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

espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

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

  • espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft...ory?id=6680183

    Even the league's top teams have some upgrading to do this offseason. As we did last week with the lottery teams of the Eastern and Western Conferences, we're now pointing out the statistical weaknesses (and options for addressing them) of the NBA's postseason participants, starting with the East.



    Indiana Pacers


    Statistical weakness: Shooting (23rd)
    Weakest position: SG, PF



    The expiration date on the current collective bargaining agreement couldn't have come at a worse time for the Pacers. With Mike Dunleavy, T.J. Ford, Jeff Foster and Jamaal Tinsley's contracts all coming off the books, the Pacers will shed about $30 million worth of expiring contracts heading into next season. Their spending money will likely be compromised significantly by the new rules, and in terms of supply and demand, it's a seller's free-agent market this offseason.



    A shooting guard should sit atop the Pacers' shopping list this summer. Danny Granger's efficiency has tumbled each of the past two seasons, and he's better equipped to play the 3 than he is to guard quicker 2s. Who can they target in free agency? Vince Carter, Jason Richardson and Jamal Crawford make up the blue-chip stocks at the 2, but they're all on the wrong side of 30 years old. With promising small forward Paul George waiting in the wings behind Granger, the Pacers could afford to deal their biggest scorer for a younger shooting guard. Though the Memphis Grizzlies don't need another small forward, it's worth restarting the talks for O.J. Mayo.




    Philadelphia 76ers


    Statistical weakness: Free throw attempts (28th)
    Weakest position: C



    So, the Sixers need a center? Join the 20 other teams in the league. The Sixers will likely bring back Spencer Hawes, who is a restricted free agent, but they'll look for upgrades in free agency and in the trade market. If Andre Iguodala truly is on the block, they need to fill that 5 position first and foremost.



    It's a good offseason to be eyeing a center as Nene, Marc Gasol, Tyson Chandler, Samuel Dalembert, Yao Ming and Kwame Brown will all look for homes in the coming months. Unfortunately, the Sixers don't have the cash to reel in a big name, so they'll be forced to get creative in trade talks. Could they entice the Mavericks with a sign-and-trade involving Tyson Chandler and Iguodala (pending new rules of the next CBA)?



    New York Knicks


    Statistical weakness: Rebounding, both offensive and defensive (24th and 26th)
    Weakest position: C



    Let's be serious: the Knicks should lobby for a designated defender in the next CBA. As defensively-challenged stars, Amare Stoudemire and Carmelo Anthony make up two of the most lopsided players in the game. If they could somehow sub out every defensive possession, the Knicks would be set! Sadly, that's nothing more than a New York City pipe dream.



    If the Knicks want to be legitimate contenders next season -- and not just a sugarcoated average squad like they were in 2010-11 -- they need to surround Stoudemire and Anthony with defensive stalwarts. Trouble is, they can't afford to compromise their summer of 2012 pursuits by burning any long-term spending money on a legitimate center this offseason. Can they convince Samuel Dalembert to take the veteran minimum to play in the Big Apple? If he's willing to play at a bargain rate, it'll be tough to keep the Haitian away from South Beach.



    Atlanta Hawks


    Statistical weakness: Causing turnovers (29th)
    Weakest position: C



    Jeff Teague blossomed as a point guard in the playoffs, but the Hawks still have to address the other end of the positional spectrum at center. This edition of the Hawks hit their playoff ceiling already, reaching the Eastern Conference semifinals without a true center anchoring the back line. And if they want to get over the hump in title contention, it may be worth dangling Josh Smith for a center who would push the 6-foot-10 Al Horford to his more natural position.



    They'll likely lose Jamal Crawford to free agency, as other teams will be looking to fill a void at shooting guard. The Hawks could be content with staying put and wading in the waters of good-but-not-great over the next couple of seasons. However, they have a tradable asset in Smith, who still ranks as one of the most productive athletic freaks in the NBA, even if he lacks polish. It might be worth kicking the tires in Denver on a sign-and-trade with Nene.



    Orlando Magic


    Statistical weakness: Avoiding turnovers (27th)
    Weakest position: PG, SG



    So, Dwight Howard thinks that Gilbert Arenas wasn't used properly last season? Arenas was an $18 million mess and a shell of his former self last season in Orlando. As painful as it is, it wasn't a case of misappropriation, but rather a demonstration of what happens when skills and health erode hand-in-hand. The Magic would be title contenders if they boasted the Arenas of five years ago, but a lot can change in a half-decade.



    The Magic are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Even though Arenas was the source of many of their offensive struggles last season, his exorbitant contract demands that they squeeze whatever value they can out of him. And it also means that they can't afford to reel in a go-to scorer this offseason. Richardson will be gone, and they don't have a backup plan that doesn't involve J.J. Redick getting the starting gig. Hey, they could always bring back Vince Carter, right?



    Boston Celtics


    Statistical weakness: Offensive rebounding (30th) and turnovers (28th)
    Weakest position: C



    The key for the Celtics this offseason is to not overreact. They don't need to blow it up. They don't need to press the rebuild button. The truth is that the elbow injury to Rajon Rondo couldn't have come at a worse time. Sure, the C's were disposed of in five games at the hands of the Miami Heat, but they're closer to title contention than it seems.



    With four All-Stars in the fold, the Celtics find themselves in a stronger position heading into 2011-12 than almost every team in the NBA. If they can sharpen the periphery, they'll be right back in the mix for the East crown -- at the very least. Jermaine O'Neal will be back for another go-around, but they desperately need someone who can rebound. For reference, Matt Barnes posted a better rebound rate than O'Neal last season. The Celtics will likely join New York and Miami, among others, in competing for the services of Dalembert at the 5.



    Miami Heat


    Statistical weakness: Causing turnovers (26th)
    Weakest position: C, PG



    Mike Bibby posted one of the worst postseason runs in NBA history and Joel Anthony averaged 2.8 points per game in the playoffs, and yet the Heat came within two wins of an NBA title. The Heat have holes at the point guard and center slots, but it's also true that they look more pronounced next to the Big Three. With Mario Chalmers entering free agency for the first time, and Zydrunas Ilgauskas and Erick Dampier likely to retire, the Heat have to refresh the roster this offseason.



    They'll start with targeting Reggie Jackson, the first-team All-ACC point guard from Boston College, in the draft, but they need to do better. After overachieving in the postseason, Chalmers is due for a big payday and the Heat may not want to match the price tag. The new CBA affects the Heat perhaps more than any other team in the league, since they have almost their entire payroll tied up in five players. They'll try to convince Dalembert to take the minimum to play for a title contender within a strong Haitian community in Miami, but the veteran will be leaving a lot of money on the table. If the Heat open next season with a starting five of Chalmers, the Big Three and Dalembert, the offseason will have been a success.



    Chicago Bulls


    Statistical weakness: Turnovers (17th)
    Weakest position: SG



    Among title contenders heading into next season, no team bears a bigger hole than the Bulls do at shooting guard. They whiffed at the trade deadline by not securing a go-to scorer alongside Derrick Rose and Carlos Boozer, and they'll look to address that void in the offseason. Although the Bulls probably can't afford them, Jason Richardson, Vince Carter and Jamal Crawford headline the shooting guard crop in free agency this offseason. Elsewhere, O.J. Mayo and Monta Ellis could be potential trade targets at the right price, and the ascension of Taj Gibson makes Carlos Boozer even more expendable at the power forward slot.



    Judging by Chicago's No. 1 overall seed and its strong statistical profile (17th in turnover rate isn't a huge concern), the Bulls could be one move away from becoming title favorites. But their good standing also means they shouldn't feel desperate to plug the hole. The Bulls could enter next season with a platoon of Ronnie Brewer and Kyle Korver at the 2, and have no problem reaching the East finals. With two picks at the end of the first round, they could use one of those for a package deal on draft day.

    --------------------------------------------------------------
    I'm a Beast

  • #2
    Re: espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

    Interesting that most of those teams need a center. I disagree that our biggest need is at SG personally, but I know many of you agree.
    "man, PG has been really good."

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

      They clearly don't watch the Pacers. They make it sound like Granger plays SG for us a lot or something, and that he's struggled doing it. WTF?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

        I like Dunleavy, especially if we can get him for cheap I would be down to resigning him, every team needs a 3 point shooter...
        Why so SERIOUS

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

          Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
          Interesting that most of those teams need a center. I disagree that our biggest need is at SG personally, but I know many of you agree.
          All depends on what u define PG as...
          Why so SERIOUS

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

            Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
            They clearly don't watch the Pacers. They make it sound like Granger plays SG for us a lot or something, and that he's struggled doing it. WTF?
            Thought about saying something too.
            "man, PG has been really good."

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

              Originally posted by Really? View Post
              All depends on what u define PG as...
              A wing. Our front line scares me, and it's not because they're intimidating.
              "man, PG has been really good."

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

                Originally posted by Really? View Post
                I like Dunleavy, especially if we can get him for cheap I would be down to resigning him, every team needs a 3 point shooter...
                I thought i could shoot the 3? so can Brush

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

                  Shooting guard and powerforward. Jeff needs to be re-signed. Draft another big and shooting guard.
                  {o,o}
                  |)__)
                  -"-"-

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

                    This two quotes worry me:

                    "The expiration date on the current collective bargaining agreement couldn't have come at a worse time for the Pacers."

                    "Their spending money will likely be compromised significantly by the new rules, and in terms of supply and demand, it's a seller's free-agent market this offseason."


                    Can anyone shed a light on this matter ?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

                      Originally posted by Pacemaker View Post

                      Can anyone shed a light on this matter ?
                      If there is less cap, there is less cap room. That simple really.
                      "man, PG has been really good."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

                        The expiration date on the current collective bargaining agreement couldn't have come at a worse time for the Pacers.
                        We aren't discussing this much, but it does really suck that FINALLY when we have an offseason that clears our crappiest contracts off the books, we're looking at a probable lockout, after which we're likely to lose a bunch of the cap space we just freed up.

                        edit: didn't see the above few posts.

                        It matters because the Pacers have done the "right" thing by clearing up space to go after free agents and/or more aggressive trades, and yet they're about to be punished by the sins of the Knicks, Lakers etc.

                        If the salary cap is "hardened" or lowered by a bunch, it negates the room we just freed up.
                        Last edited by rabid; 06-20-2011, 08:17 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

                          As long as its a hard cap, then the Pacers still get a positive gain out of it as there will be lots of good free agents if teams are forced to get under a certain number. If it's like the way it is now, just a lower number, then it doesn't do the Pacers much good.
                          "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                          ----------------- Reggie Miller

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

                            Originally posted by rabidpacersfan View Post
                            We aren't discussing this much, but it does really suck that FINALLY when we have an offseason that clears our crappiest contracts off the books, we're looking at a probable lockout, after which we're likely to lose a bunch of the cap space we just freed up.

                            edit: didn't see the above few posts.

                            It matters because the Pacers have done the "right" thing by clearing up space to go after free agents and/or more aggressive trades, and yet they're about to be punished by the sins of the Knicks, Lakers etc.

                            If the salary cap is "hardened" or lowered by a bunch, it negates the room we just freed up.
                            That blows, but at the same time at least we're still finally financially healthy for the first time in ages. That's still a big deal.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: espn insider: fixing the east's playoff teams

                              Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                              I thought i could shoot the 3? so can Brush
                              I actually trust Dunleavy hitting a shot of running a round and getting open of picks than I do Danny running up to the 3 point line and shooting one up...

                              Brush is just too much of a disappointment to me that I wouldn't give him the chance til he gets stuff together.... Rush is like a only in rare situation shooter also, so many times he was open and didn't shot it, if he doesn't believe in himself why would I be believing in him..
                              Why so SERIOUS

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X