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

Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

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

  • #31
    Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

    Counting cap holds and Plumlee's pick our payroll was at ~47.3 million. The cap's 58 million. So we had roughly a bit shy of 11 million to spend. Let's pretend we keep everybody (screw roster spots), no trades, and just sign everyone outright. Add Green's first year salary of 3.1, Mahinmi's 3.7, Augustin's 3.5 and Johnson's assumed ~750k, we're over the cap by a few hundred k. So that doesn't work.

    And then you add the new money from the Hill and Hibbert extensions and we're dangerously close to being in the luxury tax.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

      Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
      Counting cap holds and Plumlee's pick our payroll was at ~47.3 million. The cap's 58 million. So we had roughly a bit shy of 11 million to spend. Let's pretend we keep everybody (screw roster spots), no trades, and just sign everyone outright. Add Green's first year salary of 3.1, Mahinmi's 3.7, Augustin's 3.5 and Johnson's assumed ~750k, we're over the cap by a few hundred k. So that doesn't work.

      And then you add the new money from the Hill and Hibbert extensions and we're dangerously close to being in the luxury tax.
      DING DING DING....

      "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

      "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

        Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
        The dude just keeps ignoring the massive raises Hill and Hibbert got.
        sigh...the massive raises had no bearing on the capspace...none...not until they signed....again...you dont have to have capspace to re-sign your own.....now if they wouldve signed Hibbert and HIll before they signed the others...then absolutely...hence why they delayed those two signings....
        The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

          Herb Simon DOES NOT WANT TO PAY THE LUXURY TAX.

          Thus, Dahntay and Darren had to be moved for us to get DJ and Green.
          "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

          "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

            Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
            sigh...the massive raises had no bearing on the capspace...none...not until they signed....again...you dont have to have capspace to re-sign your own.....now if they wouldve signed Hibbert and HIll before they signed the others...then absolutely...hence why they delayed those two signings....
            yeah but you can't act like you aren't going to have two big contracts to add. Sure they aren't officially on the cap, but they may as well be.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

              Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
              yeah but you can't act like you aren't going to have two big contracts to add. Sure they aren't officially on the cap, but they may as well be.
              Not true at all.

              They both are assigned 'cap holds'...until we re-sign them or renounce them...if i recall Hibberts was a little over 6 million and Hills was a little under 4. The two combined were right at 10 million. So you dont pretend. They have numbers...and in this case, low numbers right? Since they signed for 20plus....see how that works then? Thats the window you have until you actually sign them....thats why you wait to sign them until youre done with everything else.
              The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

                Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
                Herb Simon DOES NOT WANT TO PAY THE LUXURY TAX.

                Thus, Dahntay and Darren had to be moved for us to get DJ and Green.
                Thats a really bad reason for giving players away. Thats bad business. Especially since the Luxury Tax is done on the year end salary and not July of the offseason. Theres no way those players couldnt have garnered at least a 2nd rounder each....none...maybe not now...though Collison almost assuredly could have now....D Jones? probably so by the trade deadline. We gave a 2nd for Barbosa. Thats why I tend to believe we got something. Just not a pick...a bit of cash. And under the current situation with Simon probably sensitive to the fact that rumors have it that Bird left because he wasnt willing to spend money....well they chose to keep that cash quiet. Which is certainly their prerogative.
                The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

                  Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                  Thats a really bad reason for giving players away. Thats bad business. Especially since the Luxury Tax is done on the year end salary and not July of the offseason. Theres no way those players couldnt have garnered at least a 2nd rounder each....none...maybe not now...though Collison almost assuredly could have now....D Jones? probably so by the trade deadline. We gave a 2nd for Barbosa. Thats why I tend to believe we got something. Just not a pick...a bit of cash. And under the current situation with Simon probably sensitive to the fact that rumors have it that Bird left because he wasnt willing to spend money....well they chose to keep that cash quiet. Which is certainly their prerogative.
                  really easy to say when its not your money. Even the knicks are looking to avoid the luxury tax as much as possible.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

                    Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                    Thats a really bad reason for giving players away. Thats bad business. Especially since the Luxury Tax is done on the year end salary and not July of the offseason. Theres no way those players couldnt have garnered at least a 2nd rounder each....none...maybe not now...though Collison almost assuredly could have now....D Jones? probably so by the trade deadline. We gave a 2nd for Barbosa. Thats why I tend to believe we got something. Just not a pick...a bit of cash. And under the current situation with Simon probably sensitive to the fact that rumors have it that Bird left because he wasnt willing to spend money....well they chose to keep that cash quiet. Which is certainly their prerogative.
                    We just bought a low second round pick for cash. Why should anyone care if we could have possibly gotten a second round pick by assuming risk? The cash savings on theses guys is enough to purchase said pick.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

                      Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                      really easy to say when its not your money. Even the knicks are looking to avoid the luxury tax as much as possible.
                      Lol...excuse me? First of all....They werent going to be in the Luxury Tax. Second of all, if they dont start doing a better job of managing their assets, theyre gonna continue to struggle financially. Lastly, Ive attended somewhere between 500 and 1000 Pacer games in my life and probably one of only a few that was in Florida for playoff games in both Orlando and Miami. So...maybe I do feel like Im entitled to a bit of an opinion on an internet message board. As for it being easy to say...Well apparently just as easy as it is for Simon to say Im not willing to do what is necessary to compete for a title.
                      The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

                        Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
                        We just bought a low second round pick for cash. Why should anyone care if we could have possibly gotten a second round pick by assuming risk? The cash savings on theses guys is enough to purchase said pick.
                        Thanks for making my point. We just bought a pick. And we just gave away two players that we realistically shouldve gotten a pick each back for....see how that works? If we manage the assets better we come up with 2 more picks and next time we dont have to buy a pick.
                        The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

                          its not the only way to compete for a title. its not how they competed for a title with Reggie and its not how we are going to compete for a title now. you may not like it, but you damn sure better be used to it after attending 1000 pacers games.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

                            Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                            Thats a really bad reason for giving players away. Thats bad business.
                            Especially since the Luxury Tax is done on the year end salary and not July of the offseason. Theres no way those players couldnt have garnered at least a 2nd rounder each....none...maybe not now...though Collison almost assuredly could have now....D Jones? probably so by the trade deadline.
                            Your opinion, and an interesting one, but nothing more, unless you have evidence of specific trades we could have made with those guys and didn't. After following this team for 25+years it's my opinion, and that of many others I think, that Simon is not the type of guy who would take the risk of getting stuck over the luxury tax this year, on the chance that we couldn't unload those guys before the trade deadline.

                            Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                            We gave a 2nd for Barbosa. Thats why I tend to believe we got something. Just not a pick...a bit of cash. And under the current situation with Simon probably sensitive to the fact that rumors have it that Bird left because he wasnt willing to spend money....well they chose to keep that cash quiet. Which is certainly their prerogative.
                            Again, your opinion, and a somewhat interesting one, but it's purely conjecture on your part and is has no effect on the team's cap situation so who cares really?

                            I think the larger point is that many of us are pointing out Simon's aversion to the luxury tax as the reason we didn't do more with our cap space this year. Which is relevant to the argument you keep making over and over in multiple threads in the past few days.

                            If you don't get it already, we aren't a huge-market team like the Knicks that can afford to absorb major luxury tax losses. The Pacers also have that damn ABA TV contract money they have to pay out each year, and we were 29th in attendance last year, etc. I am NOT trying to make excuses, as I agree sometimes it's frustrating not to be able to go out and sign big-name free agents (I was personally hoping for Nash this year) but this is the Pacers' reality and has been for some time.

                            Which is why so many of us were hoping to get more parity-related changes out of the CBA negotiations during the lockout...
                            Last edited by rabid; 07-14-2012, 10:10 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

                              Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                              its not the only way to compete for a title. its not how they competed for a title with Reggie and its not how we are going to compete for a title now. you may not like it, but you damn sure better be used to it after attending 1000 pacers games.
                              Again...not true...the Pacers did pay the luxury tax. A number of years. There for a while we had one of the highest payrolls in the league. And, we were competing. And the arena was full...and we were winning....starting to see a correlation? Herb said back then he didnt like it but would do so if it meant they had a shot to win the championship. Appears that has changed. Which means we got as close as we were gonna get for a while last year.
                              The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Cash Considerations kept quiet in the Mahinmi/Dallas deal??

                                Originally posted by rabidpacersfan View Post
                                Your opinion, and an interesting one, but nothing more, unless you have evidence of specific trades we could have made with those guys and didn't. After following this team for 25+years it's my opinion, and that of many others I think, that Simon is not the type of guy who would take the risk of getting stuck over the luxury tax this year, on the chance that we couldn't unload those guys before the trade deadline.



                                Again, your opinion, and a somewhat interesting one, but it's purely conjecture on your part and is has no effect on the team's cap situation so who cares really?

                                I think the larger point is that many of us are pointing out Simon's aversion to the luxury tax as the reason we didn't do more with our cap space this year. Which is relevant to the argument you keep making over and over in multiple threads in the past few days.

                                If you don't get it already, we aren't a huge-market team like the Knicks that can afford to absorb major luxury tax losses. The Pacers also have that damn ABA TV contract money they have to pay out each year, and we were 29th in attendance last year, etc. I am NOT trying to make excuses, as I agree sometimes it's frustrating not to be able to go out and sign big-name free agents (I was personally hoping for Nash this year) but this is the Pacers' reality and has been for some time.

                                Which is why so many of us were hoping to get more out of the CBA negotiations out of the lockout...
                                Except it wouldnt have necessarily required going into luxury tax world. Getting Brand or Scola wouldnt have mean the luxury tax. And lets be very, very clear. If youre going to take the attitude youre suggesting Simon is now taking, then you damn sure better be maximizing every single asset you have...and giving assets away for no return is not doing that. When you then are also buying 2nd rounders that would appear to be highly inefficient and borderline inept...which is again why i suggested they probably got something in the form of cash in return. Because surely if theyre gonna take this tight approach they certainly wouldnt give away assets when its quite clear someting could have been gotten in return. And thats not conjecture...It happens all the time. As stated, we gave up a 2nd for Barbosa...then went out and bought a 2nd at the draft...then failed to get one when we should have in this latest travesty of a deal. You think thats conjecture? How so? Please...tell me. Did we or did we not give a 2nd rounder in exchange for Barbosa???? Did we or did we not get zero 2nd rounders for Collison and D. Jones? Did we or did we not pay for a 2nd rounder in the draft? Exactly.
                                The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X