Tweet
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Quick....someone should check to see if Naptown Seth/NDPacer/Warriorfan was in Dallas in the grassy knoll in 1963. 
Originally posted by Hicks
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.
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
-
Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun. -
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
ND never said anything about Maggette leading up to that hype, either, come to think of it.Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Originally posted by Hicks
This was my best guess, when we were wondering about his indentity the other day..... didn't post it cause that's an awful big insult for the guy if he isn't Seth.You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?
Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Are you suggesting this is a reason to belive him, or to doubt him?Originally posted by Hicks"I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
-Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Hey Hicks, etal!!
I've done a little snooping and found this on the Golden State forum!
http://www.goldenstwarriors.com/viewtopic.php?t=1567
Warriors are going to miss playoffs this year!...Need Artest
Goldenstwarriors.com Forum Index -> Warriors Basketball
View previous topic :: View next topic
Author Message
J-Rich
Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 8
Posted: Mon Jan 16, 2006 7:40 pm
Post subject: Warriors are going to miss playoffs this year!...Need Artest
The warriors are going to miss out on the playoffs this year since they have
fallen too far behind the Lakers. And with K-Mart returning to the Nuggets
they too will make the playoff.
This young team plays on energy as well as their defense.
They will regret a year from now for not making the trade for Artest.
Just watch what he will do for his new team.
IF Artest was on the warriors we would have a starting 5 close to the Nets
but only better since they do not have a 4 like Murphy. Just look at the
type of small ball they play nobody can keep up with them.
Just remember this Warriors will not make the playoffs due to a poor
Dec. and Jan losing streak and Watch what Artest will do.
Just look at all the other trades other teams have done to get a superstar!.
Houston, Miami (Shaq). To get Artest for what the Pacers what from the
Warriors (Diogu, Pietrus and maybe a 1st rounder is just unbelievable
I find it a little funny that J-Rich is on the Lakers board as well as the Warriors board. And he sounds sooooo much like Naptown.
Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Of course keep in mind the portion from BBB.net...Posted from Absolutebest who from I know to be a fairly normal and reliable poster... now as he said he can only confirm his source, his Father, but that as far as he can go as far as assuring any validity...
Why Not Us ?
Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
I would all but guarantee that they are one and the same. In fact, I think he was also behind the "Wade is God" poster who made up some rumors at ClubLakers a week or two ago. If you look at Wade Is God's profile, he joined January 2, and among his interests he lists the Colts and Pacers. When we finally admitted he was lying about the rumors, he mentioned Seth and PD (don't recall the specifics).Originally posted by SoupIsGood
As for NDPacers, he hasn't said anything inflamatory or rumor-mongering, just offered thoughtful discussion with vague hints of insider knowledge. I'll assume he's legit -- at least for now."I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
-Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
I have always thought that NDPacers was some fake insider just having funComment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Doubt him.Originally posted by blanketComment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Well, it's not like J-Rich is exactly a unique name to find on a Warriors board. Could be two diff. people pretty easily. Case in point, there's a Naptown Seth on IndyStar who is not the same guy that posted here.I find it a little funny that J-Rich is on the Lakers board as well as the Warriors board. And he sounds sooooo much like Naptown.
Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
That's what I think!Originally posted by Aw Heck
I also don't think NDPacer is an insider. What he says doesn't really give any information that isn't said elsewhere. He also admitted he was wrong on how much of a trade exception the Pacers got from the James Jones trade after he was called on it. Whats funny is no one thought that a big deal.
As for J-Rich his supposed insider trade would cost the Pacers 6,000,000 million dollars, three million more in salary and three million more in luxury tax. Donnie traded away Brad and JJones because of salary concerns and now he's going to go $6 million in dept when he is on record as wanting to lower the payroll? Hardly!
Plus J-Rich has said NDPacer brought him to Clublakers. Why would a Pacer fan bring a Warrior fan to clublakers? I suspect if NDPacer confirms it that NDPacer and J-Rich are one and the same.Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Seems to me that a LOT of people are getting "had" again and again by every snake-oil salesman disquised as an insider with great sources.Originally posted by Hicks
I've had to go out for more popcorn a couple of times between fits of laughter at all these internet gurus putting out the bait, and watching people bite at it.
...and now, back to our movie.Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Just to set the record straight & come clean....
I am totally out of every loop. I'm so not inside that I might be in orbit!
Also, to the best of my knowledge I no longer post under anyother name.Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
OK, I tracked down the Marc Stein chat from today. Nothing realy notable, but here 'tis:
Marc Stein: Hello, all. Thanks for joining us. Time is tight today so we'll take as many questions as we can. Here goes . . .
nashbaar (mn): some of us rubes have come to grips with the fact that minny is not getting artest. that said where does Kandi end up and for whom? The hot item yesterday was Portland for Miles?
Marc Stein: No. The hot item is the Kandi-to-Boston scenario and it is indeed legit. But there's a decent chance the deal will expand to include at least one more team -- not Memphis -- and the talks are ongoing. Stay tuned.
Ashton (Brooklyn (NY)): Is Latrell Spreewell ever gonna join another team this season? What seems to be holdup in him getting to another team?
Marc Stein: The only holdup is Spree. He wants a multiyear deal that starts as close to $5 mil as he can get. The teams that want him right now, namely the Clips and Rockets, can't offer more than the veteran minimum because of their salary-cap limitations. We'll see, as the playoffs draw near, if Spree lowers those demands. If he doesn't drop his price, I don't think we'll see him. Can't see someone him paying him a full mid-level exception,
C.C. (Bay Area, CA): Would you consider Pietrus a younger Artest? Maybe that's why Mullin won't part ways with him?
Marc Stein: If the Warriors want Artest, they have to give up SOMEONE good. They rate Diogu as an untouchable, so that means they'd have to part with Pietrus. If Pietrus were an untouchable, too, GS would have zero shot.
Mark(Tampa, Florida): Steve Francis' suspension has been lifted. Do you think that's to increase his trade value or are they sincere about keeping him? They said teams are calling. What teams do you think would be/are interested in him?
Marc Stein: Based on everything I've heard so far, Orlando's plan from the start of the season was giving Francis sufficient freedom to build up his trade value. But I'm also hearing that it's the Magic who are doing more calling around as opposed to a lot of outside interest in Francis. Stevie is going to be a tough guy to move because of his contract, past transgressions, etc., so it would really help the Magic if he were playing (and playing well). Or else they might be forced into one of those Vince deals where they give him away just to get rid of him and find themselves several time zones away from equal value.
Will (NYC): Andrew Bynum!!! Your take?
Marc Stein: It's the same take I've had since the Lakers drafted him. I thought it was a great pick then and it has nothing to do with the dunk last night. Lakers need to swing for home runs to get Kobe the help he needs. Bynum is years away, obviously, but I'd rather gamble on someone like him than take someone in the teens who doesn't have a higher ceiling than SERVICEABLE.
Cassidy (Fishers, IN): Is Ike Diogu a better player/prospect than Nene at this point, or is the Pacers' apparent preference for the rookie just a contract issue?
Marc Stein: Nene is headed for free agency and would be expensive to re-sign. Pacers' payroll is already too high, so free agents-to-be like Nene or Al Harrington are problematic. Diogu is an outstanding frontcourt prospect on a rookie contract. Golden, in other words.
Harry (kentucky): Best rookie this year not named Paul?
Marc Stein: A. Bogut.
Dallas, TX: The Dampier experiment seems to have worked so far. What is your take? You think this is a long or short term thing?
Marc Stein: It's long-term unless Dampier unexpectedly plays his way back into the starting lineup. Dampier has lost the confidence of his teammates with his lack of production. There is only one way to get it back and that's by playing as hard as you can -- by earning it. Mavs have always believed that, so long as Dampier gives them something, they're dangerous. But he's been giving them nothing. It was time.
Michael (Willoughby, OH): What's going on with the Cavs? Have we hit rock bottom?
Marc Stein: Rock-bottom? Are you really a Cavs fan? If so, I think you've seen a lot worse than this.
Andrew (Flagstaff AZ): Do you think that Gasol will be an all-star this year? Do the Grizzlies win a playoff series this year?
Marc Stein: Not sure on Gasol. As a big-time proponent of rewarding team success, I feel Pau definitely deserves it, because the Grizz have been consistently good and their status as a top-five team all season merits at least one All-Star. The West frontcourt, however, is as crowded as ever. Brand and Melo have also powered their teams to winning records, but with even gaudier production than Pau. I'm just as interested as you are to see how the coaches vote. There will be at least two top-quality forwards in the West who are omitted.
Marc Stein: As for the playoffs, don't see it . . . unless the Grizz finish sixth. Then they'd play the Northwest Division winner in the first round, which would give them a shot. If they finish fifth in the West, that means Spurs or Mavs in Round 1. Which means bye-bye.
Brad (Kansas City): Oklahoma City seems to be embracing the NBA. Will the Hornets stay there, will OKC get another team or none of the above in your opinion?
Marc Stein: The official announcement from the league is scheduled to come at month's end, but the early whispers lead me to believe that the Hornets will be back in OKC for one more season. After that, assuming the Hornets do go back to New Orleans in 2007-08 as promised, OKC would remain a primary option for future relocation candidates. The market has definitely proven itself to be NBA-worthy. However . . . if the Hornets do return to New Orleans someday, OKC won't be No. 1 in line for the next franchise on the move. (Nor will Kansas City.) There's a little town called Las Vegas on everyone's radar. I believe Sin City got next and I'm hardly the only one.
Brian (Dallas): Titan alum here... Have you seen Bobby Brown? Legit NBA prospect or no?
Marc Stein: My heart says first-rounder. All my contacts in the scouting community tell me he's more like a second-rounder unless he stays in school for another year after this one. But it's early in the season still. If Brown steps it up a gear and gets mighty Fullerton to the tournament, as I and many other Titans believe he can, maybe that changes.
Joe (KY): What's your take on the Shaq/Kobe makeup?
Marc Stein: Can't say it any better than Shaq said. Yesterday was a day of peace, in Dr. King's honor, and he took the initiative to bury the hachet. You have to applaud him.
Marc Stein: I've stayed as long as I can today. Gotta get back to it. We'll do it again next week. Thanks for all your questions."I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
-Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05Comment
-
Re: Trade Rumor Thread
Its interesting....but if you replace every word in Stein's reply about Francis with Artest ( where the Pacers actually did this instead of sitting him and looking for trades ).......we maybe in a better "trade" situation then we are now.Marc Stein: Based on everything I've heard so far, Orlando's plan from the start of the season was giving Francis sufficient freedom to build up his trade value. But I'm also hearing that it's the Magic who are doing more calling around as opposed to a lot of outside interest in Francis. Stevie is going to be a tough guy to move because of his contract, past transgressions, etc., so it would really help the Magic if he were playing (and playing well). Or else they might be forced into one of those Vince deals where they give him away just to get rid of him and find themselves several time zones away from equal value.
I know its OT....but this sort of goes back to thar article that someone posted about how the Pacers initially handled the whole Artest thing ( as in let Artest play to build up whatever trade value he has but look for trades in the meantime ).
Should have taken a hard-line with Artest by sitting him and actively looking for trades by the deadline? At this point in the game....yes, cuz we have no choice.
If Walsh/Bird didn't immediately bench Artest, blowing off his comments and sweeping everything under the carpet, let him play then look to move him before the trade deadline....would be in a stronger negotiating position then we are now? Its debatable....but a definite maybe.
I'm not saying that we don't trade Artest...his @ss has to go...I'm just saying that we maybe in a better spot with this whole Artest situation if things were handled differently.Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.Comment
Comment