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

Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

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

  • Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

    Cain in New Zealand:
    What are the chances that Darren Collison and Paul George can become an All-Star back-court in a couple of years?

    Bill Ingram:
    Collison has an awful lot of competition at point guard in the East, but it's not out of the question. Paul is just starting to show us what he can do, so at this point the sky is the limit. It might be time to trade Granger and let youth be served . . .Danny would pull some nice talent. That earlier question about Houston and Rashard Lewis . . .no, but they'd LOVE to have Granger and they have some nice pieces to offer in trade.

    Cain in New Zealand:
    Who and what could the Pacers acquire for Danny Granger? Would Houston or Dallas be a good trade partner?

    Jason Fleming:
    Granger isn't on the market. Indy values him higher than any team trading for him would, so a deal would never be consummated.

    Whether or not that's the best approach for Indy is debatable, but it is their approach.
    Read more NBA news and insight: http://www.hoopsworld.com/chat.asp?c...#ixzz1IfuOqUAA


    I dont know about the salaries but would you consider a trade of say :

    Kevin Martin, Patrick Patterson, and a number 1 for Granger/Rush?
    Sittin on top of the world!

  • #2
    Re: Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

    It would make a whole lot more sense to me to bring in a player like Kevin Martin to play with Granger as opposed to swapping them. That just feels like a lateral move.
    "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

    - ilive4sports

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

      What about the pick? (Rockets appear headed for the lottery)

      and I really think Pattrick Patterson will be a stud!
      Sittin on top of the world!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

        Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
        It would make a whole lot more sense to me to bring in a player like Kevin Martin to play with Granger as opposed to swapping them. That just feels like a lateral move.
        KM and Danny would make one of the most horrible defensive duos in the NBA.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

          Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
          KM and Danny would make one of the most horrible defensive duos in the NBA.
          KM is certainly terrible. Granger is not as bad as his rep around here suggests, his defensive intensity just kinda comes and goes.

          I would like to see how Danny plays with another wing scorer taking some pressure off him, I think you might see a refocused Danny on the defensive end. He has the ability to play near elite defense when he wants to.
          "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

          - ilive4sports

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

            I think Houston is a great trade partner.

            I, however, want NOTHING to do with bringing Kevin Martin here. He can score, I will give you that, but between injuries, his size, and the way he plays the game, it would be a bigger risk than it is worth for his contract. I think he is good, but given our direction and cap space, Kevin Martin is not the way I want to use it, especially if we are trading Granger.

            I would want any package for Granger centered around Jordan Hill. Extremely athletic PF/C. I think his athleticism would be good for Hibbert and I think Hibbert's offensive game takes pressure off of him to be a scorer. I think he would give us tremendous versatility in the front court. They give him inconsistent minutes in Houston as it stands, but I think something involving him, Courtney Lee or Chase Buddinger, and either Thabeet or Miller. We would probably consider it. We may have to include a guy like Price for Dragic to make rosters and salaries work. Depending on how much the front office values some of the filler, we may ask for a first round draft pick or two, since they have an abundance of them.

            As an example:

            Granger and Price for Hill, Lee, Dragic, and Thabeet.

            PG - Lowry, Price
            SG - Martin, Williams
            SF - Granger, Buddinger
            PF - Scola, Patterson
            C - Miller, Hayes

            PG - Collison, Dragic, Stephenson
            SG - Lee, Rush
            SF - George, Jones, Posey
            PF - Hill, Hansborough
            C - Hibbert, Thabeet

            This is just an example of the type of deal that would be appropriate for a guy like Granger and what we would target in return to fill the roster. I think Granger would be a great fit in Houston with their starting lineup. He helps them spread the floor, which is something they definitely could use. I also think that we would end up following this deal up with another involving Posey's expiring or look to buy him out, so he can go play for a contender and we save a couple million. We bring in quality people with this deal, which is important for our franchise as well.

            I am not trying to make this a trade thread, but I have long considered trading Granger to Houston, because he fits their roster and I think their GM and owner would be willing to pony up for him.
            "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

              One of the most critical decisions the pacers franchise faces is whether danny and George can play together or whether the team will be better by trading one of the two to acquire needed talent.

              No one knows the answer at this point yet, and may not for a couple of years.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

                Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                I think Houston is a great trade partner.

                I, however, want NOTHING to do with bringing Kevin Martin here. He can score, I will give you that, but between injuries, his size, and the way he plays the game, it would be a bigger risk than it is worth for his contract. I think he is good, but given our direction and cap space, Kevin Martin is not the way I want to use it, especially if we are trading Granger.

                I would want any package for Granger centered around Jordan Hill. Extremely athletic PF/C. I think his athleticism would be good for Hibbert and I think Hibbert's offensive game takes pressure off of him to be a scorer. I think he would give us tremendous versatility in the front court. They give him inconsistent minutes in Houston as it stands, but I think something involving him, Courtney Lee or Chase Buddinger, and either Thabeet or Miller. We would probably consider it. We may have to include a guy like Price for Dragic to make rosters and salaries work. Depending on how much the front office values some of the filler, we may ask for a first round draft pick or two, since they have an abundance of them.

                As an example:

                Granger and Price for Hill, Lee, Dragic, and Thabeet.

                PG - Lowry, Price
                SG - Martin, Williams
                SF - Granger, Buddinger
                PF - Scola, Patterson
                C - Miller, Hayes

                PG - Collison, Dragic, Stephenson
                SG - Lee, Rush
                SF - George, Jones, Posey
                PF - Hill, Hansborough
                C - Hibbert, Thabeet

                This is just an example of the type of deal that would be appropriate for a guy like Granger and what we would target in return to fill the roster. I think Granger would be a great fit in Houston with their starting lineup. He helps them spread the floor, which is something they definitely could use. I also think that we would end up following this deal up with another involving Posey's expiring or look to buy him out, so he can go play for a contender and we save a couple million. We bring in quality people with this deal, which is important for our franchise as well.

                I am not trying to make this a trade thread, but I have long considered trading Granger to Houston, because he fits their roster and I think their GM and owner would be willing to pony up for him.
                What do you think of Patrick Patterson?

                I would love to grab him
                Sittin on top of the world!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

                  Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
                  What do you think of Patrick Patterson?

                  I would love to grab him
                  I think Patrick Patterson could replace Carl Landry on a lot of our wishlists
                  Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

                    I think both Patterson and Davis look like future studs
                    Sittin on top of the world!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

                      Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                      It would make a whole lot more sense to me to bring in a player like Kevin Martin to play with Granger as opposed to swapping them. That just feels like a lateral move.
                      From a purely offensive level...yes, I'd love to get a Player like Kevin Martin ( he's a highly efficient scorer )....but from what many posters have said and what I have heard from Grant Napier ( an NBA Beat Reporter for the Kings )....his defense is so bad that he's actually a detrement to the Team that he's on.

                      I'm not exaggerating here...his defense is really bad.

                      So...pass.
                      Last edited by CableKC; 04-05-2011, 07:59 PM.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

                        The only players that I am interested in that the Rockets have is TWill, Scola and Patterson.

                        Unfortunately, the only asset that many will be willing to part with is BRush...which is a Player that the Rockets would have ZERO interest in given the platoon of Wing Players they have.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

                          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                          One of the most critical decisions the pacers franchise faces is whether danny and George can play together or whether the team will be better by trading one of the two to acquire needed talent.

                          No one knows the answer at this point yet, and may not for a couple of years.
                          Maybe another Chuck Person - Reggie Miller situation ??

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

                            I really like Patrick Patterson, but I have heard they have become more enamored with him recently. His playing time has really picked up.

                            He has an NBA body. He knows the game. He is a solid passer, and a really good rebounder. He has a back to the basket offensive game. He is versatile enough that he can step out and hit the longer jumpers. I would love to bring him in, but the Rockets probably wouldn't want to give up both young bigs. I think Patterson would challenge Hansborough to start and Hansborough's toughness and non-stop motor will only help Patterson improve.

                            Houston has a lot of good young players on its roster. They have done a tremendous job scouting talent. I would love to have several of them on our roster. We are challenged right now with a lot of depth and little topside talent. I think many of these players could develop into very good players and starters on most teams. With Houston needing to fill a hole at SF and being in the West, and our roster being full of guys between 21-25, I think we ought to consider trading Danny to Houston. I would want three or four young prospects back, though. Hill, Patterson and Lee would be a hell of a start. We would then have a bit of a road block with playign time and would have to probably make another trade where we send three or four guys for one player just to free up time.

                            It is something to consider for sure.
                            "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Do the Rockets make good trade partners?

                              Which begs the question

                              Are the Rockets more apdt to traade Scola or Patterson?
                              Sittin on top of the world!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X