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

Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

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

  • #31
    Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

    Originally posted by Grimp View Post
    I imagine Avery is still good but his game has fallen off thanks to so many changes in Boston. Kids probably just needs a fresh start. And as for Toronto, well.....I'd rather have Bradley as my starting PG than Jeff Teague. Who they were rumored to be interested in.
    Bradley has basically turned exclusively into a shooting guard. The Celtics were even playing Crawford at the point guard spot before Rondo came back. The Raptors would not be getting a point guard back by receiving Avery Bradley, regardless of what his position is listed as on a website. Every game I've seen him play for the Celtics recently I've never once witness him playing in a true point guard role.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
      You guys do realize that moving multiple players salaries for one players salary will end up hurting the Pacers financially, right? More money, or even same money, spread over less players just drives up the probability of going over the LT.

      Marvin Williams expiring contract would take care of that. However, that's ONLY if the deal went down in the next 24 to 48 hours. Which it won't so....moot point.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

        Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
        I know its a little risky , but if we were to go after Rondo, I would say do it in the off season

        I haven't run the numbers but it would be something like:
        George Hill, Mahimi, 1st round pick and their choice of Solomon Hill/OJ for Rondo and filler

        I have no idea if they would do this, but thats all I would offer , and I would NOT do it this year




        I agree. I just posted that trade scenario since we were on the subject. But a Rondo move should happen in the off-season for 2 reasons.......


        1. Rondo now is still trying to regain his all-star form. Rondo in the 2015-2016 season will be THE Rondo everyone remembers. Why trade for rehab Rondo now for a championship run, when you can get him healthy, training camp, etc in the off-season?



        2.I wouldn't shake up the team now when we have a legit shot at a title this season. I'd just make a small move, and add shooters to the bench in exchange for offensively anemic players like Granger, and move on with trying to win the NBA crown.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

          Originally posted by Grimp View Post
          Marvin Williams expiring contract would take care of that. However, that's ONLY if the deal went down in the next 24 to 48 hours. Which it won't so....moot point.
          You would have to replace his body on the bench next year. Sure, you can sign a D-leaguer for pennies. But that guys better not need to see a second of action...

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

            Originally posted by TinManJoshua View Post
            You would have to replace his body on the bench next year. Sure, you can sign a D-leaguer for pennies. But that guys better not need to see a second of action...
            Exactly.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

              What would be the point?

              Yes, Rondo's a great point guard, but he's not a great fit playing next to PG / Lance. Remember what happened when you put Nash next to Kobe? Why would you add another ball-dominant guard like Rondo when George Hill plays off ball so well and is such a great fit for what we're doing?

              If you're trading for Rondo, you're giving up Lance/Hill/Granger. And he's not worth that, especially not this far into a title run.
              This space for rent.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

                I certainly hope not.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

                  How do people think if you add a great player it will hurt your team... there is no way that Rondo does not help this team... most fans on this post have never played basketball so they lack understanding... I guess i get that... but if you dont beleive Rondo would improve this team then you are sadly mistaken....

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

                    Originally posted by Millertime3131 View Post
                    How do people think if you add a great player it will hurt your team... there is no way that Rondo does not help this team... most fans on this post have never played basketball so they lack understanding... I guess i get that... but if you dont beleive Rondo would improve this team then you are sadly mistaken....
                    You think it's worth it to blow up the PG position mid-season for Rondo though? I'd rather wait till the Summer to get Rondo, so he can have training camp and all the other REPS with our team. IF the front office wants to blow up the PG position for an upgrade now, Kyle Lowry makes more sense. If you trade Hill, you can re-sign him and Lance.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

                      We wont get Rondo but we could get Jason Terry, he is a vet just traded to a team who is going young. The Sacto papers are even asking will Terry ever play for the Kings and their answer is I don't know. Larry get on the phone with them Cope & Solomon Hill for Jason Terry I am ALL for this. Throw in Donald Sloan while you are at it. We are playing for a title this year and Terry would help off the bench.

                      Oh and he played well against Miami in the finals when he was with Dallas.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

                        Originally posted by Millertime3131 View Post
                        How do people think if you add a great player it will hurt your team... there is no way that Rondo does not help this team... most fans on this post have never played basketball so they lack understanding... I guess i get that... but if you dont beleive Rondo would improve this team then you are sadly mistaken....
                        That's disingenuine. It's not like we're singing a 100% healthy Rondo who's been studying our playbook for a year off the street for free. There are compensation issues that need to be resolved, both in terms of payment and players, as well as chemistry and health issues, all of which can have a negative impact on the team.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

                          Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
                          We wont get Rondo but we could get Jason Terry, he is a vet just traded to a team who is going young. The Sacto papers are even asking will Terry ever play for the Kings and their answer is I don't know. Larry get on the phone with them Cope & Solomon Hill for Jason Terry I am ALL for this. Throw in Donald Sloan while you are at it. We are playing for a title this year and Terry would help off the bench.



                          He's too old. Can't shoot anymore. No thanks. Brooklyn thought they were gonna get the same player you think we will get. He was traded because they were wrong. JT is not the same JT of 4 seasons ago.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

                            If there was some realistic scenario in which we (a) landed Rondo, (b) kept Lance, Paul, and Roy, and (c) could still re-sign Lance, I'd be all over it. I highly doubt such a scenario is possible.

                            Moving George Hill ($8M), Chris Copeland ($3.1M), and Solomon Hill ($1.3M) would cover 95% of Rondo's salary next year ($13M), but losing three players for one brings on potential depth problems, and in all honesty, I highly doubt Boston would be interested in that offer, even with a 1st thrown in. Surely they can do better.

                            My guess is, if we offered Lance in a package for Rondo, Boston would be all ears. I'm just not sure I'd be willing to move him for an injury-prone reported headcase like Rondo. Maybe I'm overrating Lance, but I see potential superstardom in his game.
                            Last edited by Lance George; 02-20-2014, 11:42 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

                              Originally posted by Millertime3131 View Post
                              How do people think if you add a great player it will hurt your team... there is no way that Rondo does not help this team... most fans on this post have never played basketball so they lack understanding... I guess i get that... but if you dont beleive Rondo would improve this team then you are sadly mistaken....
                              What it boils down to, I believe, is what we will lose to gain this great player. Sure we gain Rondo, but the trades being presented would cause us to lose way too much. I can part with two of Danny, GHill, and Lance, but if we trade Danny and GHill and some picks for Rondo we're certainly losing Lance too. Now, I'm not as enamored with Lance with others, but I don't think Rondo+$2MilPlayerA+$2Milplayerb is better than Stephenson+Hill+Granger.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Could Pacers get Rondo in a trade?

                                Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                                If there was some realistic scenario in which we (a) landed Rondo, (b) kept Lance, Paul, and Roy, and (c) could still re-sign Lance, I'd be all over it. I highly doubt such a scenario is possible.

                                Moving George Hill ($8M), Chris Copeland ($3.1M), and Solomon Hill ($1.3M) would cover 95% of Rondo's salary next year ($13M), but losing three players for one brings on potential depth problems, and in all honesty, I highly doubt Boston would be interested in that offer, even with a 1st thrown in. Surely they can do better.

                                My guess is, if we offered Lance in a package for Rondo, Boston would be all ears. I'm just not sure I'd be willing to move him for an injury-prone reported headcase like Rondo. Maybe I'm overrating Lance, but I see potential superstardom in his game.


                                We'd be better off trading Hill in a sign and trade for Kyle Lowry. Hill and pieces for Lowry. Lowry can shoot better for one thing. Although I like Rondo, and we did almost have him if years ago...CP3 had agreed to be traded to Boston. I like Lowry over Rondo these days.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X