the NBA was TOR, IND, TOR, IND?
                        As a guy? Why?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

                          Originally posted by rocksballer58 View Post

                          Maceo Baston

                          I think Baston just has to go, due to the fact the Pacers really didn't use him a lot during the rebuilding year of the 2008-2009 season. The 6'11" power forward averaged closed to three points, about one rebound, and 0.3 assists per game.

                          Baston is also aging as well, as he just turned 33 years old about two weeks ago. The Pacers can manage to keep him but I just don't think he will stay. It's better if he just moved on towards a different team. Baston is a good basketball player, but he just has to go.

                          Stay or Not? Not


                          He knows and accepts his role. His salary is cheap.

                          STAY

                          Marquis Daniels
                          Daniels had his best year of his six-year career. The 28-year-old had close to 14 points, close to five rebounds, and two assists per game in the 2008-2009 season. Although, 6'6" was a backup, he made strong contributions towards the squad of Indiana.

                          Daniels is now going into his prime and is becoming a fabulous player for Indiana. After some pretty good years in Dallas, he is getting better over the years in his time with Indy. He has helped Indy well and he looks help them further in the 2009-2010 season.

                          Stay or Not? Stay


                          I can't disagree more, on numerous points

                          GO

                          Travis Diener
                          Diener didn' play as much as the two guys in front of him (Jarrett Jack and TJ Ford) but he did play well at the ending of last season. He had close to four points, close to two rebounds, and two assists last year.

                          The 6'1" point guard had his career-highs in the 2007-2008 season as he played solid in his backup position, but last year was a little of a disappointment. Diener wasn't much of a contributor last year and I really don't see him coming back.

                          Stay or Not? Not


                          Cheap insurance at guard.

                          STAY

                          Josh McRoberts
                          McRoberts didn't do that much last year, mostly just playing the final games of the season. He had two points, two rebounds, and close to one assist per game. McRoberts never started a game last year, as he was stuck behind Roy Hibbert, Troy Murphy, Jeff Foster, and Maceo Baston.

                          The 6'10" power forward from one of the best college basketball colleges in the NCAA (Duke) looks to stay but I just can't stand him staying. I'd rather just see him go because the Pacers probably won't use him next year as well.

                          Stay or Not? Not


                          I think you are going to have to learn to live with him being around. Athletic, energy, hustle, cheap.

                          STAY

                          Rasho Nesterovic

                          Nesterovic played well last year in the Pacers lineup at center. The ten-year pro had close to seven points, close to four rebounds, and close to two rebounds per game.

                          The seven-foot center was pretty good last year with the skills he brought towards Indy. If he continues to play like he has been, which is being solid, I can see him staying for a couple of more years with the roster.

                          Stay or Not? Stay


                          Rasho has a good mind for the game. His best value may be as a teacher. But I'm guessing he goes back home.

                          GO

                          Jarrett Jack

                          Ah, we are now at the ending of this article. And surely, Jack is going to stay with Indiana no matter what. Jack had 13 points, close to four rebounds, and four assists with the Pacers last year. Jack and TJ Ford made a pretty good one-two punch in the point-guard system.

                          Now with a possible chance of drafting Tyreke Evans, Eric Maynor, or even Brandon Jennings in the NBA Draft, Ford and Jack can be valuable mentors. And with Jack's great performance last year, I can see him staying more with the franchise.

                          Let this 6'3" point guard stay, he can be very good with the team.

                          [B]Stay or Not? Obviously, Stay.
                          He got better as the season went on.

                          STAY

                          As to the one you missed, Graham? I am not really sure. Some games I liked what he did, other games..........well, not so much.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

                            Diener is coming back
                            Jack....maybe
                            Maceo..gone
                            Rasho.........gone
                            Graham.....gone
                            Mc Roberts........maybe gone. If the Pacers draft somebody they think could help in the second round or sign a free agent he is maybe gone.
                            Marquis.....gone
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Pacers Free Agents to Sign and Not

                              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                              As a guy? Why?
                              I was at a Pacers road game in Philadelphia and I saw Maceo just standing there doing nothing and was inactive that night I think drinking Gatorade. So I yell MACEO!!!!! and he goes give me a second alright in a nasty, quiet voice.

                              I just found it funny that he's probably the worst player on the Pacers and I was a fan on the road and I actually knew who he was.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X