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

Evan or Lance?

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

  • Re: Evan or Lance?

    You can't just neglect what Bosh has accomplished in Miami because who he plays with.

    Comment


    • Re: Evan or Lance?

      Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
      You can't just neglect what Bosh has accomplished in Miami because who he plays with.
      i agree, but he is not the reason they've won the last 2 titles. Lebron is solely the reason they have won them. Lebron won Miami games 5 and 7 this past year vs IND and Ray Allen saved them in game 6 vs SA.
      Smothered Chicken!

      Comment


      • Re: Evan or Lance?

        Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
        A list that mostly consisted of accomplishments from a team that wasn't even 10 years old when Bosh was drafted. When you are the only good player a team has had play for you team for longer than just a few years it isn't hard to get to the top of the lists. In many cases he wouldn't even make it to the top 5 in Pacers history, and in some not even top 10.

        As well you missed the part where Granger was on the 2010 Gold Medal winning World Championship team, or that while you included Bosh as being part of the rookie all-star game you neglected to mention that so did Granger.

        All-NBA Second Team: 2006–07
        NBA All-Rookie Team: 2003–04
        NBA Rookie All-Star Game: 2003–04; 2004–05
        Bronze medal winner with Team USA at the 2006 FIBA World Championship
        Gold medal winner with Team USA at the 2008 Summer Olympics
        Team record with Raptors option 44.2% (7 seasons) - 2 playoff appearances lost in 1st round both times (team they lost to lost in the second round)


        NBA All-Star (2009)
        NBA Most Improved Player (2009)
        NBA All-Rookie Second Team (2006)
        NBA Rookie All-Star Game: 06; 07
        Gold medal winner with Team USA at the 2010 FIBA World Championship
        Team record with Pacers prior to his injury 46.4 (7 seasons) Playoffs 3 seasons (lost in first round twice (once to an ECF team) and lost once in 2nd round to eventual NBA Champs)

        As far as I am concerned that is the comparison right there.


        By the way BnG, I have never said Granger was better than JO. In his prime JO was obviously more talented than both Granger and Bosh.



        Daschysta so you are saying two season with a better PPG than Bosh's best season is comparable to Bosh's average season? Granger's scoring statistics are actually quite similar to Bosh's, especially when you look at per 36. When you go beyond popularity Granger and Bosh are very similar players for their respective positions.
        It's a joke to compare what Bosh ever had with our team in the lockout year, which significantly inflates your win percentages there. Plus accolades are clearly in Boshes favor so are stats, winning and he is believe it or not a big part of 2 championships...
        Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

        Comment


        • Re: Evan or Lance?

          Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
          i agree, but he is not the reason they've won the last 2 titles. Lebron is solely the reason they have won them. Lebron won Miami games 5 and 7 this past year vs IND and Ray Allen saved them in game 6 vs SA.
          LeBron is the main reason yes. But if its just LeBron and Wade with an average PF in Miami, they don't win a single title. Bosh has been an important cog to that team.

          Comment


          • Re: Evan or Lance?

            Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
            LeBron is the main reason yes. But if its just LeBron and Wade with an average PF in Miami, they don't win a single title. Bosh has been an important cog to that team.
            I'll go a step further: I think Bosh has been a more important cog to the Heat than Wade during the title runs. I don't think Bosh is a first option on a title contending team, but he has adapted to his role in Miami perfectly.

            Comment


            • Re: Evan or Lance?

              Originally posted by owl View Post
              These words of wisdom can apply to all of us no matter the age. There are no guarantees on tomorrow.
              Yes and no.

              We could all die tomorrow... true.

              Your time is limited when you're 80.

              And I'm assuming we have no billionaires on this site so none of us know what that is like.



              It's his money so he can do as he pleases. I just know if I had that kind of money and I was closer to the end of the spectrum, I'd like to enjoy it a bit. I imagine the Pacers are his biggest hobby. My favorite teams are a huge hobby for me, and again... I have nothing invested other than enjoyment of the game and seeing them be successful. If I was 80 and had a networth of 2 billion dollars, I'd be willing to burn 50 million in a fire place to go above the luxury tax if it meant a title(s).

              Again... I won't fault him whatever he chooses. It's his money. Even if we overlook the fact that he has 10-20 years left at best, the Pacers winning means a lot to a lot of people. I've never been to a Pacers game because I've never been to Indiana but I became a fan and I'm a diehard fan. If seeing them win means this much to me, it should mean more to him and even more to fans who are in Indy and have been lucky enough to attend games. I'm just a fan and I have this strong of an opinion. I couldn't imagine how strongly I'd feel as an owner. And to some extent, he should feel a slight obligation to oblige to fans. Without the fans, the team doesn't exist because there would be nobody buying tickets. It's a win-win-win if he spends the extra money. He puts together the best team possible for as long as possible. He can win titles. And he can give the fans titles.

              Given his age and bank account... I say go all out. I wouldn't burn the house down but I'd gladly go from 2 billion to 1.9 billion if it meant my team won titles as I rode off into the sunset. --- I don't even think he'd lose 100 million to pay for both Stephenson and Turner to go into the luxury tax. In the end, he might lose 50 million for 3 years of going above the luxury tax. That would totally be worth it for 1 title. If not 3. This is a great team. A lot of teams don't get opportunities like this and you have no opportunities like this when you're gone.
              "I have never taken the high road, but I tell other people to ’cause then there’s more room for me on the low road."

              Comment


              • Re: Evan or Lance?

                Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                I don't disagree necessarily, but Simon got to where he is today by being a prudent and savvy businessman first and foremost. Recklessly throwing out money to gamble on winning a title might go against the very grain that has made him so financially successful in the first place.
                I agree.

                I'm just saying... we're all living on borrowed time. I'm under 30 so I expect to live for a while longer. At the age of 80.... I wouldn't expect to make it to 100. In fact, I wouldn't want to live to 100. That's a personal preference though. I just feel like given the point he's at in his life, why not? Would you rather die with a large digital number in your bank account or witness your favorite team win a championship? I don't know about you, but I don't find much excitement in looking at my bank statement. If he fancies that, to each their own.
                "I have never taken the high road, but I tell other people to ’cause then there’s more room for me on the low road."

                Comment


                • Re: Evan or Lance?

                  Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
                  i agree, but he is not the reason they've won the last 2 titles. Lebron is solely the reason they have won them. Lebron won Miami games 5 and 7 this past year vs IND and Ray Allen saved them in game 6 vs SA.
                  Fantastic offensive rebound and pass by Bosh as well.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Evan or Lance?

                    Originally posted by TOP View Post
                    Yes and no.

                    We could all die tomorrow... true.

                    Your time is limited when you're 80.

                    And I'm assuming we have no billionaires on this site so none of us know what that is like.



                    It's his money so he can do as he pleases. I just know if I had that kind of money and I was closer to the end of the spectrum, I'd like to enjoy it a bit. I imagine the Pacers are his biggest hobby. My favorite teams are a huge hobby for me, and again... I have nothing invested other than enjoyment of the game and seeing them be successful. If I was 80 and had a networth of 2 billion dollars, I'd be willing to burn 50 million in a fire place to go above the luxury tax if it meant a title(s).

                    Again... I won't fault him whatever he chooses. It's his money. Even if we overlook the fact that he has 10-20 years left at best, the Pacers winning means a lot to a lot of people. I've never been to a Pacers game because I've never been to Indiana but I became a fan and I'm a diehard fan. If seeing them win means this much to me, it should mean more to him and even more to fans who are in Indy and have been lucky enough to attend games. I'm just a fan and I have this strong of an opinion. I couldn't imagine how strongly I'd feel as an owner. And to some extent, he should feel a slight obligation to oblige to fans. Without the fans, the team doesn't exist because there would be nobody buying tickets. It's a win-win-win if he spends the extra money. He puts together the best team possible for as long as possible. He can win titles. And he can give the fans titles.

                    Given his age and bank account... I say go all out. I wouldn't burn the house down but I'd gladly go from 2 billion to 1.9 billion if it meant my team won titles as I rode off into the sunset. --- I don't even think he'd lose 100 million to pay for both Stephenson and Turner to go into the luxury tax. In the end, he might lose 50 million for 3 years of going above the luxury tax. That would totally be worth it for 1 title. If not 3. This is a great team. A lot of teams don't get opportunities like this and you have no opportunities like this when you're gone.
                    If the only penalty for the luxury tax was just paying more money then I'm sure Simon would do it. Because of the new CBA there are a lot more reasons not to go into the tax and heavy restrictions that go along with it. You can't use the same exceptions as non-LT teams, there are restrictions on sign and trades. etc.

                    What the Pacers really want to avoid is paying the tax multiple years and getting into the repeater tax. We want to save our luxury tax for as long as possible because eventually Roy's deal expires and he'll be capable of making a lot more money. We have to avoid the luxury tax now in the event that we need it a couple of years down the line. As nice as it sounds to splurge and pay Evan and Lance right now, you're crippling the team for the next 3-5 years by doing it.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Evan or Lance?

                      Originally posted by BillS View Post
                      See, we no longer have DG's contract on the books. Before, DG's contract would have merely come off the books. Get it?

                      Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk
                      yea but PGs deal kicks in next year, so its pretty much a wash

                      Comment


                      • Re: Evan or Lance?

                        Originally posted by PG-24 View Post
                        yea but PGs deal kicks in next year, so its pretty much a wash
                        Yes, I agree with this. Paul's new contract takes all his money from this year and all of Danny's money also. IIRC, we were left with approx. $7.7 million in Cap to resign Scola, Lance, our draft picks and Danny. This was not going to happen and still probably still won't. We will still need to clear some serious Cap to keep either of Lance or Evan and move either Scola or Ian, or both with no salary coming back. Bird has said they are all in for this year's Championship run and he was not joking.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Evan or Lance?

                          Originally posted by Cousy47 View Post
                          Yes, I agree with this. Paul's new contract takes all his money from this year and all of Danny's money also. IIRC, we were left with approx. $7.7 million in Cap to resign Scola, Lance, our draft picks and Danny. This was not going to happen and still probably still won't. We will still need to clear some serious Cap to keep either of Lance or Evan and move either Scola or Ian, or both with no salary coming back. Bird has said they are all in for this year's Championship run and he was not joking.
                          You can go over the salary cap to re-sign your own players--which is what we will do in order to re-sign Lance or Evan.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Evan or Lance?

                            Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
                            If the only penalty for the luxury tax was just paying more money then I'm sure Simon would do it. Because of the new CBA there are a lot more reasons not to go into the tax and heavy restrictions that go along with it. You can't use the same exceptions as non-LT teams, there are restrictions on sign and trades. etc.

                            What the Pacers really want to avoid is paying the tax multiple years and getting into the repeater tax. We want to save our luxury tax for as long as possible because eventually Roy's deal expires and he'll be capable of making a lot more money. We have to avoid the luxury tax now in the event that we need it a couple of years down the line. As nice as it sounds to splurge and pay Evan and Lance right now, you're crippling the team for the next 3-5 years by doing it.
                            Roy can opt out after next year and I don't even think we can pretend to not pay him a max 30% deal. That's why it would really help to have Scola's deal come off the books at the same time as Roy and we can't really afford to dump Scola next year and spend that money on Lance or Evan. It's going to be really hard to keep either of them but I think Bird will get that done. Keeping both is almost out of the question.
                            Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Evan or Lance?

                              Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                              Roy can opt out after next year and I don't even think we can pretend to not pay him a max 30% deal.
                              With the way he's played lately ?? Too many 5 point, 3 rebound games to think he's worth that much.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Evan or Lance?

                                Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                                With the way he's played lately ?? Too many 5 point, 3 rebound games to think he's worth that much.
                                I think he'll pick that up and play more aggressively as the season winds down. However it doesn't matter, he's the best defensive player in the nba and a franchise player because of that. If we don't want to make it seamless and hand him the max contract the day he opts out, then he'll have a number of teams in line to do it.
                                Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X