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

Time for players to wave the white flag

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 21
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 21 template Next
  • #1

    Time for players to wave the white flag

    Seems as though both sides espect the other to crack.


    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...lks/index.html


    Sam Amick>INSIDE THE NBA
    More ColumnsEmail Sam Amick


    Memo to NBA players: It's time to wave the white flag.

    Or at least put the menacing stares and looks of exasperation away for a while and insert a few (dozen) more concessions into the next proposal to force those draconian owners back to the negotiating table before things get even worse.

    As the lockout approaches its two-month mark and with just one full-blown meeting having taken place since it began, the harsh reality is that the leverage players wanted so badly doesn't seem to exist.

    The international job options that were limited to begin with are shrinking by the day. Euroleague officials are claiming disinterest in the idea of signing NBA players who are under contract, and the Chinese Basketball Association recently announced that it won't allow opt-out clauses in contracts, even if doing so means it can't have Kobe Bryant.

    Decertification remains an option for the players, although dissolving the union would do immense damage to both sides, and it would only extend this sluggish situation considering the league filed a litany of preemptive lawsuits in early August. The NBA's message to its players: Go ahead and decertify, but run the risk of voiding all current contracts while continuing to avoid our inevitable victory.

    The self-employment route is also a non-starter as a business strategy. Players are learning the hard way how vital the league's marketing machine is with sponsorship and television money. Exhibit A was there for all to see on Saturday night -- as long as you paid the $4.99 user fee charged by a startup basketball website that streamed the Drew League vs. Goodman League game.

    It didn't matter how many stars played in the East vs. West battle of pro-am leagues at Trinity University in Washington, D.C., as numerous major television networks (including ESPN and Fox Sports) passed on the chance to air the game because -- as one involved person surmised -- one night of good business with the millionaire talent wasn't worth ticking off the billionaire bosses. Which says nothing of the endless problems the event had with the online streaming, paying customers getting stuck outside the venue and players griping about the not-so-small officiating snafu, in which Drew players weren't told until the final minutes that they could not foul out.

    Some exhibition games overseas have proved to be plenty profitable for the players. But there's a limited shelf life for such opportunities and the All-Star style of competition is hardly enough to fuel their competitive fire.

    There is one reason, and one reason alone, why the players aren't rolling over in this labor standoff: the expectation/belief/hope that the owners will be divided at some point in time. It is their slightest sliver of hope, the reason they continue to scoff at the league's attempt at a collective bargaining overhaul intended to shore up the $300 million in losses it cites from last season, when 22 teams were said to be in the red. That offer from the owners features a $62 million "flex" salary cap, which the players say is a hard cap in disguise (compared to the current $58 million soft cap). The plan also includes a drastically reduced split on basketball-related income that would start out as a 50-50 split and eventually could result in less than 40 percent for the players in 2016-17 (compared to the current 57-43 split that favors the players or the 54 percent players' portion already offered in the union's latest proposal).

    The hoped-for fracture might start with Jerry Buss or Donald Sterling in Los Angeles, or Jerry Reinsdorf in Chicago, or James Dolan in New York. In the eyes of so many players and the folks who represent them, someone from a large market will eventually raise his hand and ask out of this lockout game. This owner would explain how the old system worked just fine for his team and how it's no longer in his best interest to support this cause.

    He would be followed by a few more of the fattest cats whose finances are just fine, and then there would be weeping from small- and mid-market owners who have dreamed of a system makeover. The players, who would have missed many months of paychecks by this hypothetical point, would rejoice in that seemingly plausible scenario.

    But here's the thing about this premise that has so much to do with the current state of affairs: I'm pretty sure it's wrong.

    There's nary a sign of the owners backing down. Not now. Not ever. Their lack of urgency is rooted in the unofficial and universal agreement that it's worth losing an entire season if there isn't serious progress forged by the players. And while the players' desire to fight back is certainly understandable, the truth is that this slope will only get more slippery if there isn't resolution in the next month.

    The owners' offers will get worse because they will begin to account for the losses that come with losing games, all while players -- whose average career length was reported as 4.82 seasons during the last lockout, in 1999 -- will see an entire season's pay go to waste. As one agent said for the umpteenth time last week, "Billionaires beat millionaires every time."
    While owners rake in local television revenues that continue during a lockout and offer the sort of financial bloodline union members could surely use right now, most of the players will start missing paychecks in mid-November. And maybe that's when the end game will finally become clear.

    That view has been reinforced in discussions with owners who sound just as militant now as they did a year ago. I've seen the gleeful look in a large-market owner's eye when he discusses the league's dream scenario, a system in which cost certainty aids the business side and the basketball landscape is more competitive because super teams like the one in Miami simply aren't possible anymore. I've inquired recently about the owners' level of unity, and heard the chuckle on the other end of the phone after asking if any of the big-city boys have expressed concern about the possibility of sacrificing an entire season to make these changes.

    Despite the league's threats of seven-figure fines for discussing the lockout or the ones being locked out, Bobcats owner Michael Jordan -- the boyhood idol to many in the league -- recently made clear his view that the players need to give in here.

    "The model we've been operating under is broken," he told the Sydney Herald Sun, while also discussing Australian native and Milwaukee center Andrew Bogut. "We have 22 or 23 teams losing money, [so] I think we have gotta come to some kind of understanding in this partnership that we have to realign."

    Yet even the words of His Airness aren't likely to spark a resolution anytime soon. The new system would create an earnings divide between the league's superstars and their less-talented colleagues almost as wide as the current negotiating gap, meaning the player masses (and their agents, of course) are left scrambling for ways to turn this labor tide.

    As described by one such agent who was briefed about the owners' proposal and what it would mean, a player such as Lakers forward Lamar Odom would see his salary plummet from $8.9 million to $2.6 million next season, according to the union officials putting on the presentation. Such stark propositions have created a climate that another agent recently deemed "odorous," with the bad blood and bitterness continuing to rise while the emotions do nothing to help with a solution.

    As commissioner David Stern asserted in a recent podcast with ESPN's Bill Simmons when asked about the absurd lack of urgency from all involved, a recent meeting that was scheduled between the two sides never took place because of the owners' refusal to heed the union's request for another proposal. And while the NBPA has been updating players and agents on the labor situation in a series of regional talks that will continue this week, it's the meetings that include both sides that are needed at the moment. Stern estimated the two would meet in the coming weeks, but it's not known whether those sessions have been scheduled yet.

    "[The owners] worrying who has the leverage today or momentum or how we can break the union, to me, misses the point," said New York-based agent Marc Cornstein, who is closer to the talks than most of his peers. "You have a sport that's in the healthiest place it's been in, some people would argue, ever. You have an economy and a world where there's complete turmoil and uncertainty. I think we need to start finding solutions, not leverage.

    "If we miss games, it would be detrimental to the sport. ... And that doesn't mean the players should accept a horrible deal, or the owners should accept one that's prohibitive for them, but no one is going to convince me we can't find a solution and I think it's time to start doing it."

    One league source said the next Board of Governors meeting has been scheduled for Sept. 15 in Dallas, where the owners will have their own gathering and -- just my prediction here -- no one will be asked to bring a white flag. Here's to hoping the players stop by to wave one of their own.
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 08-23-2011, 01:24 PM.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Time for players to wave the white flag

    I feel like David Stern is up in his office yelling, "Give them nothing and take from them...everything!"


    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Time for players to wave the white flag

      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
      I feel like David Stern is up in his office yelling, "Give them nothing and take from them...everything!"

      I don't think so, I think it is the owners who are finally going to get the whole pie this time as opposed to the small slice of pie they got in 1999 and in 2005.

      I'm sure David Stern personally would rather just get the best deal right now and not lose any games, but the owners pay his salary and he essentially works for them. But the Stern legacy will be tarnished with another work stoppage.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Time for players to wave the white flag

        You don't think it is personal between Stern and Hunter?


        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Time for players to wave the white flag

          Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
          You don't think it is personal between Stern and Hunter?

          Maybe, but I think he is more concerned, worried about a work stoppage - to the point that he personally would push hard for the best deal right now and move on. (but then he doesn't own a team)

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Time for players to wave the white flag

            I'd really like to know what option B is for the players after they have lost a season and all their savings have dried up. I don't see where they go from there to increase their bargaining position, and still have any hope of playing in the NBA. The owners are willing to match their season forfeiture without a second thought.
            You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Time for players to wave the white flag

              The longer the players hold-out, the worse deal they're going to get. It's as simple as that. They have zero leverage, whist the owners can likely hold-out indefinitely (as far as lock-outs go).

              The NBPA is the highest paid union in the world, yet it isn't the highest grossing league/company. They'll hold out for a while - they have to - but in the end they'll take the owner's proposal because; a) They know they've been getting a good deal as opposed to players in other sports and b) they have no leverage.

              There will be a season at some point and it'll be on the owner's terms. It's all just a matter of how long it takes.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Time for players to wave the white flag

                Everything everyone is saying about Stern and the owners stance is EXACTLY what they want everyone to think. Whether its true this time, I dont' know. If it wasn't that way, they'd be doing something wrong.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Time for players to wave the white flag

                  Owners can hold out 'forever', but they have tons to lose, eventually, as well. Starting with sponsorship and the huge dollars that go with that.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Time for players to wave the white flag

                    IMO, what is happening right now is that the owners are sitting back and waiting.

                    The players are talking to their teammates as union reps. They are trying to come to terms with how everyone feels about the current proposal. There is a TON of information in these and there aren't many NBA players who went to law school. It will take some time to get everyone on the same page as to what is happening. They are also determining what concessions the players can live with or will have to endure. while more importantly, figuring out which issues are worth fighting. The owners have served, now it is time for the players to return serve. It will take them some time to figure it out. I bet we will hear back from them in the upcoming weeks. There have been rumors of a bunch of the players' reps talking to their teammates in order to have their own training camps. I have a feeling it is more about teams getting together to talk about what they can live with.
                    "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Time for players to wave the white flag

                      Originally posted by Speed View Post
                      Owners can hold out 'forever', but they have tons to lose, eventually, as well. Starting with sponsorship and the huge dollars that go with that.
                      Wouldn't 35% on the dollar for the losses the franchises take in bankruptcy make up for most of that? Those owners would just reap that back from the IRS. Would they lose out on their "investment"? Yes, but the cost isn't nearly as high as what people think for a "worst case scenario" for the owners. Those sponsorships only help make about five to ten teams profitable. The TV dollars would be missed more and that is why ESPN and ABC are praying the league doesn't hold out. It will devalue their TV deal to the point where they are basically overpaying the league for whatever they can derive in ad revenue once the league popularity plummets.
                      Last edited by pacergod2; 08-23-2011, 03:48 PM.
                      "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Time for players to wave the white flag

                        I just want to watch NBA basketball this year, that's it.
                        Follow me at @Bluejbgold

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Time for players to wave the white flag

                          For the record, I've been pro players in this, but thats not entirely true, this lockout is as much about the Pacers viablity in Indy than anything else, in my eyes. I'm all for small markets teams being profitable, so thats what I hope comes out of this, regardless how long it takes.

                          Interesting in hearing Stern talking about profit sharing among teams. He frames it that you can be a team that losing money, in a the short term and get relief from the other clubs, but at some point, it has to be a profitable team in a profitable market or you have to start to question if that team should exist. Again, this deal needs to assure the Pacers make money, imo.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Time for players to wave the white flag

                            Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                            I'd really like to know what option B is for the players after they have lost a season and all their savings have dried up. I don't see where they go from there to increase their bargaining position, and still have any hope of playing in the NBA. The owners are willing to match their season forfeiture without a second thought.
                            The players can go overseas.

                            What can the NBA do though, if the players won't agree?

                            That's why I keep saying going overseas is good for the players, they have leverage. They don't "need" the NBA like the NBA needs them.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Time for players to wave the white flag

                              Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                              The players can go overseas.

                              What can the NBA do though, if the players won't agree?

                              That's why I keep saying going overseas is good for the players, they have leverage. They don't "need" the NBA like the NBA needs them.
                              Going overseas is good for SOME players. The overseas market can't and won't accept anything approaching an appreciable fraction of the NBA players.

                              The top of the food chain players don't need the NBA, maybe, but frankly they don't need the NBPA either. The rank and file on the other hand...
                              BillS

                              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 21 template Next
                              Working...
                              X