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

Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

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

  • Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

    Interesting stuff in here. NYK, Dallas unreal. Pacers middle of the pack. 7 teams have never paid the tax.

    http://blog.shamsports.com/2012/07/w...ven-teams.html


    2002/032003/042005/062006/072007/082008/092009/102010/112011/12TOTAL
    Atlanta3,716,000       666,1994,382,199
    Boston 1,594,066  8,218,3688,294,66414,928,6625,692,5867,365,86746,094,213
    Brooklyn/New Jersey5,730,0009,390,383       15,120,383
    Charlotte         0
    Chicago         0
    Cleveland    14,008,56113,707,01015,410,550  43,126,121
    Dallas18,500,00025,031,93217,329,3247,204,96819,613,29523,611,66117,582,57418,917,8362,738,843150,530,433
    Denver   2,022,41813,572,079 5,562,942  21,157,439
    Detroit 756,627       756,627
    Golden State         0
    Houston       757,145 757,145
    Indiana892,0003,323,0594,674,028      8,889,087
    L.A. Clippers         0
    L.A. Lakers9,749,0008,439,051  5,131,7577,185,63121,430,77819,923,77212,557,26484,417,253
    Memphis7,554,000 3,743,452      11,297,452
    Miami5,180,000   8,318,879 3,039,769 6,129,34022,667,988
    Milwaukee4,734,000        4,734,000
    Minnesota6,026,00017,633,006 998,536     24,657,542
    New Orleans         0
    New York24,371,00039,867,21437,248,75245,142,00219,723,94623,736,2075,199,024  195,288,145
    Oklahoma City/Seattle         0
    Orlando  7,757,500   11,046,59520,147,413 38,951,508
    Philadelphia12,759,0005,098,635       17,857,635
    Phoenix1,888,000   3,867,3134,918,1364,958,790  15,632,239
    Portland51,971,00028,846,436   5,899,356 2,335,682 89,052,474
    Sacramento17,377,00013,141,745       30,518,745
    San Antonio187,000 889,895196,082  8,810,302 2,514,27512,597,554
    Toronto2,681,0004,090,836       6,771,836
    Utah      3,105,3724,998,247 8,103,619
    Washington         0
               
    Total173,315,000157,212,99071,642,95155,564,00692,454,19887,352,665111,075,35872,772,68131,971,788853,361,637
    Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 07-26-2012, 03:02 PM.
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

  • #2
    Re: Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

    Not particularly surprised at the teams that have never paid the tax. For the most part those teams either had down years with low payrolls since the tax was instituted or have got players still on rookie deals. OKC is the exception but I think they only have Durant's immediate post rookie deal (is Westbrook on his second contract yet?)
    BillS

    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

      Portland has also been paying an awful lot for a team that hasn't really gone anywhere...
      Trying to enjoy every Pacers game as if it is the last!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

        Clips, Bobkitties, Warriors, Hornets, and Wizards haven't paid lux tax --- real shocker there.

        Bulls and Thunder are surprising, though.

        All the recent champs have considerable lux tax #s.

        And then you have the f'n NY Knicks showing that they are the most poorly managed team in the league. I consider them a money-spending aberation. Notice, however that their lux tax tapered off considerably in last few years, thanks in part to one Donald Walsh.

        Generally shows that you just kinda gotta spend money to win the big prize.
        There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

          Not sure describing the Pacers as "middle of the pack" is accurate since the list is so heavily skewed by the heavy spenders. But yeah it does show that the Simons were willing to go into the tax (in the past, anyway).

          Originally posted by BillS View Post
          Not particularly surprised at the teams that have never paid the tax. For the most part those teams either had down years with low payrolls since the tax was instituted or have got players still on rookie deals. OKC is the exception but I think they only have Durant's immediate post rookie deal (is Westbrook on his second contract yet?)
          Chicago stands out as a surprise team. They're pretty much a big market, and they had those strong seasons under Skiles, reaching the ECF I believe. They'll finally be paying tax this year though.

          Warriors, Clippers, and Wizards all play in fairly big markets, but yeah they were mostly stuck in perpetual rebuilds. The Sonics did have a WCF season under McMillan, but they tore the team down pretty soon afterwards.

          Portland's tax bill is kind of shocking. I know Paul Allen is made of money, but it's still higher than the Lakers' tax bill

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

            Wow Portland paid $51M in '03.

            Lakers got a pretty good return on their luxury tax payments, so did the Spurs. The Knicks got a horrible return. if i were a rich owner, I could live with paying some luxury tax if it is worth it. if we win a championship and are selling out and maximizing revenue, OK. But if we are .500 and tickets are unsold, then I would be furious at the front office.

            Also interesting that the tax payments overall across the league were really high in '03 then dropped through the middle years and then spiked back up again in 2010.

            Anyone know the 2011 and 2012 season numbers.
            Last edited by Unclebuck; 07-26-2012, 03:25 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

              OK here is a current article on the luxury tax through the 2012 season

              http://aol.sportingnews.com/nba/stor...-significantly

              Luxury tax payouts drop significantly

              Published 1 hour and 31 minutes ago Last updated 1 hour and 20 minutes ago
              Jerry Snow Sporting News

              The NBA’s luxury tax seems to be serving its purpose.

              Implemented in 2002 in an effort to discourage over-spending and give smaller markets a better chance to compete, the luxury tax fines those who exceed the cap and distributes the funds to the teams who stay under the roughly $60 million they are allowed to pay out each season.

              In 2012, six teams combined to pay nearly $32 million in the tax, according to a comprehensive spreadsheet compiled by Mark Deeks of ShamSports.com, and the other 24 teams divided that as revenue.

              It’s the lowest luxury tax total to date, down from $72.77 million in 2011 and $111.8 million in 2010.

              In 2003, the first year of the luxury tax, 16 teams combined to pay a total of $173.315 million. The following year, 12 teams were over the cap and paid out $157.21 million.
              Since 2005, an average of 7.4 teams have been penalized.

              The Miami Heat paid $6.12 million in luxury tax to win the world title this summer, while runner-up Oklahoma City is one of seven franchises that has never paid a dollar.
              The Thunder have a youthful roster that could contend for many years to come, and that was next to impossible for a market the size of OKC a decade ago.

              The L.A. Lakers paid a league-high $12.56 million in luxury tax after last season.
              Boston has paid more than $46 million since bringing in Ray Allen and Kevin Garnett in 2007, including $7.37 million this year.

              The Celtics won the NBA title in 2008, and the Mavericks got the same return on their $18.92 million tax hit in 2011.

              The Knicks, on the other hand, have nothing to show for spending a league-most $195.29 million in luxury taxes since 2003.

              New York has avoided the luxury tax the past two-years, but paid out a record $45.14 million in 2006-07 for a 33-49 season.

              Over the past decade, 23 NBA teams have combined to pay $853.36 million in luxury taxes.


              Dallas has paid out the second-highest at $150.12 million, and the Lakers are third at $84.42 million.

              In addition to OKC, teams that have avoided the luxury tax since its inception include: Charlotte, Chicago, Golden State, New Orleans, Washington and the Clippers.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

                ^ That article has a factual error. It says Lakers are third in lux tax with $84m, but Sham' original list says Portland is at $89m.

                Detroit and Houston are also worth mentioning. They've paid a measly amount of tax for teams that have been in the playoffs the better part of the past decade, including a championship and a Finals appearance by the Larry Brown Pistons. That's amazing.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

                  Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                  ^ That article has a factual error. It says Lakers are third in lux tax with $84m, but Sham' original list says Portland is at $89m.

                  Detroit and Houston are also worth mentioning. They've paid a measly amount of tax for teams that have been in the playoffs the better part of the past decade, including a championship and a Finals appearance by the Larry Brown Pistons. That's amazing.
                  With the new collective bargaining agreement it will be very interesting to see of the playing field levels. Based on the past 2-3 years it looks like the overall tax payments have gone down dramatically each year.
                  Good for the league overall I believe.
                  {o,o}
                  |)__)
                  -"-"-

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

                    You would think with all the money Dolan has spent, he'd have a ring.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

                      Originally posted by pacersgroningen View Post
                      Portland has also been paying an awful lot for a team that hasn't really gone anywhere...
                      I can't believe they paid Scottie Pippen so much...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

                        Portland really shouldn't be all that surprising because of when they paid the tax, well at least the vast majority of it. Back then they were a competitive team, or at least were a competitive team on the down hill side of things.

                        This graph really shows that unless you draft a superstar or two (Thunder and Bulls, both of which will most likely be paying the tax soon if they want to continue to be as good as they are now), or are just terribly managed (Knicks), there is a correlation between spending and winning.
                        Last edited by Eleazar; 07-26-2012, 05:53 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

                          Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                          Clips, Bobkitties, Warriors, Hornets, and Wizards haven't paid lux tax --- real shocker there.

                          Bulls and Thunder are surprising, though.
                          Clips, Warriors, Bulls and Wiz should all be considered "surprising" to some extent because those are all big market teams that have NEVER paid the tax.

                          At the end of the day, it speaks more about how rich and/or willing to spend the ownership is.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

                            Story up here is that the Bulls remain committed to avoid paying the tax. Reisendorf is one cheap guy. Boozer's contract is obviously a challenge for them, but the front office never missed Ben Gordon/ his contract either.
                            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                            And life itself, rushing over me
                            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Historical Tally of the NBA luxury tax bills paid

                              During the two highest total luxury tax years, the Pacers were payers instead of sharers. Ouch. That may be when we learned our lesson.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X