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

    Originally posted by DrFife View Post
    I'm on record as anticipating/supporting the trade-up option, and I'm suspicious ... not certain, just suspicious ... that Larry wants John Henson (if he's there at #10; Kstat?). I could be all wet and maybe we'll see Austin Rivers in a Pacer uni, but Last year Larry bemoaned the fact that certain players he liked decided to return to school, and I've thought ever since that Henson was who he was referring to. Tbird has offered his opinion that we may trade up to select Tyler Zeller, but assuming we re-sign Roy, I'd be surprised if we trade up to select a big who only can play center. (Does anyone want to argue that Zeller can play minutes at PF?)

    Some of you think Henson is too twiggy, i know, but he certainly would add a whole new dimension to our current stable of bigs. If we bring over Stanko, as JT reminded us, or re-sign Fes, we'll have plenty of beef. But with West on the last year of his contract and Tyler apparently plateauing (if not regressing), Henson will be given time to develop, both skill-wise and physically, and methinks Larry sees him as our future starting PF.
    I don't know man. He didn't get better year over year. Never really saw him play, but not really improving seems a bit disconcerting.
    First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

    Comment


    • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

      Originally posted by DrFife View Post
      I'm on record as anticipating/supporting the trade-up option, and I'm suspicious ... not certain, just suspicious ... that Larry wants John Henson (if he's there at #10; Kstat?). I could be all wet and maybe we'll see Austin Rivers in a Pacer uni, but Last year Larry bemoaned the fact that certain players he liked decided to return to school, and I've thought ever since that Henson was who he was referring to. Tbird has offered his opinion that we may trade up to select Tyler Zeller, but assuming we re-sign Roy, I'd be surprised if we trade up to select a big who only can play center. (Does anyone want to argue that Zeller can play minutes at PF?)

      Some of you think Henson is too twiggy, i know, but he certainly would add a whole new dimension to our current stable of bigs. If we bring over Stanko, as JT reminded us, or re-sign Fes, we'll have plenty of beef. But with West on the last year of his contract and Tyler apparently plateauing (if not regressing), Henson will be given time to develop, both skill-wise and physically, and methinks Larry sees him as our future starting PF.
      It could just as easily be Terrence Jones, Jeremy Lamb, Perry Jones, etc. as those guys all returned too.

      Comment


      • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

        Last year Bird specifically said he likes Tyler Zeller. Anyone else remember that?

        Here:

        Larry Bird: "I don't think this is a very strong draft. I think there will be some players that do well in our league, but there's a lot of kids that didn't come out. I think I made the statement that I like Ty Zeller, he's going back to school. He didn't come out. Damn."

        http://www.tarheeltimes.com/article32429.aspx

        Comment


        • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

          http://hoopshype.com/rumors.htm

          Steve Nash: I’m considering everything at the moment. I would love to win a Championship, yes, but I’m not one of those people who believe I must win one to have a fulfilling career, so other factors, such as salary, family, playing time, and opportunity for team success all factor in. SLAM

          Steve Nash: I would consider the Knicks. Amar’e actually called me to tell me about his engagement a couple weeks back, and we talked a bit about how nice it’d be to play together again. SLAM
          - - -



          The only question is if Williams, the property of the Brooklyn-bound Nets for at least one more week, will come home. As of today, even his mother, Denise Smith, says she doesn't know the answer. Nor does she believe her son does. "No, no I don't," Smith said during a phone conversation from her home in the Dallas suburb of The Colony. "I thought he was going one way and another time thought he was going another way." ESPN.com

          A return home could form quite a happy clan, yet Smith said she is not planting any such seeds in her son's head. "They don't get it from me," she said. "I'd love to have him here, but I don't bug them about it." ESPN.com

          - - -

          So much for Nash's short list, he's still saying what he was saying before, QUOTE; "I'm still considering everything."


          As for Williams, he doesn't know where he's going either. Yet so many believe media types just because they make a good point or two. For example, they speculate Williams won't want to play in a cold weather city. The counter point to that is he chose to go to college in Illinois.

          Comment


          • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

            Originally posted by PR07 View Post
            It could just as easily be Terrence Jones, Jeremy Lamb, Perry Jones, etc. as those guys all returned too.
            True, and personally I'd cheer for Terrence Jones (although #10 is high for him). Just a hunch, though, that Bird is not interested in any of those three. I see BBJ has started a thread on this topic....


            "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

            - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

            Comment


            • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

              Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
              http://hoopshype.com/rumors.htm

              Steve Nash: I’m considering everything at the moment. I would love to win a Championship, yes, but I’m not one of those people who believe I must win one to have a fulfilling career, so other factors, such as salary, family, playing time, and opportunity for team success all factor in. SLAM

              Steve Nash: I would consider the Knicks. Amar’e actually called me to tell me about his engagement a couple weeks back, and we talked a bit about how nice it’d be to play together again. SLAM
              - - -



              The only question is if Williams, the property of the Brooklyn-bound Nets for at least one more week, will come home. As of today, even his mother, Denise Smith, says she doesn't know the answer. Nor does she believe her son does. "No, no I don't," Smith said during a phone conversation from her home in the Dallas suburb of The Colony. "I thought he was going one way and another time thought he was going another way." ESPN.com

              A return home could form quite a happy clan, yet Smith said she is not planting any such seeds in her son's head. "They don't get it from me," she said. "I'd love to have him here, but I don't bug them about it." ESPN.com

              - - -

              So much for Nash's short list, he's still saying what he was saying before, QUOTE; "I'm still considering everything."


              As for Williams, he doesn't know where he's going either. Yet so many believe media types just because they make a good point or two. For example, they speculate Williams won't want to play in a cold weather city. The counter point to that is he chose to go to college in Illinois.
              Of course Amare would love it. Nash made him look so good. What has he done since he left?
              First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

              Comment


              • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                http://www.csnbayarea.com/basketball...50&feedID=5986

                Warriors general manager Bob Myers said on Friday morning that the team has interest in former Portland Trail Blazers guard Brandon Roy, who has made it clear that he will try to play in 2012-13.

                On Dec. 15, 2011, the Blazers announced that they had used the amnesty clause to waive Roy, and shortly after that Roy announced that his professional basketball career was over.

                But Roy, 27, has been training over the past several months with the goal of joining an NBA roster for the start of the season.

                There’s a connection between Myers and Roy; Myers used to be Roy’s agent.

                “It’s a possibility,” Myers answered, when asked if the Warriors would have interest in Roy. “He’s an easy phone call to make.”

                The Warriors have Stephen Curry and Klay Thompson in their backcourt, but Myers has said frequently over the past months that the team needs to get more veteran experience. Assuming Roy can still play, he would fit the bill there.

                “I told (Roy) when he was amnesty-ed … ‘I hope this isn’t it for you. Make sure this isn’t it. He’s said publicly he wants to come back, so I’ll start to talk to him. It depends how everything goes for us and what his expectations are and all of that. But absolutely I’ll talk to him.”

                Roy, who is 6-foot-4 and capable of playing both guard spots, won the Rookie of the Year award in 2006-07 and has been an NBA all-star three seasons.

                Roy had his best statistical season for the Blazers in 2008-09, when he averaged 22.6 points – on 48-percent shooting, 5.1 assists and 4.7 rebounds.
                Bob Myers....the new GM for the Warriors and former Agent for Brandon Roy...would be interested in bringing Brandon to the Ws if he were to come out of retirement. Apparently, he's been training and has been trying to get himself back to the NBA.

                Assuming that all else fails....given KP's ties to Brandon...I would much rather give whatever minutes and $$ to Brandon Roy ( assuming that he is given a decent clean bill of health ) rather than another ComboGuard like JCraw and see what he can do for the next 2 seasons. He can certainly create for others
                Last edited by CableKC; 06-24-2012, 01:50 AM.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by DrFife View Post
                  I'm on record as anticipating/supporting the trade-up option, and I'm suspicious ... not certain, just suspicious ... that Larry wants John Henson (if he's there at #10; Kstat?). I could be all wet and maybe we'll see Austin Rivers in a Pacer uni, but Last year Larry bemoaned the fact that certain players he liked decided to return to school, and I've thought ever since that Henson was who he was referring to. Tbird has offered his opinion that we may trade up to select Tyler Zeller, but assuming we re-sign Roy, I'd be surprised if we trade up to select a big who only can play center. (Does anyone want to argue that Zeller can play minutes at PF?)

                  Some of you think Henson is too twiggy, i know, but he certainly would add a whole new dimension to our current stable of bigs. If we bring over Stanko, as JT reminded us, or re-sign Fes, we'll have plenty of beef. But with West on the last year of his contract and Tyler apparently plateauing (if not regressing), Henson will be given time to develop, both skill-wise and physically, and methinks Larry sees him as our future starting PF.
                  I always had the feeling that it was Kendall Marshall that Bird was talking about not coming out. He really does remind me a lot of Mark Jackson. He's not the fastest, but he seems to make up for that by great fundamentals. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Bird moves up to get this guy. We'll see!!

                  Comment


                  • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                    Originally posted by 2minutes twoa View Post
                    I always had the feeling that it was Kendall Marshall that Bird was talking about not coming out. He really does remind me a lot of Mark Jackson. He's not the fastest, but he seems to make up for that by great fundamentals. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Bird moves up to get this guy. We'll see!!
                    You just gave Dr. Awesome a woody ... but it's funny that, collectively, a group of us think that Larry's been looking at a Tar Heel (Marshall, Henson, Zeller).


                    "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

                    - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by DrFife View Post
                      You just gave Dr. Awesome a woody ... but it's funny that, collectively, a group of us think that Larry's been looking at a Tar Heel (Marshall, Henson, Zeller).
                      Um, you're welcome?

                      Comment


                      • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                        Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                        Last year Bird specifically said he likes Tyler Zeller. Anyone else remember that?

                        Here:

                        Larry Bird: "I don't think this is a very strong draft. I think there will be some players that do well in our league, but there's a lot of kids that didn't come out. I think I made the statement that I like Ty Zeller, he's going back to school. He didn't come out. Damn."

                        http://www.tarheeltimes.com/article32429.aspx
                        He also said he liked Luke Jackson...before the draft.

                        After the draft he revealed his true target, Ben Gordon.

                        I don't trust anything they say predraft...for me, it's almost more indicative of who they won't draft. Just basic poker playing on Bird's part.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                          wheres GrangeRusHibbert when you need him? he always seems to have some inside info... he knew about the barbosa trade WAY b4 anyone. So GrangeRusHibber if u know something plz share

                          Comment


                          • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                            Originally posted by PacerPenguins View Post
                            wheres GrangeRusHibbert when you need him? he always seems to have some inside info... he knew about the barbosa trade WAY b4 anyone. So GrangeRusHibber if u know something plz share
                            Latest nbadraft.net has Pacers taking Doron Lamb fom Kentucky. Check his shooting percentage from 2's and 3's.
                            Very impressive and very stout. A bettter Orlando Johnson?
                            {o,o}
                            |)__)
                            -"-"-

                            Comment


                            • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                              I hope Rockets can pull off a way to get Drummond. Might mean they won't throw a box of money at Roy.
                              Rockets in trade negotiations with Kings (#5) and Raptors (#8), Kyle Lowry in play, desire is to draft Andre Drummond

                              Sunday, June 24, 2012 - 11:17pm

                              The Houston Rockets are engaged in pretty serious trade negotiations with the Kings and Raptors for their lottery picks in the 2012 Draft. The Kings own the No. 5 pick, the Raptors own the No. 8 selection & the Rockets control the #14 and #16 slots. Kyle Lowry was cryptically mentioned in this ESPN report, subtly. Simultaneously to the release of the article , Kyle Lowry himself sent a very cryptic tweet. "It's been real," Lowry wrote on the social media site Sunday evening.
                              According to

                              Chad Ford

                              from ESPN.com:

                              Although sources stressed that no deal is imminent, Sacramento (No. 5) and Toronto (No. 8 ) have let Houston know that their top-10 selections are available. Sources say that the Rockets, in turn, have made both of their first-round picks available (No. 14 and No. 16), but the key to any trade going through could be point guard Kyle Lowry.

                              -----------------------------------------------

                              What’s clear from the Rockets’ end, sources say, is the player they’re fondest of in the upper reaches of the draft: UConn big man Andre Drummond.
                              http://www.iamagm.com/news/2012/06/2...y.desire.draft

                              Comment


                              • Re: Off season Rumors and Speculation

                                Kyle lowry about to be traded that means dragic is gonna stay with the rockets i think were just about screwed now
                                Counting down the days untill DJ Augustin's contract expires.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X