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?

    Originally posted by BillS View Post
    So basically LA, NY, and whoever else might have won a championship recently get the top 8 picks every single year? Screw that, especially since very soon that team that might have won a championship becomes NY and LA.


    Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk
    Of course not. In the current incarnation of the draft, every team starts with 2 picks, one in the first round and one in the second round. The first round picks have a scaled salary while the 2nd round picks don't. I'd add a scaled salary for second rounders, and players that go undrafted can't make more than the minimum until 3 years after they were in a draft (and no more than $250,000 guaranteed the first year).

    So every team gets 2 salaries to offer rookies coming into the league. That means 2 players for each team. The salaries would be based strictly on record. So, for example, the worst team in the league gets the highest salary and the 31st highest salary to offer to rookies.

    Then I'd let the players decide. For example, the Pacers have no chance at getting Zach Collins of Gonzaga because they have the 18th pick. However, under this system, they can attempt to convince Collins that the Pacers are the best place to start his NBA career. Would Markelle Fultz go to the Celtics and play for a winner and get the most money, or to the Suns for less money where he can get playing time and establish himself as an NBA player? Would any player want to play for the trainwreck that is the Sacramento Kings organization?

    It's not happening, obviously. But I disagree vehemently with your thought that rookies would just choose the top teams to play on. For one thing, those teams have less money to offer. But most importantly, players are interested in establishing themselves as NBA players, starters, All-Stars, etc. at the beginning of their careers.

    Comment


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

      It's funny hearing people say they want the 3 point line pushed back. I hope this just shows people that players today are way better than back then. That's why when I hear the media compare Magic and Bird to someone like LeBron it's silly. Or even Durant. They could not hang with them
      Last edited by BornIndy; 06-09-2017, 09:15 PM.

      Comment


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

        Originally posted by shags View Post
        It needs to be noted here, in replying to this post, that of the 36 teams that have advanced to the Finals since 2000, the 2017 Cleveland Cavaliers have the 4th worst record. The only teams worse were 2010 Boston, 2007 Cleveland, and 2003 New Jersey. They won 51 games in the regular season, and were 25 and 24 over their final 49 games.

        I think it's very possible that they beat a mediocre Pacer team, a Raptors team that played half the series without all star Kyle Lowry, and a Boston team that played 3 games without 2nd team all NBA player Isaiah Thomas, and that Golden State is proving that Cleveland isn't nearly as good as everyone thought they were.
        Those are junk stats.

        They have the best player in the world along with a top 5 PG, they are very good in their own right.

        I didn't say they were an all time great team. Just far too good to be swept. That's all.
        "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

        Comment


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

          Us trying to "fix" the NBA is a side-effect of today's "correct my mistake" society. The people who run the NBA "broke" it. So let them fix it.

          Comment


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

            Nothing will get fixed until the masses stop buying it. So long as everyone keeps
            throwing big bucks at the product, it will continue along its path to success.

            Comment


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

              Originally posted by BornIndy07 View Post
              It's funny hearing people say they want the 3 point line pushed back. I hope this just shows people that players today are way better than back then. That's why when I hear the media compare Magic and Bird to someone like LeBron it's silly. Or even Durant. They could not hang with them
              Players are way better today because they can shoot deeper???
              Players today are better 3 point shooters not better players. Wings have improved a great deal but front courts are smaller and weaker with most having no post game at all.
              Today's game is broken in that it's a less complete game. We need to move the 3 point line back to a solid 25' arc sideline to sideline.
              Rules were changed to make it easier for wing players to score with less physical defense and the addition of the 3 while rules have been changed that have to make it harder on post players such as zone defenses, the Barkley rule and even going back to widening the lane. I like the 3 but not at the rate it's used today. The only way we bring balance back to the game at this point is to implement rule changes to do that and right now the league seems to have no interest in that outside of Cuban and Pop.
              Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

              Comment


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

                Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                Players are way better today because they can shoot deeper???
                Players today are better 3 point shooters not better players. Wings have improved a great deal but front courts are smaller and weaker with most having no post game at all.
                Today's game is broken in that it's a less complete game. We need to move the 3 point line back to a solid 25' arc sideline to sideline.
                Rules were changed to make it easier for wing players to score with less physical defense and the addition of the 3 while rules have been changed that have to make it harder on post players such as zone defenses, the Barkley rule and even going back to widening the lane. I like the 3 but not at the rate it's used today. The only way we bring balance back to the game at this point is to implement rule changes to do that and right now the league seems to have no interest in that outside of Cuban and Pop.
                They are also more athletic than ever. Players handles are better than they ever have been. Some of these finishes I see are ridiculous. I'm young and of course didn't watch the game back in the day but seeing the way they moved is not the same as today.

                Their are definitely things missing in today's game like the post game. But centers and power forwards can shoot better now today than back then for sure

                Comment


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

                  Kevin Durant is a 7 foot freak who can dribble, shoot like a guard. Scary to defend.

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                    He broke lebron's ankles with a double dribble. I could walk out to a playground right now and get by people picking up the ball with two hands, faking a shot and dribbling it again.

                    And in any case, everyone is forced to overreact to his shooting so any sort of fake he performs behind the 3 point line is magnified.

                    Aside from that? Yep, absurd response. Except that it's not.

                    Keep them excuses coming. He is an elite dribbler. Absurd indeed.
                    {o,o}
                    |)__)
                    -"-"-

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by shags View Post
                      I wish the owner's and player's would have agreed to a stipulation in the CBA where the salary cap couldn't go up more than 10% or do down more than 10% in any one year. That would have stopped Durant to Golden State. It seems to me that this would have benefitted both sides, so I'm disappointed that's not in the agreement.

                      On the playing side, I wish that the court would be bigger. The players nowadays are so athletic, and widening the court would give them more room. Also, you could extend the 3 point line to the same distance all over the court. But that will never happen.

                      On to something else that will never happen, I would abolish the draft. Have a salary scale from the first pick to the 60th pick (with the first pick making the most money, and the 60th making the least money), and have each team have 2 slots per season (a first round and second round slot). The slots get decided by record like they do now. Then have the players decide which team they want to go to in a week long exclusive negotiating window before July 1st. I'd be fine with the franchise tag if the player can decide where they want to go out of college (or Europe).

                      The first paragraph really sums it up perfectly. The only reason Durant is because of a complete once-in-a-blue-moon fluke that should have never happened. Really nothing else needs to be said. The fact that it took a rare fluke like that for it to happen perfectly illustrates the video game absurdity of their roster strength. It should have never been allowed to happen if we would have had people on both sides with a bit of foresight.

                      Great point, shags, pretty much says all that needs to be said. If a roster is only this strong because of an absurd fluke like that, then it absolutely validates all the complaints about how obscene and uncompetitive it is.

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                        I'm actually on the complete other side of the fence here.

                        Players are bigger, stronger, more athletic, and more skilled than ever IMO.

                        The skill-sets may not be quite as diverse (everyone seems to copy cat one another's skills), but they are definitely at a higher level than previously IMO
                        I agree with players now being more athletic, skilled, etc.....but I honestly still feel that the top 10 players of the 90's would absolutely smash the top 10 players of today.

                        And a lot of it is because, IMHO, they had a better mixture of athleticism and BB IQ. The players nowadays are more athletic, but don't have the BB IQ like the past players. And to me that's half the battle. These players rely almost exclusively on athleticism alone. I've seen too many times the players now screw up simple bounce passes, whether in transition or not. Or just moves in general that has me thinking: "WTF were they thinking!" at the most crucial times in a game.

                        Probably my main reason (that I forgot to mention in my earlier post), is that I feel the 15th-20th best player of the 90's would've been a top 5 player in this era. If everyone disagree with me, that's fine. Maybe because the late 80's through the 90's were, IMO, the heyday of NBA basketball to me personally.

                        Another thing is that even some of the worst teams in that time had, at least, 1 player I may have enjoyed watching, even if I knew his team was garbage. Most teams now (even the playoff teams) just look like garbage. Just faster and more athletic garbage.
                        Last edited by pogi; 06-10-2017, 10:51 AM.

                        Comment


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

                          But I also feel that any rule change won't make a difference either. Regardless what changes, there will come a team that capitalizes on it - in some way or fashion - and dominate in their window of opportunity. And many here will ***** and moan about there needing to be changes made in the NBA to counter it.

                          Comment


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

                            I'm not an expert on these things, but wasn't a Chris Paul trade banned a couple years ago because it would be too unfair or something? Why didn't that apply to the Kevin Durant acquisition?
                            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                              I'm not an expert on these things, but wasn't a Chris Paul trade banned a couple years ago because it would be too unfair or something? Why didn't that apply to the Kevin Durant acquisition?
                              The NBA owned the Hornets at the time and voided it because it was a terrible long term deal and made the team harder to sell. The NBA has never unilaterally voided a deal because of "fairness" issues. The clippers offered far cheaper, better rebuilding materials.

                              Also, Kevin Durant was a free agent, not a trade. If the NBA tried to tell a player "you can't play there because you're too good," they would get sued by the union and skinned alive.
                              Last edited by Kstat; 06-10-2017, 11:30 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 Peck View Post
                                Fun season? For who?

                                I found this to literally be one of the most boring non interesting seasons I've ever experienced.

                                Not for the reasons bng said, but because our team was boring and soft.
                                I felt the same but that was mostly because we sucked and that sucked my motivation to watch basketball as a whole. The season was probably quite fun for fans of other teams
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X