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

Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

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

  • Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

    "The Cavaliers are rumored to be interested in moving up into the middle of Thursday's NBA Draft.
    Cleveland has the 30th pick, but they appear to be targeting a trio of players that will almost certainly go well before their turn.
    The Cleveland Plain Dealer writes that general manager Danny Ferry is interested in Ty Lawson, Sam Young and Earl Clark.
    A number of financially-strapped teams are believed to be shopping their first-round picks, which means that the Cavaliers might be able to purchase one for a few million on draft night."

    That is from realgm...I realize its talking about them buying a pick, and that all of those guys with the possible exception of Earl Clark WILL be available after our pick. There biggest trade chips this off season...

    1. A massive Ben Wallace contract and he is considering retiring

    2. A Big non-guaranteed Sasha Pavlovic contract

    3. A sign and trade with Anderson Varejao

    If they offered maybe Andy, Sashas contract and their 30th pick in the draft for our 13th, would you do it?
    The eyes of the Granger are upon you.

  • #2
    Re: Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

    I will do it if they take Tinsley and maybe Foster for Ben expiring and JJ and then find another way to get an extra draft pick.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

      You need to provide a link along with the name of the site, and if there's an author, that need to be included. Thank you!

      Ben Wallace and #30 and Hickson for our #13, Murphy, and Tinsley might be interesting. This is a first-glance idea, so I'll wait for the inevitibility of this being picked apart.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        You need to provide a link along with the name of the site, and if there's an author, that need to be included. Thank you!

        Ben Wallace and #30 and Hickson for our #13, Murphy, and Tinsley might be interesting. This is a first-glance idea, so I'll wait for the inevitibility of this being picked apart.
        Sorry, I put its from realgm
        The eyes of the Granger are upon you.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

          Originally posted by dgranger View Post
          Sorry, I put its from realgm
          I know. You need the other things I mentioned. It's not a matter of having one of them, but having all of them (if available in the case of an author).

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
            You need to provide a link along with the name of the site, and if there's an author, that need to be included. Thank you!

            Ben Wallace and #30 and Hickson for our #13, Murphy, and Tinsley might be interesting. This is a first-glance idea, so I'll wait for the inevitibility of this being picked apart.
            For JJ Hickson absolutely! Even as much as I can't stand Big Ben, hate giving up Murphy for Big Ben, but it gets rid of Tinsley once and for all. I can live with Big Ben for a year with his expiring, and the salary available in next summer.

            Only thing is Cleveland isn't going to let Hickson go for the 13th, they don't want Tinsley period, nor Murphy and Tinsley's next 2 years of salary. They will find better deals, and be able to keep Hickson.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
              I know. You need the other things I mentioned. It's not a matter of having one of them, but having all of them (if available in the case of an author).
              I see, Some other forums Im on dont allow links, (dont really understand that) but anyway http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_ar...three_players/

              And the author works for the Cleveland Plain Dealer
              The eyes of the Granger are upon you.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

                http://www.cleveland.com/cavs/plaind...700.xml&coll=2

                THE CAVS AND THE DRAFT

                Cleveland Cavaliers are interested in moving up in NBA Draft

                Sunday, June 21, 2009

                The Cavs haven't gotten to use it much, they've had just two first-round picks in the past four years, but General Manager Danny Ferry, Assistant General Manager Chris Grant and head scout Wes Wilcox have a practiced system for the NBA Draft. They do most of their evaluation from scouting games and watching film.

                When they bring players in to the Independence facility to work out, which they try to do secretly unlike many teams that announce which players are in town, the Cavs primarily want to get them alone to do interviews. Personality and character are very important to the Cavs, and trying to get a read on how a player might fit in is a major part of the Cavs' draft process. The problem this year is the Cavs haven't been able to get many players to come to town - mostly for political reasons. Because the Cavs have the last pick in the first round, some players don't want to come in for fear they are suggesting they might fall that far.

                So the Cavs had to do a lot of their interviews at the draft combine in Chicago last month and also at the group workouts teams put together over the past several weeks.

                The chatter in the league is that the Cavs are very interested in moving up in the draft. They have been talking to teams just outside of the lottery (starting with the 15th pick) down into the low 20s. Typically, the Cavs would have a good idea of who is willing to move where and then act on draft night.

                As they look to move up, the Cavs might be targeting three players who most certainly will not be there when they draft at 30.

                One is Ty Lawson, the dynamic and speedy point guard from North Carolina. Though he's small and that doesn't exactly fit what the Cavs need with undersized guards Mo Wil liams and Delonte West, Lawson proved to be a winner and an excel lent decision-maker for the national champs. Some teams have over looked him, and the Cavs love to find undervalued players in the draft. They think Daniel Gibson and Darnell Jackson fit that same mold.

                Another is Sam Young, an experienced wingman who proved to be a strong defender at Pittsburgh while playing in a power conference (Big East). Ferry is close to the Pitt program and has been keeping an eye on Young for the past several years. Young fits the Cavs' need for size on the perimeter.

                The last is Earl Clark, a tall power forward from Louisville who can play a little inside and out. The Cavs spent an extended period interviewing him in Chicago. At 6-10 from a power program, he also fits a need the Cavs have.

                Because the Cavs have shown a willingness to spend money and some teams are operating deep in the red, there has been a belief the Cavs will look to purchase a first-round pick. Teams are allowed to spend up to $3 million to get it and, as a result, that is almost always the price. But do not assume the Cavs will get serious about it because they might be able to find better uses for the money. If they are going to buy a pick, the second round is more likely. The Cavs might be able to find a sleeper in there, especially between their picks of 30 and 46. Last season, the Cavs spent $300,000 to buy the rights to Sasha Kaun out of the second round, and that might be the type of check they prefer to write to get another player in this draft.

                The Trail Blazers have four second-round picks; the Pistons have three; and the Lakers, Bobcats, Heat, Spurs, Timberwolves and Suns have two each. All of those teams could consider selling one.

                - Brian Windhorst

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

                  Varajeo is a UFA....so the Cavs can S&T him...but there isn't a need for us to deal with them like other FA like David Lee. Unless some solid PG like Maynor drops to 30th.....which I doubt....I wouldn't trade the 13th pick for the 30th...much less do a S&T of Varajeo ( who'll be asking for more then the full MLE )....which we wouldn't have to. Any trade that involves receiving Wallace or Sasha would only weaken any talent that we would have to take back...unless it was for Tinsley.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

                    This draft and off season will tell more about the Pacers than any other. We have all heard of the financial difficulties. The Pacers could easily fill their team with FA that are cheap and have a year or two experience. We could sell the 2nd rnd pick to the Cavs and pay our #15 guy with that money. We could trade down a few spots for cash and there are many other ways of raising money. I have yet too see any of this yet. The Pacers claim to be losing loads of cash each year, hence the Fieldhouse agreement being renogotiated. I will wonder what is going on if the Pacers go into this season with a 70M payroll and no real reductions. I will probably believe that they are losing money on paper because of front office payroll and benefits.
                    "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
                    Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

                      Originally posted by aceace View Post
                      This draft and off season will tell more about the Pacers than any other. We have all heard of the financial difficulties. The Pacers could easily fill their team with FA that are cheap and have a year or two experience. We could sell the 2nd rnd pick to the Cavs and pay our #15 guy with that money. We could trade down a few spots for cash and there are many other ways of raising money. I have yet too see any of this yet. The Pacers claim to be losing loads of cash each year, hence the Fieldhouse agreement being renogotiated. I will wonder what is going on if the Pacers go into this season with a 70M payroll and no real reductions. I will probably believe that they are losing money on paper because of front office payroll and benefits.
                      There's an old saying in business that goes, "You can't save your way to prosperity."

                      Going into full cost containment/cutting mode for the Pacers is ultimately self-defeating, and they know it. They are already committed to $58mm in salaries for 9 players. I expect them to bring in their payroll in around $66-68mm for next season.

                      Their best chance for improving their financial position is to win. To decide to curl up in the fetal position and wait for the big contracts to expire in 2011 is virtually suicidal. Not only do they need to demonstrate that they are making a good faith effort to provide a good product, but they also need to not waste two years of the prime of Danny's career.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

                        I think the Pacers pass on this deal.

                        I could see Bird moving down a few slots (no further down than say 20) if a player they like slides. But the Pacers have a lot of needs and don't want Wallace, Pavlovic or Side show Bob unless they're coming for the minimum or Tinsley is involved and we don't take back any longer contracts.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

                          Originally posted by count55 View Post
                          There's an old saying in business that goes, "You can't save your way to prosperity."

                          Going into full cost containment/cutting mode for the Pacers is ultimately self-defeating, and they know it. They are already committed to $58mm in salaries for 9 players. I expect them to bring in their payroll in around $66-68mm for next season.

                          Their best chance for improving their financial position is to win. To decide to curl up in the fetal position and wait for the big contracts to expire in 2011 is virtually suicidal. Not only do they need to demonstrate that they are making a good faith effort to provide a good product, but they also need to not waste two years of the prime of Danny's career.
                          I understand your point clearly. One of the problems here is that many other teams are in cost cutting (mostly salaries) mode. You stated that 66-68M is reasonable and what you expect. That is a 3-5M reduction and would make me a believer when combined with Fieldhouse savings. You can't save your way to prosperity but you can survive an economy that sucks if your smart.
                          "He wanted to get to that money time. Time when the hardware was on the table. That's when Roger was going to show up. So all we needed to do was stay close"
                          Darnell Hillman (Speaking of former teammate Roger Brown)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

                            Ehh tough to say.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Cavs looking to move up...Idea...Maybe

                              Originally posted by aceace View Post
                              The Pacers claim to be losing loads of cash each year, hence the Fieldhouse agreement being renogotiated. I will wonder what is going on if the Pacers go into this season with a 70M payroll and no real reductions. I will probably believe that they are losing money on paper because of front office payroll and benefits.
                              My understanding is that the Pacers are losing money on the operation of the Fieldhouse and are taking advantage of a clause in the original contract that allows them to hand it off to the city if this is the case.

                              They'd be extremely stupid business owners if they chose not to take advantage of this.

                              They have also repeatedly said that the money involved in operation of the Pacers is not part of that issue and is not going to change how they run the team (for instance, they've never wanted to be over the Luxury Tax, that won't change).

                              If they have the chance to improve the team's record without taking a character hit and within reasonable business expenditures, they will do it.

                              If they only move to cut payroll and field a cheap but mediocre team, then I will assume the team is being sold and moved.
                              BillS

                              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X