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

David Lee and Andre Iguodala

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

  • #16
    Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

    Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
    With West declining and with no real starting calibre swingman to pair with PG (CJ Miles may be arguable) would I be worth while pursuing these 2? GS doesn't really use them.

    Lee is making $15 mill but is entering his last year in his contract. Andre IguodalaIs earning $11 mill

    Lee isn't a great defender but would be good for this new "up tempo" offense they're trying to implement
    I could imagine Hibbert being an excellent fit for GS. He could be a better rim protector than Bogut, and given their offensive makeup, would have more space on the block than here in Indy. Igoudala might be the most we could get for Hibbert at this point.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

      Originally posted by presto123 View Post
      I probably would take David Lee over David West right now. I don't mean Lee as a permanent starter(just a transition or bench player), but we need offense from our bigs badly. How much worse than West on defense can he be?
      Lee is terrible all around. He always has been. His stats always look better than his impact, just like Troy Murphy.

      It's not a coincidence that the Warriors had the top offense and defense without him playing. There are other, bigger reasons, but it wouldn't have happened with more David Lee out there.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

        I've never been a huge fan of Iggy's game. He's been on the decline every year for the past 7 years yet he still makes 11 mil. We can do a lot better then Lee, I'd rather draft our next starting pf.
        Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

          I wouldn't mind Iggy as a reserve, the same role he has currently with GS. Something is going on with David Lee, age or injuries or both. This is Lee's 10th NBA season, and sometimes players' skills deteriorate rapidly
          Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

            Originally posted by BenR1990 View Post
            We all know the grass is always greener on the other side.
            Usually because the septic is leaking.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

              Originally posted by imawhat View Post
              Lee is terrible all around. He always has been.
              I've never understood the fascination some folks have had with him. He has never really impressed me, for some reason.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

                If we are going to fall in love with someone from the GSW, it would be better off being Harrison Barnes than either Lee or Iguodala.

                Barnes has very nice size for his position, appears to be a guy that can defend, pretty athletic, nice shooter and is under publicized behind Curry, Thompson, Iguodala et al. Looks like a guy whose value on the court exceeds his value on the salary cap. It would be really nice to have a couple of big wings that can defend on the Pacers again.

                Could one of you guys that lives on the left coast, that sees these guys all the time, give us some info about Barnes. He looks good on TV right now, but that isn't the same as seeing him in person.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

                  David Lee has never been all that good and the Warriors really made a mistake signing him to that 6 year $80M(!) s&t when nobody was willing to give him remotely that much. He's had one good year making the all-star team, and in that year, Curry was really more deserving of making it over him.

                  Other than that, he's had OK/decent years where he does his typical stat padding. This year, he's been hobbled and pretty close to useless.

                  I think he's definitely physically declined. Whether it's just physical deterioration or rust, bottom line is he doesn't fit in the Warriors defensive scheme anymore. The Warriors had the #1 ranked defense, and usually it would fall apart whenever Lee entered the game. He tried hard, but results just aren't there. He's by far and away the worst defensive player on the Warriors roster.

                  The Warriors paid a little too much for Igoudala in terms of the draft picks given to Utah to clear the contracts to make room for Iggy and the actual contract that gave to him, but he's still an important contributor. He's defensively versatile and can handle the ball. His shooting is streaky, but you can still livse with it considering the other things he brings to the table.

                  I've long thought of Barnes as somewhat of a disappointment, but he's alright. He's sort of doing the minimum of what he needs to do to be considered part of the future "core."

                  He's "stepping up" in the playoffs because so much attention gets focused on Klay and Curry and Barnes gets open shots and weak defenders put on him by default. Even so, he's giving you about 12-13ppg on 50% shooting. Again, that's sort of the MINIMUM of what he needs to do to stay viable IMO. I think he needs to do more, personally.

                  But like a lot of guys on the team, he's been very versatile defensively, which has really been the key to the season. He can guard 2s, 3s and 4s. His defense on Zach Randolph (with help from the roving zone behind him) was key against Memphis.

                  He'll still be on a rookie deal next year, but I'd be hesitant to back up the Brinks Truck in order to pay him his extension. He's still just 22 so I suppose he can get better, but to me he's always been a guy who just does the bare minimum of what it takes to stay relevant. Will be interesting to see if the Warriors even try to extend him in the summer, or if he even wants to and would rather wait for the new CBA to kick in, which is a conundrum a lot of players/teams will be in this summer.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

                    I have always wanted Iggy. He is still top of my wish list. That said I dont see GS parting with him at all. David "Get Mine" Lee would clash with PG big time. He would kill our ball movement. He demands the ball. And thats great. He can score with it. Problem is we got other guys who can score as well. If we brought him in it wouldnt take long before we regretted it. Also if Lee is ice cold he tries to shoot himself out of it. Problem is he never does.


                    "Pacers will win 50 games this season" 07-16-2015
                    "Ian will average 10-10 this season" 10-21-15

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

                      Side note in Game 3 tonight: Harrison Barnes laid an egg tonight with 0-9 FG.

                      To his credit, that's one of the very few disappearing acts he's had in the playoffs this year and he picked a perfect game to do it in.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

                        I'd consider trading Hibbert's final contract year for Lee's final contract year if there was a way to include Barnes & Ezeli too. The Pacers really need to to add younger bodies and depth for the reload. Problem is I can't think of any scenario where that would work for the Warriors or even cap wise.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

                          seriously, people realize David Lee sucks right?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

                            Originally posted by d_c View Post
                            Side note in Game 3 tonight: Harrison Barnes laid an egg tonight with 0-9 FG.

                            To his credit, that's one of the very few disappearing acts he's had in the playoffs this year and he picked a perfect game to do it in.
                            Didn't Barnes have some problem in college? Suspended or something? Maybe I've got the wrong guy? The one I'm thinking of played for UNC or Duke, I think.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

                              Originally posted by Tom White View Post
                              Didn't Barnes have some problem in college? Suspended or something? Maybe I've got the wrong guy? The one I'm thinking of played for UNC or Duke, I think.
                              Barnes played for UNC. IDK about any problems. Did he take one of the UNC phantom classes?

                              Off Topic/FWIW, but if UNC doesn't get the death penalty for that, the NCAA is worthless.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: David Lee and Andre Iguodala

                                Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                                Barnes played for UNC. IDK about any problems. Did he take one of the UNC phantom classes?

                                Off Topic/FWIW, but if UNC doesn't get the death penalty for that, the NCAA is worthless.
                                they'll find another Cleveland State to prove how much they care

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X