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

Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

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

  • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

    I could see Nick Young potentially working out in an environment built around winning. He would have to reign himself in a la JR Smith. With that said, there's absolutely no room for him and CJ Miles on the same team anywhere. One streaky, terrible shot taking wing per team.

    Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
    Lakers trying to sign Yi after his performance in the Olympics.
    I always liked Yi, just wish he liked himself. He did just fine when he looked to score but he was way too passive for the NBA.
    Last edited by 3rdStrike; 08-19-2016, 06:00 PM.

    Comment


    • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

      Originally posted by Grimp View Post
      Which is why starting him at the 3 and moving Paul to the 2 or starting him at the 2 would make sense..
      You want to move an All-Star SF to the SG spot and replace him with a guy that was bad on a bad team ??

      Are you freakin' serious ?? Let me re-phrase that ......... ARE YOU FREAKIN' SERIOUS ??

      Don't - don't even try to defend that. Whatever you're going to say will make no sense and only dig you deeper.

      Replace PG with Nick freakin' Young and put Monta on the bench. Say it out loud and realize how wrong that is. PG would slap you if he heard you say that.

      Comment


      • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

        Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
        You want to move an All-Star SF to the SG spot and replace him with a guy that was bad on a bad team ??

        Are you freakin' serious ?? Let me re-phrase that ......... ARE YOU FREAKIN' SERIOUS ??

        Don't - don't even try to defend that. Whatever you're going to say will make no sense and only dig you deeper.

        Replace PG with Nick freakin' Young and put Monta on the bench. Say it out loud and realize how wrong that is. PG would slap you if he heard you say that.

        I gave two suggestions. Keeping Paul at the SF was one of them.


        Also we would have moved Paul to the 2 if Rudy Gay had been traded here. Larry even asked him about it. In any scenario where we acquire a starting quality SF Paul would have to slide to the 2 to make it work. Nick I don't think is starting quality in most scenarios but in our scenario we have a tiny backcourt and our SG isn't an above 35% 3pt shooter so he can't space the floor as well.

        Comment


        • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

          Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
          I could see Nick Young potentially working out in an environment built around winning. He would have to reign himself in a la JR Smith. With that said, there's absolutely no room for him and CJ Miles on the same team anywhere. One streaky, terrible shot taking wing per team.


          I always liked Yi, just wish he liked himself. He did just fine when he looked to score but he was way too passive for the NBA.


          I give CJ a break because he manned the stretch 4 for us last season. He took one for the team playing way out of position for an abundance of games. I think him and Nick don't need to be on fire every game to work off the bench. They just keep the defense honest. Put games out of reach when teams are making runs also. If both can hit 4 3's per game or more off the bench it's a win.

          Comment


          • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

            What has young actually done thats so bad.he's just a cocky dude from cali(cali swag).

            Comment


            • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

              Originally posted by tnasty4l View Post
              What has young actually done thats so bad.he's just a cocky dude from cali(cali swag).
              cali swag 4 dat 2 guard spot
              https://twitter.com/DrogsNavan

              Change is neither good or bad, it simply is.

              Comment


              • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

                .

                Comment


                • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

                  I'll admit, if I didn't expect the team to be any good I'd be all for Swaggy P, the guy's at least funny to watch when you don't actually care about winning

                  Comment


                  • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

                    Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                    I'll admit, if I didn't expect the team to be any good I'd be all for Swaggy P, the guy's at least funny to watch when you don't actually care about winning
                    I think at this state he needs a constructive environment. I think we have that. Also our options now for a SG with more size than Monta has are dwindling. I think if nothing is done by mid September Nick is an option they have to at least consider.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

                      Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                      I think if nothing is done by mid September Nick is an option they have to at least consider.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

                        Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                        I think at this state he needs a constructive environment. I think we have that. Also our options now for a SG with more size than Monta has are dwindling. I think if nothing is done by mid September Nick is an option they have to at least consider.
                        I don't think that there is a requirement for us to make a move by mid-September.....much less any other moves at all. I know that it's not optimal to have Monta in the Starting lineup....but it is not a showstopper where we must make a move or we are screwed.

                        I know that some ( including myself ) don't really want Monta in the Starting lineup and that there are some shortcomings of having him Start ( not as much length and not as effecting as a floor spacer ), but it's debatable as to whether having him start or not is a "no go" for the Pacers until a better opportunity arises ( and no, Swaggy P is not the opportunity that I suspect that Bird is looking for ).

                        Before you start your next huge post saying that Monta and Teague is small and that we won't have any length at the Starting Guard spots.....I agree with you...I'd even prefer to have CJ Miles start over Monta. But my guess is that if push comes to shove ( as in, there is truly no better option than Monta ), Bird will go with the best SG option that he has...and that is Monta.

                        Now, if we can get a quality half way decent Starting in a trade ( again, Swaggy P is not the answer )....sure, I'd be fine with pushing Monta to the 2nd unit. All that you suggest about length and floor spacing are valid points and I also think that Monta isn't a great complement to the rest of the Starting lineup....but Bird IMHO is more of a "put the best Players on the floor and they will figure things out" type of guy ( especially when Monta is a better SG option than CJ or anyone else that we can likely acquire this late in the game ).
                        Last edited by CableKC; 08-20-2016, 09:53 PM.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                          I don't think that there is a requirement for us to make a move by mid-September.....much less any other moves at all. I know that it's not optimal to have Monta in the Starting lineup....but it is not a showstopper where we must make a move or we are screwed.

                          I know that some ( including myself ) don't really want Monta in the Starting lineup and that there are some shortcomings of having him Start ( not as much length and not as effecting as a floor spacer ), but it's debatable as to whether having him start or not is a "no go" for the Pacers until a better opportunity arises ( and no, Swaggy P is not the opportunity that I suspect that Bird is looking for ).

                          Before you start your next huge post saying that Monta and Teague is small and that we won't have any length at the Starting Guard spots.....I agree with you...I prefer to have CJ Miles start over Monta...but my guess is that if push comes to shove ( as in, there is truly no better option than Monta ), Bird will go with the best SG option that he has...and that is Monta.

                          What you suggest about length and floor spacing is important and that Monta isn't a great complement to the rest of the Starting lineup....but Bird IMHO is more of a "put the best Players on the floor and they will figure things out" type of guy.


                          My first choice is hoping we'd get Rudy so the length thing wouldn't be an issue any longer. But my second option (and the boldest) would be to get GRIII into the starting lineup. I'd love to see him blossom like Lance did when he got his 'shot.' Problem is I doubt it will happen like many here do. GRIII isn't a player we drafted. He's a project we picked up and normally teams don't make bold moves with projects they got from somewhere/someone else. Although it would be a good 'story' for next season if we started him and he made a name for himself.

                          Overall we don't HAVE to make a trade true but size is not just an issue in terms of a balanced attack but also in bothering shots. Not sure Monta at 6'3 would bother those 6'6/6'7 guards too much. Also it puts a ton of defensive pressure on Paul when our SG is too small to guard his guy. Monta also at this career stage is not gonna be able to give as much as he gets on the offensive end.

                          IF a deal gets done to shore up some size at the 2 it will probably involve us and SAC, DEN, and LAL. Since those 3 teams are rumored to be trying to move players right now more than anyone else.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

                            Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                            We wouldn't have to give up anything. If the Lakers buy him out we'd probably sign him for maybe $3 million and 2 years. Team option for year two. I don't think anyone will invest beyond a small amount until they are sure he is serious about winning. But our organizational structure and the vets we have I think are enough to keep him focused. Also he'd be spending most of his time in Indiana, not L.A. Lastly, we get him a legit starter, who has no alcohol or drug issues and who is in shape. Not a Ty Lawson or some guy who's fallen out of the league.

                            We get him for 3 or 4 million for 1 or two years. Whereas the Cavs would be paying JR Smith who is the same age as Nick and both are similar players.... $15 million per season for another 3 seasons.
                            Nick Young, IMO, is NOT a winner. When he's about to step on the court, I don't picture him thinking: "I'll do what it takes to get the team a win." It's more like: "Time for me to do my thang!"
                            To me, this guy is nothing but a show-boat. He's all about himself

                            Comment


                            • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

                              Originally posted by pogi View Post
                              Nick Young, IMO, is NOT a winner. When he's about to step on the court, I don't picture him thinking: "I'll do what it takes to get the team a win." It's more like: "Time for me to do my thang!"
                              To me, this guy is nothing but a show-boat. He's all about himself
                              Well the Cavs took on JR Smith who is what you can call a knucklehead as well. He seems to have grown up. I am not petitioning for Nick to join our team as a main option. I'm saying if a week after Labor Day we can't get any more size or better shooting at the 2 (Rudy Gay, Will Barton, Gary Harris, Wesley Matthews, etc.) - in some sort of deal. And Nick's been bought out by the Lakers. It's kind of like why not take a chance on Nick as a last ditch effort?

                              He is not a player who's had much of a real chance to win. He was drafted to a Wizards team with some bad personalities. Gilbert Arenas for example. Then he signed with the Sixers as a free agent. A losing team. His only chance at winning came as a Laker. But Nash getting hurt, retiring. Kobe getting hurt the team spiraled into a stats team. Guys were just chucking shots to score points and land that next contract. All title hopes died when Nash left truth be told.

                              While I do agree he can be a primadonna at times.... I have to admit a player who verbally jaws with Kobe in practice like Nick has done can't be too bad for our confidence as a team. At least we know Nick isn't a shrinking violet. Much like Lance he has supreme confidence. It just needs to be held in check at times when it becomes detrimental to the team.
                              Last edited by Grimp; 08-20-2016, 10:34 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Summer of 2016 off season trade/draft rumor mill thread.

                                Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                                My first choice is hoping we'd get Rudy so the length thing wouldn't be an issue any longer. But my second option (and the boldest) would be to get GRIII into the starting lineup. I'd love to see him blossom like Lance did when he got his 'shot.' Problem is I doubt it will happen like many here do. GRIII isn't a player we drafted. He's a project we picked up and normally teams don't make bold moves with projects they got from somewhere/someone else. Although it would be a good 'story' for next season if we started him and he made a name for himself.

                                Overall we don't HAVE to make a trade true but size is not just an issue in terms of a balanced attack but also in bothering shots. Not sure Monta at 6'3 would bother those 6'6/6'7 guards too much. Also it puts a ton of defensive pressure on Paul when our SG is too small to guard his guy. Monta also at this career stage is not gonna be able to give as much as he gets on the offensive end.

                                IF a deal gets done to shore up some size at the 2 it will probably involve us and SAC, DEN, and LAL. Since those 3 teams are rumored to be trying to move players right now more than anyone else.
                                I go back to what I said before.

                                You bring up some valid points about having complementary SG that can spread the floor and the need for length.

                                But at this point....I think that Bird will stick with the "start the best overall SG in the Starting lineup despite the reasons that you suggest" option.

                                To be clear:

                                - I agree with the points that you are bringing up, but I think that Bird thinks that Monta is the best option
                                - Yes, getting and starting Rudy is a better option to start over Monta....but Bird doesn't want to give up Monta or any real assets to get him
                                - No, Swaggy P nor CJ are not better SG options than Monta ( despite the reasons that you suggest )

                                Unless Bird can find a better option than Monta, than he is the best overall SG that Nate can start.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X