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

Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

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

  • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

    Originally posted by cdash View Post
    What would we have gotten for Lance had we traded him a long time ago? He just started to gain any semblance of value, so trading him would have netted us...what exactly?
    Nothing pretty much what the Pacers are going to get for him if they are stupid enough to let him go, they paid a lot of money to get him straight, Clark Kellogg was the first guy they hired to help him grow up I don't think Larry spend all this time and money just to let another team get him for free when he is not even in his prime.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

      Lance is like a jewel Bird is polishing. I suspect he will do whatever it takes to hang onto him. Yet, some of this will come down to how well Lance plays in the sand box. If he's throwing sand in people's eyes, he may find a new address. Otherwise, he will be a Pacer. He is indeed one of the big 3 on this team with Paul and Roy being the other two.

      Comment


      • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
        Nothing pretty much what the Pacers are going to get for him if they are stupid enough to let him go, they paid a lot of money to get him straight, Clark Kellogg was the first guy they hired to help him grow up I don't think Larry spend all this time and money just to let another team get him for free when he is not even in his prime.
        If he is priced out of our range, then he is priced out of our range. You know how you get roped into making stupid decisions? By making emotional decisions. How many times have we seen GMs and the like in all four professional sports get themselves into trouble by hanging onto "their guys" for too long? If it comes to us losing Lance, I suspect Bird will at the very least find a way to get assets for him (draft picks, trade exceptions, etc.) as opposed to just letting him walk away for free.

        Comment


        • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

          Originally posted by cdash View Post
          If he is priced out of our range, then he is priced out of our range. You know how you get roped into making stupid decisions? By making emotional decisions. How many times have we seen GMs and the like in all four professional sports get themselves into trouble by hanging onto "their guys" for too long?
          You can also have a similar situation to what OKC had with Harden you let the young star go and think you are replacing him with the former star(Kmart) just to realized that you have made the biggest mistake in your life(OKC's Harden trade is considered one of the worse ever).



          If it comes to us losing Lance, I suspect Bird will at the very least find a way to get assets for him (draft picks, trade exceptions, etc.) as opposed to just letting him walk away for free.
          In the new CBA there is not motivation for other teams to give you an asset just look at what the Lakers got for Howard, nothing.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

            I think the outcome of this scenario is pretty simple.

            Lance will either be paid between 6-9 Mil by the pacers and other minor moves will be made to try and allow that to happen and we stay under the cap.

            A team outbids us, and Lance goes to play for more money on a less successful team; while Larry tries to make a roster move to replace Lance.

            In all honesty, we have to allow the rest of the season to play out to truly get a sense of what to expect. If Lance is able to prove that he's irreplaceable on the team, then I think moves will be made on the roster. Either way, I honestly don't see Bird overpaying (in his mind) to keep Lance (or anyone for that matter)

            Comment


            • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

              Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
              The more I look at this trade, the picks look like a smoke screen for a salary dump for Chicago. When you hear "for Bynum and three picks" it sounds like a bundle but there's a good possibility none of these picks are even first rounders.

              So the Cavs could have probably extracted Gasol for around the same price, I wonder why they chose Deng. Irving, Waiters and Deng is a nice 1-2-3 but they're gonna have to pay Deng like $10 mil a year to keep him, and he plays the same position as Dan Gilbert's agony and ecstasy LeBron James.
              He just turned down $10m a year from the Bulls, that's way they traded him. He wants $14-$15m a year.

              As for playing the same position as Lebron, that's no problem, Deng is a free agent.

              Comment


              • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

                Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                He just turned down $10m a year from the Bulls, that's way they traded him. He wants $14-$15m a year.
                Allegedly. Could just as easily be a "leak" from Chicago's front office to try and save face with fans, "see, we tried to keep Luol!"

                Comment


                • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

                  Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                  Allegedly. Could just as easily be a "leak" from Chicago's front office to try and save face with fans, "see, we tried to keep Luol!"
                  Disagree, you don't try to save face when the other side, (Deng and his agent) would/could call them on it.

                  EDIT: Of course it is Chicago's front office, so it wouldn't surprise me if they did it anyway, then claimed they didn't say it. Confusing issues is how people try to spin things today.
                  Last edited by Will Galen; 01-07-2014, 07:28 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

                    Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                    He just turned down $10m a year from the Bulls, that's way they traded him. He wants $14-$15m a year.
                    Or he wanted more than three years. Or he wanted out of the Bulls organization for a variety of reasons.



                    Luol Deng's exit shows the callous nature of business
                    By Ricky O'Donnell  @SBN_Ricky on Jan 7 2014, 1:02p 19



                    Luol Deng gave the Bulls everything he had for more than nine seasons, but the appreciation wasn't always reciprocated. A trade sending Deng to the Cavs therefore ends a rocky era that should have been more peaceful.

                    Sentimentality only gets in the way in the cold-hearted business of basketball, a place where loyalty means paying for past performance in future years and there's simply no room for a curtain call. We all know that luxury tax dollars and amorphous future assets take precedence over a decade of blood, sweat and tears, but it doesn't exactly lessen the blow when it happens.

                    An early-morning trade sending Luol Deng to the Cleveland Cavaliers hammered home the point without apology.

                    Deng was the Bulls' longest tenured player since being drafted with the No. 7 pick in 2004. It isn't a reach to say he changed the culture in Chicago. In the six years between Michael Jordan's retirement and the 2004 draft, the Bulls averaged 20 wins per season. With rookies Deng and Ben Gordon the next year, the Bulls shot up to 46 wins. They've been a sustainable playoff threat and pseudo-contender ever since, with 2007-08 acting as the only outlier. That was the season the Bulls lucked out to win the lottery and land Derrick Rose.

                    The Bulls have been Rose's team ever since, but Deng was always riding shotgun. No one embodied the spirit of Tom Thibodeau's Bulls more than Deng. He played through a constant assortment of injuries, accepted the toughest defensive assignment on the wing every night and provided Chicago with a valuable secondary offensive option. Deng defined all of the cliches one might find trite. He was a workhorse, a glue guy, a hard hat and lunch-pail laborer. Basketball was very much a job for Deng. He took the game seriously.

                    But for someone who did so much good for the Bulls and doubled as the NBA's biggest humanitarian, Deng rarely felt fully appreciated by the organization. The way they treated a player and person of his stature was often an embarrassment. It started with a contentious negotiation process for Deng's first extension, when he fought past lowball offers from the Bulls before eventually getting $71 million over six years. He was the subject of trade rumors all the way through — everyone from Pau Gasol to Kevin Garnett to Kobe Bryant — but it never bothered him. Deng just punched the clock and kept on working.

                    The relationship between the player and team really started to sour in 2009. The Bulls misdiagnosed what turned out to be a stress fracture in his right leg and publicly challenged him to play through it. That isn't an exaggeration. In the news release announcing the injury was this line: "He will be encouraged to challenge himself physically." A few weeks later, doctors were advising him not to put any weight the leg.

                    It didn't end there. Deng was issued a spinal tap when doctors suspected meningitis during last season's playoff run, an injection that had severe repercussions on Deng's body and glued him to a hospital bed. Once he was there, the Bulls showed little concern for him. Deng didn't even have a private hospital room, much less visits from team personnel. Tom Thibodeau had the gall to say Deng had "flu-like symptoms, whatever" when asked about Deng's illness. It set the stage for another contentious negotiation process. Deng's impending free agency hung over this season the moment the last one ended.

                    It should come as no surprise, then, that the Deng era ends in Chicago with a thud. The Bulls made one final overture to Deng, a three-year, $30 million contract that would have amounted to a hometown discount. Deng does some important things with his money. He wasn't about to take less to play for an organization that mistreated him on numerous occasions over the years.

                    Still, it's hard to fault the Bulls for the offer. Even though Deng doesn't turn 29 until April, there's reason to believe his future might not be as bright as his past. The organization plays a role in that, as Deng has led the NBA in minutes per game each of the last two years. Since Thibodeau took over, he's finished no lower than fourth in the category. He's been playing with torn ligaments in his wrist since January of 2012, only he never got the surgery because of his obligations to both the Derrick Rose-less Bulls and Great Britain in the Olympics. Deng also revealed that he played through a fractured thumb last season.

                    The Bulls will spin it like this had to be the end for Deng in Chicago. Maybe this will end up being a bright business decision.

                    But from an owner who prides himself on loyalty, refusing to pay Deng market value reeks of hypocrisy. Owner Jerry Reinsdorf said it himself: "Basketball is a game. Baseball is a religion. Baseball is American." While the other team Reinsdorf owns, the Chicago White Sox, are defined by loyalty throughout the major and minor leagues, with former players holding every job imaginable, the same sense of obligation does not extend to his basketball team. It didn't even extend to Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen. Basketball is indeed only a game to Reinsdorf. Is it even American?

                    There is nevertheless plenty to be excited about in Chicago for the future, assuming Rose can stay healthy. There's a top-10 protected draft pick from the Bobcats that could be theirs in a loaded 2014 draft. They have their own pick, which may be in the lottery now. Nikola Mirotic, arguably one of the best basketball players in the world outside of the NBA, could be over next season, too. Now, they have a protected first-round pick from the Kings, multiple second-rounders from the Blazers and the right to swap with Cleveland in 2015.

                    But what the Deng trade really signifies is the end to era of Bulls basketball that never got a fair shake. Injuries decimated three straight seasons for a team that truly believed it had enough to win a championship.

                    Perhaps the Bulls should be commended for recognizing when to cut their losses. The best business decisions rarely feel good in real time. This one certainly doesn't. All the while, it might be best for every party involved.

                    Often times, it felt like Luol Deng was too good for the Bulls. Finally, the team isn't his problem anymore.

                    http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2014/1/7...s-andrew-bynum
                    This is the darkest timeline.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

                      Not sure if it's been posted Bulls waive Bynum

                      http://espn.go.com/chicago/nba/story...uol-deng-trade
                      I'm not perfect and neither are you.

                      Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the esteem of Elohim,
                      Ephisians 4: 32 And be kind towards one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as Elohim also forgave you in Messiah.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

                        Dont know who's saying this, but I'll post it since Conrad Brunner did.


                        @Bruno1070

                        Interesting to see #Pacers being mentioned in the Bynum conversation. They're almost to tax threshhold, roughly 1M under, so little room.


                        Working theory is their only motivation is to keep Bynum out of Miami.
                        Stop quoting people I have on ignore!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

                          Originally posted by Psyren View Post
                          Dont know who's saying this, but I'll post it since Conrad Brunner did.


                          @Bruno1070

                          Interesting to see #Pacers being mentioned in the Bynum conversation. They're almost to tax threshhold, roughly 1M under, so little room.


                          Working theory is their only motivation is to keep Bynum out of Miami.
                          Some Cleveland writer mentioned it as a "left field theory". No sources or anything else mentioned. Seemed like it was pure speculation.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...thinking-ahead

                            Zach Lowe seems to think the Bulls should make a run at Lance:
                            Wow. So he's saying the Bulls should offer 13mil for Lance?

                            I love Lance and don't want to see him go. But I also think that on a different team, Lance might not be the model citizen he's been here. It's kinda what Larry talked about: this team is able to keep him grounded and playing at his best. If you're Chicago and you throw 13mil at Lance, do you get your money's worth?
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

                              Lance needs the Pacers more than the Pacers need Lance. If he gets into the wrong situation things could easily go bad quickly. The Pacers can plug in a piece and re-sign Granger and still be in good shape, if Lance went to a team much like Tyreke Evans did for the Pelicans, I don't know if it would work. I don't know if Lance is inherently great as a 1 or 2 option, when he's 4 or 5 out there, it's much easier to succeed.
                              "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


                              • Re: Bulls trade Deng to Cavs

                                Rose and Lance could never co-exist....
                                The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X