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

PG TRADED TO OKC

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

  • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
    And again, are we sure that Denver's offer would still be on the table after July 1st?
    Given how lopsided those deals were, I don't see why not. However, I think you take the chance that 1 of those 2 deals is still on the table, but that's just me. Certainly nothing is guaranteed however.

    Comment


    • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
      Are you sure that we could get an equally good trade if we passed this one up? Maybe something could happen with Denver but I doubt hat the Celtics are going to give up their picks.
      My thing is, even if we assume that the Denver and OKC deals would not have been there after July 1, honestly who cares. Getting an overpaid, undersized, league average starting shooting guard and one of the worst rookies to get meaningful playing time last year by both basic and advanced stats? If OKC pulls that deal I'm not losing sleep over it and neither should Pritch.

      After Denver gets Milsap or Boston gets Hayward, you don't think they up their offer for PG? And even if they don't, what exactly has OKC done that would make you think they would no longer do the Dipo trade?

      There was no reason to trade PG at that time, and nothing that has happened since FA started suggests otherwise to me.

      Comment


      • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

        Originally posted by SkipperZ View Post
        My thing is, even if we assume that the Denver and OKC deals would not have been there after July 1, honestly who cares. Getting an overpaid, undersized, league average starting shooting guard and one of the worst rookies to get meaningful playing time last year by both basic and advanced stats? If OKC pulls that deal I'm not losing sleep over it and neither should Pritch.

        After Denver gets Milsap or Boston gets Hayward, you don't think they up their offer for PG? And even if they don't, what exactly has OKC done that would make you think they would no longer do the Dipo trade?

        There was no reason to trade PG at that time, and nothing that has happened since FA started suggests otherwise to me.
        Thats a chicken and the egg argument. OKC probably would have done more since they would of not had PG.
        Last edited by Gamble1; 07-05-2017, 01:19 PM.

        Comment


        • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

          Originally posted by PR07 View Post
          Given how lopsided those deals were, I don't see why not. However, I think you take the chance that 1 of those 2 deals is still on the table, but that's just me. Certainly nothing is guaranteed however.
          But, again, it's possible that the executives viewed these as fair deals, given PG's "Lakers!" sentiment. I can also easily imagine OKC saying "Look, we want PG, but only if we can surround him with some quality free agents so that we can try to make a run at GSW and get RW to stay. But if we don't get him, we'll want to flip RW for some assets before he bolts next summer and try to tank."

          Comment


          • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

            Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
            Thats a chicken and the egg argument. OKC probably would have done more since they would of not had PG.
            OKC could not have done more unless they traded Dipo to someone else. And trust me, no one was giving them anything close to PG for Dipo. OKC wasn't swimming in cap space.

            Comment


            • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

              Originally posted by PR07 View Post
              Given how lopsided those deals were, I don't see why not. However, I think you take the chance that 1 of those 2 deals is still on the table, but that's just me. Certainly nothing is guaranteed however.
              The worst case scenario in this is striking out completely and keeping PG until the trade deadline in which we're going to receive even worse offers for him. What's the best case scenario? Do you think that anyone would offer us something that significantly beat the OKC offer? You have every right to think that if you want but I don't think I can agree.

              Originally posted by SkipperZ View Post
              My thing is, even if we assume that the Denver and OKC deals would not have been there after July 1, honestly who cares. Getting an overpaid, undersized, league average starting shooting guard and one of the worst rookies to get meaningful playing time last year by both basic and advanced stats? If OKC pulls that deal I'm not losing sleep over it and neither should Pritch.
              If you have this view of Oladipo and Sabonis then no wonder you don't like the trade. I just happen to disagree with that view completely. Both players are better than what you give them credit for, in my opinion.

              Personally, I don't consider Oladipo undersized. He has a 6'9.25" wingspan which is actually higher than Klay Thompson's? Is he shorter than Klay? Sure. But is that really undersized? Not when you have a wingspan like that. If you want to look at an undersized shooting guard you don't have to look any further than Monta.

              I don't consider Oladipo overpaid either. Not for our current situation at least.

              Now, as far as Sabonis is concerned. I believe that he has a lot of potential. So, I like this acquisition.

              Originally posted by SkipperZ View Post
              After Denver gets Milsap or Boston gets Hayward, you don't think they up their offer for PG?
              I don't know about Denver but I really don't believe that Ainge would up his offer.

              Originally posted by SkipperZ View Post
              And even if they don't, what exactly has OKC done that would make you think they would no longer do the Dipo trade?
              What Gamble1 wrote.
              Originally posted by IrishPacer
              Empty vessels make the most noise.

              Comment


              • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

                OKC was choosing between PG or getting broken down Rudy Gay I'm pretty sure they would have waited with that great proposal.


                Also nobody was taking on Dipo's contract that is the true.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

                  Most likely OKC would of kept Taj Gibson and went after other FA's including their own. The other point is the assumption that these deals were all on the table and I just don't believe it.

                  I find it funny that everyone believes the other teams front office and sales job as if you haven't been mislead by your own front office.

                  Comment


                  • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

                    If you have this view of Oladipo and Sabonis then no wonder you don't like the trade. I just happen to disagree with that view completely. Both players are better than what you give them credit for, in my opinion.

                    Personally, I don't consider Oladipo undersized. He has a 6'9.25" wingspan which is actually higher than Klay Thompson's? Is he shorter than Klay? Sure. But is that really undersized? Not when you have a wingspan like that. If you want to look at an undersized shooting guard you don't have to look any further than Monta.

                    I don't consider Oladipo overpaid either. Not for our current situation at least.

                    Now, as far as Sabonis is concerned. I believe that he has a lot of potential. So, I like this acquisition.
                    I don't think Oladipo is overpaid because he's undersized. Its true his wingspan does make up for a lot of that. But he's been an ineffecient shooter for his entire career, and the Orlando teams which he was the focus of were pretty bad. Whatever your opinion of him is, i think its hard to argue that his current production is worth 21+ million a year. He was supposed to be an Artest-like lock down defender, but hes like slightly above average at best. He hasn't improved much, if at all as an outside shooter. He needs to get much better to be worth the 21 million.

                    He looks good sometimes. He's very athletic, and he looks good cutting to the rim without the ball, or when he's able to bee-line to the basket. But people sagged off him on defense, and shooting mostly wide open 3s last year he shot like 35%.

                    He needs to be at least a very good 3-D guy to be worth his salary. PG was a premier 3-D guy. We went from that to a guy that is not great at 3, and not great at D. I'd pay Gary Harris that money well before giving it to Dipo from what I've seen so far.

                    Also its funny you mention wingspan when it comes to Dipo, because I think Sabonis has some of the shortest arms I've seen for a guy his size. I don't know his exact measurables but I guarantee they arent good. I can't imagine he'll ever be a rim protector, great rebounder, or post player with his lack of arm length and explosiveness. So he's gonna have to be a stretch 4 to make it in this league, yet he shot a cool 32% on 3s last year.

                    I know everyone's entitled to their opinion and I hope to God I'm wrong and you're right.

                    Comment


                    • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

                      Originally posted by SkipperZ View Post
                      I don't think Oladipo is overpaid because he's undersized. Its true his wingspan does make up for a lot of that. But he's been an ineffecient shooter for his entire career, and the Orlando teams which he was the focus of were pretty bad. Whatever your opinion of him is, i think its hard to argue that his current production is worth 21+ million a year. He was supposed to be an Artest-like lock down defender, but hes like slightly above average at best. He hasn't improved much, if at all as an outside shooter. He needs to get much better to be worth the 21 million.

                      He looks good sometimes. He's very athletic, and he looks good cutting to the rim without the ball, or when he's able to bee-line to the basket. But people sagged off him on defense, and shooting mostly wide open 3s last year he shot like 35%.

                      He needs to be at least a very good 3-D guy to be worth his salary. PG was a premier 3-D guy. We went from that to a guy that is not great at 3, and not great at D. I'd pay Gary Harris that money well before giving it to Dipo from what I've seen so far.
                      Going from PG to anyone not named LBJ, Durant or Giannis would mean that we were going to downgrade regardless. Garry Harris is a good player. In the current situation we're in, I'd be fine with paying that kind of money to either of the two. If we were trying to be competitive I would probably nitpick the contracts a bit more. But we aren't doing that. We're trying to re-build around a young core and Oladipo and Sabonis currently fit this direction. So, I'm cool with the move.

                      Originally posted by SkipperZ View Post
                      Also its funny you mention wingspan when it comes to Dipo, because I think Sabonis has some of the shortest arms I've seen for a guy his size. I don't know his exact measurables but I guarantee they arent good. I can't imagine he'll ever be a rim protector, great rebounder, or post player with his lack of arm length and explosiveness. So he's gonna have to be a stretch 4 to make it in this league, yet he shot a cool 32% on 3s last year.
                      It's true that Sabonis has a poor wingspan for a big. His wingspan is only 6'10.5" which is bad for someone who's 6'10. That said, rebounding was a strength of him in college and even T-Bird (who wasn't that high on him) expects him to be average or above average at rebounding in the next level. He can also defend his man on the post and score offensively from that area since he is quite strong for his age. How good he can become heavily depends on how well he develops his passing and shooting game and whether he is able to overcome his physical limitations or not but he has a pretty good base to develop on.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

                        I have a hard time seeing OKC pull that offer, what other NBA superstar were they going to get for a year to convince Westbrook to stay for a bag of chips?

                        Comment


                        • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

                          Originally posted by SkipperZ View Post
                          OKC could not have done more unless they traded Dipo to someone else. And trust me, no one was giving them anything close to PG for Dipo. OKC wasn't swimming in cap space.
                          Whose to say Utah wouldn't have traded Favors and a first for Oladipo and Sabonis? That's just off top of my head. But after the Hayward other teams could have become interested in a young package we got. I'm not saying that would have prevented OKC from making a trade with us, but they could have leveraged competing deals and offered less.

                          Comment


                          • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

                            They may have preferred to make a deal sooner rather than later so they know which off-season plan to move forward with. If they waited too long they might not be able to inact the preferred plan. Maybe they wanted to re-sign Teague if they got the Celtics trade they wanted, and Teague wasn't willing to wait. Combine that with similar pressures on OKC, and you have plenty of motivation to get the trade done sooner rather than later. It is rarely a good thing as a franchise to be stuck in a holding pattern for marginal different trade prospects.

                            Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

                            Comment


                            • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

                              Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                              Whose to say Utah wouldn't have traded Favors and a first for Oladipo and Sabonis? That's just off top of my head. But after the Hayward other teams could have become interested in a young package we got. I'm not saying that would have prevented OKC from making a trade with us, but they could have leveraged competing deals and offered less.
                              I don't see how Favors would convince Westbrook to re-sign in OKC. Trading for Paul George probably doesn't either, but it's at least a serious move to show him the Thunder are serious about winning. I don't see the Thunder making such a move just for Favors.

                              Comment


                              • Re: PG TRADED TO OKC

                                Originally posted by PR07 View Post
                                I don't see how Favors would convince Westbrook to re-sign in OKC. Trading for Paul George probably doesn't either, but it's at least a serious move to show him the Thunder are serious about winning. I don't see the Thunder making such a move just for Favors.
                                Well, he's better than Sabonis now and a pick for the future. So they would be preparing for the future if Russ departs while getting better now. It's just one example. You never know who offers what.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X