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

{NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

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

  • {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

    So, I guess the owners can exercise self-control after all

    http://www.nba.com/2011/news/feature...ate/index.html

    $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players
    by Steve Aschburner
    Posted Jul 12 2011 12:14PM

    Escrow money withheld from all NBA players' paychecks each season will be returned to them this offseason for the first time, providing a $160 million infusion of cash in the midst of the league's labor lockout.

    The escrow funds -- representing eight percent of each NBA player's salary -- are held back each season to ensure that the players' share of basketball-related income does not exceed the contractually agreed-upon percentage, currently 57 percent. This year, for the first time since the system was introduced in the collective bargaining agreement that came out of the 1998-99 lockout, the cut to players will fall short, sources with the NBA and the National Basketball Players Association confirmed.

    When a final audit is completed later this month, the players will have been paid less than 57 percent of BRI and will be due the entire $160 million. It's the first time the players will have the full escrow returned, a union spokesman said.

    That cash could ease or delay the point at which some players begin to feel financial hardship from the lockout. Based on the "average" NBA salary of $5.7 million, the escrow rebate would be worth $456,000. A minimum-salaried player ($473,604) would be due $37,888 while a $16 million superstar could expect $1.28 million coming back.

    A majority of NBA players are paid from November through April, while those on a 12-month payment plan receive checks through the summer for the just-completed season. A check for 8 percent of their annual salary could put off any money pinch they eventually feel.

    Traditionally, the annual July audit is the time when BRI is defined, along with the salary-cap and minimum payroll figures.

  • #2
    Re: {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

    Well ............. THIS will certainely add leverage to the players union, and put added pressure on the NBA. Putting added stress on them to get a deal done , so a full season is not lost .

    A lost season would cost both the players and the NBA billions of dollars .. I don't think either side wants to lose that much money.. So I think a deal will get ironed out..

    Realistically , the worst case scenerio that is most likely to happen, in my opinion , is that nothing will get worked out till late December. The season would end up starting 2 weeks into January. I just don't see either side willing to lose a whole season.

    I think what will probably end up happening, is the season starting the end of November .. Like Friday Nov 25th , a day after Thanksgiving. When all seems at peace in the universe; Simply because as fans we will have been withdrawing all summer/fall .. ; and we will get the treat of Pacer's Basketball while being able to enjoy the delicious plethora of leftovers ...

    LOL ..
    Last edited by Kemo; 07-13-2011, 04:42 AM.
    "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

      It's starting to look more and more like this season will be completely lost.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

        If the players can hold out financially, then the holdout will extend as long as they don't blink. They want so many things that appear to be fundamentally opposed to what owners are willing to continue happen under the existing CBA. Owners have the money and access to other revenue streams that they can continue to hold-out for the deal they want. Players need to be willing to do the same - this, along with playing over seas as an option, are examples of how I think players are in it for the long-haul this time, not like in 1998 when the season was partially salvaged. I think we lose at least one season, and maybe part of next.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

          This certainly tilts the scales back in the NBAPA's favor.

          They can now argue that the league made more money than expected and that the owners are crying poor at a time when they turned a big enough profit to warrant the release of escrow funds to the players.

          IMO, the Owners should just work towards a 51/49% split of BRI with a hard cap of 75 million per team. The Owners will be getting 49% of BRI as opposed to the 43% they got in the previous CBA. That should be enough to eliminate most of the Owners claims that they are losing money and it will balance out the revenue split.

          They should keep the MLE and increase the Veteran Minimum to 1.5 million which along with a higher hard cap of 75 million should make the players less worried about their abilities to move around via free agency.

          That's a fair deal IMO. The Players have to give up more than they want in BRI and the Owners have to give up more than they want in the way of exceptions and Salary Cap limit.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

            I don't think it tips the scales in anyone's favor. To me, considering this is the first time ever the players have gotten it back means that the owners stopped spending money this last year.

            There's a reason why this is the ONLY year they've ever had to release that money.

            I think it shows that the owners started saving money at the beginning of the year, trying to cut down expenses and get into lockout mode, just like the players should have quit spending and started saving money.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

              Originally posted by Since86 View Post
              I don't think it tips the scales in anyone's favor. To me, considering this is the first time ever the players have gotten it back means that the owners stopped spending money this last year.

              There's a reason why this is the ONLY year they've ever had to release that money.

              I think it shows that the owners started saving money at the beginning of the year, trying to cut down expenses and get into lockout mode, just like the players should have quit spending and started saving money.
              I don't think that follows. Since it is Basketball Related INCOME, and one of the owners' bargaining issues is to add more expenses to that calculation, I don't think it has anything to do with owners saving money at all.

              I could have my mind changed if someone has a list of expenses that are CURRENTLY allowed against revenues to create BRI, but my feeling is that this kind of release isn't based on savings in those areas.

              I'd be more interested in understanding what % of BRI the $160M represents so we know how much it really says about the overall league income. I also thought that the escrow was taken from a player's contracted salary, not saved by the teams and added to salaries - is this correct? If so, this really just represents players getting closer to their full salaries for the first time.
              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


              • #8
                Re: {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

                Oh you're right. One of those days.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

                  I certainly don't think it's a game changer - that is chump change for the players.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

                    Originally posted by BillS View Post
                    I don't think that follows. Since it is Basketball Related INCOME, and one of the owners' bargaining issues is to add more expenses to that calculation, I don't think it has anything to do with owners saving money at all.
                    Exactly, the money is in ESCROW, which is not their pockets.

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I certainly don't think it's a game changer - that is chump change for the players.
                    Exactly, which makes their sweetheart deal even that much more ridiculous. The players are already well paid. The owners should not be forced to pay what is essentially a bonus check, to an employee while the company is losing money. And two-thirds of the league just did.
                    Last edited by Taterhead; 07-13-2011, 01:16 PM.
                    "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

                      Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                      Exactly, which makes their sweetheart deal even that much more ridiculous. The players are already well paid. The owners should not be forced to pay what is essentially a bonus check, to an employee while the company is losing money. And two-thirds of the league just did.
                      If what I understand is correct (and I'm still waiting for confirmation or refutation), that escrow is not additional money the owners put in an account, it is a percentage of the players' salaries that is held until it is confirmed how much of BRI they got in salaries that year. That means, if I remember correctly, it comes out of the players' pockets, not the owners'.

                      Now, that makes me revisit what I said to since86, because if the owners didn't pay as much in total salaries through 2010-2011 season, it WOULD in fact reduce the % of BRI the players got and therefore lead to the fund release. Saving money on salaries such that players get some of their escrow for the first time doesn't somehow prove that the owners are making more money than they said, but it also doesn't somehow help the owners by proving they can't cut their costs. It's a push.
                      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


                      • #12
                        Re: {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

                        Originally posted by BillS View Post
                        If what I understand is correct (and I'm still waiting for confirmation or refutation), that escrow is not additional money the owners put in an account, it is a percentage of the players' salaries that is held until it is confirmed how much of BRI they got in salaries that year. That means, if I remember correctly, it comes out of the players' pockets, not the owners'.

                        Now, that makes me revisit what I said to since86, because if the owners didn't pay as much in total salaries through 2010-2011 season, it WOULD in fact reduce the % of BRI the players got and therefore lead to the fund release. Saving money on salaries such that players get some of their escrow for the first time doesn't somehow prove that the owners are making more money than they said, but it also doesn't somehow help the owners by proving they can't cut their costs. It's a push.
                        I thought it was on the owners paying for taking in more than their 43%. My mistake.

                        A 57-43 pie is still a pretty sweet deal for them. It probably should come out of the players pockets with that kind of split.
                        "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

                          Okay, I'll ask.........................what the **** is esgrow?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

                            Originally posted by Day-V View Post
                            Okay, I'll ask.........................what the **** is esgrow?
                            Escrow is basically a withholding account. The players have to put a certain percentage of their salary into the escrow for the year. Its designed to keep their portion of the BRI at the 57% of league revenue. If at the end of the year, the total combine salaries of all players is under 57% of league revenues then that amount in Escrow goes back to the players. If the Salaries total more than the 57%, then the owners get it.

                            If you own a house you most likely have an escrow account set up to pay your yearly insurance policies and stuff like that. So you continually fund the escrow so that you dont' have to worry about paying a some large insurance premium every year along with your mortgage payment, since many people in this country stupidly live paycheck to paycheck.
                            You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: {NBA.com} $160 million in escrow money to be returned to players

                              Yeah the way it works it that a certain amount (I think 8% this past season) is withheld from each player's paycheck. Previously, at the end of the season, the league totals up the amount of BRI and divides that amount by the total of Player's salaries. If that sum is more than 57%, the owners get to keep that Escrow money and the money is split between the teams.

                              This is the first time that the NBA generated so much revenue that the Players get the Escrow money refunded back to them. Sure it's chump change but it's a bonus above the amount that they made this past season. It's more money to live off of for the next 3-6 months so if they miss game checks, they can still make ends meet for a while.

                              The main way this helps the players is that they can now say that hey you Owners have miss managed your money if you can still lose money during the highest revenue influx ever. Of course, this isn't exactly accurate but that's how the players will spin it in their favor.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X