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

Bird resigns

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

  • Re: Bird resigns

    Originally posted by PetPaima View Post
    - use stretch provision on Al Jefferson
    - let Teague and Aaron Brooks walk
    - wouldn't pick up Lavoy's team option
    - waive Joe Young (fully unguaranteed for next season). Probably Niang too...
    - hold to C.J.Miles Bird rights as long as possible (in hope to sign him above the salary cap). Not go crazy to compete against other teams though if someone wants to pay silly price.

    Those are the moves concerning current team. I'd jettison Monta too, but I believe the cost to do so is too high for someone we can cut at the end of regular season a year from now anyway. Thus I'd plan as having Monta in as a 2nd-string point guard.


    As for new players...

    1) Contact Portland in effort to find a luxury tax avoiding deal for C.J.McCollum. Ready to give some 1st-rounders for him. Maybe Heisenberg is right and we don't have enough assets to get him, but I'd certainly test the waters...

    2) Failing that I would use most of our cap space to recruit Jrue & Justin Holiday together. A quality starting point guard whose injury-filled seasons are hopefully a thing of past + serviceable 3&D wing.

    3) Trade Thad + salary difference fillers (possibly keep Joe Young & Niang for this purpose only if their contracts don't become guaranteed too early) for Derrick Favors + Alec Burks. We need a physical PF (ie Favors), Utah needs someone who doesn't cramp the spacing when paired with Gobert (ie Thad). Both teams win.

    4) Try to move either up or down in the draft. Potential future stars are only available in Top10 (except a hugely risky flyer in Harry Giles) so moving up to 9th or higher would be great and worth giving up some... Otoh, this draft is DEEP in solid players so giving up 18th pick for f ex Utah's double pick at 24th & 30th would also be good move IMO.
    How are you going to do anything in the draft when you have already given up MULTIPLE first round picks for McCollum? (Which is too high a price, by the way.)

    Comment


    • Re: Bird resigns

      Originally posted by Tom White View Post
      How are you going to do anything in the draft when you have already given up MULTIPLE first round picks for McCollum? (Which is too high a price, by the way.)
      Lol, if we could do these moves I might be for it. But the money doesn't work and it's unrealistic.

      Comment


      • Re: Bird resigns

        Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
        I have no problem not liking Teague, but how does the money work? He will get just as much as Teague, but count maybe double this year.
        Money works just fine... Check my earlier posts - I have blueprinted it.

        But put shortly - After the moves I presented to purge the current roster we could have some 40 million bucks under the salary cap (that without CJ Miles, Joe Young & Niang). At the very least we would have 28,5 million (with CJ's cap hold, JYoung & Niang). That would be easily enough to absorb McCollum. That should also be enough (or otherwise I wouldn't want them) for both of Holiday-bros.

        One of those alternative moves would be the only thing we would need to do under the cap...

        Making Thad for Favors+Burks -trade requires us to send an additional $ 1,554,158 dollars in excess of Thad. When that condition is met, it can be above-the-cap move...

        edit : made a slight mistake using Joe Johnson's salary instead of Favors. The difference is 1,5 million making us to have to add another $ 3,049,158 in top of Thad's salary to complete this trade under CBA. That would IMO be Seraphin and Joe Young, which both Utah could then immediately waive in order to save another 3,25 million.

        Possible re-signing of C.J. Miles can happen above the salary cap with our Full Bird rights...


        P.S. I think it was fully clear that it was EITHER McCollum OR Holiday-bros. Not both. Of course, money doesn't work for 1+2, but it works for 1 or 2.
        Last edited by PetPaima; 05-06-2017, 06:07 PM.

        Comment


        • Re: Bird resigns

          Originally posted by Tom White View Post
          How are you going to do anything in the draft when you have already given up MULTIPLE first round picks for McCollum? (Which is too high a price, by the way.)
          Acquiring McCollum was the 1st option. I would be ready to trade down this year (give 18th pick, receive 26th), give unprotected pick in 2019 and a protected one somewhere in 2020's...

          However, I clearly stated that it may not be enough and in that point we move to points 2-3-4 and we have all our picks to start with.

          Comment


          • Re: Bird resigns

            Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
            Utah is looking for cap relief from, not adding/replacing salary. Thad is lateral at best for them.
            I agree. That's why Alec Burks was in it too... That trade would save them 4-5 million dollars depending on our filler(s).

            Comment


            • Re: Bird resigns

              Originally posted by PetPaima View Post
              Money works just fine... Check my earlier posts - I have blueprinted it.

              But put shortly - After the moves I presented to purge the current roster we could have some 40 million bucks under the salary cap (that without CJ Miles, Joe Young & Niang). At the very least we would have 28,5 million (with CJ's cap hold, JYoung & Niang). That would be easily enough to absorb McCollum. That should also be enough (or otherwise I wouldn't want them) for both of Holiday-bros.

              One of those alternative moves would be the only thing we would need to do under the cap...

              Making Thad for Favors+Burks -trade requires us to send an additional $ 1,554,158 dollars in addition. When that condition is met, it can be above-the-cap move...

              Seraphin would fill that hole alone and any duo of our "youngsters" in Xmas, JoeYoung, GRIII, Niang do too... That's why I would hold on to JYoung&Niang for completing this trade as I would rather not give up Seraphin (and not give up GRIII in any case - not as a salary ballast). That makes the trade a bit hurried though. Niang's 2nd year will be guaranteed by July 15 (I can't find that info for Joe) and we would need to make the trade in time for Utah to waive them...


              Possible re-signing of C.J. Miles can happen above the salary cap with our Full Bird rights...


              P.S. I think it was fully clear that it was EITHER McCollum OR Holiday-bros. Not both. Of course, money doesn't work for 1+2, but it works for 1 or 2.
              Can't find it, what do you have Jrue making?

              Again, Jazz want to cut salary trading Favors per Lowe...

              Utahh is all-in to keep Gordon Hayward, but they also need to shed some salary before their army of young players ink pricey new deals. They’ve tested the market for Derrick Favors over the last few weeks...
              https://www.google.com/amp/purpleand...ck-favors/amp/

              Makes sense with his contract extension coming up.

              Also, while unrealistic, even if these were options Jrue and Favors both have injury issues.

              Comment


              • Re: Bird resigns

                Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                Lol, if we could do these moves I might be for it. But the money doesn't work and it's unrealistic.
                Well some of the moves might not work, CJ McCullum as an example (we just don't have the assets), but there is no reason to not do some of the others. Not picking up LaVoy Allen's option to me is addition by subtraction. Letting Aaron Brooks walk would not be a bad thing IMO. Cutting Joe Young and George Niang is a non issue with me, could easily pick up two other players of equal caliber in D league. Jeff Teague is a little trickier, because of his cap hold I am like you in that I am more tempted to hang onto him because you aren't going to find a better player at a cheaper contract, but I wouldn't break the bank for him either. I would not shed a tear of CJ Miles leaves however I also understand his value in today's NBA but again I would not offer him anything more than what he makes and he certainly will get better offers.

                I am completely open to trading Thad Young as I believe his is one of only about 3-4 trade-able assets we have (including our draft pick). I don't know about Favors (his injury issues scare me) but in theory its not a bad trade.

                Whatever it takes to move Monta and Al I'm all for with the exception of giving up more to give them away. In other words I would not want to ship them with a pick to someone under the cap just to get rid of them, I'd rather just eat the salary next year then cut them if we had to.


                Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                Comment


                • Re: Bird resigns

                  Originally posted by PetPaima View Post
                  I agree. That's why Alec Burks was in it too... That trade would save them 4-5 million dollars depending on our filler(s).
                  It's 6 mill. Paying Burks almost 11 million is bad in itself, but how are we going to sign the Holiday brothers AND have 6 mill left for this trade???

                  Comment


                  • Re: Bird resigns

                    Originally posted by Peck View Post
                    Well some of the moves might not work, CJ McCullum as an example (we just don't have the assets), but there is no reason to not do some of the others. Not picking up LaVoy Allen's option to me is addition by subtraction. Letting Aaron Brooks walk would not be a bad thing IMO. Cutting Joe Young and George Niang is a non issue with me, could easily pick up two other players of equal caliber in D league. Jeff Teague is a little trickier, because of his cap hold I am like you in that I am more tempted to hang onto him because you aren't going to find a better player at a cheaper contract, but I wouldn't break the bank for him either. I would not shed a tear of CJ Miles leaves however I also understand his value in today's NBA but again I would not offer him anything more than what he makes and he certainly will get better offers.

                    I am completely open to trading Thad Young as I believe his is one of only about 3-4 trade-able assets we have (including our draft pick). I don't know about Favors (his injury issues scare me) but in theory its not a bad trade.

                    Whatever it takes to move Monta and Al I'm all for with the exception of giving up more to give them away. In other words I would not want to ship them with a pick to someone under the cap just to get rid of them, I'd rather just eat the salary next year then cut them if we had to.
                    I agree with all this, but I would prefer to keep Thad and move him to the bench. Like you, I'd be okay with bringing in Howard if it meant moving Monta and Al.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Bird resigns

                      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                      Can't find it, what do you have Jrue making?
                      As they have stated they have a dream to play together, I expect them to take 20 mil for Jrue (4 years, max. raises) & 7,5 mil for Justin (2 years).

                      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                      Again, Jazz want to cut salary trading Favors per Lowe...
                      Again - that's why Alec Burks was included. However, I made a slight mistake above. I used Joe Johnson's salary instead of Favors. We need to add $ 3,049,158 dollars to Thad to make it happen...

                      That means Seraphin + one youngster. Pity in losing Kevin, but he is easily replaceable with a mid-level exception recruit.

                      Utah saves close to 5 million in a trade alone and additional 3 million by immediately waiving the two filler-guys we sent in addition to Thad. Those are unguaranteed contracts.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Bird resigns

                        Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                        It's 6 mill. Paying Burks almost 11 million is bad in itself, but how are we going to sign the Holiday brothers AND have 6 mill left for this trade???
                        You can trade above the cap as long as your incloming salary is no more than outgoing salary + 5 million dollars. This trade is definitely made above the cap.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Bird resigns

                          Originally posted by PetPaima View Post
                          As they have stated they have a dream to play together, I expect them to take 20 mil for Jrue (4 years, max. raises) & 7,5 mil for Justin (2 years).



                          Again - that's why Alec Burks was included. However, I made a slight mistake above. I used Joe Johnson's salary instead of Favors. We need to add $ 3,049,158 dollars to Thad to make it happen...

                          That means Seraphin + one youngster. Pity in losing Kevin, but he is easily replaceable with a mid-level exception recruit.

                          Utah saves close to 5 million in a trade alone and additional 3 million by immediately waiving the two filler-guys we sent in addition to Thad. Those are unguaranteed contracts.
                          Jrue will command much more than 20 mill, so that sinks that ship.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Bird resigns

                            Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                            Jrue will command much more than 20 mill, so that sinks that ship.
                            I wouldn't like to pay him much more than that, but we could go all the way upto max.salary if we wish... Only would need to renounce Miles 1st. (Miles, not Myles). So the ship didn't sink at all...

                            ...but I wouldn't be comfortable at much more than that 20 mil. Especially not for 4 guaranteed years.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Bird resigns

                              Originally posted by Peck View Post
                              Whatever it takes to move Monta and Al I'm all for with the exception of giving up more to give them away. In other words I would not want to ship them with a pick to someone
                              under the cap just to get rid of them, I'd rather just eat the salary next year then cut them if we had to.
                              That's why I'm holding to Monta in my list too... Eat the salary next year, use him as a back-up and waive at the end of season (saving that option year of 2018-19).

                              But with AlJeff we don't save anything by keeping him around. His contract is nevertheless still guaranteed for 4 million in 2018-19 - not a clean slate at the end of next season. As I think he has declined to a state of being "addition by subtraction", I would stretch him. Costs the same money but divided over 5 years and ending up as such a little sum annually (about 2,7 mil) that it doesn't restrict our cap management much.

                              I wouldn't use picks to get rid of either in these financial situations.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Bird resigns

                                Originally posted by PetPaima View Post
                                I wouldn't like to pay him much more than that, but we could go all the way upto max.salary if we wish... Only would need to renounce Miles 1st. (Miles, not Myles). So the ship didn't sink at all...

                                ...but I wouldn't be comfortable at much more than that 20 mil. Especially not for 4 guaranteed years.
                                We would not be able to max Jrue and do everything you're saying.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X