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

Trade David West

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

  • #31
    Re: Trade David West

    West trade value likely would only increase near the trade deadline. His contract will only have 1 year left at that point and the contending teams might need West a need they either don't have now or don't realize they will have in February.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Trade David West

      The worst thing to do would be to trade him for middling talent that has multiple years on their contracts. West's contract coming off of the books in 2016 will be very nice if he's still around. Only trade West if you get some nice young talent in return that you cannot pass on, but don't trade him for "meh" vets. He can help PG win in 2015-16, then we can either sign him for really cheap after that and/or move on and use his cap space on a nice free agent (i.e. the method we used to get him in the first place).

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Trade David West

        Why would OKC want West when they have Ibaka? Make no sense to have 12 Million in a back up PF. LOL.
        Hibbert would be the trade to make in the situation with OKC.
        You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Trade David West

          Originally posted by able View Post
          one word about all threads like this: asinine


          I am sure some posters favoring the idea of trading West feel that way simply out of respect for him, and with the wish he mlght get a better chance at a title in his remaining productive years.

          Of course, the hope is also that the Pacers might get some young talent in return who would be able to help the team once Paul returns.

          Other than disagreeing with His Majesty, what is asinine about it?

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Trade David West

            Originally posted by Mourning View Post
            It's his subjective opinion to which he's entitled. I see no reason why his opinion should be qualified as absurd, even though
            I do not agree with the entirety of it (although I do think we screwed Danny over and he deserved better not to mention our decision bit us in the *ss and, yes,
            I too do realize it's a business).
            So we are allowed to disagree but not passionately disagree with it? It is absurd. To think that it is "karma" that the Pacers deserve losing their best player because they traded Danny Granger. Just like it is karma for the Colts to lose Luck for releasing Manning?

            It is absurd.

            Now it is not absurd to think that trading Danny away and getting a negative resource in Evan Turner, brought about the consequences of us grumbling. I disagree that it is the sole reason we played horribly later in the year.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Trade David West

              Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
              Why would OKC want West when they have Ibaka? Make no sense to have 12 Million in a back up PF. LOL.
              Hibbert would be the trade to make in the situation with OKC.
              West is a much better fit for OKC. Ibaka's strength is defensive. Although he is trying to develope an offensive game, that's is still the Thunders greatest need. West's offense would mean more to them than Roy who is also a primarily defensive presence.

              Plus, I value Roy for our team moving forward. He is a cornerstone of our franchise IMO and I don't see a realistic package that OKC would put together to sway me to trade him.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Trade David West

                I think many of the people who would want to trade West aren't that way because they think he's not valuable. He absolutely is. He's very valuable in any system, but he's especially ideal for a contender or a young team trying to make the leap. The Pacers are just neither of those this year, and they don't have much flexibility next offseason either. He would still have value to the Pacers, but other teams who are trying to win it all this year would potentially give pieces up that would be even more valuable for the Pacers in the future.

                The problem is matching salaries. Houston would absolutely love West, but they traded away every salary they had. OKC as mentioned above has potential, but both teams are close enough to the luxury tax that it would complicate the deal. GS might be willing to do a Lee+Barnes for West+Mahinmi+? (some cheap salary to try to match salaries better). Charlotte's another team that might covet West and have some young assets to give up, but matching salaries would be difficult.

                One other scenario is to try to convince Cleveland that adding West and keeping Wiggins is better than trading for Love. They could potentially get Bennett+Waiters for West+Watson.

                On emotion, I would love to keep West. The way the roster is shaking out though, it would seem to make more sense to trade him. The Pacers only have two rotation players under 27 right now (George and Hill) with none really on the way. For a roster that isn't going to win the title this year, that's starting to be a little scary.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Trade David West

                  Ya'll being a little rough on Larry, aren't you? If I understand him correctly, he felt the team got what they deserved for shafting DG with the way the team lost it's way, not the injury to PG!
                  Able does not like trade ideas in the regular forum area, he prefers trade scenarios to be under the Trade heading, IIRC.
                  Trade West and pieces for Love. That let's us screw Cleveland, Love and the T-Wolves. Send Love to the Lakers at the deadline for a Steve Nash bobblehead.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Trade David West

                    ....ugh. Minnesota is not trading Kevin Love for David West....

                    likewise, you do not want Waiters and Bennett. Waiters has all the signs of being a Stuckey clone and Bennett just isn't very good. Of course the Cavs would take it, because it would essentially be a donation.

                    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Trade David West

                      You really only trade DWest for a player you think can be a starter in the 2015 or 16 season, imo. I think that should have been the only move you made with him next year, anyway, if you weren't contending, prior to PG going down. I wonder if his agent will ask for a trade now, though.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Trade David West

                        Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                        Why would OKC want West when they have Ibaka? Make no sense to have 12 Million in a back up PF. LOL.
                        Hibbert would be the trade to make in the situation with OKC.
                        Ibaka can move to 5 when West is in. He's 6'10" with a ridiculous wingspan. They could use West's offense and leadership.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Trade David West

                          Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post
                          The problem is matching salaries. Houston would absolutely love West, but they traded away every salary they had.
                          Houston is still slightly under the cap, but more importantly they have a bunch of unguaranteed contracts acquired precisely for salary matching. The numbers can be made to work, if desired.

                          Agree with the main points in your post.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Trade David West

                            Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post
                            I think many of the people who would want to trade West aren't that way because they think he's not valuable. He absolutely is. He's very valuable in any system, but he's especially ideal for a contender or a young team trying to make the leap. Houston would absolutely love West
                            Houston doesn't have anyone that I would be interested in. Too bad they didn't match the Parsons offer.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Trade David West

                              I agree that David West has earned the right to determine his own future. He has been the heart and soul of this team since he arrived. If he wants to stay, let him stay. If he wants a trade, you trade him. I know he's stated previously that he wants to retire a Pacer, I wonder if the PG injury changes that? If winning a ring with the Pacers was part of the agenda as far as wanting to retire here?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Trade David West

                                Originally posted by CooperManning View Post
                                I want to see David West win a ring before he retires. After Friday night, his odds of that are slim with the Pacers. I would send him to OKC. D-West for Reggie Jackson, K-Perk's expiring contract, and a first. Makes a lot of sense for both teams IMO.
                                Why is that a good trade from Oklahoma's perspective? Westbrook is not exactly an ironman, and thus they need Jackson. (edit, I see that others asked & answered that, but I don't buy the answers!)

                                An overpriced expiring and a first rounder is what we'd get for DW,
                                not an overpriced expiring plus a first rounder plus a really good player.
                                The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X