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

Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

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

  • Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

    Pacers trade: Mike dunleavy, 2011 top 3 protected first rounder, 2012 swap
    Pacers get: 2011 unprotected Kings first rounder

    Pacers projected wins ( trade machine): -3

    Kings trade: 2011 First rounder
    Kings get: Gerald Wallace,option to swap first round picks with Pacers in 2012

    Kings projected wins: +2


    Bobcats trade: Gerald Wallace
    Bobcats get: Mike Dunleavy, 2011 top 3 protected Pacers pick

    Bobcats projected wins: +1



    Kings pick is projected as #2 pick. Pacers only give up dunleavy and most likely a mid round pick in a not-so-good draft and a potential swap in 2012.
    We could possibly get Perry Jones, Jerad Sullinger or Kanter without giving up Granger.

    Kings want to win now even though they are sucking. Most Kings fans agreed that they would trade their 2011 1st rounder for Gerlad Wallace.

    Bobcats are looking to move Wallace to free up cap space. They do this while getting a productive player in dunleavy and a draft pick.

    I would think with all the cap space in the offseason and a new coach that we could make a run in the playoffs next year ( assuming no lockout). So the 1st rounder wouldnt be as important.


    Future lineup:

    Collison/Price
    George?/Rush/Lance
    Granger/George/D. jones
    Perry Jones or Sullinger/ Hansbrough
    Hibbert/ Josh McRoberts

    ^^^ This isn't even considering the $30 million in cap space and we still have second round pick. So you could possibly sit on some of this money until the summer of 2012 and persue a top free agent or restricted free agent ( Eric Gordon?) to fill the starting SG spot. If George is ready, move him to the 3 and trade Danny ( yeah I dont like it either much) for young guys and picks.


    2012-2013

    Collison ( possibly be a top 5 point guard by then)/ Price
    Eric Gordon/ Rush/Lance
    George or Danny/ free agent
    jones or sullinger/ Hansbrough
    Hibbert ( should be an all star once he bulks up and gets back on track/ McRoberts

    also we should save some moeny to extend Collison, George, Hibbert, Rush.

    I like to plan ahead.


    also the Bobcats arent being choked by the Luxury tax anymore. Kings get help now ()

  • #2
    Re: Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

    no way in hell DC will be a top 5 pg. This is the era of the pg there are a lot of really good ones.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

      Unless if they can find someone to take on Beno's contract I don't think Sacramento is going to do this.

      I'd take his contract if it means a top three pick.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

        I dont think the kings would trade thier pick this yr it is pretty valuable

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

          Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
          no way in hell DC will be a top 5 pg. This is the era of the pg there are a lot of really good ones.
          okay then, top 7

          Paul, Williams, rondo, rose, maybe wall , westbrook . then what other really good point guards are left? Nash is probably going to regress as he is getting older or retire by then. same with JKidd.

          and I would take Beno's or Garcia's contracts if if meant a top 3 pick. This draft is loaded with tons of talent in the top 5.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

            Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
            I dont think the kings would trade thier pick this yr it is pretty valuable
            If it means they are getting a player who could help then now while getting rid of Garcias or Beno's contract while givin up just the pick. I'm pretty sure they would do it or at least consider it.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

              Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
              and I would take Beno's or Garcia's contracts if if meant a top 3 pick. This draft is loaded with tons of talent in the top 5.
              Yeah I'm sure we'd have to do that.

              So perhaps

              To IND:
              Kings pick
              Beno

              To SAC:
              Wallace
              Pacers pick 2012

              To CHA:
              Dunleavy
              1st round pick
              Someone else of value

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

                Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
                okay then, top 7

                Paul, Williams, rondo, rose, maybe wall , westbrook . then what other really good point guards are left? Nash is probably going to regress as he is getting older or retire by then. same with JKidd.


                and I would take Beno's or Garcia's contracts if if meant a top 3 pick. This draft is loaded with tons of talent in the top 5.


                Jrue Holiday

                steph Curry

                Tony Parker

                Tyreke Evans (Combo guard)

                Aaron Brooks

                Mike Conley(this yr is playing great)

                Devin Harris

                Ty Lawson

                Rodney Stuckey
                there are others that are close. Some of these are very debateable

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

                  Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                  Jrue Holiday

                  steph Curry

                  Tony Parker

                  Tyreke Evans (Combo guard)

                  Aaron Brooks

                  Mike Conley(this yr is playing great)

                  Devin Harris

                  Ty Lawson

                  Rodney Stuckey
                  there are others that are close. Some of these are very debateable
                  You seriously call them elite point gaurds? none of those are elite or ever will be. They are all scoring point gaurds who do not have the court vision DC does. True DC is a scoring pg too but he can at least rack up assits and find the open guy better.

                  These guys cannot even put up the numbers DC did last year on bad teams except for Parker. DC nearly averaged 20 and 10 on a bad team last year. Most of these players are on bad teams and barely get above 15 and 5. DC will breeze by them once JOB is gone.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

                    It would be more valuable for the bobcats to get the pick of the kings than the pick of the pacers. Moreover, they don't need Dun, while a back up PG like beno might help them.

                    So the bobcats and the kings don't need the pacers for this deal and it might become :

                    To SAC:
                    Wallace
                    bobcats pick 2012

                    To CHA:
                    Beno
                    kings 1st round pick 2011

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

                      The bobcats have made it clear that they do not want extra salary. Beno is overpaid and 2 years left, Garcia has 3 years left. Plus mike dunleavy is a sf and a good stop gap for them. if they took your deal they would be stuck in lt land for the next 3 years and the pick might not even turn out. it looks good on paper but not if you are trying to cut salary for the future. Plus the cost of a top 5 pick is a whole lot higher than a #10 pick once you sign the pick

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

                        Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
                        okay then, top 7

                        Paul, Williams, rondo, rose, maybe wall , westbrook . then what other really good point guards are left? Nash is probably going to regress as he is getting older or retire by then. same with JKidd.

                        and I would take Beno's or Garcia's contracts if if meant a top 3 pick. This draft is loaded with tons of talent in the top 5.

                        Felton and Augustin are both having good years. Then there is former Allstar J Nelson. Your wishful thinking is a little much.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

                          Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post

                          These guys cannot even put up the numbers DC did last year on bad teams except for Parker. DC nearly averaged 20 and 10 on a bad team last year. Most of these players are on bad teams and barely get above 15 and 5. DC will breeze by them once JOB is gone.

                          AND there is NO guarantee DC will ever be able to duplicate those #'s ever again even with a new coach. Not to mention you are discounting other PG's getting better, but DC stepping his game up. Your optimism is nice, but maybe a little misplaced to the sound of homerism.

                          No one has mentioned Jennings, and I'm sure the Bucks fans feel he's better than DC and probably a top 10 PG. Bottom line there are numerous good PG's out there that are better than DC. That's not to say DC isn't a nice young talent. It will be interesting to see how things turnout down the road.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Pacers/Kings/Bobcats

                            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                            Felton and Augustin are both having good years. Then there is former Allstar J Nelson. Your wishful thinking is a little much.
                            How could i forget about Felton and Jennings and DJ(solid pg but not great)

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X