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

"Renting" a Good Vet PG

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

  • #16
    Re: "Renting" a Good Vet PG

    A one-year "rental" does not cost Rush + a draft pick.

    That's a mortgage.

    I agree with the concept that - on the court - the core players of this team will make more progress with a credible PG than any of the PGs presently on our roster.

    But that doesn't mean to leverage the future to get a one-year rental.
    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


    • #17
      Re: "Renting" a Good Vet PG

      I think Farmar is a possibility, Blake as well. Ridnour would probably be too expensive.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: "Renting" a Good Vet PG

        I think Blake would bring a vet grit to the back court. And I think we need to get a solid backup if AJ is out fr half a year. I would love to see a rookie and AJ fighting for a backup to either a draft stud or a FA star after Blake is let go after a year.

        I would love to see that but I doubt there will be any chance Blake signs for one year. It would have to be a multiple year contract.

        Then he would be a good back up to the stud in 2011/2012. But what of AJ and the 2010 rookie? I could see them by passing Blake and then the discussion would be what a waste of a contract he will be. paying him 4 million or slightly less to be a third string?

        I think we need to find a permanent solution with the expirings now, to avoid the player and contract struggles.

        But one year might work with the new CBA. IDK others might predict that better than me. Will the coming lockout result in more one year contracts or less?

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: "Renting" a Good Vet PG

          Steve Blake could be that guy, he is so underrated, floor general, good passer, can shoot the three and still young enough
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: "Renting" a Good Vet PG

            I've always liked Blake & I'd like to mentioned Kirk Hinrich too.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: "Renting" a Good Vet PG

              Originally posted by Putnam View Post
              Good thoughts, Bill.

              As I often do, I'll try to contribute to this thread with a non-basketball illustration.

              BB King is 84 years old, has recorded at least 56 albums under his own name and performed on dozens of others, has won 15 Grammies and is in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. A little over a year ago, I heard an interview in which he said, "I've still got so much to learn about music," and described a recording session with Cheryl Crow (of all people) as an amazing experience.


              "Renting" a top point guard for as short as a year, would give the Pacers long-term core of players some valuable experience. They would see the possibilities that come from professionalism, or speed, or court vision, or unselfishness, or whatever virtue that point guard brought with him. And then maybe the core players could teach that virtue to the new point guard who comes after.

              Those who say the Pacers need to build a long-term roster have a good point. BB King's best music was recorded by his band, and not with pick-up groups and session men. But we should look at the Pacers re-build as acquiring all the qualities necessary to win. Our core players are more likely to learn those qualities from one year of Tony Parker than from any amount of TJ Ford and AJ Price.
              If Price is still considered a core piece, then I think it's important that the "core pieces" play together. Learning each other's game, and team chemistry is important, imo.

              However, obviously Price stands to learn a heck of a lot more from Parker than he is from TJ. And in general, a TJ/Parker exchange would be good for all of the younger core. I just think, we can't forget that it's important that the younger guys play and learn together.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: "Renting" a Good Vet PG

                Let's stop for a second, as much as I like Putty's story I can't help but note that Westbrook came in and Watson was bumped to the bench to the point he didn't want to be there. That was very likely not a case of "they learned from Earl", and even if it was the case then we had as much Earl last year as Westbrook ever saw.

                Yet somehow OKC is full of hard workers and great professionalism.

                Danny already saw Ron's work ethic and Reggie's style, Hibbert appears as professional and polished as you could want, Foster has been here and I assume he's very professional...

                The team doesn't need someone to teach them to be winners, per se, they need some overall leadership and direction from higher up that doesn't contradict what they are trying to learn.

                Think about how JOB yanking Price out of the rotation completely because "we saw that he could play and that's all we needed to know" impacts the mood and tone. There's your problem.

                Put Scott Brooks in front of these players and they'd be plenty professional and would develop. Then the other part is you have to get more talent, period, and a rental isn't a good solution for that.


                Rentals are for teams on the cusp, teams than are going 40-42 and need Byron Scott to put them over the hump.

                This team can't afford a rental as Jay mentions, and frankly the market for them sucks right now. 2-3 years ago when some of us wanted to get in the Andre Miller chase, then you had something. Back then going for a Kidd made tons of sense, he still had a couple of good year there. Or Fisher, he was the perfect option back then.

                Right now the hard truth is the old guard is too old to be of value here and the new guard (of journeyman PG) is just too young.

                A guy like Ridnaur just hasn't proven that much. I mean Byron Scott was part of several title teams, guys like Ridnaur or even Hinrich don't have that resume.


                Maybe a Mario Chalmers in 5 years after he's been with another Miami title team becomes this type of guy.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: "Renting" a Good Vet PG

                  Actually I would agree that if Blake were about to be cut loose he'd be a good guy to get.

                  He's not a rental IMO, he's an addition. I'd get him and let him start for the indefinite future while trying to work on talent upgrades at other positions.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: "Renting" a Good Vet PG

                    I think if the Pacers are going to want to get a good solid PG it will be Jordan Farmar. He said that he is willing to look elsewhere for a starting job which he will land with ease here. He has good ball skills and can score along with that. If the Pacers can sign him I'd then look at whose avaliable at PF or try to execute a trade w/the 76ers to land Turner.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: "Renting" a Good Vet PG

                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                      The team doesn't need someone to teach them to be winners, per se, they need some overall leadership and direction from higher up that doesn't contradict what they are trying to learn.

                      Think about how JOB yanking Price out of the rotation completely because "we saw that he could play and that's all we needed to know" impacts the mood and tone. There's your problem.
                      Yep. We've been drafting guys that were part of winning programs -- guys that have been winners at every level.

                      For all the complaints that Rush is not assertive, go back an re-watch the final four. On the biggest stage in college basketball (and given that the NCAA tournament is pretty darn popular, perhaps the biggest stage in basketball, period) he stepped up and made play after play.

                      But as an organization, we're bringing them along slowly while guys that have never even played in an NBA playoff game - or very few games - get the heavy minutes.

                      Silly.
                      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


                      • #26
                        Re: "Renting" a Good Vet PG

                        Originally posted by DavisBoyz3233 View Post
                        I think if the Pacers are going to want to get a good solid PG it will be Jordan Farmar. He said that he is willing to look elsewhere for a starting job which he will land with ease here. He has good ball skills and can score along with that. If the Pacers can sign him I'd then look at whose avaliable at PF or try to execute a trade w/the 76ers to land Turner.

                        Farmar has to be looking at whether the Lakers re-sign Fisher. Why jump to the Pacers when a starting PG job would be available on a championship team? He may be open to the idea of a starting job elsewhere, but you can bet he's keeping an eye on what Fisher's situation is b4 making any decisions.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: "Renting" a Good Vet PG

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          Let's stop for a second, as much as I like Putty's story I can't help but note that Westbrook came in and Watson was bumped to the bench to the point he didn't want to be there. That was very likely not a case of "they learned from Earl", and even if it was the case then we had as much Earl last year as Westbrook ever saw.

                          Yet somehow OKC is full of hard workers and great professionalism.

                          Danny already saw Ron's work ethic and Reggie's style, Hibbert appears as professional and polished as you could want, Foster has been here and I assume he's very professional...

                          The team doesn't need someone to teach them to be winners, per se, they need some overall leadership and direction from higher up that doesn't contradict what they are trying to learn.

                          Think about how JOB yanking Price out of the rotation completely because "we saw that he could play and that's all we needed to know" impacts the mood and tone. There's your problem.

                          Put Scott Brooks in front of these players and they'd be plenty professional and would develop. Then the other part is you have to get more talent, period, and a rental isn't a good solution for that.


                          Rentals are for teams on the cusp, teams than are going 40-42 and need Byron Scott to put them over the hump.

                          This team can't afford a rental as Jay mentions, and frankly the market for them sucks right now. 2-3 years ago when some of us wanted to get in the Andre Miller chase, then you had something. Back then going for a Kidd made tons of sense, he still had a couple of good year there. Or Fisher, he was the perfect option back then.

                          Right now the hard truth is the old guard is too old to be of value here and the new guard (of journeyman PG) is just too young.

                          A guy like Ridnaur just hasn't proven that much. I mean Byron Scott was part of several title teams, guys like Ridnaur or even Hinrich don't have that resume.


                          Maybe a Mario Chalmers in 5 years after he's been with another Miami title team becomes this type of guy.
                          Oh I agree, and in fact, this team showed an extrordinary amount of professionalism and poise when dealing with O'brien. All of them. (Including TJ, whom I'm not crazy about..but many many players in his position would have spouted somewhere.)

                          But here's my thinking.

                          Let's look at Price. How many times last season was AJ a major reason the Pacers got back into a game, only to barely lose? (OKC, New Orleans, Toronto, Miami, Cleveland..I'm probably forgetting some..but it was a lot.)

                          Now some of that was unavoidable, going up against Lebron, Wade, and Durant is most likely going to end up in a loss. Often when you are down by double digits, you spend so much time coming back, you don't have the energy to win. And of course there are Jimmy's subsitution patterns...

                          But another reason, is the Pacers just didn't make the right play at the right time to win. Part of that is learning the NBA game. And what, is AJ gonna learn that from TJ? He was more clutch than TJ this season. He made smarter plays at the end of the game than TJ this season (well, throughout the games as well..)

                          What about Brandon Rush? Having a floor general like Tony, I think would enable Rush to succeed a lot more than he has. He'd demand more from Brandon. Brandon might learn more about "moments."

                          Hibbert, Hibbert would actually get touches because Tony would be smart enough to know to pass it to him.

                          Point is, great players make players around them better. Great point guards help even more. Tony is elite, having him for a year to mentor the young guys, particularly at learning the intangibles of the game. (which Price would obviously learn a lot more from Tony, rather than Rush and Hibbert..I think AJ has those intangibles, which is why I was always a fan. But I think they need to be mentored and developed, which playing with Tony..and playing time itself, would help.)

                          However, as you said..a "vet" point like Tony Parker, Jason Kid, ect..would be too expensive. Letting the young guys play and leadership from the coaching position is another way to develope these intangibles, and it's the much cheaper..and probably quicker route. We still obviously need at least one point guard. Signing someone like Jordan Farmer, and then having someone like Diener (who knows the system and the guys..so it's really a good backup option) as insurance in case AJ isn't ready for the start of the season would probably be the best bet.

                          Revisiting the Rush for Augustin (which included TJ and Henderson and some other guy..dunno who) would be a scary thought though. Augustin isn't better than Price. Price might not be ready..and then we'd have dude X, either someone of Diener's quality, Watson's quality..or second round pick pg. (In that case, might I suggest Reynolds, or Jeremy Lin if he can play the PG...I didn't notice what he was when he played Uconn..I just know he was the best player on the court..)

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X