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

Harden traded to Houston

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

  • Re: Harden traded to Houston

    Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
    So Houston will be on the hook for $45 million in 2014-2015 for just three dudes - Lin, Asik, and Harden. Worst big three ever?
    that's just in terms of the actual cash that the owner has to pay. since Lin will probably cover for himself, as long as he's decent, i'm sure the owner won't mind.

    it's more like 32-33 mil in terms of cap space.

    Comment


    • Re: Harden traded to Houston

      btw, this is basically the same package that the Rockets reportedly offered to Orlando.
      Which means Orlando might've ended up with a 3-teamer for Harden, if they had the courage to wait.

      Comment


      • Re: Harden traded to Houston

        Longest tenured Rocket? Pat Patterson. Who's going into his 3rd year with the team.

        At some point I've gotta assume the way Morey is so impersonal and treats his players as absolutely nothing but chess pieces is going to bite him hard.

        Comment


        • Re: Harden traded to Houston

          Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
          Not to mention they could have just kept him this year taken their last shot with this roster and then S&T him next offseason.
          I think OKC prolly just wanted to avoid the drama like what we've seen with Dwight, CP3, and Carmelo over the last few years... Yeah... Chemistry is already down in OKC with this trade... But keeping a player that is obviously out the door can make things even worse with all the negative media attention day in and day out...

          I think it's smart that they moved quickly... The value of these stars seem to drop with every passing week...
          Nothing in life worth having comes easy.

          Comment


          • Re: Harden traded to Houston

            Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
            So Houston will be on the hook for $45 million in 2014-2015 for just three dudes - Lin, Asik, and Harden. Worst big three ever?
            Not as bad as the big 3 of Dunleavy/Murphy/Ford but they are up there for sure
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • Re: Harden traded to Houston

              With Harden in the lineup OKC's point differential per 100 possessions was the best in the NBA, it was like 9.6. Without him it drops down to like 1.6. Which is still a playoff team, but not anywhere near the same level.

              They got good return for him, but at what cost? I think they just put themselves well behind the 8 ball for at least the next two seasons, and if LBJ keeps winning titles what happens when Durant and Westbrook get restless? I just don't like it for that reason. They took a long sighted view on a team that should be short sighted. I agree that LBJ is the best in the NBA, but I don't find it ridiculous at all to think OKC with another year of experience could knock them off in the finals. This is a deal that a rebuilding team would make, not a team that was in the finals last year.


              Comment


              • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                Originally posted by LoneGranger33 View Post
                So Houston will be on the hook for $45 million in 2014-2015 for just three dudes - Lin, Asik, and Harden. Worst big three ever?
                Yikes, true. Definitely what I would describe as a panic offseason for them. I just don't like this deal for either team. Long term it's good for OKC (unless Durant & Westbrook get frustrated over the next year or two, definitely a wild card possibility IMO), but their short term was already so good, so why mess with it? At least for this year....Houston I don't get all this "favorite" project team people are spewing. Seems to me they still need a 3 and a 4, and IMO they have major questions at the 1 and the 5 unless you really believe in Lin and Asik. (I don't). Harden is the only really, really prvoen NBA player in their starting 5, but there are clearly differing opinions on what he really is.


                Comment


                • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                  Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                  Yikes, true. Definitely what I would describe as a panic offseason for them. I just don't like this deal for either team. Long term it's good for OKC, but their short term was already so good, so why mess with it? At least for this year....Houston I don't get all this "favorite" project team people are spewing. Seems to me they still need a 3 and a 4, and IMO they have major questions at the 1 and the 5 unless you really believe in Lin and Asik. (I don't). Harden is the only really, really prvoen NBA player in their starting 5, but there are clearly differing opinions on what he really is.
                  'favorite project team' means literally 'favorite among the teams that are in project stage atm', not 'the next dynasty' as you seem to interpret it

                  Comment


                  • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                    Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                    'favorite project team' means literally 'favorite among the teams that are in project stage atm', not 'the next dynasty' as you seem to interpret it
                    No, I see what you're saying. I guess I just don't find them all that intriguing. Do they really have that much flexibility left? Seems to me they are hitching a lot of their wagon to Terrence Jones becoming a really good player at the 3 or 4.


                    Comment


                    • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                      I think I'd give OKC a B for this trade. They get the better end of the deal long term but I don't see anything coming back to them long term that would equal the talent of Harden. Martin will be gone so they'll be left with Lamb a pick around 10-12 and a pick around 20. I doubt if Lamb becomes the player that Harden is and he was a #12 pick. The picks and Lamb should give them a starting 2 guard and some quality depth though and very likely enough talent to make it back to the finals. They may be better off with this then 3 max contract players considering that Harden isn't nearly on the level of Westbrook or Durant. The reason I give them a B is that I think they may have been able to get a single top 5 pick for him.
                      Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                        Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                        No, I see what you're saying. I guess I just don't find them all that intriguing. Do they really have that much flexibility left? Seems to me they are hitching a lot of their wagon to Terrence Jones becoming a really good player at the 3 or 4.
                        They do have flexibility. They can have max contract room next summer, if they want to. Remember, while Lin and Asik earn 15 mil each in 2015, they'll only count at 8.3 mil towards the cap every year, so there are no worries when it comes to flexibility or luxury tax.

                        The Rockets will stay very flexible until they find that other star.

                        Also, they still have a lot of pieces for another trade. 3 rookies from this year, Patterson, Parsons (there's a reason why OKC insisted on getting him in this deal, he's pretty good).
                        They keep their own pick (as long as it's in the lottery), and I think they are still a lottery team this year. For instance, would you say they are better than the Murphleavy period Pacers that kept winning ~35 games? I'd say they are worse. They are too young, especially their bench. I'll be surprised if they win 30 games even with this trade.

                        Overall, I think one way or another (free agency, trades, draft) they are getting at least one more star within the next few years.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                          Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                          I think I'd give OKC a B for this trade. They get the better end of the deal long term but I don't see anything coming back to them long term that would equal the talent of Harden. Martin will be gone so they'll be left with Lamb a pick around 10-12 and a pick around 20. I doubt if Lamb becomes the player that Harden is and he was a #12 pick. The picks and Lamb should give them a starting 2 guard and some quality depth though and very likely enough talent to make it back to the finals. They may be better off with this then 3 max contract players considering that Harden isn't nearly on the level of Westbrook or Durant. The reason I give them a B is that I think they may have been able to get a single top 5 pick for him.
                          that's the sad part. didn't the Bobcats offer the #2 pick this year? i think those were the rumors. and didn't the Wolves offer Derrick Williams and pieces? Lamb or that Toronto pick better be good.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                            I think OKC dropped the ball, they had a chance with Harden to get a back to the basket forward and instead decided to trade him for a bunch of pieces and some old guy, trade Harden+Perkins for either Milsap or Al Jefferson and you have a championship team, Westbrook,Tabo,Durant,Ibaka and Jefferson? damn.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                              Shamelessly stolen infographic response to people saying Harden was a product of Westbrook and Durant: http://i.imgur.com/5TZhN.jpg

                              He's performed significantly better with those guys on the bench over the course of the last two years. It's a shame they went and signed Lin who is going to flop so hard this year. This is a move that could have been a great step in making them good, but no team starting Lin is going to be very good - he's a business signing, not a basketball one.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                                Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                                that's the sad part. didn't the Bobcats offer the #2 pick this year? i think those were the rumors. and didn't the Wolves offer Derrick Williams and pieces? Lamb or that Toronto pick better be good.
                                I totally forgot about that. Kidd Gilchrist would be a good fit on this Thunder team I think.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X