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

The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

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

  • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

    There's nothing to fix that time and circumstance can't fix. The NBA is not broken. The NBA has had teams sweep their way to the Finals before it's just that some on this board are too young to remember.

    2000- 2001 Lakers went 11-0 on their way to the Finals and only lost 1 game. They swept Portland, Sacramento, and San Antonio. They only lost one game in the Finals against the Sixers and it took 46 points from Allen Iverson and overtime to do it. The Lakers looked as unstoppable as GSW that year.

    1990-91 Bulls went 15-2 losing only once against Charles Barkley's Sixers in the second round and they swept the defending champs, Detroit Pistons before beating the Lakers 4-1.

    1982-83 Sixers only lost one game on their way to a championship beating good teams like the Bucks and Sweeping Magic, Kareem, and the Lakers. Moses Malone, a superstar who had previously won an MVP award with the Rockets, joined the Sixers to form a Super Team. Sound familiar?

    My point is that there are multiple things that could derail these seemingly unstoppable juggernauts. In the past it's been injuries and free agency. It's very hard to keep a championship team in tact for more than 3-4 years. You think Draymond Green is going to continue being happy with his limited role? They owe Steph a Max contract this summer. Will they have to let Shawn Livingston go? Will they let Andre Iguodala and Ian Clark just walk if they receive an offer higher than what they can stomach? They have a HUGE luxury tax bill waiting for them this year. Any of these changes can mess up their chemistry. KD could injury his foot again. Steph's ankle issues could resurface due to all the mileage from these multiple long playoffs runs.

    The Cavs probably won't be the same next year either. They have a bunch of aging veterans on that team. Injuries kept them from winning in 2015 and it could keep them from even advancing to the Finals next year. I wouldn't be surprised to see them pick up a coule more former all-stars this summer but they have zero cap space. Their window is closing fast.

    There's nothing broken in the NBA. These things are cyclical. The Bulls, Lakers, and Celtics dominance came to an end organically and so will Golden State's.

    Comment


    • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

      @naptownmenace - The problem isn't the lack of parity. In fact, some of the best periods in the NBA were times where there was very little parity. The lack of parity is a symptom of ONE of the problems in the NBA. Again, I hope I don't have to repeat this too often. The problem associated with the lack of parity is the way teams can be constructed under today's rules and today's norms.

      There are other problems I had listed in my OP. Lack of parity wasn't even one of them.

      Comment


      • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

        While I'm not really happy with the state of play in the league today the one over riding concern is the super team issue.

        I can no longer invest so much of myself emotionally into a team that will not, in my life time, compete for a championship.

        The ratings and global interest might have never been sounder but as a fan of a small market, cold weather city's team I don't see how we can compete under the current structure.

        Kstat:

        You might know this off the top of your head. When Jordan had his two championship runs why didn't we draw some bigger name talent to Chicago?

        There was certainly HOF talent that could have gone to the Bulls to get a ring, Rodman not withstanding.

        Maybe the league should contract back to 24 teams.

        Comment


        • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
          @naptownmenace - The problem isn't the lack of parity. In fact, some of the best periods in the NBA were times where there was very little parity. The lack of parity is a symptom of ONE of the problems in the NBA. Again, I hope I don't have to repeat this too often. The problem associated with the lack of parity is the way teams can be constructed under today's rules and today's norms.

          There are other problems I had listed in my OP. Lack of parity wasn't even one of them.
          How is your complaint about teams having a lack of talent and players forming super teams not about parity? It sounds like you're for more parity to me.

          I guess I'm one of the few people on this board that love the 3-pointer. There's nothing that should be done about it other than teams need to lean how to defend it better. We can blame Reggie Miller, Dan Marjerle, Dell Curry, Glen Rice, Dennis Scott, and Ray Allen for making it so popular. Just like Dr. J made the dunk what it became in the late 80s and 90s, what those guys did made kids of the early 2000s work on perfecting it.

          I don't have a problem with players recruiting other players to play with them. Danny Granger helped recruit David West to join the Pacers as they worked out in the offseason together. I would love it if PG13 could encourage an all-star free agent like Hayward or Chris Paul to join the team.

          Some teams are willing to pay a luxury tax to put together 3 or 4 max contract players. There's nothing unfair about free agency but it's apparent that some teams are much better at it than others. I can see how this could affect your opinion of the Pacers, especially if they continue with the strategy of signing former all-star (or no-star) players on the downside of their careers. They have to make a decision to cut the dead weight and go hard after some top talent. There won't be any changes made to the CBA Anytime soon. No hard salary cap will ever be agreed to even when the next negotiations begin so front offices need to make better decisions starting with shorter contracts and less money for non all-star players. What the Lakers and Trailblazers did this past summer is beyond idiotic.

          To be honest though, when people complain about all these things it just comes across as desperation. I don't think that the current state of the NBA is a reason for desperation. Maybe I'll feel differently after this offseason but right now, I'm content with waiting to see how this all plays out over the next 2 years.

          Comment


          • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

            Jordan did have one gift in Toni Kukoc. He was a fairly good player.

            Rodman was not a gift. Rodman was huge headache nobody in the league could handle, except for Phil Jackon. I am no fan of Phil Jackson, but getting Rodman to work on that team took a HOF coach and the GOAT.

            Comment


            • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

              Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
              How is your complaint about teams having a lack of talent and players forming super teams not about parity? It sounds like you're for more parity to me.

              I guess I'm one of the few people on this board that love the 3-pointer. There's nothing that should be done about it other than teams need to lean how to defend it better. We can blame Reggie Miller, Dan Marjerle, Dell Curry, Glen Rice, Dennis Scott, and Ray Allen for making it so popular. Just like Dr. J made the dunk what it became in the late 80s and 90s, what those guys did made kids of the early 2000s work on perfecting it.
              ...
              "players forming" is really at the root of the issue. Players should be playing. GMs should be forming teams. I have no problem if a GM competes in the free market for talent via trades and the draft...and builds a totally dominant team. The issue is when players decide to centralize talent.

              It would be just as bad if 3 GMs got together and decided to make trades such that 1 of the 3 teams got all the talent. Kind of like a partnership where they share rings. For example, say Cavs, Spurs and the Pacers GMs agreed to share players. You'd have a team with LeBron, Kawhi, Paul George, Kyrie Irving and a bench full of near all-stars. That team wins the title and all 82 of their games. The other two teams lose all their games and have the #1 and #2 picks in the draft. They shift each year and completely dominate the league forever because they are getting all of the #1 and #2 picks and those players never want to leave the trinity of SUPAH TEAM.

              So, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Let the GMs collude, manipulate the league, cheat other teams and their fans. Anything wrong with that?

              Comment


              • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

                Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                They don't have to have a CBA if they don't have a salary cap, a max contract, draft, etc. etc. If players and teams were freely allowed to pay however much they want and go where they want without any rules in place they could play with a CBA. Otherwise it is known as collusion which is illegal in the US, and the NBA would run into a bunch of anti-trust/anti-monopoly laws that would shut it down rather quickly. The CBA is required by law if the NBA wants to operate under the rules it currently operates under.
                You're right. The CBA is not for the protection of the players, it is for the protection of the owners. Without a CBA, the players would quickly get way more than 50% of the take. All it takes is one owner to try to outbid for a player and the floodgates are open.

                Comment


                • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

                  neither's ever gonna happen, but hard cap and no max salary.

                  Comment


                  • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

                    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                    Jordan did have one gift in Toni Kukoc. He was a fairly good player.
                    They drafted Toni Kucoc. He was a 2nd round pick three years before they actually brought him over.

                    Originally posted by Jose Slaughter View Post
                    Kstat:

                    You might know this off the top of your head. When Jordan had his two championship runs why didn't we draw some bigger name talent to Chicago?

                    There was certainly HOF talent that could have gone to the Bulls to get a ring, Rodman not withstanding.
                    Because the bulls were capped out from the beginning of the Jordan era to the end, and there was no mid level exemption.

                    Jordan was literally making more than the entire salary cap his final two seasons.

                    It took some serious screwing over of Scottie Pippen just to free up enough cash to sign Toni Kukoc (with Jordan retired and temporarily off the books), and even they came razor close to trading him several times rather than pay him what he was worth.
                    Last edited by Kstat; 06-12-2017, 03:46 AM.

                    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                    Comment


                    • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

                      Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
                      You're right. The CBA is not for the protection of the players, it is for the protection of the owners. Without a CBA, the players would quickly get way more than 50% of the take. All it takes is one owner to try to outbid for a player and the floodgates are open.
                      The CBA protects the owners from anti-trust litigation. The NBA violates any number of labor laws but is exempt so long as it has a collectively bargained contract with the players union.

                      The salary cap (part of the CBA) is what protects owners from themselves.

                      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                      Comment


                      • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

                        Originally posted by Jose Slaughter View Post
                        While I'm not really happy with the state of play in the league today the one over riding concern is the super team issue.

                        I can no longer invest so much of myself emotionally into a team that will not, in my life time, compete for a championship.

                        The ratings and global interest might have never been sounder but as a fan of a small market, cold weather city's team I don't see how we can compete under the current structure.

                        This is the real problem with the NBA. All other issues are secondary.
                        {o,o}
                        |)__)
                        -"-"-

                        Comment


                        • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

                          Originally posted by owl View Post
                          This is the real problem with the NBA. All other issues are secondary.
                          The underlying reasons that super teams exist need to be addressed to fix it. There are several parts to that including free agency. Additional measures to restrict that, in some way, are needed to prevent their formation.

                          I think the the rules of the game need to be adjusted as well to reduce the use of the 3 pointer. Maybe get rid of corner 3's. The arc could intersect at the sideline maybe 12 feet from the baseline. But then it might just turn into a long free throw shooting game...even worse...lol

                          Comment


                          • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

                            In general, I don't even think the NBA system is terribly broken. It took a complete fluke for Durant to fall in GS's lap with the salary cap rise. It was broken last year in that we had poor leadership on both sides who weren't able to see what could potentially happen in summer 2016. In addition to that, it took a mentality from Durant where he was OK with joining the team who he almost beat to go the Finals the prior year. The Durant thing was a fluke all around.

                            I said this last week and know it won't be popular, but I think it's just too easy to make a ton of money once you get in the league. If you're a borderline rotational player like Solomon Hill, you're getting double digit millions a year. If you're a solid starter who can't sniff all star games like George Hill or Jeff Teague, you can potentially get paid an amount that is close to what the very best players in the league made not too long ago. Be Mike Conley and you're like the highest paid player ever. It used to be that the truly insane amounts of money were reserved for the very best. Not the case anymore. Just make the team and you're in line to make boatloads of obscene money. I think this will lead to continued complacency and slop in the coming years.

                            The fact that we're paying Al Jefferson $10 million a year is truly mind boggling. What's the incentive for him at this point to really bust it when in one year he can make enough money to create generational wealth? I don't begrudge anyone for taking the money as they should, but the big money is just way too easy nowadays. It used to be a motivator for the best, but now all you really have to do is just stay in the league.

                            Comment


                            • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

                              Getting rid of 3 pointers or eliminating the corner 3 are probably the dumbest 2 ideas I have ever heard. Might as well get rid of free throws too if you have that sort of mentality.

                              Comment


                              • Re: The NBA is broken. How do we put it back together again?

                                NBA officiating can be very good, I don't think it is nearly as bad as some here do, but it can be really inconsistent too. How is KD pushing Lebron down when he was dunking it on that drive in the first half last night not a foul, but then Tristan Thompson (I think) barely bumping into Steph Curry 2 or 3 seconds after a shot was released (thereby having no impact on the shot itself) a foul? The NBA seems to criminalize defense at times, I understand they want the game to flow and be more offense driven, but at least be consistent with how you call things.

                                I've always wondered why Allen Iverson didn't leave Philly earlier in his career and team up with someone else. Did he just have too much of the alpha mentality like Westbrook does know where he had to be the guy regardless? Was it just a money thing? Or better yet, why wasn't Philly able to sign someone in free agency around 2000-2001ish when the East was pretty wide open and it would have instantly made Philly the team to beat.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X