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

Off season Rumors and Speculation

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

  • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

    Oh and Ben Wallace is looking for a team...

    http://articles.boston.com/2012-09-0...dan-grant-hill

    Veteran center Ben Wallace has indicated that he would like to return to the NBA but it likely won’t be with the Pistons, who have begun a youth movement and plan to go with Andre Drummond, Austin Daye, and Jonas Jerebko as their primary big men. Wallace said he was retiring after last season but changed his mind in July and is looking for a deal . . .
    Weren't there some people who think the Pacers need more big man depth?

    Comment


    • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

      Oh...so Boston.com's insinuating the Pistons are done with Monroe eh? I mean, if they just want to dump the guy...

      Wallace needs to retire, dude's toast. Wonder if he's made bad investments or something. Maybe has a gambling addiction (while sucking at gambling) like Iverson.

      Comment


      • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

        Not a place to put this, but the preseason opens in one month from today on 10/10/12. Also, I saw the first NBA preview magazine on the stands, yesterday. It's getting closer!

        Comment


        • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

          Originally posted by Speed View Post
          Not a place to put this, but the preseason opens in one month from today on 10/10/12. Also, I saw the first NBA preview magazine on the stands, yesterday. It's getting closer!
          Wow, it's hard to believe that training camp is just around the corner. It seems like just yesterday that we were playing the Heat.

          "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

          Comment


          • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

            Yea im excited to seethe preseason game at Notre Dame. Who is all going!?

            Follow me @PacerNation_24

            Comment


            • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

              Leandro Barbosa: "Among others, I'm talking with Phoenix, the Brooklyn Nets and the Los Angeles Lakers. Steve Nash even texted me because he wants me there." UOL Esporte
              Garbage players get 1st round picks, (WTF)! All of the NBA must hate the Pacers! LOL

              Comment


              • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                Portland's Elliott Williams tore his Achilles,' he's out for the year.

                Comment


                • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                  Portland: Where careers die.
                  Counting down the days untill DJ Augustin's contract expires.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                    Originally posted by DGPR View Post
                    Wow, it's hard to believe that training camp is just around the corner. It seems like just yesterday that we were playing the Heat.
                    When does training camp start?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                      Harden trade watch begins?

                      And btw, small market fans take note, it's looking like the first major casualty of the new CBA will be small market OKC. Well actually, Dallas was probably first (self-inflicted break up of their champion team in anticipation of harsher taxes), but you don't see LA stop spending do you?

                      http://newsok.com/thunder-signing-ja...rticle/3708684

                      Thunder signing James Harden 'might' be impossible
                      To keep the franchise under the luxury tax, the decision of letting the popular Harden leave OKC might be necessary

                      By Jenni Carlson | Published: September 10, 2012

                      Sam Presti didn't say that signing James Harden would be impossible.

                      It just seemed that way.

                      On the day that the Thunder held a press conference to tout the deal done with big man Serge Ibaka, the focus predictably turned to Harden. Signing Ibaka last month meant that three-fourths of the Thunder's young and talented core was secure. Kevin Durant, Russell Westbrook and Ibaka are all under contract beyond next season.

                      So, what about Harden?

                      “James is somebody we value,” Presti said Monday afternoon. “We think he's an important part to what we're trying to do with our team and we're hopeful that he'll be with us.”

                      No doubt about that. Harden is super talented, a rare combination of shooter, slasher and distributor. His offensive skills provide an amazing complement to those of Durant and Westbrook.

                      “By the same token, we've been very upfront and transparent with everybody that we have some inherent challenges that we face as an organization as a result of the new collective bargaining agreement,” the Thunder general manager continued. “I know we'd love to have him here. I think James would like to be here as well. But at the end of the day ... you have to find a way to make it work for everybody.”

                      Notice those qualifiers in there? By the same token? But?

                      You don't have to read far between the lines to realize the reality — striking a deal with Harden is going to be like walking uphill on an icy sidewalk.

                      Darn near impossible.

                      The deadline to sign him is Oct. 31, so there's still a lot of time to hammer out the details. But Presti seems to be laying the groundwork for what will happen when a deal doesn't get done — Harden will become a restricted free agent next summer, some team will offer him an exorbitant amount of money that the Thunder won't be able to match, and Harden will be playing for another team after this season.

                      The problem is the luxury tax.

                      In the 2013-14 season, when the new contracts for Ibaka and Harden would begin, the luxury tax would kick in once a team's combined player salaries reach $72 million. The Thunder already has $53.9 million committed to Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka and Kendrick Perkins for that season.

                      The team could amnesty Perk, but unless some of these newly acquired bigs grow a serious nasty streak, I wouldn't recommend it.

                      But even if the Thunder ultimately cuts ties with Perkins, Harden would still have to sign for $10 million a year or so for the team to stay out of luxury-tax trouble. And even then, it might exceed the limit.

                      Do that, and the consequences are serious.

                      Go over by $9 million — which the Thunder likely would if it pays Harden what he's expected to be worth on the open market — and the Thunder would owe $14.5 million in luxury tax. Add that to the salaries, and the team would be on the hook for nearly $100 million.

                      In any market, that's a big chunk of change for an NBA franchise. In Oklahoma City, that level of financial obligation could be crippling.

                      That's a lesson Presti learned in San Antonio. He was with the Spurs when they had to make some difficult and unpopular decisions because of finances.

                      In 2003, Stephen Jackson became a darling in San Antonio. He endeared himself to Spurs fans by making big shot after big shot in the playoffs, capped with several 3-pointers down the stretch in the championship-clinching game of the Finals.

                      With Tim Duncan, Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili already on the roster, the Spurs offered Jackson a three-year, $10 million deal after the season.

                      He walked.

                      Fans freaked.

                      What the Spurs did was not popular, but because they are a small-market franchise, they have made a commitment to be frugal about finances. That's one of the reasons they've been able to maintain success over several decades. Short-term sacrifices (and PR hits) for long-term stability.

                      You'd better believe Presti will do the same with the Thunder.

                      That reality might be starting to dawn on Thunder fans, but Monday afternoon, it seemed to have already set in with those close to the situation. As soon as the subject of Harden's contract arose, Ibaka and Thunder coach Scott Brooks went completely and totally stone faced.

                      Will signing Harden be impossible?

                      Sure looked and sounded that way.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                        Presti is in negotiations, so he's not going to say "Don't worry fans, we are ready to give him max, we are just trying to lowball him for a while."

                        There's no reason why they can't keep him after amnestying Perkins. Perkins gets amnesty, Harden gets his max, and then it's only a question of which end-of-bench role players to let go. They can easily stay under luxury tax. The article assumes that they are going to keep Eric Maynor, Hasheem Thabeet and such, who I'm sure they can live without.

                        I don't love the S-Jax comparison either. S-Jax was already getting overpaid with 3x10, considering his production. It was basically a payment for his upside, which is a risky thing, and San Antonio would've been taking a huge risk going higher than that. James Harden is arguably worth the max now, at this moment. Not to mention his trade value when they have him under long term contract. To me, this is more comparable to the Joe Johnson / Phoenix situation, where I still believe Phoenix would've won several titles if they kept that core together.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                          OKC can't amnesty Perk, beause the deadline to do so was in the middle of July.

                          EDIT: Wait, was the amnesty clause good for two years or three?
                          Last edited by Since86; 09-12-2012, 11:47 AM.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            OKC can't amnesty Perk, beause the deadline to do so was in the middle of July.

                            EDIT: Wait, was the amnesty clause good for two years or three?
                            Amnesty clause is active every year of the new CBA. So yeah, they can amnesty him next year if they want.

                            It's not like Perkins makes a ton of money though. He's owed $9m in 2013, which while a fair size chunk, is pretty small compared to what Durant, Westbrook, Harden, and Ibaka will get. And good luck finding another starting center at that price.

                            Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                            Presti is in negotiations, so he's not going to say "Don't worry fans, we are ready to give him max, we are just trying to lowball him for a while."
                            There's some of that, but looking at the numbers, it does seem difficult. In 2013, Durant will making $17.8m, Westbrook $14.7m, Ibaka $12.2m. Add a max contract for Harden ($13.7m), and that's $58m for 4 players. Add in a couple of veteran salaries (Thabo at $3.9m, Collison at $2.6m), and they're at $65m for 6 players. Not sure where the tax level is next year, but it won't be much higher than $70m (maybe $72m?). And oh yeah, they'll still need to pay someone else to start at center for them.

                            So paying tax seems unavoidable for the Thunder if they decide to keep Harden. The only question is how much tax they can stomach. For all that the OKC franchise has accomplished, there is still only so much revenue that they can pull in.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                              The amnesty clause goes through 2016.
                              http://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q67
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                                Originally posted by wintermute View Post

                                There's some of that, but looking at the numbers, it does seem difficult. In 2013, Durant will making $17.8m, Westbrook $14.7m, Ibaka $12.2m. Add a max contract for Harden ($13.7m), and that's $58m for 4 players. Add in a couple of veteran salaries (Thabo at $3.9m, Collison at $2.6m), and they're at $65m for 6 players. Not sure where the tax level is next year, but it won't be much higher than $70m (maybe $72m?). And oh yeah, they'll still need to pay someone else to start at center for them.

                                So paying tax seems unavoidable for the Thunder if they decide to keep Harden. The only question is how much tax they can stomach. For all that the OKC franchise has accomplished, there is still only so much revenue that they can pull in.
                                Thabo, Collison, rookies, vet players. They can easily be under tax.
                                Collison/Ibaka will handle 5, Perkins kind of sucks in most situations anyway. + they have Aldrich. + they'll get some vets on a minimum. They are a contender with tons of potential, they don't need an All Star center. And if they feel they do, they'll just trade Harden for one at some point.
                                This is the oddest part for me... Harden is extremely valuable. As a player and as an asset both. OKC would never let him go just to be able to add a midlevel role player or two. That's like the Pacers letting Hibbert go and signing Kaman and Mayo. Just worse, because Harden is younger, more proven and arguably higher upside than Hibbert.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X