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.
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
-
-
Re: Can someone please post these?
What do the Pacers do now?
By Chad Ford
ESPN Insider
What happens when three weeks into the season, one of the top contenders for the NBA crown loses its three top scorers for the next few months?
No good. No Upside. Just lots and lots of bad.
The Very, Very Bad
INDIANA PACERS: Without Ron Artest, Jermaine O'Neal and Stephen Jackson, it's tough to believe the Pacers have any real shot at the playoffs, let alone competing for an NBA title.
O'Neal won't return until Jan. 15. Jackson won't return until Jan. 26. With Jonathan Bender out six weeks with a knee injury and other Pacers such as Jeff Foster, Reggie Miller and Scot Pollard also nursing injuries, can the Pacers rebound?
The team had been worried for months that Artest was going to snap and be lost for the season. Now that Indiana's worst fears have been realized, how will the Pacers respond?
Despite the gloomy outlook, they do have several things going for them. In fact, they still have a route to the playoffs. Insider breaks it down.
# The appeal: Union chief Billy Hunter already has said the players' association will appeal on behalf of Artest, O'Neal and Jackson given the severity of the penalties.
What will happen next? Things don't look good for Artest & Co. According to Article XXXI, Section 8 (a) of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, the players' association can't ask for an independent arbitrator in this particular instance, because the dispute involves "conduct on the playing court."
Instead, players (or the union) must file an internal appeal, petitioning the commissioner to reconsider – something several of the players, including Artest and O'Neal, plan on pursuing – but the final say rests solely with Stern.
The union can file a grievance arguing the players' actions took place off the court, because Artest went into the crowd. Off-the-court incidents can be appealed to an independent arbitrator (like the Latrell Sprewell-P.J. Carlesimo choking incident). However, a league source familiar with the language of the rule claims it's unlikely an appeal on those grounds will prevail, given precedent of the rule's application.
If somehow Stern decides to reduce the suspensions (or if the union can convince an arbitrator the events took place off the court), Artest theoretically could be back before the end of the season, and both O'Neal and Jackson could be in uniform before their current mid-January return dates.
However, right now the chances of that seem slim.
# The schedule: The good news for the Pacers is their schedule in December is relatively light. They have eight road games during the stretch, and six are against the Clippers, Warriors, Hawks, Bulls, Bobcats and Nets – arguably the worst six teams in the NBA.
Their home schedule is tougher but still includes winnable games against the Bobcats, Bucks, Raptors, Sixers and Hornets.
However, in January, things get brutal. A four-game road trip against the Spurs, Mavericks, Suns and Grizzlies, followed by a home game against the Suns, could be a killer.
But even if the Pacers go 7-23 in their stretch without O'Neal and Jackson (a worst-case scenario, in my mind), you still can't write them out of the playoffs at 14-26 overall.
That record isn't great, but given how weak the East is at the moment, the ground they would need to gain over the second half of the season isn't insurmountable. If they could move into a sixth seed, they actually would avoid a potential problem that has worried them since the league realigned – facing the Pistons in the second round of the playoffs.
# Several cap exceptions: The league will allow the Pacers to sign a few free agents to replace the three suspended players. Luckily for the Pacers, they didn't spend all of their exception money this summer. They have $2.7 million of their $4.9 million mid-level exception left and also own their full $1.6 million exception.
There are several free agents still unsigned, among them Marcus Haislip, Keon Clark, Michael Curry, Gary Trent and Troy Bell.
Will the Pacers spend the cash? The problem they face is they already have one of the highest payrolls in the league and an owner who doesn't want it to grow. The team gets no cap relief for having players suspended. Anyone they add is an additional cost.
The Pacers also are free to make a trade, including possibly moving Artest while he's under suspension. While his trade value is at an all-time low, a team like the Knicks, who previously have shown enormous interest in him, might be willing to make a deal now, hoping Artest wins his appeal or, in a worst-case scenario, will be ready to play next season.
# The replacements: The Pacers do have one of the deeper benches in the league, and they'll need it now more than ever. Several of their top young players haven't had a lot of opportunities to play. Now that they're thrust into the spotlight, can they pick up some of the slack?
Fred Jones has to step up with the Pacers' three top scorers out of the lineup.
Start with new starting 2-guard Fred Jones, who already had taken over a big role this year with Miller out with a broken hand. His 31 points against the Magic on Saturday gave you a taste of what he's capable of doing without the other go-to guys in the lineup. Jones is a strong, athletic 2-guard who can defend and hit 3s. Expect him to put up big numbers during the stretch.
Austin Croshere will step in and replace O'Neal. Croshere looked like the next great thing four years ago, when he helped the Pacers push the Lakers in the Finals. Since then, he's been kind of lost in the shuffle. This year he's been playing big minutes for the injury-depleted Pacers and playing well. He's averaged 13 ppg and 7.8 ppg on 48 percent shooting the past five games. He's also one of the team's best 3-point shooters. He won't provide the toughness, rebounding or shot blocking O'Neal does, but he isn't bad.
Second-year forward James Jones likely will get the call at small forward until Bender comes back from injury. Jones has played sparingly but had an impressive 12-point, 12-rebound performance in his first game against the Magic.
Also, don't forget about rookie David Harrison at center. Larry Bird and Donnie Walsh raved about him all summer, and with both Foster and Pollard nursing injuries, he's been more than solid in the middle. He had 19 points and eight rebounds against the Magic. He's still raw, but this gives the Pacers a wonderful opportunity to throw him out there and have him learn on the job.
# The unity factor: While it's tough to see a silver lining in this cloud, the Pacers may end up with two positives:
One, a team that seemed quite fractured a week ago appears to have bonded over the whole incident. Sources in Indiana claim Artest's teammates haven't blamed him for what happened to the team. The fact many of them rushed into the stands in his defense is a great sign of team unity.
Two, if players like Jones, Croshere and Harrison can carry the team over some of the rough spots, they'll be much better equipped to help once a well-rested O'Neal and Jackson return in mid-January.
David Stern may have landed a crippling blow to the franchise on Sunday. But it isn't over yet.
The Pacers may no longer be serious contenders for the Eastern Conference crown, but come mid-January, they'll still have enough firepower to make teams sweat in the East.
And if by some miracle Artest does get reinstated this season, the Pistons will be the ones sweating in May.
The Bad
# Detroit Pistons: There's probably more than one Pistons fan out there who thinks his team belongs in the "good" category today. Ben Wallace's antics Friday night effectively eliminated Detroit's closest competition for the season.
Congratulations.
Had that been accomplished on the court, we'd be impressed. But the fact remains it was Wallace who started this by over-reacting to an Artest foul. It was Wallace who egged Artest and the crowd on, throwing a towel at Artest before fans threw anything.
And it was a few Detroit fans who destroyed all the goodwill the team and the city had earned at the end of last season.
"You know, a few months ago, people were talking about our crowds as the envy of the league," said Joe Dumars, Pistons president of basketball operations. "It just goes to show you how one foolish moment can change things."
The Pistons may have played the right way last season. But everyone in Detroit played the wrong way on Friday.
The Pistons will recover quicker than the Pacers. But they're still without Wallace for the next six games. Those include road games against the red-hot Cavaliers and the Rockets, as well as a tough home game against their primary rivals in the East now – the Miami Heat.
The Pistons weren't just embarrassed by the actions off the court Friday. The banged up Pacers beat a healthy Pistons squad convincingly on the court. So far Detroit is off to an unimpressive 5-4 start – with squeaker overtime wins against the Clippers and Bobcats – and is giving up more than 97 ppg.
Everything is not right in Motown.
Hopefully Friday night's ugliness will help remind the Pistons' players and fans what made them special last year and how quickly things can turn when you lose focus of it.
The Ugly
# The NBA: David Stern came out swinging Sunday. The Pistons and Pacers had put a black eye on his beloved league, and his punches landed where it hurts, proving once and for all the commish can hit back harder than the rest of them.
Stern had to do something that made a statement to the fans, players and teams about the seriousness of the events that went down on Friday.
To that end, he succeeded. Suspending Artest for the season sends the appropriate message – the league won't to stand for that type of behavior. The huge punishments for O'Neal and Jackson also were unprecedented, destroying the myth that Stern was out just to purge the psychos.
Stern got everyone's attention, and as the SportsNation poll indicates, his decision was a popular one.
Placating the angry mob that wanted a pound of flesh may have been Stern's primary job. However, as commissioner, Stern also had a duty to be fair not only to the players, but to two of the best franchises in the league. It's also clear from the punishments that he may have over reached – especially with Artest.
There's no question Artest has a history of bizarre, even violent behavior on and off the court. The fears mostly centered on the irrational Artest – the guy who does insane things for no apparent reason. Who could've known it would be the semi-rational Artest who evoked Stern's greatest wrath this weekend?
I'm not defending Artest, but for almost the entire episode on Friday, Artest was a model of restraint – for Artest anyway. After being shoved in the neck and face by Ben Wallace, he resisted the urge to retaliate. The old, out-of-control Artest I've seen in the past would've lost it right there and went toe-to-toe with Wallace. Instead, he retreated to the scorer's table, laid down and waited for the refs to work things out. When Wallace later threw a towel his direction, clearly trying to provoke Artest, he didn't flinch.
It wasn't until a cup landed on his chest that Artest lost it. By now you've seen the video a hundred times. Artest bolted off the scorer's table and headed into the stands. Pacers sources claim Artest saw the fan throw the cup. Pistons sources say the tape clearly shows Artest actually got the wrong guy.
Artest didn't punch the fan or pummel him into a bloody pulp, as more creative columnists have suggested. He grabbed Ryan, manhandled him and asked him if he did it. The fan, in his own words, corroborates this.
"He asked me, 'Did you do it?' " the fan, Mike Ryan of Clarkston, Mich., told the Associated Press. "I said, 'No, man. No!' "
And it appears that after a few seconds, Artest let go and moved on to confront a number of other fans that were now taking their own shots at him. That doesn't sound like a guy totally out-of-control.
The next time the video gives us a good look at Artest, he's back on the court, trying to make his way to the locker room. Another fan moves onto the court and makes a threatening move toward Artest. Ron throws a haymaker at the guy before backing off. Again, Artest didn't beat him to a pulp. His teammates did that for him.
In fact, you can argue what O'Neal and Jackson did was worse. Though each claims they were coming to the defense of their teammate, both were clearly out of control. Jackson was swinging wildly at everyone. O'Neal cold-cocked a guy in the jaw who already was getting off his knees and looking the other way. I don't know how you call what they did "defense."
The argument that the fan was on the court and thus had it coming won't hold up so well in court. Only Artest really had the right to defend himself against that person.
However, you also could argue that O'Neal did less than Artest. He didn't leave the court. The only fan he hit was a guy who was on the court, messing with a teammate. Anthony Johnson hit the same fan in the face before O'Neal did. Johnson got five games. O'Neal got 25.
Still, Artest paid the ultimate price, primarily because he's Ron Artest. Stern admitted on Sunday that Artest's history played a part in the decision to suspend him for the season.
Artest has proven too many times his judgment is poor. In this case, his decision to run into the stands, no matter how much he was provoked, incited a riot. It was a stupid, stupid decision. Nothing good can ever come from a player running into the stands.
But suspended for the season? I'm all for tough love. But the time doesn't fit the crime – this time.
Look in the mirror this morning and ask yourself if there isn't a little bit of Ron Artest in all of us? On many nights, the crowds behind the visiting team's bench resemble the studio audience at the Jerry Springer show. And no, I don't think that's a good thing.
Lines are crossed too often, with fans going far beyond taunts. They can be vile and uncivilized. I've heard racist epithets flung with a venom that would make the KKK proud. Disparaging and demeaning remarks about family members or a player's history or personal problems all are fair game for fans these days.
Lines are being crossed by the media, too, with sports talk radio taking on a very Springer-like tone. When insults are dubbed "killing a guy," we've gone too far, too.
The players are as sick of us as we are of them. Just because they make millions doesn't mean they should be subject to flying objects – whether chairs, bottles or nasty words.
Stern did what he had to do. He did it against the only constituency over which he had any control.
But if you're waiting for the players or the NBA to make this all better, your finger is pointed in the wrong direction.
Chad Ford covers the NBA for ESPN Insider. -
Re: Can someone please post these?
Remaining Pacers show exceptional teamwork
By Brian James
ESPN Insider
INDIANAPOLIS – The injury-and-suspension-depleted Pacers proved again mind over matter and motivation are key ingredients in winning in the NBA.
On Tuesday in a charged Conseco Fieldhouse, they defeated the Celtics 106-96. With only eight players eligible to play and in uniform in wake of the brawl with the Pistons on Nov. 19, the Pacers were able to "circle the wagons" and play over their heads. They were helped by an energized crowd – Pacers' fans are some of the most loyal and knowledgeable in the entire league – that transferred an "us against the league" mentality to the players.
Another team also has excelled despite being short-handed this season: On opening night, the Wizards defeated the Grizzlies despite having only eight players in uniform.
For a player in this situation, being short-handed has a silver lining. If you make a mistake, chances are you're not going to have to look over at the bench to see who is getting ready to replace you.
Coach Rick Carlisle rotated just seven players in his main rotation, even though an eighth player, center John Edwards, played two minutes. Carlisle was tremendous in terms of game management and play calling.
Rookie swingman James Jones, off guard Fred Jones, and point guard Jamaal Tinsley played more than 40 minutes each.
The short-handed Pacers proved to be more than the Celtics could handle.
The key to the short-handed Pacers' success was precise offensive execution in the half court. The Pacers used every kind of screen and roll – in different sets – imaginable. This enabled them to get Tinsley into the lane to distribute on penetration, kicking out to shooters such as James and Fred Jones, or finishing shots in the lane.
That helped the Pacers erase a one-time 11-point Celtics' lead and hold off runs in the second half.
Austin Croshere had great looks on pick-and-pop action while Scot Pollard and rookie center David Harrison made shots after rolling hard into the lane.
Being very aggressive throughout the course of the game helped Indiana secure a distinct free throw advantage, making 31 of 34 free throw attempts (91 percent). The Celtics had 24 attempts, making 18 (75 percent).
The Pacers won the battle of the paint with this type of play. A 12-rebound advantage gave them extra possessions or limited the Celtics to one shot most of the evening.
Croshere, Tinsley, and Fred Jones need to play like All-Stars until injured and suspended players return. But if the Pacers continue to play as hard as they did last night, they will win their share of games.
Defensively, the Pacers kept the Celtics out of the lane and forced them to hit jump shots. Post players were being fronted at all times. They also showed out on screens and did a good job of keeping Gary Payton out of scoring areas.
The Celtics appeared to be playing uphill most of the night, and it wears on you always having to come from behind.
Not knowing how to play defense on the younger players and possibly taking them for granted had some effect as well. The Celtics allowed the Pacers' James Jones to make 4 of 6 three-point attempts. They did not run him off the three-point line to attempt two-pointers instead.
On the defensive end, when Celtics coach Doc Rivers went with his smaller lineup in the second half, Carlisle countered with James Jones as a four.
With the season-long suspension of Ron Artest and the multiple-game penalties against Jermaine O'Neal, Stephen Jackson and Anthony Johnson, the remaining eligible Pacers will have to continue to play at a high level.
Croshere, Tinsley, and Fred Jones need to play like All-Stars until injured and suspended players return. But if the Pacers continue to play as hard as they did last night, they will win their share of games regardless of who the opponents are.
Brian James, a former assistant coach with the Pistons, Raptors and Wizards, is a regular contributor to Insider.Comment
-
Re: Can someone please post these?
Good Articles, Thanks!"Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"Comment
-
Re: Can someone please post these?
One of the Best and level headed Chad Ford articles I have seen in along time.Comment
-
Re: Can someone please post these?
Just lost some respect for this clownOriginally posted by Jose SlaughterComment
-
Re: Can someone please post these?
OH yeah and thanks for posting these articels JoseComment
Tweet
Comment