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

Lance as a free agent

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

  • #31
    Re: Lance as a free agent

    Originally posted by Hypnotiq View Post
    lance isnt getting 8 million a year.

    he has a poor jump shot and is vastly overrated on this forum almost to the point where it's starting to become annoying.
    You're dead on with this and I knew this is where this thread would go just like the last few on this subject.
    Lance grew a lot last year from a guy I never thought would stay in the nba to a guy that has a long term future. He's still an undersized 2 guard that averaged 8 ppg in big minutes and he isn't getting 8 mil per year from any team. Lance is still very inconsistent but I think he'll cut back on the mistakes this year. I see Lance as a solid contributor that is never going to be a great scorer or assist guy just solid which is o.k., every player doesn't have to be an all star, but these are the guys that won't net big paydays in the current cba. If we look around teams aren't even using their full MLE's on a single player very much anymore and teams that have worked to get under the cap are going after much bigger fish with their cap space. Gone are the days that teams over the L.T. would bring in a player using their full MLE every year, these teams don't even have a real MLE and wouldn't use it if they could due to the penalties. Lance isn't getting 8 mil any more then David West was getting 18 mil which many thought he would. I'd say somewhere between Copeland money and 5 mil per year will land him and we should be able to afford that. I'm not worried about losing Lance.
    Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Lance as a free agent

      Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
      Lance grew a lot last year from a guy I never thought would stay in the nba to a guy that has a long term future.
      Well, I guess your prognosticating record with Lance is a little weak at this point, eh?
      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Lance as a free agent

        Just saw this in Mark Montieth's new mailbag so I thought I'd toss it on the pile.

        Q. The way I read cbafaq.com Lance is not eligible for an extension until next summer because he isn't on a rookie contract.We may have no choice but to let him become a free agent and test the market. You might check that out.

        Also, there is a difference of opinion on the internet as to whether Scola's contract is partially guaranteed or became fully guaranteed when he went through the amnesty waiver process. If you can get the official word and slip it into a story, it would be appreciated.

        - Frank


        A. Lance is eligible for an extension now, but with a second-round contract he can only get a raise of 7.5%. It wouldn't make sense for him to sign that contract. If he continues to make the kind of improvement he showed last year, he'll be able to command much more than that. So much, in fact, that it might be difficult for the Pacers to re-sign him.

        The final year of Scola's contract is partially guaranteed. It's a great deal for the Pacers, because he's also getting $5.7 million this season from Houston, who amnestied him a year ago. In fact, Scola will be Houston's third-highest paid player next season, although he'll be playing for the Pacers.
        http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/marks...filling-roster

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Lance as a free agent

          Lance was one of 5 players worth half a **** on a team that came within a game of going to the NBA finals, he is pretty good and certainly better than hot garbage like JR Smith. He's a good playmaker, great finisher inside, great break starter, elite rebounder, and strong defender. His jumper is pretty awful and he is prone to disappear and/or play out of control, but these aren't uncommon for 22 year olds at this level. I think he should be at least a more dynamic version of Tony Allen if nothing else (already is really and Allen just got MLE money at age 32 - 36) and probably has a true ceiling in the area near Dwayne Wade if he can figure out how to excel in half court offense.


          Yeah, I'd probably invest 8 mil in Lance if I had to. But if you think it's wiser to base the decision on his PPG as a 5th option then...okay.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Lance as a free agent

            $8M seems like way too much. I think $4M-$6M range.
            First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Lance as a free agent

              I hope we can get him for about 4/22. but if another team pushed i'd go to 28-30 provided he is healthy and improves...which he would if a team pushes that hard, you have to assume.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Lance as a free agent

                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                JR Smith fg%: 42 percent
                Lance fg%: 46 percent

                Lance is a better defender, rebounder, and passer and has not reached his ceiling.

                I know I would pay Lance a lot more.
                I wanted to reply to the poster that said since JR Smith got this much money, Lance will get less because he isn't as good with a similar rebuttal. I would take Lance over JR Smith 10 times out of 10. Lance is actually more valuable than Smith at this point, Indiana just has one of the biggest salary steals in the NBA last year and this coming year. If they don't pay him after he continues to progress this year then the FO is the only one's not living up to their part of the deal. Lance performed like an 8 million dollar man last year regardless of what stats say and was paid like a million bucks. If he plays better this year? We would be lucky to lock him up for 8 per with PG and Hibbert in their primes and West still performing...I don't know if is it possible, but if I'm in the front office I lock up Lance to a George Hill type of contract this year, and then throw the max at PG and offer Granger what is left next year.

                The way people feel about Lance reminds me of just three years ago when a good deal of posters around here proclaimed us one of if not the least "talented" team in the NBA. After just drafting Lance and PG, and having Hibbert and Granger on the team. I looked at it as a boatload of potential talent, maybe the most untapped talent in the NBA. Now people look at Lance and a majority say he is worth MLE money. LMFAO. Lance has definitely been undervalued here since day one so this notion he is overvalued is laughable.

                You take Lance off the team last year and Indiana doesn't take Miami to game 7 in the ECF, and I'm very doubtful they would have made it there at all...Lance was an upgrade over Granger, and this team will regress if they lessen Lance's role for Granger. That's why I recently proclaimed on here Danny's ceiling is now Jamal Crawford. Deadly shooting assassin 6th man of the year candidate. Putting up huge number in limited minutes, per 36 scoring numbers out of this world. That will win us a championship. I fear we will not go as far in the playoffs if DG is playing 40 minutes per night and Lance 8.

                Lance made a million dollars last year and without him we would not have even sniffed the ECF. Granger made like 13 million bucks and did absolutely nothing outside of being a lock room leader. If you can't see who we owe more to at this point then I give up trying to convince you. We've paid Granger enough to retire a really rich man if he was smart with his money. My loyalty says we owe more to Lance at this point...
                Last edited by Midcoasted; 08-20-2013, 01:46 PM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Lance as a free agent

                  I think everyone knows that JR Smith is paid less than the average 6th man of the year since he can be a complete headache both on and off the court. Similar to say players like Artest and Stephen Jackson.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Lance as a free agent

                    JR Smith is inefficient and a bad defender and not particularly like either of those dudes as a player.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Lance as a free agent

                      Originally posted by Jukeb0xHero View Post
                      Lance was one of 5 players worth half a **** on a team that came within a game of going to the NBA finals, he is pretty good and certainly better than hot garbage like JR Smith. He's a good playmaker, great finisher inside, great break starter, elite rebounder, and strong defender. His jumper is pretty awful and he is prone to disappear and/or play out of control, but these aren't uncommon for 22 year olds at this level. I think he should be at least a more dynamic version of Tony Allen if nothing else (already is really and Allen just got MLE money at age 32 - 36) and probably has a true ceiling in the area near Dwayne Wade if he can figure out how to excel in half court offense.


                      Yeah, I'd probably invest 8 mil in Lance if I had to. But if you think it's wiser to base the decision on his PPG as a 5th option then...okay.
                      I think you're reaching a bit when you say Lance's ceiling is D.Wade. D.Wade is a HOF, top 5-ish 2Guard of all time. He's been pretty damn special since day one. So when people say something regarding 8ppg--its when you compare him to a HOF guy like D.Wade.

                      So lets compare him to what he's been - a glue guy/role player at the 2guard.

                      It's not his PPG as a 5th option why people say that he isn't worth 8M/yr; it's recent NBA salary history. Guys like JJ Redick (great shooter) Lou Williams (great 6th man scorer) and Tony Allen (great defender) all got between 5 and 6mil a yr. A guy that's somewhat similar to Lance in Wes Matthews (thick bodied 2-guard, 2nd round pick, aggressive game) received under 7 Mil a yr as well. As it stands right now Lance is not as good as any of those players--so that in itself puts him out of the question for 8 million PLUS on a team that's strapped for cash like the Pacers. He COULD be better than these guys eventually, but we honestly don't know what he'll become.

                      As much as his biggest fans like to say "it's more than about scoring" (which is true) the truth is that current NBA salaries show that a 2-guard that's making anything over 7 mil a year, better be a damn good player and a serious threat offensively. Glue guys or role players aren't making 8 mil.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Lance as a free agent

                        Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
                        He is soooo overrated, yet he was the primary reason we got past NY. Game 6, when the chips were on the table, and this was a must win game, Lance showed up and carried us to a victory. He was also THE ONLY guy that was ready for game 7 vs Miami. If anything, he is underrated
                        You cant look at ONE or two games where he did very well and say he's great; you need to look at his overall work of art. He was efficient within his limited role, and brought great energy and enthusiasm. He also had a pretty inconsistent jumpshot, and wasn't able to consistently score offensively outside of fast breaks, wide open 3's, and occasional ISO's.

                        All in all he's a very good glue guy/role player, but we don't know what he is with more of an offensive burden, and with defenses more focused on him. People on this board are comparing him to D.Wade (a future HOF'er). He's overrated by some on this board, underrated by some, but I feel he's properly rated by the majority.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Lance as a free agent

                          I love Lance, but I would not give him more than 6 mil per year. Hopefully less at around 4 or 5 mil. Some of you need to look around the league and see what role players are getting paid now days...I feel like Lance is starting to become overrated on this board...there's no way in hell I'd give him 8 mil per.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Lance as a free agent

                            Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                            JR Smith fg%: 42 percent
                            Lance fg%: 46 percent

                            Lance is a better defender, rebounder, and passer and has not reached his ceiling.

                            I know I would pay Lance a lot more.
                            1. Lance shooting %s went down to about 40% once he started shooting more. 2. He benefited from getting so many open looks early in the season. I'm sure if Lance shot as much as JR, their shooting %s would be nearly the same. 3. PG also shot 42%.

                            I wouldn't pay Lance more than JR. I'd just pay Lance what he deserves...and I feel that is really $4m-$6m/yr.
                            First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Lance as a free agent

                              Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                              He's still an undersized 2 guard
                              Okay
                              Last edited by Noodle; 08-20-2013, 05:35 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Lance as a free agent

                                Many of you are ignoring the LT and the liklihood that the Simon's won't go over it.

                                Assuming that PG24 gets the MAX at something starting at $17.5 mil a year......Lance ( or Granger ) could get $6 mil a year. This should put the Pacers RIGHT at the LT of $75.7 mil with 12 Players.

                                Between the 2 of them....I think that Lance will get a contract slightly over the LT. Probably something over the full MLE at a flat $6 mil a year for 4 years or ( more than likely ) $5 mil oveer 5 years. Hopefully PG24 would take $750k less so that it allows the Pacers to sign a 13th Player at the vet minimum to fill out the roster.

                                BTW, on a related question....IMHO...the unfortunate and harsh reality that will decide whether the Pacers will keep Granger OR Lance isn't which is the better option.....it will be which one will take a $6 mil a year / 4 year Contract offer ( the amount that the Pacers can afford to pay either of them before hitting the LT Ceiling ).
                                Last edited by CableKC; 08-20-2013, 06:42 PM.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X