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

Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

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

  • Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

    This was being discussed in another thread, and it made me want to learn more about it.

    As I understand it, in the NFL, you can apply the "franchise tag" to one of your players in an effort to keep him on your team.

    Can someone explain more of the basics of how this works?

    Can someone explain how it would/could/should work in the NBA to save small market teams from going through what Cleveland just went through?

  • #2
    Re: Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

    when an NFL team applies a franchise tag on a player it means that they are giving the player a 1 year deal worth the average amount of money the top 5 players of that position are earning.. so if top 5 QB's average 10 million a year, the franchised QB will earn that amount..i believe.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

      oh yea, once u apply a franchise tag on a player, its hands off to other teams.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

        Originally posted by Hicks View Post
        This was being discussed in another thread, and it made me want to learn more about it.

        As I understand it, in the NFL, you can apply the "franchise tag" to one of your players in an effort to keep him on your team.

        Can someone explain more of the basics of how this works?

        Can someone explain how it would/could/should work in the NBA to save small market teams from going through what Cleveland just went through?
        in the NFL it is the average of the top 5% of players at your position or + 20% your current salary, whatever is highest. Its a one year distinction. If someone signs them to an offer sheet the other team would be owed 2 first round picks.

        IIRC....
        "man, PG has been really good."

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

          Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
          in the NFL it is the average of the top 5% of players at your position or + 20% your current salary, whatever is highest. Its a one year distinction. If someone signs them to an offer sheet the other team would be owed 2 first round picks.

          IIRC....
          Average of the top 5 highest paid players at the position (hence players like Terrell Suggs getting into fights about what position they play), not the top 5% - but you're right other than that. If you're in the top 5, you get 120% of your previous year's salary (which is what you mean when you say +20%, I believe).

          There are two types of franchise tags - exclusive and non-exclusive. Exclusive means you can't sign with other teams (and is the more expensive of the two tags in terms of guaranteed money). Non-exclusive means you can sign, but the tagging team has the right to match within a certain period of time. If they do not match, the new team must give up two 1st round picks (unless the teams work out a trade, which has happened).

          There is one other kind of tag - the transition tag. It's basically a glorified restricted free agent distinction. The player receives the average of the top 10 players at their position (or 120% of the previous year's salary if they're already in that grouping) and the original team reserves the right to match. If the original team does not match, there is no subsequent compensation (in terms of draft picks).

          NFL teams can use either tag in any given off-season but not both. The franchise tag is traditionally the tag used because the compensation that must be paid dissuades teams from signing players.

          Just for the sake of example, let's assume the NFL CBA is the same after the next off-season (it won't be) and Peyton Manning becomes a free agent (a new contract is likely soon). His current base salary is just over $14 million dollars (I'm ignoring anything but base salary here). If the Colts were to tag him, they would have to pay him 120% of $14 million for the following season. If they couldn't work out a deal again the following year, it would be 120% of the previous tag number, and so on because the figure compounds on a yearly basis.





          As far as the NBA, if they were to try something similar, I would imagine teams could only use a tag every 3 years (or at least not on a yearly basis) to ensure that player movement isn't heavily restricted. NFL teams can tag less than 2% of their roster (1 player) on a yearly basis. If an NBA team could tag even one player, you're talking about almost 7% of the roster (if that teams has 15 players). Maybe not a significant distinction, but a potentially important one. You could have 30 players removed from free agency indefinitely. Assuming all teams have 15 player rosters, you'd again have almost 7% of the league potentially permanently removed from free agency (same math as above - though I suck at math).

          I'd have a hard time believing that would be added/agreed to without some major revenue/player salary concessions by the owners.
          Last edited by btowncolt; 07-09-2010, 04:38 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

            Here you go Hicks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franchise_tag

            Franchise tags are great for small market teams and the owners, but a lot of the times they just **** off the player because they are looking for the security of a long term contract with more guaranteed money. The teams can just keep on tagging every single year. That is what happened to Orlando Pace in St. Louis. They franchised him for what seemed like 3-4 years straight.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

              Originally posted by btowncolt View Post
              Average of the top 5 highest paid players at the position (hence players like Terrell Suggs getting into fights about what position they play), not the top 5% - but you're right other than that. If you're in the top 5, you get 120% of your previous year's salary (which is what you mean when you say +20%, I believe).
              This. And I forgot the rest of the stuff, other than the transition tag. I've stayed away from the NFL after the Colts won it all. No interest in it anymore...
              "man, PG has been really good."

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franchise_tag

                Plus there is a limit to the number of years an NFL team can "tag" a player, it is 2 or 3... I think 2.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

                  While it seems like adjustments to fit the CBA are certainly necessary, doesn't this sound like something (or something like it) that the NBA needs to add?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

                    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                    While it seems like adjustments to fit the CBA are certainly necessary, doesn't this sound like something (or something like it) that the NBA needs to add?
                    Something similar maybe. The big deal is will the players let this be added. I feel that the NBA needs to establish the Team > The Players as teh lunatics are running the nuthouse.

                    Maybe don't allow the tag to be used if you are over the luxary tax.
                    "man, PG has been really good."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

                      I do think something like this would be good for the NBA, it would allow small markets to keep their "studs" who want to leave and plan for their departure.

                      When one looks at the NFL and the NBA it is easy to see why one flourishes and the other is struggling.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

                        Originally posted by Ozwalt72 View Post
                        Something similar maybe. The big deal is will the players let this be added. I feel that the NBA needs to establish the Team > The Players as teh lunatics are running the nuthouse.

                        Maybe don't allow the tag to be used if you are over the luxary tax.
                        The players are not going to have much of a say on anything when the next CBA is negotiated. The owners are gearing up to hammer them good.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

                          it would be harder to have proper compensation in the NBA for losing your franchise player. 1st round picks are far less valuable in this sport. i do think its a good idea though.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

                            Originally posted by crunk-juice View Post
                            it would be harder to have proper compensation in the NBA for losing your franchise player. 1st round picks are far less valuable in this sport. i do think its a good idea though.
                            That's the crux of one of the counterarguments. Some teams would happily give up two 1st round picks for a good player. Low first round picks mean nothing to good teams.

                            I would think you would need a system similar to what might happen in the event of a team contracting. Let's say the Lakers signed Danny Granger to a contract the Pacers wouldn't match. You could put a system in place where instead of two pointless first round picks the Lakers can protect 1 or 2 players on their roster, but the Pacers get to cherry pick any player they want not protected AND take a 1st round pick back AND the signing team loses the ability to use their tag for 4 years. Or maybe the top 10 payrolls can't sign anyone tagged. Put a little bite to the tag somehow.
                            Last edited by btowncolt; 07-09-2010, 05:05 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Can someone explain the NFL "franchise tag" and how it might work in the NBA?

                              NBA players are never going to go for any system that doesn't provide long term stability. In order for them to allow it, a franchise tag would have to come with a three year guaranteed contract, not a one year, which is a possibility. There's no way they'd agree to one year.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X