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

Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

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

  • #61
    Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

    Originally posted by d_c View Post
    Yeah, being NY or Boston definitely has its advantages in the NBA. No doubt about it. But some of the stuff being written (this article in particular) makes it sound as if the Celtics and Knicks can just operate as if they're the Red Sox and Yankees, which is hardly the case.
    As blatant? No, certainly not. If they are in position to afford the luxury tax, however, this doesn't really ring true. I'm not necessarily thinking of the Celts and the Knicks here, more like the Lakers and eventually, the Heat. I would dearly love to see a hard cap. PERIOD. No exceptions for this, that or the other. Don't know how you would implement it, however. Probably never happen.
    http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...nce-stephenson
    "But, first, let us now praise famous moments, because something happened Tuesday night in Indianapolis that you can watch a lifetime’s worth of professional basketball and never see again. There was a brief, and very decisive, and altogether unprecedented, outburst of genuine officiating, and it was directed at the best player in the world, and that, my dear young person, simply is not done."

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

      Originally posted by DaveP63 View Post
      As blatant? No, certainly not. If they are in position to afford the luxury tax, however, this doesn't really ring true. I'm not necessarily thinking of the Celts and the Knicks here, more like the Lakers and eventually, the Heat. I would dearly love to see a hard cap. PERIOD. No exceptions for this, that or the other. Don't know how you would implement it, however. Probably never happen.
      A hard cap would not have prevented The Superfriends from forming in Miami last summer. They got way under the cap and signed those guys fair and square. It's not like the Yankees already having a $200M+ payroll and then signing CC Sabathia and Texeira for more ridiculous amounts of money.

      A hard cap also would not have prevented Shaq from signing with LA, as even they had to get under the cap. They would have been able to fit Shaq with Kobe under max deals and then found role players to put around them and still have been under a hard cap.

      Would their supporting casts have been weaker under a hard cap?

      Probably so, but the same would have been said of their opponents. Recall that the small market Pacers team that the Lakers beat in 2000 had one of the league's highest payrolls at the time. The small market Kings team they beat in 2001 also had a high payroll that the owners went into luxury tax on when they gave Mike Bibby a MAX deal. A hard cap would have hurt the strength of those teams as well.

      At the end of the day, a hard cap still can't address the most fundamental inequity in the NBA: The insufficient number of superstars to go around for every team.
      Last edited by d_c; 01-05-2011, 09:51 AM.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

        Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post


        2. Coaches- Do you think Phil Jackson comes out of retirement in 1998 to coach the Sonics. Of course not.
        Yes I do if they had Shaq and Kobe.


        3. GM's/Presidents - Do you think Danny Ainge pulls off the Ray Allen/KG trade if he is in Sacramento. Do you think Jerry West builds the 80's Lakers in Memphis. He tried and he didn't.
        Yes I think they could have pulled that trade off if in Sacramento - I don't think the city or size of market helped that rtrade.

        4. Owners - Big Market owners time and again appease their superstars. Kobe wants to be traded and they say no and make the changes to win titles. Paul Pierce demands a trade and Ainge comes through.
        I don't think market size is a factor in this.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

          Originally posted by Brian View Post
          I agree with Danny. I had brought this point up a few years back...

          If the pacers were to offer an all star level FA a max deal and say the laker,knicks or any other big market team were to make a lower offer, i'd say 95% of the time the FA would take less money. Because if anything they can always recoup what they left in Indiana plus several more millions in endorsements in a larger market. Sad but true.
          Lebron didn't. he was offered max deal with the Knicks and Bulls and he ended up going to Miami which is the same market size as Cleveland. (Obviously I realize there are other factors involved) but the fact remains that Lebron didn't make his decision based upon market size.

          Also didn't a big market team offer Joe Johnsion Max money and he stayed in Atlanta

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            Lebron didn't. he was offered max deal with the Knicks and Bulls and he ended up going to Miami which is the same market size as Cleveland. (Obviously I realize there are other factors involved) but the fact remains that Lebron didn't make his decision based upon market size.
            Correct, if Lebron made his decision purely on market size, he would've gone to NY. He went to a good but hardly gargantuan sized market in Miami.

            And he went to a team that was not considered to be a prime FA spot in the 80s to mid 90s. Back then, Miami was an expansion team with an expansion team image, and it was considered to be as much in the eyes of players. Nobody wanted to go there. What big free agents did Miami sign back then?

            They may as well have been the Memphis Grizzlies. It wasn't until Pat Riley took over the operations there that the place all of a sudden had an air of desirability and credibility. And Riley chose to go there on his own accord when the franchise had Glen Rice and nothing else.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

              Originally posted by d_c View Post
              Correct, if Lebron made his decision purely on market size, he would've gone to NY. He went to a good but hardly gargantuan sized market in Miami.

              And he went to a team that was not considered to be a prime FA spot in the 80s to mid 90s. Back then, Miami was an expansion team with an expansion team image, and it was considered to be as much in the eyes of players. Nobody wanted to go there. What big free agents did Miami sign back then?

              They may as well have been the Memphis Grizzlies. It wasn't until Pat Riley took over the operations there that the place all of a sudden had an air of desirability and credibility. And Riley chose to go there on his own accord when the franchise had Glen Rice and nothing else.

              Agreed with this sentiment.

              It seems like some people are already trying to lay the groundwork of excuses for when we miss out on free agents this summer, and proceed to take a completely mediocre player 13th overall next draft.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

                Back to the OP, I am incredibly glad that we have Danny Granger representing this team. I wonder how many players in the league actually understand the nuances of the situation. Smart guy.
                You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

                  Originally posted by aaronb View Post
                  Agreed with this sentiment.

                  It seems like some people are already trying to lay the groundwork of excuses for when we miss out on free agents this summer, and proceed to take a completely mediocre player 13th overall next draft.
                  and i absolutely hate our supposed leader being one of those people

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

                    Honestly, the only time that the size of the market comes into play is when you're dealing with FA's and players with veto power.

                    Real talk, Superstars are hard to get unless you were lucky enough to draft one, or you gut your entire team. If you think about it, how often are Superstars traded?


                    Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

                      Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                      Honestly, the only time that the size of the market comes into play is when you're dealing with FA's and players with veto power.

                      Real talk, Superstars are hard to get unless you were lucky enough to draft one, or you gut your entire team. If you think about it, how often are Superstars traded?
                      Sometimes its lucky draft picks and sometimes its threats. Where do you think the Lakers would be if they didn't draft/trade for Kobe.

                      Quoting Bass Hornets GM.
                      "He wouldn't work out with us and that bothered us," Bass said. "We couldn't meet him. His agent was trying to aim him to the Lakers and they threatened us."
                      The New Jersey Nets, coached by John Calipari, considered Bryant with the eighth pick but chose Villanova's Kerry Kittles after hearing a similar message.
                      http://www.charlotteobserver.com/201...g-on-kobe.html

                      Certainly superstars or allstars aren't traded much but when they do they have veto powers. Geez no one wants to poney up the cost for Carmelo if they think he won't resign with the team. There is more than one way to manipulate a situation.

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      Yes I do if they had Shaq and Kobe.
                      No one knew that Kobe would reach his full potential and he wasn't even a starter for the team when Phil got there. Phil went there because they are a winning organization in a big market.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

                        Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                        No one knew that Kobe would reach his full potential and he wasn't even a starter for the team when Phil got there. Phil went there because they are a winning organization in a big market.

                        In the year before Phil become the head coach, Kobe:
                        Kobe averages 19.9 points per game and Kobe started every game he played. he only played 50 games that season.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                          In the year before Phil become the head coach, Kobe:
                          Kobe averages 19.9 points per game and Kobe started every game he played. he only played 50 games that season.
                          He only played 50 games because it was the lockout season.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

                            Originally posted by d_c View Post
                            Correct, if Lebron made his decision purely on market size, he would've gone to NY. He went to a good but hardly gargantuan sized market in Miami.

                            And he went to a team that was not considered to be a prime FA spot in the 80s to mid 90s. Back then, Miami was an expansion team with an expansion team image, and it was considered to be as much in the eyes of players. Nobody wanted to go there. What big free agents did Miami sign back then?

                            They may as well have been the Memphis Grizzlies. It wasn't until Pat Riley took over the operations there that the place all of a sudden had an air of desirability and credibility. And Riley chose to go there on his own accord when the franchise had Glen Rice and nothing else.
                            There are a couple of important things you left out about Miami:

                            1. It's located in Florida. Nice weather and South Beach are attractive to athletes.

                            2. There is no state income tax in Florida.

                            These are some perks that Indianapolis doesn't have.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                              In the year before Phil become the head coach, Kobe:
                              Kobe averages 19.9 points per game and Kobe started every game he played. he only played 50 games that season.
                              Got my years mixed up.

                              Point is I doubt Phil knew his 20 year old player was going to be that good. Kobe only went to the Lakers because they were a big market anyway.

                              Look if you want to believe that the NBA gives equal chances to teams to win titles then by all means believe that. To me evidence speaks otherwise.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Granger looks on as Indiana tries to keep pace with big markets

                                Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
                                Got my years mixed up.

                                Point is I doubt Phil knew his 20 year old player was going to be that good. Kobe only went to the Lakers because they were a big market anyway.

                                Look if you want to believe that the NBA gives equal chances to teams to win titles then by all means believe that. To me evidence speaks otherwise.

                                I agree that it certainly helps. But San Antonio and the Pacers from 91-2004 are examples of Small markets having sustained success.

                                The key is having good management that can formulate a plan. Then having the stones to follow that plan. (see also, OKC and Sam Presti)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X