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

Granger traded to Philly

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

  • Re: Granger traded to Philly

    Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
    for those who say Danny did not deserve this. How about the Pacers Franchise. do the BnG deserve a discount from DG if he were to re-sign here in the offseason. how about if Pacers mgt said Danny were gonna turn down a deal for a former #2 pick and a serviceable big because we believe you deserve it. however, we want to re-sign you to 1M per until you retire in order to recoup the 20+M worth of production lost.

    my guess is Danny would decline.

    if we gave up even value (1st rounder) I could see where many could be upset w Pacers brass. as it is, we gave up a 2nd rounder for a former #2 pick and a serviceable big. Birds been upfront from day one with the numerous trade rumors in regard to DG over the seasons. Always stated that it would take an offer to good to pass up to trade Danny.

    In regards to next season this trades a no brainer.

    only way in which this trade is declined is if its not gonna help us win a title now. I don't see how Turner can play much worse than what Danny has given us vs backup level players.

    The bench is one of the worst in the league.


    Hard to believe anyone would want Bird to have turned that deal down if LEGEND felt it made us a better team.
    Danny gave them a discount in his most productive years. HE was averaging 25pts making only 10 million.

    Insurance picked up most of his salary last season. So its not like the Pacers were out 14 million. Or even 20 Million? Not sure where you get the 20 Million from.
    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

    Comment


    • Re: Granger traded to Philly

      So apparently Danny had let up on his training regiment with the knee......

      http://www.basketballinsiders.com/nb...medium=twitter

      Where Does Danny Land?: The Philadelphia 76ers and forward Danny Granger are expected to reach a buyout agreement at some point today, although 76ers coach Brett Brown told reporters last night that he was still unsure of the outcome and that Granger and 76er General Manager Sam Hinkie were still talking through the scenarios.

      Granger and the 76ers have had several discussions about the structure of a buyout that would allow Granger to become an unrestricted free agent. It is believed that Granger is not overly interested in finishing the season in Philadelphia and may be willing to sacrifice some of the $4.2 million still remaining on his $14.02 million final contract year in order to join a contending playoff team.

      Several teams are expecting a buyout to occur and have started doing due diligence on Granger and his long problematic left knee.

      Sources close to the situation in Indiana say that Granger had let up on the routine conditioning that has become an almost daily requirement to keep his knee workable and that, combined with his ending contract is what lead to his trade from the Pacers.

      Inquiring teams are trying to get a sense of what they can expect from Granger down the stretch. Granger has been linked to both the Miami HEAT and the San Antonio Spurs, although sources say that the New York Knicks and the Chicago Bulls have expected some interest in Granger too.

      Assuming that Granger and the 76ers reach an agreement today, there is a 48-hour waiver period that would have to pass before he could join another team.

      A player must be bought out and waived before March 1 in order to be eligible for the postseason, regardless of when that player signs with a new team.

      Read more at http://www.basketballinsiders.com/nb...E18sQFdkDOT.99
      Last edited by Sandman21; 02-25-2014, 01:19 PM.
      "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

      "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

      Comment


      • Re: Granger traded to Philly

        That doesn't surprise me one bit.

        This season he's played like a guy that doesn't care about basketball. Sometimes priorities change, and I don't fault Danny for that. But he had no fire at all this season.

        Comment


        • Re: Granger traded to Philly

          Originally posted by imawhat View Post
          That doesn't surprise me one bit.

          This season he's played like a guy that doesn't care about basketball. Sometimes priorities change, and I don't fault Danny for that. But he had no fire at all this season.
          Maybe his knee was feeling better and didn't need to do the routine every day anymore?
          You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

          Comment


          • Re: Granger traded to Philly

            Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
            Maybe his knee was feeling better and didn't need to do the routine every day anymore?
            He never played like he didn't need to do it anymore.

            Comment


            • Re: Granger traded to Philly

              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
              I learned very early in life that championships are all that matters in the end. The closest thing the fans get is a championship celebration.
              I always disagree when someone says that! I see the journey as what matters. For example Reggie Miller never won a championship, but boy did he provide a lot of highlight memories for Pacer fans throughout his years. Just watching him at the end of a game was a treat in itself. Detroit won a championship in the same era, but I wouldn't trade my memories of that era for yours.

              Now you could come back and say you had a lot of great Detroit memories from the same era. Detroit was in the eastern conference finals for about 6 out of 7 years, but you're already said that only championships matter to you in the end. Myself I would have loved the 7 year journey!

              I just disagree that championships are all that matter in the end! The journey is the thing, a championship would have just been the cherry on top.

              Comment


              • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                Originally posted by Ragnar View Post
                holy cow I was busy and missed this until just now, I am going to miss Danny and if he gets cut and ends up in Miami I am going to really freak out.
                They are saying this morning (Feb.25) if he gets a buyout he wants to play for a contender. I would say that is Miami, Oklahoma, Clippers, and Spurs.

                Comment


                • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                  Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                  Danny gave them a discount in his most productive years. HE was averaging 25pts making only 10 million.

                  Insurance picked up most of his salary last season. So its not like the Pacers were out 14 million. Or even 20 Million? Not sure where you get the 20 Million from.
                  This is completely and totally false.
                  "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                  -Lance Stephenson

                  Comment


                  • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                    Wouldn't Miami signing Liggins pretty well rule out Danny signing with them? Unless they cut Liggins 4 days after singing him to a 10 day contract. Or they cut one of their other guys under contract.

                    Danny has to be signed by Saturday to be playoff eligible.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                      Sources......

                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                        Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                        They are saying this morning (Feb.25) if he gets a buyout he wants to play for a contender. I would say that is Miami, Oklahoma, Clippers, and Spurs.
                        Everybody would love to play for a contender.

                        A contender has to also want you to play for them.
                        "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                        -Lance Stephenson

                        Comment


                        • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                          Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                          I always disagree when someone says that! I see the journey as what matters. For example Reggie Miller never won a championship, but boy did he provide a lot of highlight memories for Pacer fans throughout his years. Just watching him at the end of a game was a treat in itself. Detroit won a championship in the same era, but I wouldn't trade my memories of that era for yours.

                          Now you could come back and say you had a lot of great Detroit memories from the same era. Detroit was in the eastern conference finals for about 6 out of 7 years, but you're already said that only championships matter to you in the end. Myself I would have loved the 7 year journey!

                          I just disagree that championships are all that matter in the end! The journey is the thing, a championship would have just been the cherry on top.
                          You missed the part when I already clarified this.

                          http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...=1#post1791985

                          I don't mean that nothing else matters. I mean the championship matters the most. The journey is also what makes it the most important.

                          As far as not trading the Reggie Miller era for the pistons....any fan if any team is going to say that, and honestly mean it.

                          I'll leave you with this scenario, though. If you could have traded Reggie in 2004 for a much more productive player that would have gotten you past Detroit and won a championship, you'd have done it.
                          Last edited by Kstat; 02-25-2014, 02:04 PM.

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

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

                          Comment


                          • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                            “Off the court, he’s a different dude. He’s a guy without a filter. Some people think about things they say, he doesn’t. But that’s my guy. He’s going to be big for Indiana I believe so. He’ll help them out big and they got a real opportunity here to try to bring that ‘ship home.”
                            -Nick Young on Evan Turner

                            Honestly, that isn't really news to me. I read Titus' book and it had quite a bit about the prickly nature of The Villain in there. Not that it's a bad thing, I just think it's funny.

                            http://blogs.pacers.com/2014/02/25/n...-bynum-turner/

                            Comment


                            • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                              Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                              I'll leave you with this scenario, though. If you could have traded Reggie in 2004 for a much more productive player that would have gotten you past Detroit and won a championship, you'd have done it.
                              I'm not sure about that, but it's an extreme and unique situation and has nothing to do with pretty much any other top player in the history of the team.

                              By 2004, it was clear Reggie was going to get his number retired here. You have to be pretty damn sure your player coming in is a 100% lock to get you the title vs. the guy you are sending out in that case - and, during the actual 2003-2004 season, there was no reason to believe the Pacers weren't as strong as they needed to be (at least, until the Pistons trade for Sheed, which was as I recall right at the deadline). Reggie was putting up 10 PPG but was known for turning it on in the playoffs, so trading him for the playoffs would have been even more a matter of looking into a crystal ball.

                              Now, change any one of those things (expected retired number player, great regular season from the team, player who was expected to be built for the playoffs) and you might be right.
                              BillS

                              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                              Comment


                              • Re: Granger traded to Philly

                                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                                -Nick Young on Evan Turner

                                Honestly, that isn't really news to me. I read Titus' book and it had quite a bit about the prickly nature of The Villain in there. Not that it's a bad thing, I just think it's funny.

                                http://blogs.pacers.com/2014/02/25/n...-bynum-turner/
                                Do you remember any examples from the book? That kind of stuff is fun to read.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X