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

Jazz trade rookie Eric Maynor to Oklahoma City

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

  • #31
    Re: Jazz trade rookie Eric Maynor to Oklahoma City

    I don't get why people think this is a knock on Maynor, really. The owner probably looked at it like this .... we've got Deron Williams and he's going to play nearly the whole game. Then we're paying the luxury tax on 7.8 million dollars between the two of them. Which means they're really paying 15.6 million dollars for 2 guys who will play a whole 15 minutes per game.

    Yeah ... I don't know of an owner who wouldn't be willing to make that trade.

    -- Steve --

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Jazz trade rookie Eric Maynor to Oklahoma City

      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
      Um, NO. It shows we shouldn't move Murphy for a longer-term contract, sure. But if we could move him for an expiring then it's a no-brainer.
      I think you're mixing up my perspective on this. I'm not referring to the Pacers saving money. I'm suggesting that we could get something pretty valuable for Murphy as his contract comes closer to expiring. Murph's contract WILL become an expiring and quite a large one at that.

      We help another team out by trading Murph's expiring for a contract(s) they may want off their books. In exchange we get a player we covet. I don't have a problem with the Pacers taking on a long-term contract for Murph, as long as it's a player we want. I think this Maynor deal shows that teams are willing to give up value to save money.

      If the Pacers hold onto Murph long enough to where his contract becomes an expiring deal, then we're in the driver's seat.
      Last edited by pacerDU; 12-23-2009, 01:01 PM.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Jazz trade rookie Eric Maynor to Oklahoma City

        Originally posted by pacerDU View Post
        I think you're mixing up my perspective on this. I'm not referring to the Pacers saving money. I'm suggesting that we could get something pretty valuable for Murphy as his contract comes closer to expiring. Murph's contract WILL become an expiring and quite a large one at that.

        We help another team out by trading Murph's expiring for a contract(s) they may want off their books. In exchange we get a player we covet. I don't have a problem with the Pacers taking on a long-term contract for Murph, as long as it's a player we want. I think this Maynor deal shows that teams are willing to give up value to save money.

        If the Pacers hold onto Murph long enough to where his contract becomes an expiring deal, then we're in the driver's seat.
        The only problem with that is the team needing cap relief are usually prepared to offer a "star" that is either unhappy, againg, or posturing for a trade.

        If said"superstar" was all that why would they trade him in the first place?
        Sittin on top of the world!

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Jazz trade rookie Eric Maynor to Oklahoma City

          DU... I agree with your sentiment, however, the perspective that I (and I believe Anthem) was taking is that we CURRENTLY need to make a deal to get rid of one of those four contracts before next year. We currently will be over the LT threshold next year. If we hold on to Murphy (or others), we will be forced to make a trade NEXT year for roughly the same amount of salary and we will be hard-pressed to get under the LT threshold. If however we are under the LT threshold by trading someone away THIS year, we will go into next year with the financial flexibility to make a deal like you suggest.

          A deal like the one you suggest is a near perfect solution for our franchise going forward, but we will have to make a trade before we ever even think about a deal like that. It won't be possible to make that type of deal if we don't trade away one of our 2011 expirers this year. If that makes sense.
          "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Jazz trade rookie Eric Maynor to Oklahoma City

            Originally posted by Thesterovic View Post
            Maybe now Kyle Weaver is on the block? He could come in and do better things than our PGs.
            Weaver's not a PG though. That said, I do like him and think he has potential in the league as a defender on the wing. If we didn't have Dahntay already, I'd be interested in picking him up as a backup.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Jazz trade rookie Eric Maynor to Oklahoma City

              Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
              DU... I agree with your sentiment, however, the perspective that I (and I believe Anthem) was taking is that we CURRENTLY need to make a deal to get rid of one of those four contracts before next year. We currently will be over the LT threshold next year. If we hold on to Murphy (or others), we will be forced to make a trade NEXT year for roughly the same amount of salary and we will be hard-pressed to get under the LT threshold. If however we are under the LT threshold by trading someone away THIS year, we will go into next year with the financial flexibility to make a deal like you suggest.

              A deal like the one you suggest is a near perfect solution for our franchise going forward, but we will have to make a trade before we ever even think about a deal like that. It won't be possible to make that type of deal if we don't trade away one of our 2011 expirers this year. If that makes sense.

              I see what you're saying. I think I'd prefer to see TJ traded before Murph however due to Murph's expiring being more valuable. However I do understand that's easier said than done.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Jazz trade rookie Eric Maynor to Oklahoma City

                Originally posted by pacerDU View Post
                I think you're mixing up my perspective on this. I'm not referring to the Pacers saving money. I'm suggesting that we could get something pretty valuable for Murphy as his contract comes closer to expiring. Murph's contract WILL become an expiring and quite a large one at that.
                Right. But we'll still have plenty of expiring contracts... if Murph's only value is an expiring then he gives us what others (Dun, TJ, Foster) give us.

                Far better to have the cap space now AND two years from now than to have it two years from now.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Jazz trade rookie Eric Maynor to Oklahoma City

                  Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                  Harpring didn't rule out a comeback until well after the season started. I think the Jazz were more than happy to pay him if he could play and be their version of Jeff Foster (not so much just rebounding, but as in the feisty, reliable role player off the bench that the coach likes). Now that he's done for the year officially, the owner certainly wasn't trying to keep him around — plus pay the dollar for dollar on his deal since they're over the tax.

                  And if they didn't want to take on a long term deal, they had to do something to make it worth the other team's while. Since they have Deron and he'll never be supplanted, and since Maynor never has a shot to be anything but a 15-minute per game guy in Utah nor ever be a Barbosa/Jason Terry little guy at the SG, he was just that expendable sweetener.
                  Fair enough, that may have been their rationale. Although the perspective of paying $13 millions to have Harpring filling the role of lockerroom statesman and energy/hustle 9th man scares me. Anyway, now that I think about it, I believe my assumption that they could get a better deal in the off-season was faulty. IIRC, the Nuggets had to give away their 2010 first round pick to the Grizzlies in order to dump Steven Hunter's contract (which is pretty smaller than Harpring's), so there's a good chance the Jazz just never had a less costly deal available.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Jazz trade rookie Eric Maynor to Oklahoma City

                    Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                    Right. But we'll still have plenty of expiring contracts... if Murph's only value is an expiring then he gives us what others (Dun, TJ, Foster) give us.

                    Far better to have the cap space now AND two years from now than to have it two years from now.
                    One more thing to add.......if we are to assume that TPTB want to avoid paying the Luxury Tax.....which ( pretty much ) is a given due to the Pacers Financial situation....how much value are going to get in moving one of our 2010-2011 Expiring contracts when Teams know that we have to do it ( or else face the prospect of paying the LT )?

                    For opposing Teams that would be interested in any of our 2010-2011 Expiring Contracts, it's an option......for the Pacers, moving one of the 2010-2011 Expiring Contract is not a choice.....it will be a requirement next season. This IMHO weakens our stance in any negotiations.....if we don't deal...we will be put in a position that we do not want to be in ( pay LT ).

                    IMHO....trying to move one of our 2010-2011 contracts now gives us more options....where we can take on an 2009-2010 Expiring contract and clear their contracts off the books now. If we wait til the 2010-2011 season.....it will only impact our Financial situation that season since we will have to ( likely ) take on a long-term contract that lasts beyond 2010-2011 season ( which is what we did with moving Croshere to Dallas for Marquis ).

                    As Anthem posted.....if we get an Expiring Contract deal for Murphy, Ford, Dunleavy or Foster now......it's something that TPTB should strongly consider.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Jazz trade rookie Eric Maynor to Oklahoma City

                      While cap space does give you the flexibility to make trades like this, I think you guys are overselling its value. Eric Maynor is a good young player - he has a 50/50 shot of becoming a solid role player at some point, a starter/sixth man type on a solid team. To me that's his ceiling. So while it's a good pick-up for the Thunder, it's not like its life changing. And imagine what a team like the Pacers would have to do to get into such a position. Move Dunleavy, Murphy, and Ford for scraps? Dump draft picks and other assets to convince teams to take on their bad contracts?

                      You guys really think it's such an obvious advantage to dump overpaid but decently talented players like Murph/Dunleavy/Ford AND to give up tradeable assets in order to put yourself in the position of stealing a decent young prospect three years in the future? The Thunder can take advantage of the position they're in, but they're only in this position because of mismanagement in the past.

                      You have to account for all their losing seasons, their bad trades, and their dumb decisions that forced them into their current position. And, with all that said, really the only reason they have a bright future is that they got lucky enough to have the second pick in a year when the first overall pick distracted a team like the Blazers from picking a once-every-five-year talent like Durant.
                      Last edited by bulldog; 12-24-2009, 01:38 PM.
                      2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Jazz trade rookie Eric Maynor to Oklahoma City

                        Just FYI, the Jazz owner sent out a letter to season ticket holders regarding the Maynor deal to explain his rationale.

                        http://www.slcdunk.com/2009/12/28/12...ember-2009-131

                        Zach Harper asks some fair questions about the specifics and the owner's true commitment to going over the luxury tax, but my main takeaway from this was that it's pretty cool for an owner to try to breakdown exactly what he's thinking and not condescend people.

                        The NBA is weird in the sense that so many deals get made for purely financial reasons, and it's nice to see a small-market owner just say "Look, I'm not Paul Allen and we don't play in New York ... but I'm trying as much as bank account will allow."

                        Pretty cool.

                        (And, btw, I feel like Herb is pretty straight-forward about this stuff, too.)
                        Read my Pacers blog:
                        8points9seconds.com

                        Follow my twitter:

                        @8pts9secs

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Jazz about to make another move?

                          O'Connor Hints Jazz Are Close To Deal
                          Jan 04, 2010 7:39 AM EST

                          Jazz general manager Kevin O'Connor suggests that a trade could be imminent.

                          O'Connor hinted to the Deseret News that he's spoken to multiple teams about trade possibilities and that a deal could go down as early as Tuesday.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Jazz trade rookie Eric Maynor to Oklahoma City

                            not sure even who to speculate about, Boozer, maybe? AK47, there are a number of candidates.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Jazz about to make another move?

                              Originally posted by GrangeRusHibbert View Post
                              If we had expiring Contracts, Pacer Players that would make more sense for the Jazz to actually improve them for the Playoffs and there were Jazz Players that would make sense for the Pacers long term needs ( while not ruining ours and their Luxury Tax concerns ) .....I'd be like you. But since we don't have any Players that would make any sense for the Jazz and they don't want to part with any that would make sense for us, I'm not so sure what is causing you to

                              Now...if you are bored of Pacer Ball ( like me ) and are about this as a NBA Basketball fan....I too would wonder what Team ( other then the Pacers ) are working with the Jazz to make a trade happen.

                              Is there a Team in the League that is still under the Salary Cap for 2009-2010 enough to absorb most of Boozer's Salary?

                              I know that they have the Trade Exception from moving Maynor+Harpring....but I'm guessing that it won't cover enough of Boozer's Salary to get them under the Luxury Tax threshold. If there is, I'm guessing that Boozer is headed there. The Jazz have $82 mil owed for the 2009-2010 Salary Cap. At most IMHO, the Jazz are a 2nd round Playoff Team...and maybe ( if they are lucky ) good enough to be a Western Conference Team. Nowadays, we are looking at the Camby-like Deals and the one that sent Maynor and Harpring to OKC when it comes to deals that essentially are to avoid paying the LT. Either way, I'd guess that they are doing their best to get under the LT.
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Jazz trade rookie Eric Maynor to Oklahoma City

                                I've been looking at Maynor more since being traded to the Thunder. I've never thought Westbrook was great at the PG, so I see Maynor being the Thunders's PG with Westbrook taking Sefalosha's place at SG. Talk about falling into a trade that can set them up for the future. Why is it always some other team and never the Pacers?

                                I know Bird liked Ty Lawson, but my pick at PG was Maynor. Bird went with Tyler instead of either one.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X