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

IndyStar-Johnson agrees to terms-Brewer-Wright Point guard competition

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

  • IndyStar-Johnson agrees to terms-Brewer-Wright Point guard competition

    http://www.indystar.com/articles/0/162912-9800-179.html

    Johnson agrees to terms

    The Pacers reached an oral agreement Thursday with point guard Anthony Johnson on a four-year contract worth $10 million-$11 million.

    Johnson, 29, averaged 6.2 points and 2.8 assists for the Pacers last season. His agent, Richard Howell, said 10 to 12 teams expressed interest.

    "All along, Indiana was his No. 1 option," Howell said. "This is where he wanted to go."

    Johnson, who played for a league-minimum salary of $813,679 last season, is scheduled to fly to Indianapolis today to sign his contract.

    Point guard competition

    After Johnson signs, there will be just one roster spot for another point guard and at least two players vying for the job.

    Free agent Jamison Brewer, who spent the past three seasons with the Pacers, and second-round draft pick Rashad Wright have designs on the job.

    It's an audition of sorts, Pacers associate coach Mike Brown said, a competition that should bring out the best in two competitive players during the Pacers' summer league stint at the Rocky Mountain Revue, which begins today and runs through July 24.

    "He's right. It's wide open, healthy competition," Brewer said.

  • #2
    Re: IndyStar-Johnson agrees to terms-Brewer-Wright Point guard competition

    I've been saying I didn't think the Pacers would carry 4 point guards this year. It would seem they don't intend to. As for the competition I think Brewer might have the edge. (if he's developed a shot) He's familiar with the Pacer's system thus making him more of a veteran, I think Wright will really have to be something to beat him out.

    Another thing, Saying there will be just one roster spot for another point guard leaves one roster spot open. The Pacers are apparently searching for another big man. Mark Montieth says they have shown interest in Dampier, but don't appear desperate to get him.

    What I think will happen if they don't make any more trades is they will keep one of the big centers on their summer league team. One of the following.

    RUBEN BOUMTJE-BOUMTJE C 7-0 257 5/20/78
    A second round draft pick (No. 50 overall) of the Portland Trail Blazers in 2001, he has logged a total of 44 games in three seasons and 11 games in the last two campaigns for Portland...before being traded to Cleveland along with Jeff McInnis, 1/21, he had four points and one rebound in nine games for the Blazers...after being acquired by the Cavs, he was placed on the injured list where he remained for the remainder of the season...in just two games in 2002-03, he had one offensive rebound, one steal and one assist in five scoreless (0-1 FG) minutes...his rebound, steal and assist all came in the same game--vs. Golden State, 4/1/03...as a rookie, he played in 33 games, averaging 1.2 ppg and 1.7 rpg...in the best game of his career, he had career-highs of five points and five rebounds in 16 minutes at Sacramento, 12/29/01...in a career-high 24 minutes vs. Detroit, 12/21/01, he had three points, four rebounds, an assist and two blocked shots...he blocked a career-high three shots twice: vs. Golden State, 10/31/01, and at San Antonio, 12/19/01...as a rookie, he missed 41 games due to injury and eight due to coaching decisions.

    SOUMAILA SAMAKE C 7-0 230 3/18/78
    A 2000 second round draft pick (36th overall) of the New Jersey Nets, he played 34 games for the Nets, averaging 1.4 ppg and 1.6 rpg as a rookie in 2000-01...in July, 2001, he was traded to Phoenix as part of the Jason Kidd-Stephon Marbury trade...he was then dealt by the Suns to Chicago for Jake Voskuhl, but never played for the Bulls...playing in Italy, he averaged 9.5 ppg and 9.2 rpg for Orlandino Basket in 2001-02...signed in August, 2002, by the L.A. Lakers, he logged 13 games and 77 minutes for L.A...he averaged 1.7 ppg and 1.8 rpg for the Lakers...he was the Lakers' starting center on opening night, 10/29/02, registering two points, six rebounds and two blocked shots in 13 minutes vs. the Spurs...the next night at Portland, he scored a career-high 10 points on 4-6 FGS and 2-2 FTS...he added seven rebounds and two assists off the Lakers' bench...after being waived by L.A. in December 2002, he signed with the Greenville Groove of the NBDL, where he led the league with an average of 1.6 bpg in 33 games....he ranked third in the league in field goal percentage, hitting 101-181 FGS (.558), and ranked fifth best in the NBDL with 7.0 rpg...he also averaged 8.2 ppg...in January 2004, he signed with Detal Met Notec Inowroclaw in Poland...in Poland, he averaged 9.6 ppg and 8.1 rpg in 15 games...before being drafted by the Nets, he played one season for KK Slovan in Slovenia, where he averaged 7.0 ppg and shot 81-123 from the floor (.659)

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: IndyStar-Johnson agrees to terms-Brewer-Wright Point guard competition

      Isn't Brewer, as a four-vet vet, going to cost several hundred thousand more than Wright? And after having been on the IL for three years, he should clearly be better than the rookie? "Its wide open, healthy competition." isn't exactly a ringing endoresement.

      I don't see Brewer wearing blue-and-gold next season; and if anybody in the NBA picks him up, he won't get any more minutes than he's gotten here. He needs three or four seasons in NBDL/ CBA/ overseas. The Pacers have actually done him a major dis-service by stashing him away on the injured list.
      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
      And life itself, rushing over me
      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: IndyStar-Johnson agrees to terms-Brewer-Wright Point guard competition

        *If* Brewer actually had a reliable jump shot, he would be a great 2nd PG, bringing high energy, huge athleticism, good size and tight defense. He has the ability defensively to break the opponent's PG down. The difference in his jump shot from 2 years ago to last year was remarkable. I think he knows what he has to do and if has done it, we will retain him. Keep in mind Heywoode Workman stuck in the league despite being buried on benches before he got a break here.

        On the other hand, I think AJ's 4 year deal is the true sign that the team still doesn't believe in Brewer.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: IndyStar-Johnson agrees to terms-Brewer-Wright Point guard competition

          If they don't make a move for a center like Dampier I wouldn't mind having Ruben Boumjte Boumjte on this team as a second or 3rd center on this team. Hes another big guy with bulk that we can throw in a game against some of the more physical teams.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: IndyStar-Johnson agrees to terms-Brewer-Wright Point guard competition

            Originally posted by 75Ranger
            If they don't make a move for a center like Dampier I wouldn't mind having Ruben Boumjte Boumjte on this team as a second or 3rd center on this team. Hes another big guy with bulk that we can throw in a game against some of the more physical teams.
            Of course, if he makes the team - baring any trades - he'll be the FOURTH center off the bench!
            Which is to say, he won't be leaving the bench at all.
            "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
            -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: IndyStar-Johnson agrees to terms-Brewer-Wright Point guard competition

              Originally posted by blanket
              Originally posted by 75Ranger
              If they don't make a move for a center like Dampier I wouldn't mind having Ruben Boumjte Boumjte on this team as a second or 3rd center on this team. Hes another big guy with bulk that we can throw in a game against some of the more physical teams.
              Of course, if he makes the team - baring any trades - he'll be the FOURTH center off the bench!
              Which is to say, he won't be leaving the bench at all.
              He might when we play the Heat 3-4 times a year.
              Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: IndyStar-Johnson agrees to terms-Brewer-Wright Point guard competition

                He might if there was an injury. That's it.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: IndyStar-Johnson agrees to terms-Brewer-Wright Point guard competition

                  I'd feel very comfortable going into next season with the roster we currently have-Brewer or Wright: who cares.

                  I'm very glad to have Harrison in the middle and I think we have a good chance to advance very far-maybe even win the whole thing.
                  Two=the number 2
                  Too=means "also"
                  To=many definitions-also known as the one to use when the other 2 (two, too) do not apply.

                  Their=shows ownership-'it is their house'
                  They're=they are
                  There=many definitions-also known as the one to use when the other 2 (their, they're) do not apply

                  Sorry but it bugs me when these are used incorrectly when I read posts on PacersDigest.com.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: IndyStar-Johnson agrees to terms-Brewer-Wright Point guard competition

                    I just can't believe we gave AJ a 4 year deal, supposedly ed:

                    I mean, he's not terrible, but he's not great, and last year the offense came to a grinding halt when he checked in. Opposing point guards pressured him down the court, forcing us to start our offense late, and obviously AJ isn't going to be threading the needle to the cutter for an easy layup. To me, he's like Eric Strickland with a better attitude, less athleticism, and better feel for the PG position.

                    I understand we needed someone with some experience back there, because we couldn't go into the season with Wright and Brewer as our options, but 4 years seems a little excessive, unless we plan on packaging him as filler down the road.

                    Here's to hoping either Brewer or Wright outplay him this season :

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: IndyStar-Johnson agrees to terms-Brewer-Wright Point guard competition

                      The deal was between 10-11 mill...

                      Does anyone know how much he made last year?
                      Here, everyone have a : on me

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: IndyStar-Johnson agrees to terms-Brewer-Wright Point guard competition

                        Originally posted by ILovethePacers
                        The deal was between 10-11 mill...

                        Does anyone know how much he made last year?
                        $800k.

                        I don't care about Brewer's shot. He's gotta show some bball-IQ and lead the team on the floor. His shot don't matter (much.)

                        I think Brown's comments are very telling. This is Sigg's last chance. He needs to bring it. It'd help if Artest went to Salt Lake and cheerlead for him, too.

                        You know, in 5 years, when we've got a real farm system, we're gonna be sitting around here saying, "Can you imagine what this thing could have done for guys like Jamison Brewer?" :shakehead:
                        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X