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

Larry Bird stunned Lance left

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

  • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

    Originally posted by Peck View Post

    I also think people were not understanding Mckey fans nuanced humor there.
    I was responding to Since86. I think he got it.

    Not sure he laughed, but he got it.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
      Wait, can't you sign your own FAs even if that takes you over the salary cap? If that's the case then Lance really wouldn't have to wait about anything. We could sign Lance and work the S&T for Ian later.
      It's not that, but now that I think about it, you only need to get below the tax line by the end of the year, I believe. So you're right that you could do a trade later. (Although teams would know you are desperate and could hold you over a barrel).

      EDIT: Actually, once you've used the MLE can't go over the apron (=Tax Line+$4M) at all. So that leaves us about $2M short of signing Lance still, I believe. (And then you'd have to shed $4M later in the year).

      In other words, when a team is below the apron and uses its Bi-Annual exception, receives a player who is signed-and-traded, or uses its Mid-Level exception to sign a player to a contract larger than the Taxpayer Mid-Level exception allows, the team becomes hard-capped at the apron for the remainder of that season. This eliminates any potential loophole where a team could first use one of these exceptions and subsequently add salary to go above the apron, since adding salary first and then using the exception would be illegal.

      If a team is hard-capped, it cannot exceed the apron under any circumstance. If the team subsequently needs to sign a player (for example, to replace injured players) it must first create room under the apron by waiving player(s) with non-guaranteed salary, waiving player(s) with guaranteed salary and utilizing the stretch provision, trading downward in salary, etc. A team that is hard-capped can sign players to non-guaranteed contracts for training camp or the regular season, but must rid themselves of such players before their salary would take the team above the apron. A team subject to the hard cap can also sign players to rest-of-season contracts during the season, as long as the salary pro-ration keeps the team below the apron.

      A modified version of the team salary calculation is used for all transactions related to the apron and to the hard cap. See question number 14 for details.



      EDIT: or see this post linked by DrFife in the other thread
      http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ba...174942087.html



      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
      I really, really don't give a crap about Kravitz. I only care about what Bird said.
      This is Kravitz quoting (or paraphrasing) Bird. At least supposedly. Who knows, he could be making it up, misunderstood something etc.
      Last edited by dal9; 07-21-2014, 11:24 PM.

      Comment


      • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

        Originally posted by dal9 View Post
        It's not that, but now that I think about it, you only need to get below the tax line by the end of the year, I believe. So you're right that you could do a trade later. (Although teams would know you are desperate and could hold you over a barrel).

        EDIT: Actually, once you've used the MLE can't go over the apron (=Tax Line+$4M) at all. So that leaves us about $2M short of signing Lance still, I believe. (And then you'd have to shed $4M later in the year).

        In other words, when a team is below the apron and uses its Bi-Annual exception, receives a player who is signed-and-traded, or uses its Mid-Level exception to sign a player to a contract larger than the Taxpayer Mid-Level exception allows, the team becomes hard-capped at the apron for the remainder of that season. This eliminates any potential loophole where a team could first use one of these exceptions and subsequently add salary to go above the apron, since adding salary first and then using the exception would be illegal.

        If a team is hard-capped, it cannot exceed the apron under any circumstance. If the team subsequently needs to sign a player (for example, to replace injured players) it must first create room under the apron by waiving player(s) with non-guaranteed salary, waiving player(s) with guaranteed salary and utilizing the stretch provision, trading downward in salary, etc. A team that is hard-capped can sign players to non-guaranteed contracts for training camp or the regular season, but must rid themselves of such players before their salary would take the team above the apron. A team subject to the hard cap can also sign players to rest-of-season contracts during the season, as long as the salary pro-ration keeps the team below the apron.

        A modified version of the team salary calculation is used for all transactions related to the apron and to the hard cap. See question number 14 for details.



        EDIT: or see this post linked by DrFife in the other thread
        http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ba...174942087.html
        I see. Thanks a lot for the info

        Originally posted by dal9 View Post
        This is Kravitz quoting (or paraphrasing) Bird. At least supposedly. Who knows, he could be making it up, misunderstood something etc.
        I wasn't talking about the part that you quoted that Kravitz paraphrased. I was talking about Bird's actual quote that has been widely reported nation-wide (the "It's just disappointing, I feel bad about losing him and I did what I possibly could to keep him here" etc. parts of the article).
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

          dal9 is right, we're hard capped by the apron because of the CJ Miles signing. (I keep harping on the Miles signing, but it's nothing against him personally - in CBA terms it really took away a huge amount of flexibility.)

          Lance couldn't even sign our original 5 year $44m offer anymore, unless we waived someone first.

          Comment


          • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

            Originally posted by Mourning View Post
            Sure, a lot of us have been much more pro or anti Lance, but how you can not see some shift in general with the people with opinions in between (before it was clear he was gone) is pretty much beyond me. Sorry .
            I can see how it appears that way, but it is closer to the truth that people who have been silent are now speaking up.

            Look, I'm actually happy Lance isn't back here and CJ Miles is instead. I think it's going to work. But, I also thought Lance was going to be signed by the Pacers so there was nothing to say.

            I haven't posted much at all over the last few months because there was not much I could add. I didn't believe in the offensive structure, I haven't for a long time (wintermute in another thread linked to me actually criticizing the Pacers offense back in November when the Pacers were crushing the league).

            edit - Please note I'm not saying I predicted the Pacers falling flat on their faces. I never could have seen that coming. I just knew there was something wrong with the Pacers offense at the time I wasn't entirely sure what. I just saw PG playing out of his mind the Pacers offense was still ranked lower than what it should be if you have a guy like PG destroying the league...

            So once George Hill was relegated to basically the two guard position this past season, and his numbers crashed, and his play suffered there wasn't much I could say. He was playing bad in a role that wasn't meant for him but since Lance was playing pretty well, there wasn't a lot I could say. I do believe that I will be validated this upcoming season. The offense should work much better as Hill regains his role as fulltime point guard, and CJ Miles adds much needed shooting. We shall see.
            Last edited by mattie; 07-22-2014, 06:47 AM.

            Comment


            • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

              Also, as happy as I am with the Pacers direction, I don't think it would have been the worst thing if Lance was signed either! Honestly. I think Lance will be a great player some day in the right situation, so if the Pacers kept him, they would have kept what I believe will be a future all-star. I think if they kept Lance tho, the team would have needed to blown it up. I think Roy, Hill and West would have needed to been traded so the team could add some shooting at the 4 and 1 positions, and so that they could speed up the pace and completely change the way the team played.

              With Lance and PG dominating the ball, a starting stretch 4, and an absolute shooter at 1 (not a point guard, but a shooter) would be necessary. Sort of like the Miami heat last year is how the Pacers would have to go. The Heat put shooters around Wade and LBJ, the Pacers would have to do the same. Anywho...

              Comment


              • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

                Haven't seen this article posted, nothing really new, but does refute Kravitz points as has been done in this thread

                http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ba...174942087.html
                Last edited by Unclebuck; 07-22-2014, 09:16 AM.

                Comment


                • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

                  Bottomline with me is this. If lance matures, if he truly becomes a team player, if he stops most of his antics, if he learns to play hard when he isn't in the spotlight, if he improves his shooting if he learns to play NBA basketball, and if he becomes a better teammate, all things he is capable of doing, the the pacers made a huge mistake letting him go. And I don't care about salary cap issues or other player issues, but if lance does all those things then he will be too good to have passed up. I doubt he'll be able to do all of that and I seriously doubt lance and PG could have co-existed

                  Comment


                  • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    Haven't seen this article posted, nothing really new, but does refute Kravitz points as has been done in this article

                    http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ba...174942087.html
                    This article references an old article http://8points9seconds.com/2012/07/0...value/#!bjLFRU thats interesting from when they signed Roy/GHill.

                    Sorry if this is already posted.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

                      Let just end this thread with everyone thoughts on the following...

                      If Lance blows up over the next 3 years do you want Larry Bird to chase him in Free Agency? Should he be part of Larry's long term plan for this team?
                      It seems like several teams begin the targeting process for certain player years in advance now days. If this came to be true, Larry would be paying Lance a bigger contract than PG. Both Hibbert and West expire in 2 years. Would you be willing to see the Pacers make a few stop gap 1 year signings (ie- tread water) for one year to target Lance the All-Star?
                      You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

                        Originally posted by Peck View Post
                        Statistics are fine, they are important and even essential to an extent. However I think McKeyfan and myself share the same thought that you can not "not" view a game and gather the mathematics at the end and determine how the game was played and get a true picture of the game.

                        The deeper we get into advanced stats the more I am convinced that the old basic stats are still the most important ones and that a lot of these advanced metrics are subject to interpretation.

                        There is a balance between the two because as you point out the final score is a stat, but I also subscribe to intuition over integers philosophy as well.

                        I'm not going to disagree with anything you've said, but I'll just say that "I watch the games" is one of the laziest, narcassistic "points" a poster can come up with. Instead of actually, you know, offering a rebuttal I get a declaration of "because I said so."
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

                          Originally posted by Bball View Post
                          One of the problems with at least some of the advanced stats and their advanced metrics is the game itself dictates how it is being played by the players (and coaches) on a game by game basis and can negatively or positively impact things that the stats might seem to otherwise be saying.
                          Which is why you don't use single game stats, and use seasonal averages.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

                            Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                            Let just end this thread with everyone thoughts on the following...

                            If Lance blows up over the next 3 years do you want Larry Bird to chase him in Free Agency? Should he be part of Larry's long term plan for this team?
                            It seems like several teams begin the targeting process for certain player years in advance now days. If this came to be true, Larry would be paying Lance a bigger contract than PG. Both Hibbert and West expire in 2 years. Would you be willing to see the Pacers make a few stop gap 1 year signings (ie- tread water) for one year to target Lance the All-Star?
                            Ha ha, that's enough fodder to double the length of the thread.
                            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                            Comment


                            • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

                              I think chasing a top-level Lance in free agency would be a mistake for the Pacers. As has been pointed out over and over, teams like the Pacers need to find guys on reasonable contracts and fit them together - the Spurs model, if you will, since they never have had multiple guys on max contracts at the same time.

                              Chasing yet another max FA is a fools game when you can't surround him with solid, lower salary players.
                              BillS

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

                              Comment


                              • Re: Larry Bird stunned Lance left

                                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                                Bottomline with me is this. If lance matures, if he truly becomes a team player, if he stops most of his antics, if he learns to play hard when he isn't in the spotlight, if he improves his shooting if he learns to play NBA basketball, and if he becomes a better teammate, all things he is capable of doing, the the pacers made a huge mistake letting him go. And I don't care about salary cap issues or other player issues, but if lance does all those things then he will be too good to have passed up.

                                I doubt he'll be able to do all of that and I seriously doubt lance and PG could have co-existed

                                I stated after Stephenson took the Charlotte offer that I never felt he and PG could co-exist. I just feel Stephenson can't accept not being "the" player on a team. To me, it would have been too much of a urinating contest between the two as to which was the "greatest" player. Too much, "I" instead of TEAM, and that applies to both of them.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X