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

Rumors from Vacsey

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Rumors from Vacsey

    http://www.nypost.com/sports/15736.htm

    CHASING 'RASHWEED'

    February 17, 2004 -- LOS ANGELES - The biggest surprise regarding All-Star Weekend is Magic Johnson didn't win MVP.
    Don't be surprised, sources accentuate, if Rashweed Wallace is in uniform tonight at the Garden when the Knicks host the Pistons - only not in a Knick uniform.

    Now that Wallace is a member of the Hawks, the Pistons, who didn't have the necessary assets to acquire him from the Blazers, have intensified their pursuit - along with at least one other team, perhaps the Mavericks whose All-Star-like lineup is the league's path of least resistance.

    "We definitely play defense like an All-Star team," harpooned Mark Cuban in person, not by e-mail.

    Chances of Joe Dumars capturing his prey for Detroit are better than good. Before I boarded a flight back to New York yesterday I was advised the Pistons' VP was playing tag with Billy Knight and the Hawks' GM was it. The incoming owners clearly aren't thrilled at the prospects of being represented by Rashweed.

    Meanwhile, the Pistons have the critical goods Atlanta wants - a spare No. 1 pick and enough contracts (belonging to Bob Sura, Lindsey Hunter, Zeljko Rebraca, Darvin Ham and Tremaine Fowlkes) that expire at season's end which almost equal Wallace's $17 million salary.

    The Knicks are well aware of Rashweed's continued availability, but aren't in position to do much about it; which doesn't mean Isiah Thomas has stopped trying. In the final analysis, it appears he simply can't come close to meeting the Hawks' above requirements.

    At the same time, the Pistons' lease of Wallace in a relatively bold attempt to win a championship (at the cost of a first-rounder in what the experts contend is a weak draft) figures to be brief. There's still every reason to believe the 6-11 finesse forward plans to settle for less come summer and sign with the Knicks.

    Especially now that he sees exactly where he fits - opposite Tim Thomas and alongside Nazr Mohammed (both 27 this year, as is Stephon Marbury) - and how Isiah isn't wasting time or fooling around.

    Not that Mohammed is a deadbolt lock to start for the Knicks. Dikembe Mutombo remains both a shot-blocking force ("His defense was probably the difference when we lost to them at the Garden the other day," mentioned Pacer coach Rick Carlisle) and a vital pawn (along with Kurt Thomas) in sustained trade talk with the Warriors for Erick Dampier.

    If they don't do something with the elderly Dikembe soon they can forget it," notes column castigator Frank Drucker. "He's about ten minutes away from being declared a landmark."

    Again, it's doubtful the Knicks have sufficient resources to beat out, say, the Grizzlies, but they haven't been disqualified from the hunt either. Memphis Moolah Michael Heisley is lovin' the life of being eight games above five hundred (30-22) and isn't letting the luxury tax intimidate him.

    Like Isiah, Grizzlies prez Jerry West has the freedom to spend whatever it takes to compete at the highest level. Which is why he's all over Dampier (as long as the price is one essential piece, not two), who, at least, bears a vague resemblance to centerfolds he's been associated with throughout his career as a player, coach and exec: Wilt, Kareem and Shaq. Ahem, unlike Lorenzen Wright and Jake Tsakalidis.

    * The second biggest surprise during All-Star Weekend is Bill Russell smiled without first getting paid; all it took was Kelly Clarkson singing Happy (70th) Birthday to him.

    Numerous sources are predicting the Rockets will do something noteworthy before Thursday's trading deadline, but it positively won't involve Steve Francis. In an effort to ease the defensive congestion around Yao Ming, management is trying to acquire a legit 3-point shooting forward, namely Austin Croshere.

    A few weeks ago, the Pacers discussed swapping him for Kelvin Cato. Recently, the talk revolved around Maurice Taylor; if Indy pulls the trigger, you might see Al Harrington to Denver for Rodney White and Jon Barry.     Houston also is talking to the 76ers about Aaron McKie, who could just as easily wind up in Chicago for Jerome Williams.

    The fact the Nets are 9-0 since Lord Bye-Ron Scott's eviction is a damning indictment on both the coach and the players; he had totally lost their respect and attention, whereas they had bailed out on him one and all, particularly at the defensive end. That's where New Jersey has made its biggest improvement.

    The third biggest surprise of All-Star Weekend is Kobe Bryant didn't opt out of his court case.

    ----------------

    I could see Detoit going after Resheed. His 17 million would come off the books at the end of the season so they would have more than enough money to resign Okur. Who knows, he might like it there and resign with them.

    If he does sign with Detroit it hurts the Pacers chances of coming out of the East. Doesn't mean they still can't win the East though.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Rumors from Vacsey

    I wouldn't even consider Austin Croshere for Maurice Taylor.

    However Austin Croshere for Cato would work fine for me. He would provide a legitimate center & legitimate bulk to our lineup.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Rumors from Vacsey

      Al for Rodney White and Jon Barry? ed:

      WTF is Vescey on? I don't think Al's value is that low. Cro for Cato is a must deal for me. With that Pollard or even Foster could be re-dealt for a guard. I have hopes that Polalrd will regain some sort of resemblence to his Sacto days, but even if so, him and Foster don't work well together, they're too similar for each other's own good. Cato would give the Pacers another intimidatior, but again all this Pacer/Rocket talk makes me feel that a huge deal may possibly be in the works, how about a 3 team deal with Indy/Houston/Philly; with Iverson to Indy, Francis + another quality guy to Philly, and Harrington, Snow, and Croshere to Houston? It won't ever happen though as losing Iverson would kill the Sixers popularity, and I feel Iverson wouldn't like it in Indiana, maybe swap him for T-Mac I guess.
      "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

      ----------------- Reggie Miller

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Rumors from Vacsey

        I wouldn't even consider Austin Croshere for Maurice Taylor.

        However Austin Croshere for Cato would work fine for me. He would provide a legitimate center & legitimate bulk to our lineup.
        Me too, but I don't think Houston will give Cato up in a 1 for 1 trade for Croshere. The reason being Ming is the only listed center on their roster. Taylor has been playing backup center, while Cato starts at PF, but losing Cato would make them really small if Ming would be out for any length of time.

        And, we need Cro's shooting ourselves so if any trade is made with Houston I think it will be bigger than 1 for 1.

        Harrington for White and Barry doesn't work for me. If we give up Al, I want someone back who is better than just good in return. Like others I think Al is going to be a star.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Rumors from Vacsey

          1st we can't give up 1 and take back two without waiving one of them, we already have 15 contracts.

          I'm all over Cro for Cato tho.
          Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Rumors from Vacsey

            God, I dont know how to react to this. On one hand, he is one of the 5 most talented PFs in the game today. On the other, he is a total bad apple.

            I guess I can live with him if he's only a 3-month rental. And the fact if he acts up on the court or in practice, Ben Wallace will personally dislodge his skull.....

            On paper though, it makes us a legit threat to make the finals. I cant argue that.

            I guess Id rather the Mavs got him instead......

            This would also open the door for the Atkins-for-Lue/Giricek deal, since wed need bench help, and they give us cap space.....

            Damn, we could replace HALF our roster in a week.....

            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Rumors from Vacsey

              I hope Rasheed does not go to the Pistons.

              Cro for Cato or Mo does not excite me

              AL for Barry and White. White has some talent and if he goes to the right team he could be a player. Barry has been injured most of the season. I don't do this trade.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Rumors from Vacsey

                I hope Rasheed does not go to the Pistons.

                Cro for Cato or Mo does not excite me

                AL for Barry and White. White has some talent and if he goes to the right team he could be a player. Barry has been injured most of the season. I don't do this trade.
                Barry and White are perhaps the two worst defensive 2guards IN THE LEAGUE.

                Harrongton for them alone would be a joke. Now Al for Dre Miller, on the other hand....

                It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Rumors from Vacsey

                  Kstat, what is the deal with White. I hear that if given minutes the guy can really score. Deadly shot out to 20 feet and can really drive to the hoop also. The few times I have seen him actually play, he looks like a guy who can score 20 pts a game if given the playing time

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Rumors from Vacsey

                    Kstat, what is the deal with White. I hear that if given minutes the guy can really score. Deadly shot out to 20 feet and can really drive to the hoop also. The few times I have seen him actually play, he looks like a guy who can score 20 pts a game if given the playing time
                    Jon Barry could probably score close to 15 if he started as well. He's an outstanding shooter. But he would give up 30.

                    And so would white.

                    He got dealt from Detroit because he couldnt play Defense, and Carlisle refused to play him. He went to Joe D to make Rick play him, and Joe told him he could sit or be traded. He chose to be traded.

                    Now he's going to Denver, and not only do they refuse to pick up his option (unheard of for a lottery pick), but they are trying to deal him AGAIN. That says something. He just isnt willing to work to become a better player.

                    White is a HECK of an offensive talent, but he is so INCREDIBLY lazy on D, its hard to imagine him ever starting. Job Barry isnt lazy on D though, he just has no physical ability to defend.

                    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Rumors from Vacsey

                      Now Al for Dre Miller, on the other hand....
                      As little as I want to see Tins go.... If we could get Dre But boy at the price of AL?

                      If we sent them Tins and AL would they send us Dre and Carmello?

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Rumors from Vacsey

                        me being a realgm junkie, i managed to work out a deal that looks like this:

                        harrington, tinsley, pollard for andre miller and white

                        sounds a lot better than harrington for white

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Rumors from Vacsey

                          Wintermute: I'd do that trade in a split second. I've always been a huge fan of Miller.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Rumors from Vacsey

                            I hope Vescey's just talking out his ***, per usual. At this point, unless we trade some depth for a good upgrade in a particular position, I'm content with just staying the course.

                            I hope Detroit doesn't get Wallace.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Rumors from Vacsey

                              I think he's full of it as usual, but.......

                              IF a decent proposal for Al comes in I think he's gone.

                              Why?

                              Ron and JO aren't going anywhere the first couple of years.
                              Jamaal should be kept, despite what some think he's in line to be a great one (and not only)for this team.

                              C we will be looking to get a "real" one either now or in the off-season. the sharing of that spot and playing JO there is something that works but we could be more effective with a "real" C. Jeff's (or Scot's) energy would be more suited of the bench anyway.

                              leaves the SG open for now, depending on JB and Freddie, we are sort of OK on that spot for the next couple of yeasr, (Reg isn't worn out yet )

                              So in all reality we have to conclude that the starting spot that Al craves so badly is nowhere in sight in the near future.

                              With the market moving the way it does at the moment it can be the right time to do it now, it would certainly prevent any mal contented player in the play offs, or solo-antics to carve a spot on the market in those same play offs, which would hurt the team so much more.

                              I can not see them trading for a SG or PG unless we're talking really BIG names, but a "good" starting C is not impossible.

                              just my opinon though.

                              So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                              If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                              Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X