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

O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

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

  • #31
    Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

    Someone said a JET + Damp deal doesn't make sense because you can't rebuild around those players ... both are vets, in their prime, but with virtually no upside. Obtaining those kind of guys clearly signals "win now" versus rebuild. But isn't it going to be near impossible to rebuild anytime soon anyway? By my count the Pacers have committed roughly $135 million over the next four years to five veterans not counting O'Neal. Unless Bird can deal O'Neal for young players AND deal Murphy, Dunleavy, Daniels, Tinsley, Foster etc., for young talent you can "rebuild" around, he would be wise to move O'Neal for veterans who can help him win now.

    Of course, one could argue O'Neal gives the Pacers their best chance of winning now. I don't claim to be an expert but if rumors that O'Neal wants out are true, Bird just may have to make a move.
    Last edited by Mav; 06-22-2007, 11:11 PM. Reason: spelling

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

      The Pacer management consortium lacks the basketballs to rebuild. The best they will do is 'retool' and try and get back in the playoffs short term. We have no long term goals or vision otherwise (IMO). Any trade we do will have to have some veteran presence in it because of that. And that means we're probably holding out for too much.

      -Bball
      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

      ------

      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

        Originally posted by Mav View Post
        Someone said a JET + Damp deal doesn't make sense because you can't rebuild around those players ... both are vets, in their prime, but with virtually no upside. Obtaining those kind of guys clearly signals "win now" versus rebuild. But isn't it going to be near impossible to rebuild anytime soon anyway? By my count the Pacers have committed roughly $135 million over the next four years to five veterans not counting O'Neal. Unless Bird can deal O'Neal for young players AND deal Murphy, Dunleavy, Daniels, Tinsley, Foster etc., for young talent you can "rebuild" around, he would be wise to move O'Neal for veterans who can help him win now.

        Of course, one could argue O'Neal gives the Pacers their best chance of winning now. I don't claim to be an expert but if rumors that O'Neal wants out are true, Bird just may have to make a move.
        saying that getting jet and damp to win now is like advising mark cuban to trade dirk and josh howard for juwan howard and darius miles to win now. putting damp and his heinous contract and jet with murphy, dunleavy and granger is not a lineup to win now. that puts the team in an even more dire financial situation. if you trade your franchise player you're going into rebuilding mode unless you get a superstar back (like JO for dirk). thats why the rumored LA deals involve picks, bynum then brown's exp. contract ($9 mil) and odom (2yr $13mil). you add picks to bynum, granger, shawne and ike and thats a nice nucleus to rebuild with. yes we owe players money but we still have two years before we have to re-sign ike and danny. by then we will hopefully have made dunleavy and murphy either valuable to our future or to other teams. adding damp and jet to the team we have now (less JO) is not going to get us any more wins than we'd get with JO alone.
        This is the darkest timeline.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

          I wouldn't want anybody on the Mav's roster except Josh Howard, and he's probably the player we need the least. I could see why Terry would be a fit, but I'd only be for that if we play him as a small 2-guard next to Tinsley. No way in hell do I want Dampier back.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

            Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
            I'm just waiting for some uber-trade, in which JO, Kobe, KG, TMac, Amare, Dirk, and 20 lesser players all get shuffled around.
            Sam Smith is that you

            Why Not Us ?

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

              I heard it was a sign and trade: Croshere for O'Neal straight up.......
              PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

                Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
                I heard it was a sign and trade: Croshere for O'Neal straight up.......
                I do NOT want that thug back here.


                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

                  Originally posted by Mav View Post
                  Someone said a JET + Damp deal doesn't make sense because you can't rebuild around those players ... both are vets, in their prime, but with virtually no upside. Obtaining those kind of guys clearly signals "win now" versus rebuild.
                  Terry+Dampier would mean "reload" instead of "rebuild" which fits Bird/JO'Bs comments about making the Playoffs next season.
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

                    I see your point ... but it's one of the great fallacies among casual NBA fans that Damp has a "horrendous" contract. In fact, Dampier's contact mirrors his productivity closely. Said another way, the difference between Minnesota missing the playoffs with KG and the Mavs with Dirk appearing in the Finals and following it up with one of the best regular seasons of all time is simple. KG has no one and Dirk has Terry, Howard and Dampier. Make no mistake, JET and Damp are huge factors in Dallas, which is why I think moving both of them would be a mistake.

                    The analysis below is from the "Wages of Wins" journal and the metric is rumored to closely resemble Sagarin's fabled WINVAL ("win value") analysis that real NBA GMs pay thousands of dollars to see. WINVAL is not available to fans but the idea is that the stat measures a player's actual contribution to WINNING basketball games.

                    The Dallas Mavericks in 2006-07
                    After 72 Games
                    Record: 61-11
                    Dallas MavericksWins Produced Wins
                    per 48 MinutesProduced
                    Dirk Nowitzki0.33718.1
                    Jason Terry0.19410.3
                    Josh Howard0.2139.8
                    Erick Dampier0.186.8
                    Devin Harris0.1174.5
                    DeSagana Diop0.1183
                    Jerry Stackhouse0.0762.3
                    Greg Buckner0.0531.3
                    Austin Croshere0.0861
                    Anthony Johnson-0.0040
                    Pops Mensah-Bonsu-0.087-0.1
                    Jose Barea-0.1-0.2
                    Didier Ilunga-Mbenga-0.189-0.3
                    Devean George-0.034-0.7
                    Maurice Ager-0.388-0.9

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

                      How in the heck do they claim to measure that?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

                        "One can both play and watch basketball for a thousand years," they write. "If you do not systematically track what the players do, and then uncover the statistical relationship between these actions and wins, you will never know why teams win and why they lose."

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

                          Weighing the relative value of fouls, rebounds, shots taken, turnovers, and the like, they’ve created an algorithm that, they argue, comes closer than any previous statistical measure to capturing the true value of a basketball player. The algorithm yields what they call a Win Score, because it expresses a player’s worth as the number of wins that his contributions bring to his team.

                          Basketball experts clearly appreciate basketball. They understand the gestalt of the game, in the way that someone who has spent a lifetime thinking about and watching, say, modern dance develops an understanding of that art form. They’re able to teach and coach and motivate; to make judgments and predictions about a player’s character and resolve and stage of development. But the argument of “The Wages of Wins” is that this kind of expertise has real limitations when it comes to making precise evaluations of individual performance, whether you’re interested in the consistency of football quarterbacks or in testing claims that NBA stars “turn it on” during playoffs. The baseball legend Ty Cobb, the authors point out, had a lifetime batting average of .366, almost thirty points higher than the former San Diego Padres outfielder Tony Gwynn, who had a lifetime batting average of .338:

                          So Cobb hit safely 37 percent of the time while Gwynn hit safely on 34 percent of his at bats. If all you did was watch these players, could you say who was a better hitter? Can one really tell the difference between 37 percent and 34 percent just staring at the players play? To see the problem with the non-numbers approach to player evaluation, consider that out of every 100 at bats, Cobb got three more hits than Gwynn. That’s it, three hits

                          Michael Lewis made a similar argument in his 2003 best-seller, “Moneyball,” about how the so-called sabermetricians have changed the evaluation of talent in baseball. Baseball is sufficiently transparent, though, that the size of the discrepancies between intuitive and statistically aided judgment tends to be relatively modest. If you mistakenly thought that Gwynn was better than Cobb, you were still backing a terrific hitter. But “The Wages of Wins” suggests that when you move into more complex situations, like basketball, the limitations of “seeing” become enormous

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

                            That's fine, we'll just give you something like Foster and Williams for Jet then. Yes? No?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

                              Originally posted by Mav View Post
                              I see your point ... but it's one of the great fallacies among casual NBA fans that Damp has a "horrendous" contract. In fact, Dampier's contact mirrors his productivity closely. Said another way, the difference between Minnesota missing the playoffs with KG and the Mavs with Dirk appearing in the Finals and following it up with one of the best regular seasons of all time is simple. KG has no one and Dirk has Terry, Howard and Dampier. Make no mistake, JET and Damp are huge factors in Dallas, which is why I think moving both of them would be a mistake.
                              no one is disputing that they don't help the mavs. the problem is it would lock us into (with dampier) a 4yr contract worth (according to HoopsHype)

                              2007-08: $8,587,500
                              2008-09: $9,500,000
                              2009-10: $10,112,500
                              2010-11: $13,075,000

                              for what dampier does and what other contracts we have that are long and expensive .. that's heinous. because how does dampier help our current team? it is not remotely worth it to us.

                              on the mavs he fills a vital role, but if this proposed deal for JO goes down either Jet or Damp would have to come back. neither would actually help our team win more.

                              it is truly a moot point, you don't have to try and convince us that dampier would be worth JO and we don't have to try and convince you that the only way you're getting JO is for dirk. its not going to happen.
                              This is the darkest timeline.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: O'Neal to Dallas, K.G. to LA?

                                I don't think sabermetrics is as applicable to basketball as it is to baseball. In baseball, few variables apply. The batter always stands in the same spot, the pitcher is always on the rubber. The ball will always come towards the batter, and if its over the plate and above your knees/below your shoulders, its a strike. Curveball, fastball, slider, changeup, maybe a knuckleball - those are the pitches.

                                Statistical analysis is valuable in baseball because you have so many constants. Patterns are very easy to detect.

                                But basketball? Every game is so different that stats are very difficult to trace. If the Mavs play the Spurs, Dirk is gonna be guarded by Duncan and Jet by Parker. No way is that fair. Jet is playing a much easier game. So already, the stats are skewed.

                                Very few (if any) teams have two excellent defensive big men in their starting lineup. If they don't and that team plays the Mavs, guess which player the great defender is gonna match up with? Dirk. Guess who is gonna draw the weaker defender? Dampier.

                                If Dampier is traded for JO, who is gonna be his Dirk? Nobody. So he is going to go from being the sidekick to the superhero. And that won't work.

                                If you put Chase Utely on the Padres, he would have the exact same stats (give or take a few trivial runs and RBIs). Same would be true if you put him on the lowly Reds. It is true that his spot in the lineup would help or hurt him a bit, but nothing drastic.

                                If you put Dampier on the Suns, his stats would go down. If you put him on the Lakers, his stats would go down. If you put him on the Spurs, his stats would go up.

                                Like football, teammates and match ups are so crucial to individual performance that sabermetrics don't have much value.

                                If the Hawks signed a bunch of players who are sabermetrically good (yet are not held in high esteem otherwise) and made the EC Finals with a bunch of no-name scrubs, then I would be listening. But the fact that the Mavs spend a ton of money on name players, had an outstanding regular season, and choked in the first round doesn't do it for me.

                                It has been proven effective in baseball by the relative success of the small market A's and the huge market Boston Red Sox. I am a huge fan of sabermetrics, in fact (because I'm a huge A's fan). But basketball? sabermetrics can help determine starting lineups for each game, that's it. Using sabermetrics to prove Dampier's value to the Pacers is just a fallacy.
                                The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                                http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                                RSS Feed
                                Subscribe via iTunes

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X