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: Best Fits for Remaining Top FA

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    ESPN: Best Fits for Remaining Top FA

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story...ng-free-agents

    Let the matchmaking begin.

    Although Kevin Garnett and Gerald Wallace reportedly are already off the market, there are still plenty of big names looking for jobs in the NBA as free agency heats up.

    Where will they go?

    Considering cap space, playoff contention and team needs, let's take a look at the best fits for the remaining top 10 free agents.

    PG Deron Williams

    Best fit: Brooklyn Nets
    Next-best: Dallas Mavericks

    There are only a handful of teams who can offer the max deal that Williams warrants, but only the Nets can offer a real chance at winning right away. With Wallace, Joe Johnson and (likely) Brook Lopez in tow, the Nets have the makings of a top-four team in the East if Williams stays aboard.

    The Mavericks can't pony up the max-level cash, but the Texas native could head there if he values a shot at a championship more than fame and money. While the Nets are building a strong team in the East, Western Conference teams have to be rooting against a Nowitkzi-Williams pairing. Whatever the case, Williams has made it clear it's between Brooklyn or Big D.

    SG Eric Gordon (restricted)

    Best fit: New Orleans Hornets
    Next-best: Indiana Pacers
    The dark horse: Phoenix Suns

    Don't let New Orleans' selection of Austin Rivers fool you -- the shooting guard spot has Gordon's name on it. Gordon and Anthony Davis could be one of the top young duos going forward, but don't expect the Hornets to be the only one calling.

    Along with James Harden, Gordon is one of the league's best young wing players and could possibly see a near max-contract offer from Indiana, his home state. But Gordon is a restricted free agent so the Hornets can match any offer sent his way. And all indications are that they will. Gordon can get the money he wants -- and the ball whenever he wants -- in the Big Easy.

    PG Steve Nash

    Best fit: Indiana Pacers
    Next-best: Toronto Raptors
    The dark horse: Dallas Mavericks

    As our own John Hollinger pointed out, an Indiana-Nash partnership makes all the sense in the world from a basketball standpoint. They're on the cusp of championship contention, they have the cap space to offer him a $10 million-plus, three-year deal, and they have an open slot at point guard to boot (George Hill can slide to the 2 if needed).

    Alas, when it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. The city of Indianapolis probably won't lure any top free agents until it moves to a coast. Toronto has a three-year, $36 million offer out to Nash, even if it can't offer a shot at a title.

    C Roy Hibbert (restricted)

    Best fit: Indiana Pacers
    Next-best: Portland Trail Blazers
    The dark horse: Cleveland Cavaliers

    So, with the Trail Blazers reportedly throwing the max at Hibbert, the question becomes, will Indiana match it? They should if they plan on capitalizing on their meteoric rise in recent years.

    Hibbert led the Pacers by taking huge strides in his efficiency and rebounding numbers while providing a nice complement to David West's inside-out game. While the Blazers can build a towering front line with Hibbert and LaMarcus Aldridge, the Pacers offer more certainty on next season's roster and likely more W's.

    PF Ryan Anderson (restricted)

    Best fit: Orlando Magic
    Next-best: Phoenix Suns
    The dark horse: Sacramento Kings

    Like Gordon, it's a good bet that Anderson won't be switching jerseys this summer since he's a restricted free agent. However, you can't rule out anything with the Dwight Howard situation that's playing out in Orlando. Anderson took his game to new heights with a career-high 21.2 player efficiency rating in 2011-12, but can he be an adequate defender without Howard if the center bolts?

    Few players are as efficient as Anderson at the power forward position, but new GM Rob Hennigan might face a difficult decision when someone inevitably offers the young stretch 4 a bloated deal.

    C Brook Lopez (restricted)

    Best fit: Brooklyn Nets
    Next-best: Portland Trail Blazers
    The dark horse: Indiana Pacers

    Every indication is that the Nets will reel in the restricted free agent and debut the Brooklyn arena with Lopez anchoring the paint. It makes sense on all fronts, especially if he can fully recover from his foot surgery.

    There are some red flags here -- namely, the problematic foot and an allergy to rebounding -- but a 24-year-old 7-footer who can consistently average 20 points a night and do so efficiently? That's a franchise cornerstone. Don't be surprised if the Blazers jump in the bidding if Hibbert stays in Indiana.

    SG Ray Allen

    Best fit: Boston Celtics
    Next-best: Miami Heat
    The dark horse: Los Angeles Clippers

    There's no doubt that the Heat can give Allen a better shot at a title next season, but at what price? The Heat won't have nearly enough dough to offer as the Celtics (the Heat have only an annual $3 million exception to flaunt). Though the starting gig might be out of reach for both squads, Allen could get far more money by returning to the Celtics than venturing elsewhere.

    With the Celtics bringing back Garnett and potentially getting a draft day steal in Jared Sullinger, the end of the Big Three era may not be as close as we originally thought.

    PG Jeremy Lin (restricted)

    Best fit: Phoenix Suns
    Next-best: New York Knicks
    Less snug fit: Toronto Raptors

    The expectation here is that Lin will find himself on the Knicks roster next season and beyond. But the 2011-12 season taught us that Lin's game isn't optimized with an isolation-heavy offense filled with players who struggled to play off the ball (i.e. Carmelo Anthony and Amare Stoudemire). Lin could get his stage and money in New York, but he might be better off blossoming elsewhere.

    If Phoenix offered a back-loaded "Omer Asik deal" to Lin, it might deter the Knicks from matching, Chris Broussard reports. The Suns could look to Lin as a replacement for Nash if he doesn't return and give him the offense in which he could thrive.

    PF Ersan Ilyasova

    Best fit: Phoenix Suns
    Next-best: Milwaukee Bucks
    The dark horse: New Orleans Hornets

    The Suns are an interesting team this summer. They have gobs of cash to throw at a free agent, but they haven't necessarily been a destination for an elite player since Nash joined eight summers ago. If they strike out on landing Nash or Gordon, they might feel pressured to overpay for a lower-tiered player (here's looking at you, Ilyasova).

    The Bucks have already stockpiled big men this summer (Samuel Dalembert and John Henson), which means Ilyasova might be squeezed out. As a stretch 4 and rebounding monster, Ilysaova would be a big upgrade from Channing Frye.

    SF Nicolas Batum (restricted)

    Best fit: Minnesota Timberwolves
    Next-best: Portland Trail Blazers
    The dark horse: Dallas Mavericks

    It looks like a two-horse race between the Blazers and the Timberwolves for the services of the stretch wing player. Of course, since Batum is a restricted free agent, the Blazers have the last say on where he goes, and if they lose out on Hibbert, they might feel more compelled to match a big offer from Minnesota.

    In terms of on-court fit, the Timberwolves, who entered the offseason starving for a shooting guard who could, you know, shoot, offer Batum a stronger bet to reach the playoffs now and in the future.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: ESPN: Best Fits for Remaining Top FA

    And here comes another EJ thread.....

    Thanks for posting, although I don't agree with all it was a good read.
    Senior at the University of Louisville.
    Greenfield ---> The Ville

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: ESPN: Best Fits for Remaining Top FA

      thanks

      they also have us listed in Brook Lopez
      "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
      -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: ESPN: Best Fits for Remaining Top FA

        The mention of us being a Dark Horse for Brook Lopez is intriguing. If Hibbert goes that is a nice back-up plan. Defensively and rebounding wise it isn't ideal but Offensively he would give us a dynamic we haven't had since JO.
        I don't want to sound condescending, which means to talk down to you by the way

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: ESPN: Best Fits for Remaining Top FA

          I feel like the author just threw us in as the dark horse for Lopez because it could make sense on paper. He didn't even mention us in the little blurb

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: ESPN: Best Fits for Remaining Top FA

            Would not mind Brook at all, has the potential to be a efficent 20 10 guy, averaged more than 1.5 blocks per game every season, that is who I originally wanted to fall to us in that draft.

            An interesting thing is that he may be a better investment long term, when balancing money and potential with Roy. I wonder what kind of offers he has been getting, if any.
            Why so SERIOUS

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: ESPN: Best Fits for Remaining Top FA

              Originally posted by Really? View Post
              Would not mind Brook at all, has the potential to be a efficent 20 10 guy, averaged more than 1.5 blocks per game every season, that is who I originally wanted to fall to us in that draft.

              An interesting thing is that he may be a better investment long term, when balancing money and potential with Roy. I wonder what kind of offers he has been getting, if any.
              I think he'd be a better back up plan than Kaman.
              Senior at the University of Louisville.
              Greenfield ---> The Ville

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: ESPN: Best Fits for Remaining Top FA

                Originally posted by Really? View Post
                Would not mind Brook at all, has the potential to be a efficent 20 10 guy, averaged more than 1.5 blocks per game every season, that is who I originally wanted to fall to us in that draft.

                An interesting thing is that he may be a better investment long term, when balancing money and potential with Roy. I wonder what kind of offers he has been getting, if any.
                He is not a good enough rebounder to average 10 a game. Roy only averaged a lil over 8.5, and Roy is much better rebounder than Lopez. Also even though he gets a few blocks, I'm not sure he could be the intimidating presence that Roy has become. Now offensively, Lopez is much more versatile in the high and low post. If he could be had for 10 mil a yr, he's not a bad consolation prize.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: ESPN: Best Fits for Remaining Top FA

                  Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                  He is not a good enough rebounder to average 10 a game. Roy only averaged a lil over 8.5, and Roy is much better rebounder than Lopez. Also even though he gets a few blocks, I'm not sure he could be the intimidating presence that Roy has become. Now offensively, Lopez is much more versatile in the high and low post. If he could be had for 10 mil a yr, he's not a bad consolation prize.
                  Brook averaged 8+ rpg in his 1st two seasons.....his rebounding went down after Avery Johnson decided to have him focus on his offense while allowing Kris Humphries to do all of the dirty work ( as in rebounding ).

                  He is perfectly capable of rebounding at a much rate.

                  But IMHO...even with the likely upside that Brook has over Kaman....I doubt that there is enough justification for the Simons to go after Brook over Kaman....especially with as a UFA.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: ESPN: Best Fits for Remaining Top FA

                    It would be so awesome if we could sign Nash and resign Hibbert while trading DC, Hans, 1st round pick(s) for Eric Gordon

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: ESPN: Best Fits for Remaining Top FA

                      Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
                      It would be so awesome if we could sign Nash and resign Hibbert while trading DC, Hans, 1st round pick(s) for Eric Gordon
                      That would be ideal.

                      Comment

                      Previous template Next
                      Working...
                      X