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

Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

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

  • #16
    Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

    Originally posted by ECKrueger View Post
    Really, really disagree. They got Cope, then found a trade for Scola. Either way, I don't think Cope proves there is any thing between them.
    Bird mentioned something during the post season presser regarding Turner not being used effectively. I'm sure he would like to see his new acquisitions play well here. Maybe there isn't a disconnect, but Bird can't fully be pleased with the results of his new player acquisitions

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

      Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
      Bird mentioned something during the post season presser regarding Turner not being used effectively. I'm sure he would like to see his new acquisitions play well here. Maybe there isn't a disconnect, but Bird can't fully be pleased with the results of his new player acquisitions
      That's what I said. Turner HAD/HAS flaws. But Frank's highly-poor offensive schemes, and failure to know his personnel's strengths and weaknesses. Had a lot to do with Turner looking good when he got here, and then tapering off quickly as time went on. He would've looked better in Pop's system in San Antonio. They are masters at getting the most out of players of all shapes and sizes.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

        I'm down with Marion and Bledsoe/Gragic.

        Making a move for Bledsoe or Gragic would mean we're moving one of our core guys. Bird said he wanted another shot with this team
        "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

          Originally posted by PaulGeorgeHill View Post
          I'm almost convinced now that pwee and Grimp are the same person...


          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
          I can assure you we're not. I just wanted to write about some possibilities with free agency around the corner. Not saying any will happen, just some options

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

            Originally posted by Grimp View Post
            The article writer is in sync with my line of thinking. I love the idea of making a move for Dragic and Bledsoe. If the Suns want Hibbert, I say make the deal. Getting back Bledsoe or Dragic would give us our much-needed PG upgrade. All the while clearing salary, because Phoenix is under the cap enough to take on Roy and send back smaller-salaried players. We could have money leftover to throw at Gortat or Monroe.

            Most likely Gortat, since Herb doesn't like us pursuing Restricted Free Agents. Adding Jodie Meeks is another suggestion the article makes that I like. DUDE CAN SHOOT. And he is good off screens and going to the basket as well. I don't care for the Seflosha idea too much. Nor do I care for Paul Pierce. He's just too old and too slow now. We don't need more slowness. And he WILL NOT ACCEPT coming off the bench. Plus, he said after Brooklyn lost in the playoffs that he's done. Most likely will retire. By the way, here's a list of FREE AGENT CENTERS......


            http://hoopshype.com/free_agency/centers_2014.htm


            ^ In a hypothetical scenario, where we trade Roy to Phoenix for Eric Bledsoe or Goran Dragic? We could sign Channing Frye or Spencer Hawes to be our centers. Hawes is about an inch shorter than Roy. He's a good rebounder, and can shoot from deep.

            Frye is 6'11 and can shoot from deep. I'd trust him more because he's a veteran. But his health issues, albeit seemingly resolved scare me a little bit. Hawes or Frye, would be cheaper than Gortat. That'd leave us enough money to add Jodie Meeks who the article suggests.

            West
            PG
            Hawes/Frye
            Lance
            Goran/Eric



            LaVoy
            Copeland
            Ivan Johnson
            Meeks
            CJ
            Are you sure you didn't write that?


            Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

              Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
              http://inkonindy.com/2014/06/29/pote...agent-targets/

              It's a slideshow so I can post the article in here. I may have been off on the Suns pair as it seems like LeBron and Melo are their main targets, but you never know if they miss out on those 2.
              With what money?.... Lance is the only real option in free agency that can make a difference

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

                Once Bird said he wanted another shot with this group, I thought that meant there will be minimal changes to this roster. That's what I took away from it

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

                  Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                  The article writer is in sync with my line of thinking. I love the idea of making a move for Dragic and Bledsoe. If the Suns want Hibbert, I say make the deal. Getting back Bledsoe or Dragic would give us our much-needed PG upgrade. All the while clearing salary, because Phoenix is under the cap enough to take on Roy and send back smaller-salaried players. We could have money leftover to throw at Gortat or Monroe.

                  Most likely Gortat, since Herb doesn't like us pursuing Restricted Free Agents. Adding Jodie Meeks is another suggestion the article makes that I like. DUDE CAN SHOOT. And he is good off screens and going to the basket as well. I don't care for the Seflosha idea too much. Nor do I care for Paul Pierce. He's just too old and too slow now. We don't need more slowness. And he WILL NOT ACCEPT coming off the bench. Plus, he said after Brooklyn lost in the playoffs that he's done. Most likely will retire. By the way, here's a list of FREE AGENT CENTERS......


                  http://hoopshype.com/free_agency/centers_2014.htm


                  ^ In a hypothetical scenario, where we trade Roy to Phoenix for Eric Bledsoe or Goran Dragic? We could sign Channing Frye or Spencer Hawes to be our centers. Hawes is about an inch shorter than Roy. He's a good rebounder, and can shoot from deep.

                  Frye is 6'11 and can shoot from deep. I'd trust him more because he's a veteran. But his health issues, albeit seemingly resolved scare me a little bit. Hawes or Frye, would be cheaper than Gortat. That'd leave us enough money to add Jodie Meeks who the article suggests.

                  West
                  PG
                  Hawes/Frye
                  Lance
                  Goran/Eric



                  LaVoy
                  Copeland
                  Ivan Johnson
                  Meeks
                  CJ

                  I would LOVE to get Bledsoe or Dragic, but what in God's green earth leads you to believe a team like Phoenix who won 48 games in the west with a roster of athletes would have ANY interest in a guy like Hibbert?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

                    Grab Lowry let Lance go, move Hill to the 2, sounds good enough to me along with adding some key bench additions, this will also avoid Lowry going to Miami. And allow Hill to not have to worry about making the correct pass all the time and being able to focus more on his offense.

                    With that being said we will lose a lot with Lance being gone, but I think we could gain a lot from adding Lowry as well.
                    Why so SERIOUS

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

                      Originally posted by Really? View Post
                      Grab Lowry let Lance go, move Hill to the 2, sounds good enough to me along with adding some key bench additions, this will also avoid Lowry going to Miami. And allow Hill to not have to worry about making the correct pass all the time and being able to focus more on his offense.

                      With that being said we will lose a lot with Lance being gone, but I think we could gain a lot from adding Lowry as well.
                      How much money is Lowry going to command? If we lose Lance in a bidding war maybe this could be a backup plan. Personally, I don't see Larry just letting his boy Lance just walk away to sign Lowry although I think it would be a decent plan.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

                        Originally posted by PacerPenguins View Post
                        With what money?.... Lance is the only real option in free agency that can make a difference
                        There can still be trades made. Just b/c Bird says he wants to give the core another shot doesn't mean he can't maneuver. We also have a couple trade exceptions as guys like Morrow, Big Baby, Sefolosha, etc...won't be that expensive.

                        I personally think we'll at least one new starter. Either Hill or Hibbert will be traded or Stephenson won't be resigned

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

                          I would love to add Lowry, but that is another pipe dream IMO. Even if we don't re-sign Lance I am sure Kyle will command far more money than we will have available.

                          IMO he could command 12 million bucks per year on the open market, although he may give Miami a slight discount to play with the big one/little two.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

                            Lowery in a contract year always looks great. It it the year after that he is unwilling to play with any injury.


                            Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

                              Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                              Lowery in a contract year always looks great. It it the year after that he is unwilling to play with any injury.


                              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                              AKA Trevor Ariza Syndrome. Some team's gonna regret it.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Potential Pacers Free Agent Targets

                                Originally posted by ECKrueger View Post
                                (1) Lance Stephenson
                                (2) Goran Dragic/Eric Bledsoe
                                (3) Paul Pierce
                                (4) Jodie Meeks & Anthony Morrow
                                (5) Kris Humphries, Jordan Hill, Glen Davis, Andray Blatche
                                (6) Shawn Marion & Thabo Shefolosha

                                Out of those I'd like Lance back, either Suns guard, Morrow, and Shefolosha.
                                Let's be clear about this so that everyone understands what the Pacers Salary Cap situation is.

                                Assuming that the Pacers do not trade anyone ( see below ), the Pacers will be over the Salary Cap and only have the full MLE to offer any Non-Pacer Free Agent. That means that the most the Pacers can offer any of these non-Pacer Free Agents a contract starting at $5.38 mil.

                                That eliminates Bledsoe from the list.....he will command $9 to 10 mil a year....maybe even more if some Team goes crazy ( it just takes one ).

                                The rest of the Players on the list would likely be crossed off the list if Lance is re-signed ( which is likely ). At most, we may have $1.5 to 2.5 mil in Salary Cap space ( if Scola is let go and Lance is signed to $7.5 to 8.5 mil ). My guess is that we'd be looking at Morrow...but everyone else would likely get more then $2.5 mil to the Full MLE.

                                Even if Lance is not re-signed and we dump Scola.....the most that we can offer is the Full MLE to non-Pacer Free Agents. Other options would be to re-sign Lavoy or ET. Again, we're at the same spot as we were before.....the only Player that wouldn't likely be an option is Bledsoe....but no Lance. But then we'd likely eliminate some Players from the list since we'd likely have to fill the PG or SG Starting spot....which means that you'd likely have to cross the PF/C from the list.

                                Before you say that we just have to clear some Salary Cap space to go after better Free Agents....let's be realistic about the Pacers ability to simply dump salary. I am very sure that the Pacers will try to move any of the non-Starters ( Copeland or Mahinmi ) to clear space to try to improve the Team Salary Cap situation. I mean....if some Team offered you Copeland or Mahinmi ( Scola is a different case cuz he's an unguaranteed Salary and would likely be let go if Lance is re-signed ), how much would you ask for in return to take them off of the Other Team's hands? Many of you have such low opinion of these Players already.....why do you think that some Team will just want to take for literally nothing?

                                The answer is that it would require giving up assets ( something that the Pacers cannot afford to give up ) to have some Team take them on. If the Pacers could dump many of the non-Starters that you want to dump.....I would be amazed....but honestly, I'm not counting on that happen ( which is the main reason why I think that the Pacers have very little choice but to "Stand Pat" ).

                                IMHO....the most realistic scenario that I see is re-signing Lance and then signing Morrow for $2+ mil a year ( purely as a rotational but near elite 3pt shooting role Player ). That's the reality of our Salary Cap situation.
                                Last edited by CableKC; 06-30-2014, 02:43 AM.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X