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

Explain your understanding of the three year plan

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

  • Explain your understanding of the three year plan

    There seems to be a consensus that TPTB have a three year plan they are following. However I keep seeing different references to what the plan is and even to what year we are in. I've looked to see some idea what the plan is and I can't find anything from TPTB. Has Bird or Morway ever specifically said "three year plan"? I have seen references to having many expiring contracts. I'm curious if that is really all the plan is - an acknowledgement that the team has had little to no flexibility until after next season. Is there more to it? Have they been working off a master plan? Or just trying to get back to the playoffs?

    I understand that they would not likely come out a detail an exact plan in the media. But considering how many times I've seen it referenced in the media and on forums, I expected to find more from TPTB than I did.

    The most common plan I see referenced is that we are building around solid, smart, "NBA ready" draft picks and that when all of the contracts expire we will be able to add a difference making player to that solid core via free agency. I personally don't like that plan. For numerous reasons I do not believe the team will be able to sign a difference maker via free agency. I think that will leave us with a solid team of mediocre players. In the playoffs, but certainly not true contenders. That is obviously better than we have been, but not really where I want to go.

    I don't really believe there is what I would call a "plan". I believe they are doing what little they can each year to attempt to make the playoffs. The idea being that eventually they will have more flexibility. IMO that explains the reluctance to draft underclassman, the signings of Watson and Jones, the reliance on mediocre veterans, and the resigning of Foster. Those moves do not match what my idea of the three year plan would have been. My version would have been to take more chances in the draft. To try to acquire a difference maker - a double, triple, or home run instead of singles. To more actively try to developed the younger guys. Then use the flexibility of the expirings to acquire the role players that we have been drafting. The primary example of this IMO is drafting Tyler and passing on Holiday. The two players that I wanted the Pacers to take were Jennings and Holiday. I felt certain that at least one of them would be there. I also felt certain that Bird would pass on either because they weren't deemed "NBA ready"........

    I'm starting to ramble. My questions are:

    Has TPTB ever specifically mentioned a three year plan?

    What do you believe the three year actually is?

    Do you feel confident we are where we should be within the plan as you understand it?

    How would you know we weren't where we should be or that it isn't going to pan out how you understand it?

  • #2
    Re: Explain your understanding of the three year plan

    Try to make the playoffs to give our guys playoff seasoning (and make money and bring more fans back), keep drafting solid players in the mid 1st round, then in 2011 acquire significant piece(s) to push for serious contention starting in 11-12.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Explain your understanding of the three year plan

      To be Boston2.0, with Danny Granger as Paul Pierce, Chris Bosh as KG, and probably Ray Allen as Ray Allen.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Explain your understanding of the three year plan

        Marriage Counselling
        Ya Think Ya Used Enough Dynamite there Butch...

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Explain your understanding of the three year plan

          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
          To be Boston2.0, with Danny Granger as Paul Pierce, Chris Bosh as KG, and probably Ray Allen as Ray Allen.
          I kind of agree with this, except w/ 2-3 more years of stockpiling young players and draft picks, until we dump a bunch of them off for an aging KG-type player to go with Danny.

          Honestly I don't see how we'd get another top-notch player. We need to accumulate a lot of "promising" youngins, and then unload them. They'll likely all have lengthy NBA careers that peak at "Good, Nearly Very Good" while we get 2-4 years of an aging all-star. . . hopefully.
          You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Explain your understanding of the three year plan

            Originally posted by SoupIsGood View Post
            I kind of agree with this, except w/ 2-3 more years of stockpiling young players and draft picks, until we dump a bunch of them off for an aging KG-type player to go with Danny.

            Honestly I don't see how we'd get another top-notch player. We need to accumulate a lot of "promising" youngins, and then unload them. They'll likely all have lengthy NBA careers that peak at "Good, Nearly Very Good" while we get 2-4 years of an aging all-star. . . hopefully.

            At the rate we're going Danny will be the aging KG-type player in your scenario and the "plan" then will be to get a player in his prime to go beside him.
            Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

            ------

            "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

            -John Wooden

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Explain your understanding of the three year plan

              A proclamation that we suck, that we are aware that we suck, and the FO wanted to buy some time before the fanbase got really restless. Before it's all said and done, we are going to be hearing about this "three year plan" for five or six years.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Explain your understanding of the three year plan

                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                A proclamation that we suck, that we are aware that we suck, and the FO wanted to buy some time before the fanbase got really restless. Before it's all said and done, we are going to be hearing about this "three year plan" for five or six years.
                I see it like Hicks sees it. If that is the case, the change at the end of the plan will be dramatic with the introduction of 1-2 high caliber players.

                If it doesn't happen, your complaints will be well taken. Until then, they seem a little premature at best.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Explain your understanding of the three year plan

                  Originally posted by Bball View Post
                  At the rate we're going Danny will be the aging KG-type player in your scenario and the "plan" then will be to get a player in his prime to go beside him.
                  Danny's 26. If I were him, I wouldn't count on playing on a really good team anytime before 30. If he's thinking long-term, he should use this next bunch of seasons to really hone his skills as a leader and as a go-to scorer, so that he's ready once he gets his shot to be the hero.

                  And really, if Danny can't keep his focus through several more bad seasons, then he's probably not the guy to lead us through the good ones. I have faith in him, though.
                  You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Explain your understanding of the three year plan

                    Originally posted by judicata View Post
                    I see it like Hicks sees it. If that is the case, the change at the end of the plan will be dramatic with the introduction of 1-2 high caliber players.

                    If it doesn't happen, your complaints will be well taken. Until then, they seem a little premature at best.
                    It was a comment made in jest. I actually subscribe to Hicks' line of thinking on this one.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Explain your understanding of the three year plan

                      How are we going to acquire significant pieces in 2011?
                      You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Explain your understanding of the three year plan

                        Make it to this year of finally being able to shake the albatross contracts off our necks. Up to this point, everything has been pretty reactive. They are now in a better position to be proactive about shaping the team. That's what I think they're targeting during this 3 yr period.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Explain your understanding of the three year plan

                          Year 1. Collect Players
                          Year 2. ??????
                          Year 3. Profit

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Explain your understanding of the three year plan

                            My understanding of the 3 year plan is this:

                            - Make a concerted effort to return to the Playoffs with the Players that we have on hand
                            - Build Team Chemistry and familiarity among a group of young core Players through Free Agency and the Draft. The idea was to build around Granger. It started with the drafting of BRush and Hibbert....then with the drafting of Hansbrough and Price and included the signing of Inferno. It will continue with whoever we draft in 2010-2011 and 2011-2012.
                            - Do our very best to maintain as much Salary Cap flexibility at the start of the 2011-2012 season. This means that the FO should do their very best to not sign or acquire ( through Trades ) Players beyond the 2010-2011 seasons that are not considered part of the future Core of Players. Also, it will likely mean that we will most of the Big4 Contracts expire.

                            The end result ( I'd hope ) by the start of the 2011-2012 season would have meant that the Pacers would have had a core of 8 young Players ( Granger/BRush/Inferno/AJ/Hansbrough/Hibbert and whoever we draft in 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 ) and a copious amount of SalaryCap Space to sign a 9th Player to round out our primary 9-man rotation for the immediate future. This would have also allowed us to fill out the roster with whatever other Players we wanted and still have enough Cap Flexibility for the next 3-4 seasons.

                            So far, I think that TPTB have pretty much stuck to the plan and really do their best to resist the Temptation to make a stupid move while letting 3 of the Big 4 Contracts expire. Unfortunately, I think that because we failed to move Murphy before the Trade Deadline for an Expiring Contract....it will mean that we will likely deviate from this plan and acquire ( through some trade ) some longer-term contracts in an effort to shore up the Team with some experience.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Explain your understanding of the three year plan

                              A lot of questions, I will do my best.

                              I remember Bird mentioning something about a three year plan about a year or so ago, I believe. But he was also trying to get the team good enough to make the playoffs. I think we might of been able to get into the playoffs this year (8th seed) if Foster, Hansbourgh, and Danny would have healthy all year. Plus Dun had a lot more trouble coming back from his knee. If not for all these factors and we very well could have made it in this year.

                              I have to believe that TPTB are following somekind plan that is has a lot to do with moving or let the contracts of Murph, Dun, Foster, & Ford come off the books. We haven't been able to sign an great free agents because of our commitment to the above players. The hope is we can move one or more of these deals this summer. The worst case is we wait another season for he deals to expire.

                              We are trying to get under he cap and get Danny an All Star caliber player to team up with, that to me is the plan.

                              I guess in the end I have to trust Bird and the rest of that TPTB. If not I should find another team to follow. But I love the Pacers and I am commited to seeing them turn this around.
                              Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X