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

Antoine Walker and O'B

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

  • #16
    Re: Antoine Walker and O'B

    Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
    Agreed. But Mike will never be an asset on an NBA team. He is solid, but he doesn't add anything in particular and can be replaced fairly easily. Therefore, I am in favor of doing whatever to clear his salary off the books.

    8 million in cap room is more important to this team than a 28% 3-pt shooting SG.
    Are you talking bang for the buck, or just straight skill level? Dunleavy isn't a star, but to say that he can't benefit an NBA team is crazy. He's suffered from star expectation more than anything. Golden State took him sky high in the draft, and then dumped on him because he wasn't a star player. What was he supposed to do...tear up the contract because he wasn't worth it? If anything, dump on these gm's with itchy contract writing fingers. Don't blame Dunleavy for taking the money, nor for the Pacers bringing him in. He has a great all around skill set that we would greatly benefit from if used correctly. I'll bet he really blosoms under O'Brien.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Antoine Walker and O'B

      For as much as people harp on Dunleavy being so bad if you look at stats the swap of Al for Dunleavy is pretty close to being fair.

      Al's salary 7,625,000

      Dun's salary 7,438,016

      Year Team FG% 3P% FT% Off Def Tot APG A/TO PPG
      2006-07 .458 .458 .713 2.0 4.3 6.3 1.4 2.5 15.9

      Year Team FG% 3P% FT% Off Def Tot APG A/TO PPG
      2006-07 .454 .283 .792 1.0 4.7 5.7 2.6 1.4 14.0
      You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Antoine Walker and O'B

        Originally posted by johnnybegood View Post
        Are you talking bang for the buck, or just straight skill level? Dunleavy isn't a star, but to say that he can't benefit an NBA team is crazy. He's suffered from star expectation more than anything. Golden State took him sky high in the draft, and then dumped on him because he wasn't a star player. What was he supposed to do...tear up the contract because he wasn't worth it? If anything, dump on these gm's with itchy contract writing fingers. Don't blame Dunleavy for taking the money, nor for the Pacers bringing him in. He has a great all around skill set that we would greatly benefit from if used correctly. I'll bet he really blosoms under O'Brien.
        I certainly hope he does, and I think there is a chance. But right now he could be replaced by any number of SGs in the game, and I'm not sure that just cutting his salary wouldn't be good.

        Ever read moneyball? I think Mike can be functionally replaced by a second-year shooting guard that spent all four years in college. That would save us 6-7 million a year.

        And let me clarify:

        Can Mike be a part of a very good NBA team? Sure.

        On that theoretical very good NBA team, could he be unoticeably replaced by just about any starting shooting guard in the league? Oh yeah.

        There are only two things that make Mike distinctive: Above average rebounds for a shooting guard, and a very good ability to hit mid-range jumpers.

        I will say that a smart coach could make Mike into a mini Rip Hamilton, since the only real thing Rip can do is hit mid-range jumpers, too. So there is hope.

        But why is Mike any better than Charlie Bell? Or Luther Head? Or DeShaun Stevenson? Wouldn't you rather be paying that kind of player 1 million instead of 8 million?
        The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
        http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
        RSS Feed
        Subscribe via iTunes

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Antoine Walker and O'B

          Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
          But why is Mike any better than Charlie Bell? Or Luther Head? Or DeShaun Stevenson? Wouldn't you rather be paying that kind of player 1 million instead of 8 million?
          I don't know that I would agree that Dunleavy is a 1 million dollar level player. Stevenson is athletic..nothing special. Luther Head is a good 3rd guard. Charlie Bell...about the same..nothing special. And while I don't think that Dunleavy is All-star level, I certainly wouldn't drop his value down around the level of the above mentioned players. He's worth much more. I think he struggled as a catch and shoot player somewhat..in Rick's offense. Certainly someone like a Brent Barry would have fit much better feeding off O'neal. But if we're moving O'neal and going to more of a motion offense..Dunleavy's passing ability and scoring ability fit much better.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Antoine Walker and O'B

            Originally posted by johnnybegood View Post
            I don't know that I would agree that Dunleavy is a 1 million dollar level player. Stevenson is athletic..nothing special. Luther Head is a good 3rd guard. Charlie Bell...about the same..nothing special. And while I don't think that Dunleavy is All-star level, I certainly wouldn't drop his value down around the level of the above mentioned players. He's worth much more. I think he struggled as a catch and shoot player somewhat..in Rick's offense. Certainly someone like a Brent Barry would have fit much better feeding off O'neal. But if we're moving O'neal and going to more of a motion offense..Dunleavy's passing ability and scoring ability fit much better.
            I'm not necessarily saying that Dunleavy is worth a million. All I am saying is that I can find three players without much effort that are at least as good as Dunleavy that are making a million. Maybe your gut says Mike could become better, but there is no statistical evidence yet to back that up.

            Again, I hope you are right, and like I said Mike has some potential to be a Rip Hamilton-esque player. But looking at what he has proven to be so far, I see no reason to keep Mike if we have a chance to get rid of him.


            As a fan, I do hope you are proven correct.
            The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
            http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
            RSS Feed
            Subscribe via iTunes

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Antoine Walker and O'B



              Dunleavy, Sr: "So Larry, how did Mike work out for you this season?"
              Bird: "I'm at the lottery, how the **** do you think it went?"


              That being said, Dunleavy is an incredibly mediocre player and I'd agree with FlavaDave's comparisons. His massive contract is what garners the most criticism - if he wasn't paid so much, then his results wouldn't seem so lackluster.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Antoine Walker and O'B

                I'd trade Trophy for Walker. In a heartbeat.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Antoine Walker and O'B

                  Wow, I am really suprised at how much people dislike Antoine Walker.

                  We would have Antoine for 2 years, 2 years assuming we wouldn't exercise a team opition for the 09-10 season and if that would be the case we would have him one more year after that.

                  We will see Murphy and Dunleavy 4 more years each. Do the math.

                  Murphy is defiantly not better than Antoine. Dunleavy and Antoine are about the same just different styles but Antoine's style and contract fits in better with this team. With OB as our coach a role player like Dunleavy won't do us that much good. Especially if we trade Jermaine for Lamar/Bynum we could really use Antoine because he can be a scorer for us.

                  Antoine hasn't filled up the stat sheet in Miami but what do you expect? He is playing with Dwyane Wade and Shaqiule O'Neal, two of the most ball dominate players in the NBA. Walker is player who needs the ball himself.

                  This team is looking like we are re building. You know that OB and Bird still want to make the playoffs though and Walker can help us do that.

                  IMO, Walker can help us more than Dunleavy or Murphy.

                  We still would have a problem with an overload of forwards but atleast we will only have that problem for 2 years instead of 4.

                  People just need to get over their dislike for Walker. You can't dislike him as much as I grew to dislike Artest. Walker isn't my favorite player by any means but given who our new coach is and knowing the style he wants to play (and the contract status) we defiantly should try and get Walker for Murphy or Dunleavy.

                  Let me go on record by saying I don't think it will ever happen unless it is Murphy, then MAYBE the Pacers would do it. But I don't think the Heat have any use for Murphy and I can't see Donnie or Larry trading Dunleavy after half a season unless OB really wants to.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Antoine Walker and O'B

                    Walker shot 40% and 28% last season, Murphy shot 46% and 40%. Murphy also didn't get suspended for failing a physical.

                    No. Thank. You.

                    [edit] Also, as for the notion that he needs to ball to be effective, Shaq and Wade were hurt this year. He shot 44% and 36% the previous season when they were healthy. And I just looked at his FT%. 44% last year, 64% for his career.

                    Again. No. Thank. You.
                    Last edited by Kegboy; 06-04-2007, 03:32 PM.
                    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Antoine Walker and O'B

                      Walker's a 3 time all-star, NBA Champion, 10th all time in 3 pointers made, his diminished stats are still as good as MDJ's best years and he has 60 playoff games under belt. He has 2 more guaranteed years left on his contract and has a relationship with the coach. I see no downsides. I also don't see why the Heat would touch MDJ or Troy.
                      I'm in these bands
                      The Humans
                      Dr. Goldfoot
                      The Bar Brawlers
                      ME

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Antoine Walker and O'B

                        Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
                        his diminished stats are still as good as MDJ's best years
                        40%, 28%, 44% vs. 45%, 37%, 78%.
                        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Antoine Walker and O'B

                          Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
                          his diminished stats are still as good as MDJ's best years.


                          Show me years where Dunleavy or Murphy get 4 rebounds a game, shoot 39.7% from the field, 27.5% from 3, 43.8 % from the line. He used to be a good passer now he gets 1.7 assists per game.

                          He used to be a good player. Now he has NOTHING left. He would not even be worth the veteran's minimum.
                          The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Antoine Walker and O'B

                            I don't know where you're getting that 37%. He shot 35% for the Warriors and 28% for the Pacers last year. Look at what they've done over the last few seasons. Don't forget to look at Walker's playoff numbers, too.
                            I'm in these bands
                            The Humans
                            Dr. Goldfoot
                            The Bar Brawlers
                            ME

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Antoine Walker and O'B

                              Originally posted by Dr. Goldfoot View Post
                              I don't know where you're getting that 37%. He shot 35% for the Warriors and 28% for the Pacers last year. Look at what they've done over the last few seasons. Don't forget to look at Walker's playoff numbers, too.
                              You said compare Walker's diminished stats to Dunleavy's best years, so I did.
                              Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Antoine Walker and O'B

                                You don't see any downsides? Have you watched the man play at all in the past 4 seasons?

                                During the '04-'05 playoffs he was a sole reason why IND won that series. Not only did he manage to get himself ejected during a tight game in the 4th qtr. he managed to miss lay-up after lay-up. His shooting made Jeff Foster seem like Reggie out there.

                                He's fat and out of shape. He's a horrible lockerroom guy, which is what the Ps are definately trying to stay away from. He can't shoot a lick while managing to think he's a scoring PG. He wouldn't make it out of FanJam intros before getting boo'd.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X