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

76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

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

  • #61
    Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

    Originally posted by croz24 View Post
    iguodala is better in every aspect of his game but 3pt shooting. and in some cases like rebounding and getting assists and penetrating, MUCH better.
    Pretty much. Iggy is a legit 20-5-5 guy with very good defense. He's capable of being a primary ball handler a lot of the times, and is a good passer. I don't know anyone here thinks Brandon is capable of that. Paul George, maybe. That's a pretty big maybe though.

    I don't know why someone wouldn't want to do this.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

      Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
      Pretty much. Iggy is a legit 20-5-5 guy with very good defense. He's capable of being a primary ball handler a lot of the times, and is a good passer. I don't know anyone here thinks Brandon is capable of that. Paul George, maybe. That's a pretty big maybe though.

      I don't know why someone wouldn't want to do this.
      Easy....1 of 2 reasons...or some combination of both....(1) likely giving up PG and (2) thinking that Iggy is overpaid.

      IMHO....assuming that ( at most ) we'd just have to take on Nocioni....given that it would not impact our ability to resign BRush and Hibbert in the 2012-2013 offseason and that Iggy is only paid roughly $1.5 mil more then Granger ( who IMHO is underpaid ).....my guess is that the majority would be against acquiring Iggy simply because they don't want to give up PG.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

        Cleveland would be another playoff contender with Iguodala, nothing more. Probably 1st round fodder. A team very far away from contending... and without the means to get there.

        Cleveland needs to acquire talent via draft. There's no other way. They have no future core. They have no assets - no established All-Star, no high-level prospects, no abundance of draft picks, cap flexibility - to start adding pieces to what they have now. It's a roster with a starter in Varejao, a handful of bench players, some borderline NBA player, a decent prospect in Hickson.

        Adding Iguodala will be a wast of time. Accept losing, try to move those overpaid veterans like Mo Williams, Jamison and Gibson (they'll probably be stuck with them till the very end) and the rest is patient.

        Indiana is in a different situation. A lot more quality, a core already in place to build around. Iguodala would be a perfect complement to Granger's game, they'd have a very strong backcourt. If George pans out, they'd be another piece away from becoming contenders. And there's a chance they may acquire another player with the cap flexibility next Summer.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
          Easy....1 of 2 reasons...or some combination of both....(1) likely giving up PG and (2) thinking that Iggy is overpaid.
          1 - What is Paul George's ceiling? I would guess to be as good as Iguodala. Why not skip the risk and time ... and just get to having a player of that caliber now?

          2 - If Iggy is overpaid, I don't know how. Unless you're (not you, specifically) gauging it off of the 15-20 games he's played this year. 18 points, 5 rebounds, 5 assists, 2 steals + great defense, and playing 82 games in a season 5 of his 6 years ..... hard to be overpaid.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
            Easy....1 of 2 reasons...or some combination of both....(1) likely giving up PG and (2) thinking that Iggy is overpaid.

            IMHO....assuming that ( at most ) we'd just have to take on Nocioni....given that it would not impact our ability to resign BRush and Hibbert in the 2012-2013 offseason and that Iggy is only paid roughly $1.5 mil more then Granger ( who IMHO is underpaid ).....my guess is that the majority would be against acquiring Iggy simply because they don't want to give up PG.
            I am as excited about PG's potential as anyone. And trust me, I don't get sold on potential easily.

            But I have to ask anyone who doesn't want to give up PG...do people really think he'll be better than Iggy? Particularly since Iggy is only 26 himself?

            An expiring and a young player is an exceptionally fair deal for someone with Iggy's talent. In fact, I'd say that's borderline robbery and we'd probably have to add a pick (which I'd still do)

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

              Sookie, the more you post the more I'm starting to agree! Lol

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

                Also my point with the last lost was that what's the point were getting a bargain even with ai's contract on 4-5 top players. ( Roy, AI, DG, for sure, DC2000, PG-24)

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

                  the way rush is playing right now, we may have our starting sg for the future already.. and i like the idea of having PG there as well in case rush reverts back to his former ways.

                  i like the idea of acquiring iggy, but we have to be real wise with our cap room.. seems like every year one of these types of players becomes available.. and remember during the draft and we take on other teams draft picks who are willing to get rid of guaranteed contracts as well.. much like the bulls and heat did last year.

                  again, i like the idea, but right now rush has been very impressive. maybe we could get involved in a 3 way deal with the 76ers for another teams PF.

                  im kinda surprised that the Pacers have not been mentioned as one of the teams who could acquire Iggy.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

                    Has anyone asked the Pacers public voices if we're in the running for Iggy?
                    This space for rent.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

                      If no one has read the article yet,
                      Andre Iguodala is on the block

                      By Kelly Dwyer
                      Andre Iguodala(notes) is on the trading block probably, and that makes a good deal of sense. His Philadelphia 76ers are struggling, Doug Collins has declined to hand him the "you-run-everything" point-wing role Collins handed both Grant Hill(notes) and Michael Jordan, and Iguodala is talented enough to help a team that could use someone who is good at just about everything, though not overwhelmingly.
                      Of course, you have to go easy with these things. Partially because A.I. makes a lot of money. Over $56 million spread out from now until 2014, according to ShamSports.com. But mainly because -- and I apologize for going all general columnist on you -- I don't know if he's that guy. Of course, it's a decade-long bias that has me thinking this way.
                      There was an NBA preview magazine I remember sneaking glances at between classes, as the months led up to the 1996-97 season. And among the many lines I've stolen and ideologies I've clung to in the years since reading and re-reading that thing, one bit of armchair GM'ing stood out.
                      San Antonio Spurs All-Star Sean Elliott, the magazine told me, would be better off as a third wheel. Sure, this is easy analysis, but the simplicity got to me. The idea that there were tiers to be acknowledged beyond the two "stars" NBC or ESPN showed you on screen. That things could change, seats could move, and that a pretty good team in San Antonio could be pretty great. Not to be outdone, because Hakeem Olajuwon was ticked or because Dennis Rodman couldn't get along.
                      And by the time next year's magazine came along, Elliott was that third wheel, behind David Robinson and rookie Tim Duncan(notes). Now while I'm not suggesting that teams break the foot of their franchise center, fire their coach within a month, hire the GM to run the sideline, sign Monty Williams to take copious amounts of shots and bank on breaking the odds on the lottery to acquire a pivotman for the ages, I do suggest a reasonable attribution when it comes to the stylings of stars and semi-stars.
                      And I'd suggest to Cleveland, a team that is reported to be interested in Iguodala, that it take it easy in trying to bring in a person that a Cleveland-area paper termed "LeBron Lite."
                      Because LeBron James(notes), full and hearty, couldn't win with this Cavaliers team. And while you'd like to think that LeBron, rich and full of delicious calories, could have won with Cleveland had he not given up on those Cavs last May, it's probably fair to suggest that LeBron made himself "LeBron Lite" as he moped through that Boston series last year. And even in that watered-down state, could you really imagine Andre Iguodala approximating the same results?
                      Iguodala puts up great stats, and stats are documentation of production gone both good or bad, so it would be foolish to dismiss the way the guy helps a team toward victory. He can score, pass, rebound and do the sorts of athletic things (finishing in transition, grabbing steals and coming up with blocks) that aid a team toward the goal among goals.
                      But as a go-to guy? Even a second option? He's just not that guy.
                      Because he shoots. He shoots from far away, and his teams have suffered as a result. Whether it's in the playoffs against the Pistons or the Magic, or this month while Doug Collins gets more and more frustrated. Sure, as Collins pointed out, the defenses tend to "wall up" against Iggy as he prepares to work in an offense that (through no fault of his own) has absolutely no spacing. But we've seen him with spacing and no wall to work through. The guy still shoots.
                      Which is why he'd do fine as a second option. Quite well. But it's also why he'd do brilliantly, championship-level'y, as a third option.
                      This doesn't mean that any team trying to acquire Andre (who is working under a top-gear contract that might be more than prohibitive to any team even if he is a first-tier option) should move forward with him in mind as the Elliott to David Robinson's Tim Duncan. It just means he's not going to automatically put anyone over the top. Because even second-tier go-to guys have to have an idea in mind once the play breaks down, things go pear-shaped and the ball ends up in Deborah Kerr's hands.
                      (She was in a lot of movies in a supporting role. Never mind.)
                      Sadly for A.I. and the Sixers, the contract that Iguodala signed back in the summer of 2008 -- that seemed just about right to just about everyone -- could prevent the sort of trade needed to make all sides happy. For the 76ers, Andre, and whoever tracks down his services. And even more importantly, should such a trade go through, Iguodala's brand of ball might prove the most frustrating to those whose expectations are stuck way, way too high."
                      http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/bal...urn=nba-292358

                      overall Iggy doesn't seem that great, why get him when we have Rush :/

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

                        Although AI is a good player, I don't think he'll be the one that the Pacers really need. What they should be aiming for is a primary backup center. Solid first 5 and backup for each position is what this team need not only to reach the playoffs, but to be competitive in the playoffs. Celtics, Hawks, Orlando and others can simply abuse the thin frontcourt we have, especially in the playoffs where teams plays much rougher for obvious reasons.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

                          I'll be very interested to see what he start hearing the closer we move to January. Although the idea of Philly moving their star in December is certainly not unheard of...they've done it before with nearly identical timing with Iverson.


                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

                            Originally posted by immortality View Post
                            If no one has read the article yet,
                            http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/bal...urn=nba-292358

                            overall Iggy doesn't seem that great, why get him when we have Rush :/
                            What that guy says is that Iguodala isn't talented/skilled enough to be the go-to guy, the primary scoring option, for a good team. That's correct, he isn't efficient/prolific enough as a scorer to be that kind of player, not even close. That's why it doesn't make any sense whatsoever for the Cavs to go after him. As a secondary/tertiary option (as a scorer, playmaker, ball-handler) in a team with proper spacing, he'd be a very good fit. Dwyer overstates how bad of a shooter he is. Of course he still shoots, he's not Rondo or something. But again, surrounded by players with a more complimentary skill-set, he'd shoot a lot less of those long 2s.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

                              Originally posted by cordobes View Post
                              What that guy says is that Iguodala isn't talented/skilled enough to be the go-to guy, the primary scoring option, for a good team. That's correct, he isn't efficient/prolific enough as a scorer to be that kind of player, not even close. That's why it doesn't make any sense whatsoever for the Cavs to go after him. As a secondary/tertiary option (as a scorer, playmaker, ball-handler) in a team with proper spacing, he'd be a very good fit. Dwyer overstates how bad of a shooter he is. Of course he still shoots, he's not Rondo or something. But again, surrounded by players with a more complimentary skill-set, he'd shoot a lot less of those long 2s.
                              And to me, those skill-sets seem exceptionally complimentary to Grangers..


                              Not to mention, he's a good young player with a decent contract (it's not as bad as some think, IMO) he wouldn't be that hard to trade if he doesn't fit.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: 76ers Attempting To Trade Iguodala

                                Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                                And to me, those skill-sets seem exceptionally complimentary to Grangers.
                                I agree with you and cordobes on this....most notably because of something that Dwyer highlighted himself:

                                Iguodala puts up great stats, and stats are documentation of production gone both good or bad, so it would be foolish to dismiss the way the guy helps a team toward victory. He can score, pass, rebound and do the sorts of athletic things (finishing in transition, grabbing steals and coming up with blocks) that aid a team toward the goal among goals.But as a go-to guy? Even a second option? He's just not that guy.
                                and this:

                                Sure, as Collins pointed out, the defenses tend to "wall up" against Iggy as he prepares to work in an offense that (through no fault of his own) has absolutely no spacing. But we've seen him with spacing and no wall to work through. The guy still shoots.
                                Sound familiar with what we do? There is a greater # of Player that would compliment what he does then compared to what currently exists on the Sixers.

                                Seriously....I'll be the first to say that IF the Pacers somehow are able to get Iggy....I would seriously consider extending JO'B who happens to understand what Iggy is capable of doing and not doing.

                                I really hope that Bird has made some calls to the Sixers. If anything...it's dis-heartening that the Pacers aren't mentioned as suitors that have contacted them ( other then rumors that place the Pacers as logical candidates to do so ). Hopefully some talk heats up after December 15th.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X