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

Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

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

  • Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

    Originally posted by Anthem View Post
    I'd consider Tinsley a necessary part of any JO trade.
    That's asking too much of the other team.

    Comment


    • Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
      That's asking too much of the other team.
      We don't NEED to move Jermaine. I'd be happy to do it, but giving him away for Sideshow and Wally doesn't make us any better. If we're moving JO without including Tinsley, it had better be an amazing deal.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

        I think it would make us better. Any more, JO is around for what, 2/3rd's of the time at best? And during that time, he's truly healthy for a dozen or so games?

        A healthy Verajao and a healthy Wally and another 1st rounder will make us better. It'll be like having another Jeff up front, and I think Wally is an upgrade over Kareem.

        Would it be better than getting the 2004 JO? No. But he's gone. What it IS better than, is the team that didn't have JO much last year.

        Comment


        • Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

          Originally posted by Plax80 View Post
          The reports I heard about centered on how unhappy he was about his restricted contract staus and the fact that Cleveland wouldn't either sign him long term or allow another team the opportunity to sign him away from them for a reasonable long term deal. Once he finally ended the stalemate, he pouted much of the year and played no where near the playoff level from 07. Thus they mostly relegated him to mop up duty and traded for Ben Wallace (absorbing a ton of money in the process) to fill the role that had largely been Varejo's the previous season.

          So if LeBron couldn't get him to buy into the team first concept.......how can we expect Granger to get him there. And even if he does for one season, what will you do with him next offseason........give him a Troy Murphy contract ??

          I'm not so enamored with JO that I expect a KG type return for him......but I'm not going for less than what Memphis got for Gasol either.

          Phx and Dallas both proved that desperate people sometimes do desperate things only a few months ago. I know JO has more value than either Shaq or JKidd. If he comes back close to healthy than a team looking for a final piece may give you a young cornerstone player in return for him.

          Taking adeal that has no such player coming back to us is worthless. So you save his salary in 2010.....does that mean we could see a third return of Al harrington ?? Or maybe Jack 1's second stint. Or who knows.......lets dream big.........Eddy Curry might agree to come talk to us.

          I'm not trying to be acomplete arse, but I just don't see the point in giving away one of your best and marketable players. The Simon's shouldn't be in dire financial straits.

          To me a team like Golden State who is on the cusp of being a contender could package either Wright or Bierdens with Foyle's contract and maybe Al's .......that is far more enticing to me than a Varejo and Chase Buddinger trade.

          I'm not going to stick up for Andy, but the Cavs put him in an awkward position. I could see where there could be hurt feelings and no warm feelings. A new team, a different setting could be a total different situation. Apparently, things were fine the previous years he was in Cleveland. I don't see the comparison to Harrison.

          I just don't see why posters feel ownership have deep pockets and should be willing to absorb 44 mil worth of salary for a player who doesn't play a good % of the time or to the ability he once did.

          I finally got my answer to my question of how many games JO has missed. On another board, it was stated 126 games over 5 years. My gosh folks at his salary that's 20-25 mil dollars for doing nothing but sitting on a bench in a suit looking pretty! That's downright ridiculously sickening! Again, why should the Simons pay JO ANOTHER 44 mil? There comes a time you cut your losses in business and move on. This is the time. Get the best deal available and get rid of him. Who cares about his 09-10 trade value or his 09-10 expiring contract next year. If he's kept, it costs the Simons 21mil! Just for a better deal or an expiring contract?

          Sorry, but GS bought out Adonal's contract and he signed/played played for the Magic last season.

          Comment


          • Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

            If you keep him for 12 months, 18 months, or 2 years, you have paid him between 21 to 44 mil. For what? This is the whole crux of why you trade him. His contributions vs what you receive in return for him. If your GM does any prudent type of trading, you will come out on the positive end.
            Luckily for us the Pacers are the only ones who understand this concept. Maybe you shouldn't post it out in public where other teams can see it even.


            Like the Pacers are getting back players that will contribute more than JO will. Please. Right now is some group of fans hoping suckers like the Pacers will take their dopes so they can get JO.

            You pay JO now to INCREASE HIS VALUE. It's an investment. You want to get some good chunks to rebuild with, send out his expiring to a contender that's falling off the pace in JO's final year. You get a quality vet and maybe a pick so they can get cap space.

            As the FINAL move in a Pacers rebuild, JO being traded for that last vet piece makes a lot more sense than getting a 20th pick and some longer contracts that cost you somewhere close to that SAME $44m with modest to low output.

            Comment


            • Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
              Luckily for us the Pacers are the only ones who understand this concept. Maybe you shouldn't post it out in public where other teams can see it even.


              Like the Pacers are getting back players that will contribute more than JO will. Please. Right now is some group of fans hoping suckers like the Pacers will take their dopes so they can get JO.

              You pay JO now to INCREASE HIS VALUE. It's an investment. You want to get some good chunks to rebuild with, send out his expiring to a contender that's falling off the pace in JO's final year. You get a quality vet and maybe a pick so they can get cap space.

              As the FINAL move in a Pacers rebuild, JO being traded for that last vet piece makes a lot more sense than getting a 20th pick and some longer contracts that cost you somewhere close to that SAME $44m with modest to low output.
              Yep, let's put another $5 grand in that old suv gas eating guzzler, which is worth $5 grand, so we can can trade it next year for $4 grand when it's older and depreciated even more! Forget the price of gas, and it only gets 14 MPG.

              That's the thinking of numerous posters on this board. Spend 21mil more on JO in hopes he will get better trade value next year that won't include the 21mil in salary spent on him. Oh, I forgot JO will be retuning to Allstar form this coming season and his health will be fine, so he won't he adding to that 126 games missed in 5 years. Or adding to the 20-25 mil that the Simons have already paid him for games not played.

              If this is true, then DW won't have any problem finding takers for Starbury's expiring 21mil contract b4 the season starts. Maybe DW can trade him for JO. Is DW that foolish to take on and pay an extra 23mil for JO all in the hopes JO will be the JO of old? Some think the Simons are and should!

              If I truly believed JO would return to Allstar form, play 75 games this year for the Pacers, and not detract from the play of the others players, I'd jump on the bandwagon of keeping him; but I think that is foolish wishful thinking.

              At the present time I'm so frustrated with JO, his greed, and lack of playing, that I'd trade him for any type deal that even has a hint of being decent with an expiring, young player with some possible talent, a role playing veteran, and hopefully a pick. It doesn't have to be a great deal, I gave up on that along time ago, but a deal that can be lived with. For those that have been advocating buying out Tinsley, the savings of 23mil for JO's last year the Pacers could even used to buy out Tinjury! Then both would be gone. The last chapter of the book on the last 4 years would be closed, and a new beginning starts. JMOAA

              Comment


              • Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                Yep, let's put another $5 grand in that old suv gas eating guzzler, which is worth $5 grand, so we can can trade it next year for $4 grand when it's older and depreciated even more! Forget the price of gas, and it only gets 14 MPG.

                That's the thinking of numerous posters on this board. Spend 21mil more on JO in hopes he will get better trade value next year that won't include the 21mil in salary spent on him. Oh, I forgot JO will be retuning to Allstar form this coming season and his health will be fine, so he won't he adding to that 126 games missed in 5 years. Or adding to the 20-25 mil that the Simons have already paid him for games not played.

                If this is true, then DW won't have any problem finding takers for Starbury's expiring 21mil contract b4 the season starts. Maybe DW can trade him for JO. Is DW that foolish to take on and pay an extra 23mil for JO all in the hopes JO will be the JO of old? Some think the Simons are and should!

                If I truly believed JO would return to Allstar form, play 75 games this year for the Pacers, and not detract from the play of the others players, I'd jump on the bandwagon of keeping him; but I think that is foolish wishful thinking.

                At the present time I'm so frustrated with JO, his greed, and lack of playing, that I'd trade him for any type deal that even has a hint of being decent with an expiring, young player with some possible talent, a role playing veteran, and hopefully a pick. It doesn't have to be a great deal, I gave up on that along time ago, but a deal that can be lived with. For those that have been advocating buying out Tinsley, the savings of 23mil for JO's last year the Pacers could even used to buy out Tinjury! Then both would be gone. The last chapter of the book on the last 4 years would be closed, and a new beginning starts. JMOAA
                I tend to agree with you. Particularly the part about ending this era of Pacers basketball. If nothing else than from the standpoint of the psychological health of the team, franchise, and fans.

                JO wants to be moved. He's made it patently clear. This team won't be a serious contender for some time whether we have him or not. So it seems inevitable he'll be dealt sooner or later.

                If he goes to a good team, it seems inevitable (if by miracle he recuperates physically) that he can be a valuable player elsewhere. That means he'll look good elsewhere b/c his team is successful and its talented enought to where he gets to be the role player he should be-approximately 3rd to 4th offensive option and shot blocking specialist. It's a pill we have to swallow.

                In the meantime, with his injury history and discontent about being here, I can't forsee him building up his trade value significantly more than what it is now. Some permutations of the rumors that have been mentioned with Chicago or Cleveland, for example, are not bad offers for JO's market value.
                I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                -Emiliano Zapata

                Comment


                • Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                  There was a report - well just a short paragraph from the Cleveland Plain Dealer that said the cavs have no interest in JO.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    There was a report - well just a short paragraph from the Cleveland Plain Dealer that said the cavs have no interest in JO.
                    Hmmm. Of course, who knows what that means? On the surface, you can't expect anyone to be going ape**** over a guy who's been as banged up as JO.
                    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                    -Emiliano Zapata

                    Comment


                    • Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                      I've said it before and I'll say it again... the priority this offseason should be moving Tinsley, not JO.
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                        I've said it before and I'll say it again... the priority this offseason should be moving Tinsley, not JO.

                        You are only half correct, the priority is moving BOTH!

                        If Bird can do that, he would be a GM of the year candidate.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                          I've said it before and I'll say it again... the priority this offseason should be moving Tinsley, not JO.
                          I agree 100% esp. if we can pick up a PG in the draft. Then, following the DW model, you sit back and look at what you have and what options you have. The most important option may be holding onto JO until the deadline at a minimum which gives you time to evaluate his health. If healthy you have a player to hold onto or trade, if not healthy you can begin looking for the best deal available before the next draft.
                          Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                            I've said it before and I'll say it again... the priority this offseason should be moving Tinsley, not JO.
                            To me, if the Pacers moved Tinsley, the summer would be a success, regardless of what else happened, just as it would be a failure, regardless of what else happens, if Droopy suits up for the Pacers on opening night.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Draft Express - JO to Cavs Speculation (among other things)

                              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                              I've said it before and I'll say it again... the priority this offseason should be moving Tinsley, not JO.
                              I agree with you. The rational behind wanting to move JO seems to be based more on his contract than his injury history although many try to link both. With Tinsley it's clear that injuries, attitude and inconsistent performace have all factored into the fans wanting to see him gone. JO may have sustained some serious injuries, but they've been nothing like the apparent knicks and dings that have kept Jamaal off the court.

                              I found this website, Forecaster.ca (yeah, it's Canadian!) where you can plug in any player's name and get a decent injury history that spans approximately 3 years. When you compare JO's to Tinsley's it's as if Jamaal was out every week for one reason or another for what were seemingly minor injuries sustained during typical game play - an ankle sprain, bruised thigh, a knock to the funny bone (elbow) - not to mention his infamous sinus infections (which really aren't anything to "sneeze" at (...pun very much intended... ) if you've ever had one.

                              Gamble1 asked which position was more important for more wins next year and we both took pretty much the same viewpoint - PG. When I look at Tinsley's injury history I can't help thinking that he's the least reliable between the two (himself and JO). Therefore, to me it's more important to shore-up the PG position coming into this year's draft than it is the PF position.

                              Just my 2-cents worth.

                              (Sidenote: I'll once again go on record and say that while I do believe many of Tinsley's injuries IMO are the result of happenstance, it does seem as though they happen much too frequently. So much so that durability is a legitmate concern with him. Nonetheless, it's not his durability that's at the heart of the matter with him. It's his overall attitude and his off-court issues. All three combined go into the negative column agaist retaining him.)
                              Last edited by NuffSaid; 06-09-2008, 11:31 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X