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

2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

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

  • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

    Random thoughts?? Um. Go Pacers. The Lakers suck.. Um, can't wait for the game tomorrrow. Oh and one more thing. THE PATRIOTS SUCK.

    Comment


    • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

      Comment


      • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

        Ughhhhhh... The refs killed the Denver-OKC game....

        Comment


        • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

          Westbrook did it twice lol


          @basketballtalk: Russell Westbrook denies two halfcourt shots by Denver’s mascot (VIDEO) http://t.co/D5II7FkR #PBT #NBA
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

            Originally posted by MAStamper View Post
            So in fact you think seven (7) Pacers are overpaid.


            2. Roy is certainly the easiest to describe as overpaid, I think. I would argue that while he is overpaid, it's not as much as people might believe considering the variables in play:

            a. Rarity of quality true centers
            b. Even more rare, true centers who make an all-star team
            c. Yet more rare, a true center matching a. and b. while also being seen as a two way player, not a one-sided specialist (offense or defense).
            d. Again, rare to have a true center who plays defense as well as Roy was playing at the time
            e. He had never been this awful offensively last season and it was not expected to happen, and in the meantime he may yet bounce back this season or next
            f. He was seen as a guy who worked as hard as anybody to improve his body and game, with the implication being that he might keep doing so heading into this season (which, defensively, he has improved)
            I feel this is a bit misleading as a defense of Hibbert. You are giving him too much credit here. Hibbert made the allstar team by default. Most talked about player on a really good team that was putting up respectable numbers, given West and Granger had relatively off years.

            Hibbert had 2 really bad offensive slumps last year, infact there were grumblings prior to the playoffs that the Pacers should let him walk in RFA. Hibbert did not have a very good playoffs, besides 1 game against the Magic that we actually lost if I recall. So really totally undeserving of the max contract, we totally overpaid by matching, and honestly the guy is barely squeaking by this year just cause he is playing high level defense and top 5 in blocked shots.

            Centers who do not average a double double consistently should not get max contracts. Roy has a whole host of problems with this game. He gets knocked off the block, he brings the ball down too low on put backs, he gets knocked to the floor about 10 times a game.

            Even though I like hibbert and hope he improves offensively to earn that contract. He is without a doubt the most overpaid player in the league right now. He is without a doubt one of the main reasons we can not win on the road this season.
            You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

            Comment


            • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

              Roy averaged 11.7 points on 50%FG, 11.2 rebounds and 3.1 blocks. He played stunning defense allowing the Pacers to beat Miami whenever he was on the court.

              Roy had a GREAT playoffs.

              The only thing Roy didn't do is score a lot of points, which was always a foolish desire from his fans. Roy should be efficient on offense but no one should have ever expected him to offer much on offense.

              Comment


              • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                Kevin Durant is such a classy guy! That'll be the day when any Boston or Miami player owns up like that~

                Kevin Durant ‏@KDTrey5
                We took a L...movin on, Denver is a good team! I Love my brothers we always compete hard
                Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                Comment


                • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                  Per 36, Roy averaged 13 and 13 and 3.6. Just excellent performance across the board. Roy was GREAT in the playoffs. The MVP of the Pacers.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                    Originally posted by BornReady View Post
                    Kevin Durant is such a classy guy! That'll be the day when any Boston or Miami player owns up like that~

                    Kevin Durant ‏@KDTrey5
                    We took a L...movin on, Denver is a good team! I Love my brothers we always compete hard
                    Lebron's currently in the process of sticking up for Sacramento on Twitter

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                      Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                      I don't agree with your view that the Pacers had to sign Green early b/c of having to sign Hibbert and Hill quickly. I'll give on signing Hibbert early b/c the Pacers had to match Portland's offer in a certain time frame, BUT Hill didn't have to signed quickly. Walsh bid against himself and signed him early. If Walsh hadn't signed Hill early there was cap that could have been used to sign another player instead of Green.

                      Remember the uproar on the board over their signing early that wouldn't allow the Pacers to be able to bid on amnestied players Brand and Scola? Vnzla still hasn't gotten over it.

                      When did Augustin get signed? B4 or after Hill and Hibbert signed their contracts? I don't remember.
                      Augustin got signed before Hill and Hibbert signed their deals. He had to because he also makes more money than the room exception allows.

                      I think the combination of Hibbert signing+Augustin+Hill's cap hold would have been enough to put the Pacers over the cap (with or without the Mahinmi trade). At the very least, it would have put them right up against the cap with no room to pay anybody else. So Hill signing later wouldn't have affected that.

                      So it really just depends on if you think the Pacers could have indefinitely pushed back Hibbert's signing for amnestied players and to give time for other player's prices to come down. From the statements that have come out about amnestied players, I happen to think they were getting pressure to get the Hibbert deal done and couldn't have delayed it, but at the end of the day there isn't conclusive proof on either side of that debate.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                        Originally posted by spreedom View Post


                        $50 says no fine or warning for this.
                        That's not a flop, that's clearly Griffin avoiding the smell from Nene's armpits.

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy


                          Comment


                          • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                            I started to notice him towards the end of the game. He looked like he could defend. It looked like he had long arms was was athletic. Just thinking about him as a possible b/u PG next year.
                            He can defend, he is athletic and he has a 6'6.5" wingspan. Here's his DraftExpress profile:

                            http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/...Beverley-1132/

                            Not a bad player to have on your bench.


                            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                            I wish you'd put a bug in the Pacers FO ears about some good International players you think would be a good player in the future.
                            I wish the same as well

                            I could give more player suggestions if I had a way to know which players were nearing the end of their contracts.
                            Originally posted by IrishPacer
                            Empty vessels make the most noise.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              just look what OKC had to do because they are over the quote of overpay players.
                              Actually, the only overpaid player that OKC had is Kendrick Perkins. And they weren't even the ones that gave him that contract.

                              The reason that they couldn't afford Harden was simple. No team can afford 4 real MAX contracts. Because Westbrook, Durant, Harden and Ibaka all deserved a max contract.

                              Essentially, they were penalized for drafting well.

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              Here is the part that I'm worry about remember the time we thought nobody was going to offer Hibbert the kind of contract he got?
                              No one was thinking that. It was clear as day that Hibbert would be offered the max by us or another team. I clearly remember Peck saying it as early as the Lakers game and people agreed with him.
                              Originally posted by IrishPacer
                              Empty vessels make the most noise.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2012-13 NBA Random Thoughts Thread IX: Ode to Joy

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                Note that I'm looking to have a good conversation so those that feel the need to make smart a** comments please stay away, thanks.
                                I'm glad that you decided to answer this at last

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                David West is not overpay this year 10mil is fine for him, I expect him to get way more than that next year making him overpay.
                                I see. I believe that West is going to get a 4 year contract in the 8-10 million range. Will you consider this overpaying?


                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                Danny has been overpay for few years now, he is in the same category of overpay players like Iguadola, Deng and Gay, maybe not overpay by much when healthy (3/4mil) but overpay still.
                                I highly disagree here. Let's take a look at those contracts.

                                Rudy Gay: A bit over $80M over 5 years -> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=5346332

                                Andre Iguodala: $80M over 6 years -> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3532139

                                Luol Deng: $71M over 6 years -> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3510232

                                Danny Granger: $60M over 5 years (with incentives that could push it to $65M) -> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=3676045

                                Nicolas Batum: $46M over 4 years -> http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/81...-nicolas-batum

                                Rudy Gay is overpaid as he was signed to this contract due to potential and he failed to improve his production. Andre Iguodala may be slightly overpaid by 1 or 2 millions. Not a big deal.

                                The rest are paid fairly.


                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                9.7 and 8 for a guy that is making 14mil a year for the next 4 years? I love Roy but he is becoming one of the must overpay players in the league, hopefully he gets better, and like I said before I think it was the right decision to overpay for him.
                                He has a similar contract with Marc Gasol and Marc is not overpaid.

                                In fact, the two players had similar production before Hibbert's drop in scoring this seaso.

                                Thus, he was paid fairly like Marc.

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                I love Hill but the Pacers made a mistake in not letting the market set the price, guys like Felton, DJ, Hinrich and others were free agents, I think he is getting overpay for like 3mil, similar players(Felton, Hinrich, Jarret Jack) are making way less.
                                Felton was horrible in his 2 years in Denver and Portland. He was out of shape and several people argued that he was not the player he was in New York and Charlotte. He looked disinterested and we chose well not to go for him, imo.

                                Hinrich is 32 years old and he's averaging 6.3 PPG and 5.2 APG. At this point of his career he is a dependable back-up. Not a starter. He is a good stopgap for Chicago until Rose returns and he is good veteran but that's about it.

                                Jarret Jack is certainly underpaid at this point. He is probably too good to be a backup at this point.

                                The Pacers were looking for their PG of the future and they consider Hill to be that guy. The one that will grow with their core of PG and Roy. His contract is reasonable for his role.

                                In overall, I don't consider Hill overpaid. He's a bit cheaper than Conley and they're on a similar level. I certainly consider Jarret Jack underpaid, though.

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                I compare Ian's salary and productivity with other backups and my problem with Ian is not that he is making 4mil a year but that he is making them for the next 4 years, those 4 millions are going to hurt the Pacers when is time to resign Danny, West, Paul George and Lance, I guess I'm not a fan of paying a backup that kind of money if that backup doesn't bring an specialty, Ian to me is not the difference between winning a championship or not.
                                Ian is certainly cheaper than Asik or Gibson, for example. I can see the argument about the duration of the contract, though.

                                However, I do believe that having a rim protector in the second unit can be a difference between winning a championship or not.

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                Why no sign Barbosa for vet minimum instead of signing this guy? no only he is making 3 millions but he is making them for the next 3 years, the guy needs to be in the D league.
                                I like Barbosa but I agreed with taking a risk on Green. He fits the team's defensive identity better than Barbosa. If he wasn't in a shooting slump his contract would look better as that's the kind of money that back-up athletic swingmen that can shoot the 3 get.


                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                4mil is a lot for Tyler and I love the guy.
                                The league dictates the rookie deals. Not the Pacers. You could argue that the team should pick someone else, though.


                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                Overpay but thanks god is only for one year.
                                1 year risk. It may or may not work out. He seems to be playing better recently.


                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                My way to find out if a player is overpay or not is to compare them to similar players in the NBA, call it looking at "the green grass" or whatever
                                That's exactly what I do as well and it has nothing to do with "green grass" or whatever.

                                It's strange how we both do the same thing and yet you find the majority of our roster overpaid whereas I do not find anyone overpaid
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X