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

What would you do? (Granger Related)

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

  • #31
    Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

    I don't really want JO traded, but if he ever were, a frontcourt of Granger/Foster/Harrison would not be bad at all (as long as Harrison and Granger continue to develop), especially if we had a good backcourt to go with it.
    You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

      Originally posted by SoupIsGood
      I don't really want JO traded, but if he ever were, a frontcourt of Granger/Foster/Harrison would not be bad at all (as long as Harrison and Granger continue to develop), especially if we had a good backcourt to go with it.
      Soup's ON!

      DH is still kinda iffy, but at least we know he can offer some post O.

      Actually, if JO were to be traded along with several other characters from this cast, there's no reason we might not be able to get another decent big contributor to help out in addition to a backcourt upgrade or two. It's not beyond the realm of possibility.

      There's enough guys I'd be happy to ship out that it creates myriad permutations for assembling a future roster.
      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

      -Emiliano Zapata

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

        You won't get a high draft choice from L.A. They are good now & improving. If they had J.O. they would be the best team in the league hands down. The Spurs, Pistons, & Heat all have nice windows, but they are closing. L.A. doesn't have the window open far enough yet, but it's going up as fast as anybody's. The Lakers & the Cavs are 2 teams that will keep improving next year & possibaly beyond.
        1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
        3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
        5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
        7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.



        Comment


        • #34
          Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

          You can't just pull of some type of dream deal. However, this team is overloaded w/ forwards & centers. This team needs help w/ the 2 guard positions. That is why we are so slow. Also, I know we have 4 points. However, these quarters aren't adding up into a dollar. I love Jax for his spirit & toughness. He is too streaky to be a starting SG. At least for a tittle contender. He would be better than Fred as a back up imo. If you want a realistic trade look to a team in our shoes. Just like the Kings were.
          1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
          3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
          5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
          7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.



          Comment


          • #35
            Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

            Hmmm...
            The Sonics?
            1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
            3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
            5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
            7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.



            Comment


            • #36
              Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

              Funny thing is the only player I can think of is Ray Allen too...

              However, just to throw it out there would you trade JO for Yao (yes, I know others would be involved too).

              A Yao, Foster, Granger front line would be very much like our old Smits, Davis, McKey front line. Not that I want that to happen, just a thought. I certainly wouldn't be mad...

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                Keep Jermain O'Neal - All this talk of trading Jermaine O'Neal is laughable. All the blame for the teams mediocre season being blamed on Jermaine O'Neal is equally laughable. The facts are, Jermaine O'Neal is one of the 5 best big men in the entire world. He has the complete package; offense, defense, and rebounding. And he plays with heart and has been loyal to us since coming here. His only flaws from my viewpoint are, he needs to stay healthy, if that means dropping a little muscle mass and playing at a more comfortable weight then so be it. And he needs to keep his cool a little more often.

                Keep Jamaal Tinsley - Yes, I know most people will disagree with this. But two things you must understand, (1) Tinsley's value now is as low as it's ever been, and as low as it will likely ever be. Have you ever heard of the buy low/sell high philosophy in the stock market? Well that same rule which applies to stocks and bonds also applies to basketball players. (2) Jamaal Tinsley, when he's healthy and in relatively good shape, is an impact player for our team, capable of outplaying any point guard in the league on any given night. That's something that will never be able to be said for Anthony Johnson or Sarunas Jasikevicius.

                Peja Must Not Be Allowed To Walk - Bottom line: You cannot allow a player of Peja's caliber to leave without proper compensation. He needs to be back in a Pacers uniform next season. And although most of you don't understand this, in this day and age, a player of Peja's skill level commands max or near-max level contract. I expect Peja to be resigned with Indiana for a contract around 6 years/$72,000,000.

                Trade Peja Stojakovic For A Star Shooting Guard - This is a continuation of the above. Peja's a great player, but with Danny Granger being such a huge part of the teams future, there's really no room for Peja in the long run. What there is room for, however, is a shooting guard who can score 20+ points per night, on a consistent basis! And believe me, that's the type of player a resigned Peja Stojakovic would command. A Corey Maggette/Jason Richardson/Joe Johnson caliber player. This is where a nice little playoff run for the Pacers is critical. The better the team plays, the better Peja plays, the higher his value goes. When the Pacers aquired Peja, he was having his worst season in years and was a potential free agent at seasons ends. This lowered his trade value substantially. Since joining the Pacers, his play his picked up considerably, and as long as he can be resigned long-term to a reasonable contract (Up to $12M per is reasonable for a player of Peja's abilities) his value will continue to rise. Remember the "buy low/sell high" strategy? Well thats what the Pacers have done with Peja. So once you've signed Peja to his contract, you look to move him for a younger star shooting guard, which is what this team needs for the present and most importantly the future.

                Make Stephen Jackson Our 6th Man - I love Stephen Jackson, although I know most of you don't. Sure he's a hot head, but he has passion and a desire to win, something not everybody has. Stephen Jackson as our 6th man would mean Stephen Jacksons the #1 option of the 2nd unit. We've all noted how much better Jackson seems to play when he's forced to be the #1 option. Jackson would be great off the bench getting 30 minutes a game backing up both the SG and SF positions. He would be as good as any 6th man in the league.

                Play David Harrison! - This is crucial. I love Jeff Foster, he's the ultimate role player, but he's best suited as an energy boost off the bench as opposed to a starting center. David Harrison, on the other hand, has top-5 center written all over him. Perfect size (7' 280 lb.), great athleticism, great skills, plays to his strengths for the most part etc. Take a look at the ballyhooed Chris Kaman for the Clippers. What does he have that Hulk doesn't? A terrible hairstyle, that's it. Similar size, same age, same skill set. The only difference is, Mike Dunleavy has allowed Kaman to be the fulltime starter, something Rick wont do with Harrison.

                The Draft - Many of you have mentioned a big man, but with O'Neal, Granger, Harrison, and Hulk all under contract, not to mention Lorbek over in Europe, I think Pacers decline on a big in the first round. Instead I believe they'll go with a guard, and looking at the potential draft class and going by my earlier move of trading Peja for a starting shooting guard, I'm leaning towards point guard. Randy Foye, Rajon Rondo, Marcus Williams, Daniel Gibson, and Dee Brown are all possibilities and most will be available from where Indiana will be picking. Out of the bunch, I think Marcus Williams has the most upside. He's been described as a young Mark Jackson and his play with UConn has been very clutch. Draft one of these guys (preferably Williams ), and groom his as our potential full-time starer, barring Tinsley doesn't finally stay healthy for more than 2 weeks at a time.
                By the way, Rudy Fernandez looks to be leaning more towards being an NBA 2-guard, so I didn't mention him although with Bird's alleged love for the Euro game, he's still a definite possibility.

                Ladies And Gentleman....Your 2006-2007 Indiana Pacers!
                Starters: Jamaal Tinsley...Corey Maggette-level 2-guard...Danny Granger...Jermaine O'Neal...David Harrison

                Bench: Stephen Jackson...Jeff Foster...Anthony Johnson...Austin Croshere...Saraunas Jasikevicius...Marcus Williams/Rajon Rondo/Randy Foye/Daniel Gibson/Rudy Fernandez

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                  Originally posted by HulkSmash!
                  The facts are, Jermaine O'Neal is one of the 5 best big men in the entire world. He has the complete package; offense, defense, and rebounding.
                  Now THAT is laughable. That is pure homerism. That is ridiculous.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                    Originally posted by Roy Munson
                    Now THAT is laughable. That is pure homerism. That is ridiculous.
                    Care to elaborate?

                    A guy capable of 20-25 points per game, 9-12 rebounds per game, and 2-3 blocks per game is a top-5 big man.

                    Further proof, check the Pacers record with Jermaine and without since he's been here.

                    If you don't have a solid case to backup your claim, and are only one of the fickle Jermaine haters, then please stop wasting mine and everyone elses time.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                      [QUOTE=HulkSmash!]Keep Jermain O'Neal - The facts are, Jermaine O'Neal is one of the 5 best big men in the entire world. [QUOTE=HulkSmash!]

                      Say what??

                      Let's see. Shaq, Duncan, Yao, Garnett, Brand.

                      And that's just what immediately came to mind. No brainstorming involved.

                      MAYBE you could get buy saying top ten on a good day, but with the injury history factored in then it gets really dicey.

                      Very similar to the JT top ten PG debate. If these guys are really top 10 and top 5, how come they and their team don't play better? If you say the injuries, then how can they be so highly regarded?
                      I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                      -Emiliano Zapata

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                        Whether or not JO is traded will be determined by if a total house cleaning is
                        desired and what is available in trade. I could live with a good house
                        cleaning if some good pieces are brought in(see back court).

                        Some good role players later in the draft and second round would
                        be Terrell Everett(great guard skills), Steve Novak(great shooter)
                        and Justin Williams(great shot blocker and rebounder). If the Pacer
                        pf did that and scored a little that would be fine with me.
                        The Pacers need one major pressure point on offense that teams have
                        to respect. That should come from the sf or sg or both if possible.
                        If JO could net Tyrus Thomas I would do it.

                        owl
                        {o,o}
                        |)__)
                        -"-"-

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: What would you do? (Granger Related)

                          Originally posted by HulkSmash!
                          Care to elaborate?

                          A guy capable of 20-25 points per game, 9-12 rebounds per game, and 2-3 blocks per game is a top-5 big man.
                          Many guys are CAPABLE. Not so many actually produce. JO's reputation seems to be built around what he COULD do instead of what he does.

                          And even when he is filling up the stat sheet, he DOES NOT make his teammates better. If you want to point to the win-loss record since JO has been in Indiana, take out all the games Ron Artest played in. Then see if JO makes the Pacers better or not. Artest had a heck of a lot more to do with all those wins that JO did.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X