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

Trade talk: Team by team

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

  • Trade talk: Team by team

    http://www.sheridanhoops.com/2012/03...-team-by-team/

    By Chris Sheridan
    March 13, 2012 at 10:31 AM



    With Thursday’s NBA trade deadline approaching, we will keep you updated on all the trade chatter being reported. And we’ll do it in one post, which will be constantly updated between now and 3 p.m. EDT on March 15.

    You should also check out our story on Eurostash trade assets, and which teams are holding other teams’ future draft picks.

    ATLANTA HAWKS — Beat writer Michael Cunningham of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution said Josh Smith has informed the team he wants to be dealt, and Golden State is among the teams that has inquired. Sekou Smith of NBA.com says Smith’s trade request was initially made last February. Smith and Al Horford for Dwight Howard? A deal that would return D-12 to his hometown? Ken Berger of CBSSports.com says it is a possibility.

    BOSTON CELTICS — General manager Danny Ainge asked the Indiana Pacers for Tyler Hansbrough and a first-round draft pick for Ray Allen, Pacers GM Larry Bird told Jackie McMullan of ESPNBoston.com. Breaking up the Big Three remains a possibility, but the player who would bring the most in return is Rajon Rondo, who says the team is old enough to know how to tune out the rumors. A.Sherrod Blakley of CSNNE.com quotes Danny Ainge: ”Rondo’s not being traded.”

    CHARLOTTE BOBCATS — Tyrus Thomas went from not playing against Utah on Wednesday to starting vs. the Nets on Friday. A showcase of the player that Michael Jordan acquired from the Bulls, surrendering a future No. 1 pick that becomes unprotected in 2016? Boris Diaw’s consecutive games streak ended at 384 games Tuesday, and his agent has already raised the possibility of a buyout, which would need to happen before March 23 in order for Diaw to sign with a playoff team.

    CHICAGO BULLS — As first reported on this site, there is interest in trying to obtain Pau Gasol from the Lakers in return for Carlos Boozer and at least one other player. But the most recent rumors list the Rockets as the leading candidate to acquire Gasol, who was headed to Houston as part of the original Chris Paul trade that commissioner David Stern vetoed squashed. As for Dwight Howard, the big fella said “it’s pretty cold here.”

    CLEVELAND CAVALIERS — Antawn Jamison has a big, fat expiring contract and would make a nice addition to a contending team. Well, that’s what was said two years ago when the Cavs got him from the Wizards. Nowadays, Byron Scott is using Jamison at center as the Cavs try to stay in the playoff race. And GM Chris Grant wants a No. 1 draft pick in return for Ramon Sessions, an asking price the Lakers reportedly deemed too high.

    DALLAS MAVERICKS — If the master plan is to clear enough cap space to make a run at free agents Dwight Howard and Deron Williams, the Mavs need to find a taker for Shawn Marion and the two remaining years on his contract. As repeatedly suggested in our Sunday Power Rankings, a straight-up deal with the 76ers for Andres Nocioni (a favorite of Rick Carlisle) makes sense for both teams. Jason Terry said if he was running the floundering team, he would make a deal.

    DENVER NUGGETS — They are in a standoff right now with Wilson Chandler, who is a restricted free agent but can only sign with the Nuggets under a new provision of the collective bargaining agreement. He wants to sign for the rest of the season, then become unrestricted. The Nuggets want him to sign long-term. Aaron Lopez of Nuggets.com quotes owner Josh Kroenke: “We are still in active talks.” On trades, Kroenke said: “We’re in a position this year where we don’t have to do anything.”

    DETROIT PISTONS — Not a lot has been out there publicly about what Joe Dumars plans to do with his strange collection of an underperforming mix of young and old. Charlie Villanueva was active Friday night but did not play. Ben Gordon shot 1-for-7. Both players have contracts with huge player options for 2013-14, when the punitive luxury tax kicks in. Mike Payne of DetroitBadBoys believes Rodney Stuckey and Detroit’s No. 1 pick could get them Josh Smith.

    GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS — If their notion of getting Dwight Howard as a rental runs into the logic wall, they have interest in a different big guy with a fractured ankle. Sam Amick of SI.com says Golden State is one of the teams to have expressed interest in acquiring Milwaukee Bucks center Andrew Bogut, a former overall No. 1 pick who has averaged only 66 games in his six seasons because of injuries. Local writers threw cold water on ESPN report sending Monta Ellis to Orlando — unless Howard is coming back.

    HOUSTON ROCKETS — Still seeking Pau Gasol, and Sam Amick of SI.com says Kevin Martin and forward Luis Scola remain in the mix for possible deals for Howard or Gasol. Beat writer Jonathan Feigen of the Houston Chronicle expects them to be active and says they have cooled of late on Chris Kaman but have warmed up to the idea of Gerald Wallace.

    INDIANA PACERS — They are the only team in the league that have the cap space to absorb Chris Kaman’s contract without surrendering anything in return, other than a draft pick. Right now, they project to pick in the low-to-mid 20s in what should be a deep draft — but not that deep. Internally, the big debate is whether to promote George Hill over Darren Collison.

    LOS ANGELES CLIPPERS– The Clippers, who seem to add a player every two weeks or so, are eyeballing Blazers guard Jamal Crawford. Ken Berger of CBSSports.com tweeted that the Clippers would like to surrender Eric Bledsoe and Ryan Gomes for Crawford, who has a player option for next season. Ben Golliver of BlazersEdge says Portland doesn’t want Gomes’ contract.



    LOS ANGELES LAKERS — The waiting continues for Pau Gasol, who told Spanish media outlets that any trade is in the hands of ownership (not management). Houston still covets him, as does Chicago — and David Aldridge of NBA.com says the Wizards have an outside shot. Lakers also still have $8.9 million trade exception from Lamar Odom deal. Would have to take on luxury tax, but ownership can afford it and needs to send positive message to Coach Kobe.

    MEMPHIS GRIZZLIES– For the second straight year, guard O.J. Mayo’s name has popped up at the trading deadline. However, Hoopsworld cited a league source who said Memphis is no longer interested in moving Mayo and any trades it is discussing do not involve primary players – which may mean they are looking to move the underutilized Sam Young. Remember, this team already has made two trades since its roster supposedly was set, acquiring Mareesse Speights and Quincy Pondexter and moving Greivis Vasquez and Xavier Henry.

    MIAMI HEAT — Dwight Howard would be interested in playing here, according to a tweet from veteran NBA scribe Chris Mannix of SI.com. As enticing as it sounds (it would have to be for Chris Bosh and more), a move to Miami does not jibe with the perception that Howard wants to be the top banana wherever he lands, because he’d be a distant third here behind LeBron James and Dwyane Wade.



    MILWAUKEE BUCKS – Brandon Jennings has been made available, according to Sam Amick of SI.com. While it is no secret that the Bucks are eager to shed Stephen Jackson, who has one year remaining ($10.1M), and Drew Gooden, who has three years remaining ($20.1M), it is not all that surprising to hear that Jennings might be made available — especially given the doubts over whether he’ll want to remain in Milwaukee long-term after he said he was “doing my homework on big-market teams.” But Mark Spears of Yahoo tweeted that Jennings is staying put.



    MINNESOTA TIMBERWOLVES –Any plans they had to trade Luke Ridnour went out the window when Ricky Rubio went down for the season, and the player most likely to be dealt elsewhere is Michael Beasley. The Wolves are sitting on a stockpile of future second-round draft picks that could be added into a deal to exchange Beasley for a better player.

    NEW JERSEY NETS –The very reliable Rick Bonnell of the Charlotte Observer has reported that the Nets have interest in acquiring Boris Diaw and his expiring contract, and would throw in Houston’s No. 1 pick. The deal would likely involve Jordan Farmar, who has a player option for $4.5 million next season that eats into the Nets’ cap room, and possibly Shawne Williams, who has a $3.1 million player option. Nets would prefer to push Johan Petro, but even MJ wouldn’t do that. Right? Also, Kris Humphries would reportedly waive no-trade clause for right deal.

    NEW ORLEANS HORNETS– According to Alex Kennedy of HoopsWorld and Jerrod Rudolph of RealGM, the Hornets are discussing a three-team trade that would presumably include Chris Kaman and would have the end effect of bringing Monta Ellis to Orlando — presumably to entice Dwight Howard to remain long term. The reported deal would send Ellis, Andris Biedrins and Dorell Wright out of Golden State while Ryan Anderson, J.J. Redick, Hedo Turkoglu and Quentin Richardson would be leaving Orlando.

    NEW YORK KNICKS — Toney Douglas is the odd man out since Linsanity began and who could be a steal for a team looking for a defensively capable combo guard. If Douglas moves to a place where defense is valued over offense, it would play to his strengths. On-the-ball defenders are tough to find. That’s why Lindsey Hunter stuck around the NBA for so long. Knicks would want a backup big or a draft pick (a low No. 1 or high No. 2) in return.

    OKLAHOMA CITY THUNDER– The Thunder have the best record in the Western Conference but are not averse to changing their roster. But it would have to be a steal, according to Darnell Mayberry of the Oklahoman. Mayberry’s story goes on to nitpick about some of OKC’s shortcomings, which is like complaining about Cindy Crawford’s mole.

    ORLANDO MAGIC– The two latest quotes from Dwight Howard. Make of them what you will: “”We want to be hitting our peak at the right time. It’s great to beat these teams now, but we want to beat them when it counts.” And … ”We want to make sure heading into the playoffs we’re playing our best basketball.” By all accounts this one will be the call of owner Rich DeVos, who wants to win a title now.

    PHILADELPHIA 76ERS– President Rod Thorn told the Philadelphia Daily News that the Sixers are listening, but the belief is that they will not do anything. Given Spencer Hawes’ balky Achilles, you would think they would be looking to add a big man who can tie his shoes and chew gum at the same time. However, Philly radio pot-stirrer Howard Eskin tweeted that the Sixers are looking for a wing player. (Hat tip to Liberty Ballers)

    PHOENIX SUNS– There has been some talk about Steve Nash, but the belief is he’s not going anywhere. The Suns will have cap room this summer and still hold the rights to guard Aaron Brooks, who is playing in China. However, his team is still alive in the Chinese Basketball Association, which would leave him about a month of the NBA campaign – and the playoffs, if Phoenix makes it.

    PORTLAND TRAIL BLAZERS — Jamal Crawford is right there with Chris Kaman on the Most Likely to be Traded list, and the Clippers and Blazers are discussing a deal that would send Jamal Crawford to the Clippers for Eric Bledsoe and Ryan Gomes, according to Ken Berger of CBSSports.com, who notes that rival executives believe the Blazers are interested in exploring a swap of Raymond Felton to the Lakers for Steve Blake, with L.A. sending another piece. Gerald Wallace is another popular name in many, many speculative reports, and a D.J. Augustin for Crawford swap is a possibility, according to the Charlotte Observer.

    SACRAMENTO KINGS — In another rather sudden piece of news in his most recent column, Amick (who resides in Sacto) said the Kings are willing to field offers for former Rookie of the Year Tyreke Evans, who has been moved to small forward with Keith Smart’s choice to use rookie Isaiah Thomas more at the point. Amick also notes that the franchise is committed to rebuilding around DeMarcus Cousins (Excuse the shaky foundation joke).

    SAN ANTONIO SPURS — If the Spurs wanted to go after Dwight Howard, they could package Richard Jefferson, DeJuan Blair and the rights to a bunch of these Eurostash players and use him as a rental. Think about it, and is that such a crazy idea when we start talking about Howard rentals? San Antonio would win the championship with him, IMHO. The Spurs could field a team of the overseas players they hold rights to that would defeat the Bobcats.

    TORONTO RAPTORS– Toronto Star beat writer Doug Smith on Bryan Colangelo: “The art of the deal is something he’s quite fond of and I know he’ll at least be exploring stuff to get involved with. He can’t help himself, we always joke, and it’s a bit true. However, even with Jose (Calderon) out and the struggles that will mean and with a team absorbing losses at a rapid rate, Bryan needs to spend this week taking a series of deep breaths and wondering what next season might look like with Valanciunas, a free agent or two, the core guys he’s got now and another high draft pick.

    UTAH JAZZ– Jazz GM Kevin O’Connor had no comment when asked if guard Raja Bell requested a trade, according to the Deseret News. Bell was sent home after an argument with coach Tyrone Corbin following Friday night’s loss in Philadelphia and did not participate in Monday’s shootaround, instead meeting with Corbin and O’Connor. He started Monday night. Utah also has a $10.9 million trade exception from the Mehmet Okur deal.

    WASHINGTON WIZARDS — From beat writer Michael Lee of the Washington Post: Multiple sources around the league contend that Wall is the Wizards’ only untouchable in trade discussions. Ken Berger of CBSSports.com says the Wizards are in the mix on Andrew Bogut.
    Sittin on top of the world!
Working...
X