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

Lance's stock around the league ?

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

  • #46
    Re: Lance's stock around the league ?

    Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post
    Deng wouldn't be ideal, but if Larry decides Lance can't stay for whatever reason he wouldn't be a bad option. We'd certainly need a true PG if that were to happen though.
    I couldn't disagree more. A guy like Deng who's a more than accomlished slasher off the ball, would imprpve our off the ball movement which makes the need for a "true PG" even more moot.

    Deng would be a great fit both offensively and defensively as well as from a veteran presence point of view. I doubt the Cavs do a sign and trade for Lance but if they would Id make that move without batting an eye

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Lance's stock around the league ?

      Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post
      Because I believe Hibbert will never develop into a consistently useful offensive player and it appears teams has figured him out to some degree defensively. I also suspect his mental fragility will prevent him from playing at peak effort for this organization again and IMO he needs a change of scenery. It is just an opinion but no different than your opinion that Lance is a chemistry destroying cancer.

      West has become a complete liability on defense and history says that at his age even his offensive skills will decline soon. Rashard Lewis effectively checking him in the ECF was not a good sign.

      This team is no longer an elite defensive or rebounding unit. They will be even worse with Lance gone and given the salary situation it will be very unlikely they will have the cap flexibility to offset his impact on these areas of the team identity.

      I believe we have all overvalued the talent on this team during the current run and much of that talent is on the downside of its peak. The only two guys who have a high enough current baseline and can improve enough to offset this issue are Lance & PG (Solo is reaching). Until someone provides a smoking gun that Lance is the cancer you and others believe him to be I am erring on the side of talent and to me that means keeping Lance.
      More talent doesn't always equate to being a good thing. Look at Rudy Gay and how teams improved tremendously once he was traded away. If you cant get an adequate fit then yes, the loss of Lance would hurt. But if you're bringing in other players woth varying skill sets, then the loss for Lance and his talent isnt a huge loss

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Lance's stock around the league ?

        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
        More talent doesn't always equate to being a good thing. Look at Rudy Gay and how teams improved tremendously once he was traded away. If you cant get an adequate fit then yes, the loss of Lance would hurt. But if you're bringing in other players woth varying skill sets, then the loss for Lance and his talent isnt a huge loss
        Assuming Lance moving on is part of the answer getting the adequate fit is still a huge problem. The Pacers are effectively capped out and don't have a first round pick this year. As I and others have indicated a S & T with Lance is more likely to bring in a couple of crapshoot 2nd round draft picks than it is even a mediocre role player. If Lance leaves it is a very real possibility the teams best option is to sign Evan Turner and hope Hibbert not only gets his mojo back but actually improves.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Lance's stock around the league ?

          Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
          More talent doesn't always equate to being a good thing. Look at Rudy Gay and how teams improved tremendously once he was traded away. If you cant get an adequate fit then yes, the loss of Lance would hurt. But if you're bringing in other players woth varying skill sets, then the loss for Lance and his talent isnt a huge loss
          I honestly never looked thought of him being more than a scorer. I feel his defense is worse than Lance, and he doesn't make his teammates better. When he was talked about in trade rumors here, my thoughts were like: "no!"

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Lance's stock around the league ?

            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
            I couldn't disagree more. A guy like Deng who's a more than accomlished slasher off the ball, would imprpve our off the ball movement which makes the need for a "true PG" even more moot.

            Deng would be a great fit both offensively and defensively as well as from a veteran presence point of view. I doubt the Cavs do a sign and trade for Lance but if they would Id make that move without batting an eye
            So you want to get slower and have even less playmakers? And that's somehow supposed to make our offense better? Without a good pick and roll player to take Lance's place we'd be the worst pick and roll team in the league by far. We're already terrible at it, I'd rather not get worse.

            Edit: Paul would have to be the guy with the ball in his hands most of the time making plays if we shed Lance then add a SF and I don't want that. He needs an opportunity to play with a PG that can actually make plays and see the floor. I don't necessarily mean a Calderon type as long as he's an aggressive guy that defenses have to worry about. I still want Lance to be that guy though and think he can with the proper coaching.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Lance's stock around the league ?

              I think Lance really hurt his stock starting right after the all star break. Really showed his selfishness is more important than teammates and winning. Had a very weak playoffs too.

              I'm thinking he's currently $6M-$8M.

              $9M+ at this point would be overpaying. Maybe he takes a 1 or 2 year deal to prove himself again for a bigger pay day. He still has room to grow, but is woefully inconsistent at this point. Plus, some of his advanced numbers don't look very good either from what I've been reading.
              First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Lance's stock around the league ?

                Originally posted by BornReady View Post
                HAHAHA its a Pokemon named Kingler :P might be due for a change soon lol.
                Pokemon are cool and everything...but of all Pokemon...why Kingler...lol
                //

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Lance's stock around the league ?

                  Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                  Would a Lance sign and trade for Kevin Martin and Gorgui Dieng be enough to entice? If Lance could get that, then Hibbert could be unloaded.
                  Kevin Martin defense is as good as ET's defense......I'd pass on Kevin Martin for that very reason.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Lance's stock around the league ?

                    Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                    I think Lance really hurt his stock starting right after the all star break. Really showed his selfishness is more important than teammates and winning. Had a very weak playoffs too.

                    I'm thinking he's currently $6M-$8M.

                    $9M+ at this point would be overpaying. Maybe he takes a 1 or 2 year deal to prove himself again for a bigger pay day. He still has room to grow, but is woefully inconsistent at this point. Plus, some of his advanced numbers don't look very good either from what I've been reading.
                    I agree on this. I'm guessing that Bird's $$$$ in his head is around what GH makes....maybe a little more...up to $9 mil. He really didn't do himself a favor when he did what he did against LeDecision. It's possible that some FO may look at that as "not bowing down to the King" and be considered fearless....but I can totally see more "old school" FOs look at that as childish and likely how the rest of the Fans saw it... where you don't want a Player to "poke the bear" that is ready to strike.

                    If he could be had for some GH-like contract....then I would be okay with keeping him. But I would truly be surprised if some Team offers him $10+ mil a year.....if they do...then I am fine with letting him go via some S&T to get back a TPE or something.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Lance's stock around the league ?

                      Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post
                      For everyone proposing Sign & Trade scenarios for Lance the fact is Sign & Trades (especially with this CBA) are almost always lopsided in the favor of the player and the team receiving said player or some third party team with enough cap space to facilitate the trade. The team who owns the rights of the player rarely gets close to equal value.

                      Here is a quick and dirty rundown of last years Sign & Trades:

                      Milwaukee signs & trades J.J. Reddick. In return they receive 2 2nd round picks.

                      Denver signs & trades Andre Iguodala and includes cash and a 2nd round pick. In return they receive Randy Foye and a 2nd round pick. Utah makes out like a bandit (2 1sts & 3 2nds) just for taking on the contracts of Biedrins, Jefferson & B. Rush and enhancing their tank mode for 2014 season.

                      Sacramento signs & trades Tyreke Evans & includes a 2nd round pick. In return they receive Greivis Vasquez and 2 2nd round picks.

                      OK City signs & trades Kevin Martin and includes cash. In return they receive a 2nd round pick. Milwaukee gets Luke Ridenour, the cash & a 2nd round pick for facilitating the trade.

                      Milwaukee signs & trades Brandon Jennings. In return they receive Brandon Knight, Khris Middleton & Viacheslav Kravtsov. (This S & T wasn't terrible but even with Jenning's flaws Detroit clearly got the best player in the deal)

                      The only way I see where a sign & trade make sense for Lance is if he is without a doubt the cancer in the locker room. Even then this team will take a huge step backwards in terms of talent which will make them a mid-level playoff team at best and that is in the East.
                      Just a FYI....but you have to remember that the Team doing the S&T would get a huge TPE.

                      The Thunder received a $6.5 mil TPE in exchange for moving KMart and the Nuggets received a $9.8 mil TPE for moving Iggy. Both Teams will likely have suitors ( Bulls and Rockets ) when it comes to using those huge TPEs when it comes to trying to sign Melo.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Lance's stock around the league ?

                        I was watching the Starters on NBATV last night and they were discussing Lance's value. They seemed to think 10-12 per year, although one of the 4 guys on the show said probably more like 8-10.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Lance's stock around the league ?

                          I don't think Lance will get quite as much as GH but we're about to find out. I hope Larry's number is less then 8 mil and less then 4 years. If Lance gets more then that I hope it's with another team.
                          Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Lance's stock around the league ?

                            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                            If Bird re-signs Stephenson, which I'm not in favor of, the contract has to have team options in it to protect the Pacers.

                            I am very nervous about Lance and having those team options in place would be very wise. Lance needs to have something in place in his contract to keep him in check.
                            {o,o}
                            |)__)
                            -"-"-

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Lance's stock around the league ?

                              5 year contract graduating from $8 mill to $12 million. CJ Watson's and Copeland's contracts come off the books next year. We buyout Scola's contract this summer (partial guarantee). Keeps us close to under the Luxury Tax this year and we move forward building around Lance, PG, and Hibbert. Lance is only 23 and still has room for improvement and has the moxy and personality to be a leader on this team.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X