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

Here's how to deal five teams in

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

  • Here's how to deal five teams in

    http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/...teams-need-one

    It's probably true the trade machine is the last refuge of a desperate basketball fan. But it's the first refuge of a fan hoping to give his team an edge in the sometimes unpredictable 2011-12 season.

    Employing the trade machine, here are five writers proposing five deals.

    1. What trade should the Lakers make?



    J.A. Adande, ESPN.com: Andrew Bynum and Pau Gasol for Dwight Howard and Hedo Turkoglu.

    So Dwight doesn't want to be the No. 2 guy? Wait a couple of years. That's less time than Kobe had to spend behind Shaq. Make movies and TV shows in the meantime.



    D.J. Foster, ClipperBlog: Andrew Bynum to the 76ers for Andre Iguodala.

    The Lakers would address some glaring weaknesses by trading Bynum to the 76ers for Iguodala. Athleticism and defense are Iguodala's main strengths, but his ability to make plays and occupy the point-forward role vacated by Lamar Odom would be huge. The 76ers, meanwhile, would stop fighting fire with fire by acquiring the elite center Miami doesn't have.



    Brett Koremenos, HoopSpeak: Pau Gasol to the Bucks in a 3-team deal with the Nets that sends Drew Gooden, Luc Mbah a Moute, Anthony Morrow and Brandon Jennings to L.A.

    The Bucks receive Gasol and Jordan Farmar while New Jersey receives Dwight Howard bait -- Stephen Jackson and Jon Leuer. (Note: Some combination of Devin Ebanks, Darius Morris and Jason Kapono would need to be waived.)

    L.A. sends out Gasol to field a much more balanced roster and brings back a young, up-and-coming player in Jennings. Losing Gasol hurts, but Mbah a Moute and Morrow dramatically upgrade a woeful bench, and Jennings would finally plug the lingering hole at the point guard spot. It's also worth nothing that Gooden has been sneaky productive (19.48 PER) for the Bucks this season. If he keeps that up, it may not be as big a downgrade at the 4 for the Lakers as it initially appears.



    John Krolik, Cavs: The Blog: Andrew Bynum for the trade exception, Steph Curry, Kwame Brown and Dorell Wright.

    Gasol is out of position, the Lakers won't win championships when Kobe gets too old anyways, the Warriors are center-crazy, and the Lakers desperately need penetration and 3-point shooting. Also, Mike Brown and John Kuester excelled at running plays to get Mo Williams open 3s in Cleveland, so they'd likely do well with Steph. Unfortunately, this doesn't work without including the trade exception, but if the Lakers can get Beasley for Walton and two picks to fill the hole at the 4, they should do that.



    Royce Young, Daily Thunder: Pau Gasol to Boston for Rajon Rondo and Jermaine O'Neal.

    The Lakers have already "traded" Gasol once. So it's not like they have a major attachment to their Spanish power forward. They need a point guard badly and would probably be willing to compromise in giving up someone like Gasol to get one of the better guards in the game. Why do the Celtics want Gasol when they already have Kevin Garnett? Well, you'll see when you get to my Celtics trade.

    2. What trade should the Magic make?



    Adande: See above. It's the only way Orlando could bring in two big men who've made an All-Star team. If you have to move Howard that should be the minimum requirement. Plus, they're out of Hedo's contract.



    Foster: Dwight Howard to Houston for Kevin Martin, Samuel Dalembert, Chase Budinger, Goran Dragic, the rights to Donatas Motiejunas and a 2014 first-round pick.

    This might look bad for Orlando, but it may be safer than putting all their eggs in one basket with Andrew Bynum or relying solely on draft picks from New Jersey to pan out.



    Koremenos: Jameer Nelson and J.J. Redick to Phoenix for Steve Nash and Josh Childress.

    Otis Smith has put Orlando in bad contract hell, so taking on the remaining three years and roughly $21 million on Childress' deal to get Nash is a risk he has to take to keep Howard in Orlando. A Nash-Richardson-Turkoglu-Anderson-Howard starting five is tough and definitely pushes the Magic's ceiling as a team higher than the current construction. However, their bench would be so horrendous that Childress would step in and immediately become their most productive reserve. So while their ceiling is raised with Nash on board, the question is, by how much?



    Krolik: Three-team trade. Magic give up Jameer Nelson and J.J. Redick to the Warriors, who give up Monta Ellis to the Suns, who give Steve Nash to the Magic.

    This is a very long shot, but the Suns do need to get younger, and Monta might thrive in that system. Also, the Magic are now contenders.



    Young: Jason Richardson, Ryan Anderson and J.J. Redick to Phoenix for Steve Nash.

    It's time for Otis Smith to put all his eggs in the basket. Make everything available to Phoenix, other than Howard, to get Nash. If you want to have any dream of maintaining Howard, you have to show him this is a franchise worth staying with. Nash and Howard would give the Magic an incredible one-two punch, and you just fill in the pieces after that.

    3. What trade should the Suns make?



    Adande: Steve Nash to the Hawks for Al Horford.

    It doesn't put Nash on the inside track to a championship, but it gets him closer than he'd be in Phoenix, while bringing the Suns a big man that Atlanta has done surprisingly well without.



    Foster: Steve Nash to the Trail Blazers for Raymond Felton and Nicolas Batum.

    This would be smart regardless of what direction Phoenix wants to go. Batum is a rising star who just needs more minutes, and Felton requires an up-tempo setting to be successful. For Portland, Nash and LaMarcus Aldridge's pick-and-pop game would transform it into a serious contender.



    Koremenos: Steve Nash to the Trail Blazers for Raymond Felton, Elliot Williams and Portland's 2012 second-round pick.

    The Suns ideally should look to get something for Nash, as it is unlikely he will decide to spend his remaining years under Robert Sarver's reign of cheapness. This trade nabs them two young assets, along with another expiring contract. It's not splashy or sexy, but it's a logical move to start stockpiling assets and young players on a roster that has too many middling, overpaid veterans.



    Krolik: See my answer to Question 2. Really, the Suns are getting the shortest end of the stick in this trade, because Monta Ellis is horrifyingly overrated and Gentry's system isn't that different from the systems he developed his bad habits in, but this will give the Suns a talented scorer in his 20s and allow them to be terrible enough to get a high-lottery pick. Yay?



    Young: Steve Nash to Orlando for J.J. Redick, Ryan Anderson and Jason Richardson.

    From the Suns point of view: You're not building around a 38-year-old. As loyal as Nash is and as much as he means to the organization, sometimes it's just better if you let go. Nash needs to spend the twilight of his career competing for a ring, not helping in a rebuild. What Phoenix gets back here isn't a whole lot, but think about it: It's a 38-year-old point guard on an expiring deal. All things considered, it's not a bad haul.

    4. What trade should the Celtics make?



    Adande: Rajon Rondo to the Bucks for Brandon Jennings, Mike Dunleavy Jr. and Ersan Ilyasova. If Rondo has to go (if for no other reason than to end the annual rumors of him leaving) this deal brings a replacement point guard, plus $5 million in payroll savings to help free-agent shopping.



    Foster: Boston acquires: Steve Nash, Jared Dudley and Kenneth Faried; Denver Nuggets acquire: Rajon Rondo, Chris Wilcox and Sebastian Telfair; Phoenix Suns acquire: Ty Lawson, Andre Miller, Avery Bradley

    In a three-team point guard swap, Boston would ramp up for one last run, Denver would get the best player in the deal and Phoenix would save money -- its usual priority.



    Koremenos: Paul Pierce to Minnesota for Michael Beasley, Martell Webster, Brad Miller and the Jazz's 2012 first-round pick.

    Webster and Miller both have player options on their deals, so this trade is essentially three expiring contracts and a lottery-protected first for Pierce. Boston's aging core is finished, and getting Pierce's contract off the books leaves the C's with only $14.5 million in committed salaries going into the offseason. Would the Celtics' strong tradition, a blank slate of a roster and Rajon Rondo be enough to lure Howard to Beantown?



    Krolik: Stand pat. Remember when everyone was panicking because the Celtics were losing to the league-worst Nets and being horrifyingly inconsistent, and the Cavs made trades that doomed their franchise specifically because they were looking past the Celtics and ahead to the Magic? This is not a team you want to count out of anything. Give Doc, Rondo and the Big Three one more shot.

    Young: Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett to Atlanta for Josh Smith, Kirk Hinrich and Zaza Pachulia.

    The Celtics' title window is barely cracked right now and that core just isn't built to win anymore. Danny Ainge knows it, and that's why you're hearing his entire roster come up in trade rumors. A shakeup is needed and, as he tried last year with the Jeff Green trade, he needs to get talented youth. The Hawks have been stuck in neutral and could get two guys to give them a chance at making a run this season while opening up some cap flexibility for the future.


    5. What trade should the Warriors make?



    Adande: Monta Ellis to the Hornets for Emeka Okafor.

    If the Warriors want to get bigger and more defensive-oriented under Mark Jackson while moving Monta's contract, here's a way to do it.



    Foster: Monta Ellis to the Utah Jazz for Al Jefferson.

    The Warriors would finally have the legitimate center they've been yearning for and a resolution to the backcourt dilemma between Ellis and Steph Curry. On Utah's end, it would be clearing playing time for Derrick Favors and Enes Kanter and have the backcourt scoring option it desperately needs.



    Koremenos: Monta Ellis, Andris Biedrins and Golden State's first-round picks in 2012 and 2014 to Orlando for Dwight Howard and Chris Duhon.

    Extension or not, Golden State should roll the dice on Howard. The Warriors have a nice collection of wing players who can spread the floor, a productive 4 in David Lee who can stretch the floor to 20 feet and a dynamic young point guard in Curry. This move will make or break this franchise going forward. If the gamble pays off and Howard signs an extension, the Warriors will find themselves in the upper tier of the Western Conference for quite some time.



    Krolik: See my answer to Question 1. The Warriors now have a franchise center, a solid point guard, a great young shooting guard who actually scores efficiently, plays defense and does the little things, and are free of the horrors of Monta Ellis' shot selection, aversion to passing, turnovers, and anti-defense. If they really want to make an extreme culture change, they need an extreme personnel change, and this would be it.



    Young: Monta Ellis and Ekpe Udoh to Indiana for Roy Hibbert and Paul George.

    It's time to move Ellis. I'm sure it's tough to do because the Warriors see him as a star player because of his scoring ability and aren't going to get equal return. Still, it's time to hand the team over to Stephen Curry. Would the Pacers give up their big man for Ellis? Probably not, but the Warriors want a sizable 5 who can score. Next to Dwight Howard and Andrew Bynum, Hibbert's the next best thing.
    Sittin on top of the world!

  • #2
    Re: Here's how to deal five teams in

    The bold part is a joke.
    Reggie Miller is a God. Period.

    Passion. Pride. Pacers.

    It's ALWAYS Miller Time.
    #31 & Only

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Here's how to deal five teams in

      Why the hell would Indiana ever do that?

      Comment


      • #4
        YES! Trade our 7'2 All-Star center and future All-Star forward for two non All-stars.

        /green

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Here's how to deal five teams in

          I wouldn't even trade just 1 of those 2
          Did you know Antonio and Dale aren’t actually brothers?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Here's how to deal five teams in

            ...that seriously made me angry reading that. Like, really? ESPN pays ppl to write this?

            and i loved his idiotic reasoning of Would the Pacers do it? Nope, but the Warriors would love it -______-

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Here's how to deal five teams in

              Yeah...no kidding....why wouldn't they ask JayRedd to answer any of these questions?
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Here's how to deal five teams in

                Originally posted by rel View Post
                ...that seriously made me angry reading that. Like, really? ESPN pays ppl to write this?

                and i loved his idiotic reasoning of Would the Pacers do it? Nope, but the Warriors would love it -______-
                right with that kind of reasoning pacers should trade away a.j. price for derrick rose and then we can trade lou for kobe......the bulls or the lakers wouldn't do it....but the pacers would love it!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Here's how to deal five teams in

                  Is this the bleacher report?
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Here's how to deal five teams in

                    For that matter, why would the Warriors 'turn the team over' to a guard that can't stop twisting his ankles and missing games?


                    [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Here's how to deal five teams in

                      I have an even better trade idea for Royce Young:

                      How about Monta Ellis and Epke Udoh
                      for Kevin Durant and Serge Ibaka!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Here's how to deal five teams in

                        That was good for a laugh.
                        There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Here's how to deal five teams in

                          what the ****?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Here's how to deal five teams in

                            Hey guys, but we are receiving Ekpe Udoh!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Here's how to deal five teams in

                              Not just the Pacers trade is horrible, the one for Atlanta with Horford going to Phoenix for Nash is ridiculous.
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X