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

[ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

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

  • #46
    Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
    Is Andre Iguodala worth of his contract? Is Josh Smith worth of his contract? Is Nic Batum worth of his contract?
    Not really, yes and probably not.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

      Originally posted by beast23 View Post
      Well, if we are really going to ponder inflated salaries. The US president makes 400k per year, which includes 50k for expenses. That means our president makes a base salary of 350k per year. The starting salary for an NBA player in 2011-2012 was 490k.

      Do we really need to argue which NBA players are overpaid? Yes,they are ALL overpaid. So, when we get right down to it, does it really matter by how much they are overpaid? I suppose there is only one accurate answer anyway.... "by one hell of a lot".
      Salaries of NBA players should be compared with salaries of other NBA players. Comparing them with other occupations is moot because their value is relative.
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

        Originally posted by beast23 View Post
        Well, if we are really going to ponder inflated salaries. The US president makes 400k per year, which includes 50k for expenses. That means our president makes a base salary of 350k per year. The starting salary for an NBA player in 2011-2012 was 490k.

        Do we really need to argue which NBA players are overpaid? Yes,they are ALLoverpaid. So, when we get right down to it, does it really matter by how much they are overpaid? I suppose there is only one accurate answer anyway.... "by one hell of a lot".
        I 100% agree with this. I'm a firefighter who risks his life along with others to save complete strangers. Yet I still struggle to make ends met. Yes I chose this life, not for the money. I'm saying our reward system is off. Our values in this country are backwards. Seriously when's the last time you heard about a important profession on tv.. now when's the last time you heard about Snookie? The important professions aren't nearly as high class as the entertainment sector.
        Last edited by sportfireman; 01-19-2013, 06:41 AM.
        I'm not perfect and neither are you.

        Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the esteem of Elohim,
        Ephisians 4: 32 And be kind towards one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as Elohim also forgave you in Messiah.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

          The Pacers cannot trade Granger this year. They need to find out what this group can become with him on the floor.

          Granger's salary is only an issue in the future context of signing other key pieces and the luxary tax.

          If Granger comes back and contributes to an epic Pacers playoff run then the franchise needs to keep him from a purely basketball standpoint but will have to make a tough financial decision on the luxary tax.

          If Granger comes back and the team doesn't look championship relevant then trading him in the offseason for young pieces and/or draft picks probably needs to happen. In Grangers absence I have done a complete 180 and now see how much this franchise needs David West long-term.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

            Yes, NBA salaries are inflated. That is just the way of things. Unless/until a teacher or firefighter or other important professions can find a way to get 20,000 people paying $100 a head to watch them work, that's the way it is going to stay.

            The truth is we are all worth what we can get. NBA guys are paid more because their owner wanted to pay them more. Life is unfair.

            Originally posted by beast23 View Post
            Well, if we are really going to ponder inflated salaries. The US president makes 400k per year, which includes 50k for expenses. That means our president makes a base salary of 350k per year. The starting salary for an NBA player in 2011-2012 was 490k.

            Do we really need to argue which NBA players are overpaid? Yes,they are ALL overpaid. So, when we get right down to it, does it really matter by how much they are overpaid? I suppose there is only one accurate answer anyway.... "by one hell of a lot".

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

              Kurt Helin ‏@basketballtalk
              Reports: Pacers may try to move Granger, but don’t bet on it happening http://dlvr.it/2q1yYX #PBT #NBA
              Hide summary Reply Retweeted Favorite More


              Danny Granger is close to coming back, sometime right around the start of February. On the surface that suggests the Pacers could get better — they have the best defense in the NBA but the 29th ranked offense (using points per possession). Granger gives them scoring and good wing defense, put him in the mix and in theory the Pacers get a lot better.

              Or, they may just trade him instead.

              That’s the buzz from a few places. ESPN.com’s Marc Stein wrote this:

              Interesting comments recently from Indy’s Paul George about how past Pacers teams all “had an ego to them” but how this one is “putting the team first.” Hard to imagine that the Pacers could find a trade taker for Danny Granger in the next 24 days before the deadline, given that Granger (knee) has missed the entire season so far, but it seems safe to suggest the end of the Granger era in Indy is drawing closer and closer.

              ESPN’s Chad Ford ads this:

              If they can get him back into the swing of things quickly — and get his trade value up — expect them to try to flip him fast now that Paul George has replaced Granger as the alpha dog of the team

              Pulling off a deal at the deadline will be hard because teams will be skeptical and not offering a ton after he missed months with a knee injury. Plus, Indiana is a team based around chemistry and fit where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. You have to defend well, you have to buy into the system and not every player fits what they do.

              But look for the buzz to start heading into the deadline. A deal could happen.

              I’d say a summer deal is more likely, but that also might depend on how the Pacers play during the playoffs — a deep run can change perspectives and plans. Just something to keep an eye on.
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                Kurt Helin ‏@basketballtalk
                Reports: Pacers may try to move Granger, but don’t bet on it happening http://dlvr.it/2q1yYX #PBT #NBA
                Hide summary Reply Retweeted Favorite More
                Wow, a lot of assumptions going on there. I highly doubt the soft spoken PG would publicly call out a guy he has said he looks up to.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

                  Someone older than I may have to shed more insight on this since my 10 year old basketball analysis wasn't that great. But could we have a Nick Anderson situation? I know Penny played point, but he was still a guard/forward. As Orlando got more talent (D3, Shaq, Penny) Anderson didn't have to be the near 20 point a game scorer to get to the finals, 15-16 was fine. Why can't Danny be like Anderson? A reliable scorer on a deep starting 5?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

                    Isn't it ironic that during the struggling seasons, you were told to be patient with the struggles and wait for the team to get better, then when things are getting better you became the #1 rumored player to be shipped out?

                    Hopefully these rumors will not affect what team is working on right now.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

                      RT @indyvnzla81: Any rumors from Indiana? ---> Danny Granger almost ready to return. They'll gauge where they are from there
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

                        Who would we even trade Danny for? The spot we could fill is the starting SG. We're not going to get much for Danny. I would guess that JJ Reddick and a pick might be the best we can even get. Is that worth it?

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

                          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                          Kurt Helin ‏@basketballtalk
                          Reports: Pacers may try to move Granger, but don’t bet on it happening http://dlvr.it/2q1yYX #PBT #NBA
                          Hide summary Reply Retweeted Favorite More


                          What a gloriously useless headline.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

                            Originally posted by thatch3232 View Post
                            Who would we even trade Danny for? The spot we could fill is the starting SG. We're not going to get much for Danny. I would guess that JJ Reddick and a pick might be the best we can even get. Is that worth it?
                            No.

                            To be "worth it" you're looking for someone who can be relied on nightly to be a focal point of our offense. Reddick can be a good guy to have, but Granger brings a different component, IMO. Paul might be the new #1, and he should be, but have you seen our offense? We don't have the luxury offensively to trade away a scorer like Danny for a shooter like JJ.
                            It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

                              Once upon a time, the Pacers traded away Chuck Person to make way for a certain skinny shooting guard from UCLA.

                              Not saying it was a good or necessary move, certainly there are still people in this forum who thought that trade was a mistake, but all I'm saying is don't be surprised if it happens again.

                              I'll point out too that Walsh also thought it necessary to move Jalen Rose to make way for JO. On the other hand, maybe Danny's temperament is different. Maybe he's more like Reggie in his willingness to move into the background. We'll see.

                              In any event, I don't expect a trade at the deadline. All bets are off in the offseason though, IMO.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: [ESPN] Keep Him or Trade Him? - Danny Granger

                                Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                                Once upon a time, the Pacers traded away Chuck Person to make way for a certain skinny shooting guard from UCLA.

                                Not saying it was a good or necessary move, certainly there are still people in this forum who thought that trade was a mistake, but all I'm saying is don't be surprised if it happens again.

                                I'll point out too that Walsh also thought it necessary to move Jalen Rose to make way for JO. On the other hand, maybe Danny's temperament is different. Maybe he's more like Reggie in his willingness to move into the background. We'll see.

                                In any event, I don't expect a trade at the deadline. All bets are off in the offseason though, IMO.
                                Might have been a championship move had it brought in a point guard who could actually play. Otherwise it was just one of several neccessary steps between 91-93 that changed the Pacers from a bunch of guys who could score but couldn't guard their position to a group that could defend and rebound with the best in the league. Also got the team a valuable role player in Sam Mitchell.

                                The situation with Granger is different. Person's body was already starting to betray him in a big way at that point. He was more of a volume shooter than multi-dimensional scorer and by that time he couldn't defend 3's or 4's. Granger can contribute on both ends of the court and doesn't need 15-20 shots to impact a game.

                                Short of a "gift" type of trade Granger only needs to move on if his return doesn't make the team championship relevant and the ownership won't pay both him an West.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X