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

Retooling the Indiana Pacers - Without Hitting Over the Luxury Tax

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

  • Retooling the Indiana Pacers - Without Hitting Over the Luxury Tax

    So this is the BLUEPRINT that I think the Pacers need to follow to retool this team without crossing over the dreaded LUXURY TAX.


    Step 1: Trade David West to the Pistons for Josh Smith. (Throw in a future 2nd rounder to make it work if necessary)

    West has been good for our team. Salary wise, this trade works. We'd only be on the hook for an extra $1.5 million of Joshes contract. Since West has 2 years left on his at $12 million. And Josh has 3 years left on his at $13.5 million. Not to mention, you never know what will happen in the final year of Joshes contract. Trade deadline and all, expiring's. Especially large ones are always coveted. But Smith has all the tools, this team needs to get quicker, faster, and more mobile. Get ourselves some easy transition baskets and run outs. Smith still has game. And while he takes the occasional ill-advised 3 pointer, I think our organizational structure and coaching will be good for him and his game. He's also closing in on "those years". So he will want to ride with a contender and win a title, without screwing it up.

    There was a game back in FEB, where he put up 32 on Dallas. An assortment and array of moves that West at his age can't make often enough. Smith can also run the floor like PG can. That will be a big help to us because we hardly score any transition points. Roy is naturally slow, and West is declining. This is also a guy who signed here after an ACL surgery. So whatever explosiveness he had in his legs, was mooted by the surgery somewhat. While age has stolen the rest.

    Josh back at PF will be a plus too. His natural position. But we get quicker, younger, faster, and more explosive. Not to mention, Josh is an above-average shot blocker. So we gain defense from that position.



    Step 2: Trade Hibbert and CJ to Portland for Robin Lopez, Mo Williams, and J. Freeland.


    Works financially. Roy would help Portland elevate their status in the West as a serious contender. He adds a defensive stopper, and some occasional scoring with the hook shot array. Portland now has someone who can blunt the many long-range shots they take on offense. Plus him and LA are friends. And he will have a mobile PF, and a TRUE point guard playing with him. That'll make his life easier, and could be the resurgence of his career. If so, we'll only see him and them twice a season so no biggie if he tears it up in Portland.

    Plus his contract is really only two more years. So it doesn't tie Portland up in HUGE, long term money and years. For us, Lopez adds a more mobile big to our team. He can run, knows PnR, he's a decent shot blocker, and a great rebounder. In the East, where there are no true centers....he'll do just fine for us. Freeland is filler, and Mo Williams and CJ are a wash really. Both are on similar deals. We just take Mo because maybe we prefer him over CJ. A Josh Smith/Robin Lopez front line gives us ALOT more speed and quickness than we were working with before.


    STEP 3: Trade George Hill for Marcus Thornton

    The money bit of it works. Hill's only got two more years on his deal. Marcus has one. But their money is similar. Almost an exact match. Brooklyn just has Hill for 1 extra year on their roster. And again, in an expiring year...they can always deal him at the trade deadline for nothing or a pick or something.

    Thornton gives us shooting from the SG spot. Which is what we need. He's streaky, and is capable of going off for 30+ in any game if he's hot. We saw that up close and personal last season. This allows us to re-sign Lance and move him to the 1, where he belongs. His size at PG would hurt opposing teams. His passing ability (when under control and focused, and more seasoned)...fits the position. And he pushes the ball early and often. No more WALKING IT UP EVERY DAMN TIME.

    Step 4: Cut Scola or move him. Move Ian as well. And cut Sloan. Sign Ivan Johnson to the vet Min.

    Saves us money if we can clear all these guys without taking back anything. Plus, we still have our TPE's to do something with. Ivan Johnson for the vet MIN, would be a steal at backup center. The guy does all the dirty work, isn't afraid to lay wood to guys driving to the basket, and is pretty athletic in running the floor and grabbing rebounds. Or we could resign LaVoy for cheap. A larger offensive threat.




    Our NEW ROSTER. Would look like this........


    STARTERS

    Smith
    Paul George
    Robin Lopez
    Marcus Thornton
    Lance Stephenson


    BENCH
    Chris Copeland
    Solomon Hill
    LaVoy Allen/Ivan Johnson
    ??????
    Mo Williams

    We could use our TPE to try and fill the back up 2 guard role. Or use our MLE to add someone like CJ Miles for cheap.

    Financially.....in this roster scenario? This is how we look next Summer.........

    Mo Williams: EXPIRING
    Robin Lopez: EXPIRING
    J. Freeland: EXPIRING
    Marcus Thornton: EXPIRING
    Chris Copeland: EXPIRING
    Scola (if kept): EXPIRING
    Mahinmi (if kept): ENTERING FINAL YEAR
    SLOAN (if kept): EXPIRING




    Now I am not sure how much in total would fall off our cap next Summer IN THIS SCENARIO? But we'd definitely be in good position financially to make some deals. And replace SOME of these guys with rookies and young players on cheap contracts.

  • #2
    Re: Retooling the Indiana Pacers - Without Hitting Over the Luxury Tax

    No don't blow up the core.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Retooling the Indiana Pacers - Without Hitting Over the Luxury Tax

      Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
      No don't blow up the core.
      We aren't. Our youngest players Paul and Lance are main-stays. We're getting rid of two slow big's, and a passive PG.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Retooling the Indiana Pacers - Without Hitting Over the Luxury Tax

        Originally posted by Grimp View Post
        We aren't. Our youngest players Paul and Lance are main-stays. We're getting rid of two slow big's, and a passive PG.
        How can you suggest getting rid of 3/5 of our starting line-up, yet say we aren't blowing up the core?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Retooling the Indiana Pacers - Without Hitting Over the Luxury Tax

          Originally posted by pacerfan4life031 View Post
          How can you suggest getting rid of 3/5 of our starting line-up, yet say we aren't blowing up the core?
          Well West and Hill weren't drafted here. Roy of the suggested tradee's, was. So in that regard, we're removing one 1/3 of our core.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Retooling the Indiana Pacers - Without Hitting Over the Luxury Tax

            Originally posted by Grimp View Post
            Well West and Hill weren't drafted here. Roy of the suggested tradee's, was. So in that regard, we're removing one 1/3 of our core.
            Being drafted or being traded is irrelevant.

            Bird....and most of us....consider the ENTIRE Starting Lineup....as the core. As in, the core of 5 Players that got us this far over the last 3 season.

            Trading away West, Hibbert and GH would represent a significant change that many of us do not think is necessary. Regardless of the reasons that you suggest.
            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Retooling the Indiana Pacers - Without Hitting Over the Luxury Tax

              We've gotta get quicker and more athletic though. This is the only way I see to do it.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Retooling the Indiana Pacers - Without Hitting Over the Luxury Tax

                No offense Grimp, but I don't think I could stomach this team. They would be horrible and not fun to watch.

                "Quicker & more athletic" does not automatically make you a better team. There were several teams that were "quicker and more athletic" that the Pacers this year that finished below them. You still need a team identity. This looks like a street ball team.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Retooling the Indiana Pacers - Without Hitting Over the Luxury Tax

                  Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                  Being drafted or being traded is irrelevant.

                  Bird....and most of us....consider the ENTIRE Starting Lineup....as the core. As in, the core of 5 Players that got us this far over the last 3 season.

                  Trading away West, Hibbert and GH would represent a significant change that many of us do not think is necessary. Regardless of the reasons that you suggest.
                  I think you could argue that Lance is not necessarily part of the core. But the other four certainly are.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Retooling the Indiana Pacers - Without Hitting Over the Luxury Tax

                    Originally posted by Shade View Post
                    No offense Grimp, but I don't think I could stomach this team. They would be horrible and not fun to watch.

                    "Quicker & more athletic" does not automatically make you a better team. There were several teams that were "quicker and more athletic" that the Pacers this year that finished below them. You still need a team identity. This looks like a street ball team.


                    Robin has been solid for Portland last season. Larry wanted him previously. Thornton is a solid 2 guard. The guy can shoot and is always there for the pass-out. Ala Ray Allen. Smith I think has just had some bad misfourtune. The Hawks rebuilt too fast for his liking, and then the Pistons had all sorts of problems from the top down. Mo Williams is a solid back up PG. Plus we'd be almost $16 million under the cap next Summer in this scenario. With all the expiring contracts.
                    Last edited by Grimp; 06-28-2014, 05:04 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Retooling the Indiana Pacers - Without Hitting Over the Luxury Tax

                      Just say NO to Josh Smith. His contract is horrible and his decision-making is iffy. Then again, it would be hilarious hearing the BLF crowd yell "NOOOOOOOOO!!!!" every time he pulls up for a jump shot like the Atlanta crowd used to do.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Retooling the Indiana Pacers - Without Hitting Over the Luxury Tax

                        Originally posted by Solomon Grundy View Post
                        Just say NO to Josh Smith. His contract is horrible and his decision-making is iffy. Then again, it would be hilarious hearing the BLF crowd yell "NOOOOOOOOO!!!!" every time he pulls up for a jump shot like the Atlanta crowd used to do.
                        No it wouldn't.
                        "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


                        • #13
                          Re: Retooling the Indiana Pacers - Without Hitting Over the Luxury Tax

                          Josh Smith.

                          LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLlll no
                          #LanceEffect

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X