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

How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

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

  • How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

    http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_11267.shtml

    DONYELL: The word is Donyell Marshall is being showcased for potential suitors as the Raptors try to up the value. The Raptors have been on a tear lately, winning 7 of their last 10 games, putting serious trade talks to the side, but Rob Babcock is still talking according to league sources as he looks beyond this year into next for the future cap room and draft picks that the Raptors feel they need to re-tool around Chris Bosh. The Miami Heat has serious interest in Donyell, but do not have the trade assets the Raptors are seeking. The Pacers are a new entry into the Marshall talks, and they may have the parts Toronto is looking for namely Fred Jones and draft picks. The Knicks have expressed interest in Marshall, but would have to take Jalen Rose in any deal they make, and they do not have the friendly contracts or draft picks the Raptors are seeking. There is the chance New Jersey gets in the mix with their trade exceptions, but the Nets want Marshall too.

    Interesting idea. If this happened, we could let Marshall start at SF and we'd be back to Jackson/Reggie at the 2.

  • #2
    Re: How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

    Is Marshall's natural position SF? How does he play?
    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

      no!
      sigpic
      "It's a league game, Smokey"

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

        Marshall can play SF and PF just fine.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

          How old is he?

          And the big question...

          Can he play any defense?
          You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

            i don't think its smart to trade someone who might turn out to be very good for a journeyman.
            sigpic
            "It's a league game, Smokey"

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

              I don't know why they would do this. I do not see it happening.
              Sorry, I didn't know advertising was illegal here. Someone call the cops!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

                You guys are giving Fred too much credit. The guy is not all that great, he is expendable.
                You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

                  Originally posted by SoupIsGood
                  How old is he?

                  And the big question...

                  Can he play any defense?
                  He's older than Fred for sure. Let me check:

                  He'll be 32 in May.

                  http://www.nba.com/playerfile/donyel...all/index.html


                  2004-05 Statistics










                  REBOUNDS PER GAME
                  TEAM G GS MPG FGM-A FG% 3PM-A 3P% FTM-A FT% OFF DEF TOT APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
                  TOR 33 0 24.0 123-300 .410 61-159 .384 43-52 .827 1.60 5.00 6.60 1.1 .91 .55 .73 2.30 10.6


                  CAREER AVERAGES








                  REBOUNDS PER GAME
                  YEAR TEAM G GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% OFF DEF RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG
                  94-95 MIN 40 8 25.9 .374 .302 .680 1.60 3.30 4.90 1.4 .63 1.25 1.45 1.60 10.8
                  94-95 GSW 32 23 32.8 .413 .270 .640 2.30 4.30 6.50 1.5 .63 1.19 1.78 2.90 14.8
                  94-95 -- 72 31 29.0 .394 .284 .662 1.90 3.70 5.60 1.5 .63 1.22 1.60 2.20 12.6
                  95-96 GSW 62 6 15.1 .398 .298 .771 1.00 2.40 3.40 .8 .35 .50 .77 1.30 5.5
                  96-97 GSW 61 20 16.8 .413 .315 .622 1.50 3.00 4.50 .9 .41 .75 .90 1.60 7.3
                  97-98 GSW 73 73 35.8 .414 .313 .731 2.90 5.70 8.60 2.2 1.30 1.00 2.01 3.10 15.4
                  98-99 GSW 48 20 26.0 .421 .361 .727 2.40 4.70 7.10 1.4 .98 .77 1.67 2.60 11.0
                  99-00 GSW 64 51 32.4 .394 .355 .780 3.00 7.00 10.00 2.6 1.06 1.06 1.92 2.80 14.2
                  00-01 UTA 81 49 28.7 .503 .320 .751 2.10 4.90 7.00 1.6 1.05 .96 1.58 2.40 13.6
                  01-02 UTA 58 42 30.2 .519 .310 .708 2.70 4.90 7.60 1.7 .86 1.16 2.14 2.60 14.8
                  02-03 CHI 78 53 30.5 .459 .379 .756 3.00 6.00 9.00 1.8 1.22 1.09 1.73 3.00 13.4
                  03-04 CHI 16 8 25.5 .419 .407 .700 1.80 4.40 6.20 1.8 .81 1.25 1.38 2.90 8.7
                  03-04 TOR 66 66 39.1 .467 .403 .741 2.80 8.00 10.70 1.4 1.21 1.58 1.44 3.00 16.2
                  03-04 -- 82 74 36.4 .461 .403 .736 2.60 7.30 9.90 1.5 1.13 1.51 1.43 3.00 14.7
                  04-05 TOR 33 0 24.0 .410 .384 .827 1.60 5.00 6.60 1.1 .91 .55 .73 2.30 10.6
                  Career
                  712 419 28.4 .439 .343 .732 2.30 5.10 7.40 1.6 .92 1.00 1.54 2.50 12.4
                  Playoff
                  9 5 31.6 .413 .286 .760 3.00 4.70 7.70 2.1 .56 1.22 1.56 2.70 12.1

                  CAREER TOTALS








                  REBOUNDS
                  YEAR TEAM G GS MIN FGM-A 3PM-A FTM-A OFF DEF TOT AST STL BLK TO PF PTS
                  94-95 MIN 40 8 1,036 158-423 32-106 83-122 64 132 196 57 25 50 58 63 431
                  94-95 GSW 32 23 1,050 187-453 37-137 64-100 73 136 209 48 20 38 57 94 475
                  94-95 -- 72 31 2,086 345-876 69-243 147-222 137 268 405 105 45 88 115 157 906
                  95-96 GSW 62 6 934 125-314 28-94 64-83 65 148 213 49 22 31 48 83 342
                  96-97 GSW 61 20 1,022 174-421 35-111 61-98 92 184 276 54 25 46 55 96 444
                  97-98 GSW 73 73 2,611 451-1,090 63-201 158-216 210 418 628 159 95 73 147 226 1,123
                  98-99 GSW 48 20 1,250 208-494 26-72 88-121 115 227 342 66 47 37 80 123 530
                  99-00 GSW 64 51 2,071 331-840 49-138 199-255 189 448 637 167 68 68 123 180 910
                  00-01 UTA 81 49 2,326 427-849 41-128 205-273 172 394 566 133 85 78 128 196 1,100
                  01-02 UTA 58 42 1,750 343-661 13-42 160-226 158 285 443 101 50 67 124 150 859
                  02-03 CHI 78 53 2,378 421-918 33-87 167-221 234 465 699 137 95 85 135 234 1,042
                  03-04 CHI 16 8 408 57-136 11-27 14-20 28 71 99 28 13 20 22 47 139
                  03-04 TOR 66 66 2,580 413-884 120-298 120-162 182 527 709 94 80 104 95 200 1,066
                  03-04 -- 82 74 2,988 470-1,020 131-325 134-182 210 598 808 122 93 124 117 247 1,205
                  04-05 TOR 33 0 792 123-300 61-159 43-52 54 165 219 35 30 18 24 76 350
                  Career
                  712 419 20,208 3,418-7,783 549-1,600 1,426-1,949 1,636 3,600 5,236 1,128 655 715 1,096 1,768 8,811
                  Playoff
                  9 5 284 43-104 4-14 19-25 27 42 69 19 5 11 14 24 109

                  CAREER TRANSACTIONS
                  Selected after junior season by the Minnesota Timberwolves in the first round (fourth pick overall) of the 1994 NBA Draft....Traded by the Timberwolves to the Golden State Warriors for Tom Gugliotta on 2/18/95....Traded by the Warriors to the Utah Jazz as part of four-team deal in which the Boston Celtics received Robert Pack, John Williams and cash considerations from the Dallas Mavericks and a conditional first-round draft pick from the Jazz, the Mavericks received Dana Barros from the Celtics, Bill Curley from the Warriors and Howard Eisley from the Jazz, the Jazz received Bruno Sundov from the Mavericks, and the Warriors received Danny Fortson from the Celtics and Adam Keefe from the Jazz on 8/16/0 ... Signed by the Chicago Bulls as a free agent on 8/16/02... Traded by Chicago with guard/forward Jalen Rose and forward Lonny Baxter to Toronto for centre/forward Antonio Davis, and forwards Jerome Williams and Chris Jefferies on 12/01/03 ... Signed through 2004-05 season.


                  Season Highs / Career Highs

                  2004-05 HIGHS CAREER HIGHS
                  Points22 3 Times 37 @ Milwaukee 2/23/00
                  Field Goals Made9 @ Detroit 12/08/0416 @ Dallas 5/01/99
                  Field Goals Attempted17 @ Cleveland 12/04/0426 3 Times
                  Three Point Field Goals Made 6 @ Minnesota 1/17/057 @ Boston 12/12/03
                  Three Point Field Goals Attempted11 @ Philadelphia 1/14/0511 @ Philadelphia 1/14/05
                  Free Throws Made8 vs. Utah 12/22/0411 vs. L.A. Lakers 4/05/00
                  Free Throws Attempted8 vs. Utah12/22/0414 vs. L.A. Lakers4/05/00
                  Offensive Rebounds5 @ Miami 11/30/0410 vs. New Jersey 11/25/97
                  Defensive Rebounds15 @ Detroit 12/08/0417 2 Times
                  Total Rebounds15 @ Detroit 12/08/0424 @ Chicago 2/17/04
                  Assists4 @ Houston 12/20/049 2 Times
                  Steals4 @ Houston 12/20/045 6 Times
                  Blocks3 2 Times6 vs. Sacramento 2/13/01
                  Minutes Played36 3 Times49 2 Times

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

                    Marshall is a solid big man, one that I have always thought was underrated.

                    Guards like Fred Jones are a dime a dozen, there is nothing that is so special about him that you can't trade him for a big man as solid as Donyell Marshall.

                    Unfortuneately, there are who don't think Fred Jones should be traded unless you get Kobe or Tmac in return.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

                      Marshall is a good rebounder and an excellent three point shooter. He is decent at everything else. His best position is as a power forward who can cause matchup problems by shooting three pointers. Space the floor, sorta like Cro can.

                      The thought of Marshall defending the good small forward in the NBA is a pipe dream. he simply cannot guard those type players. He is a power forward

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

                        Well don't trade for him now, he just sprained his right wrist. We're already short on players as it is.

                        And Hicks, stats don't really show how ell he plays defense. Although averaging 6.6 REB a game is defintley something this team knows, but the return of Stephen should help with that.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

                          I think I would do this trade. I've always like Marshalls game. Hes a very versatile offensive player and will help us out on the defensive end as well especially in rebounding. The only reason you don't do this trade is because of the age difference. but if were serious about trying to win a title this year then we probably have to make this trade.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

                            What about Trenton Hassel of Minny, I have kind of liked him. We don't really have anything they need though, except maybe Pollard.
                            You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: How about a rumor: Fred and picks for Donyell Marshall

                              No, if were to do any trade with Minnesota I would want to get Troy Hudson.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X