Tweet
Originally posted by Jon Theodore
View Post
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
-
If you're not posting about your dream off-season then I'm sorry to say it but you're out of topic. The topic of this thread isn't what's going to happen. It's our dream off-season.Originally posted by IrishPacer
Empty vessels make the most noise. -
Jrue is definitely gettable, there’s only so many teams that would want to take on that contract and NOLA will be tearing it down.Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
Gordon is the tougher get. His contract is pretty reasonable and it’s one of those declining contracts.
Maybe the better question would be if a Jrue Holiday/Aaron Gordon offseason would be worth trading Sabonis for? We have the asset we need to make stuff happen but ideally you’d want to avoid that route.
Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 02-13-2019, 02:02 PM."As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."
- ilive4sportsComment
-
It's a little bit of both. I wanted to make the dream offseason in the confines of what the Pacers might possibly do.Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
The Pacers were reported at looking at Middleton just last week though. There isn't room cap wise or starting lineup wise for all of Bogdanovic, Middleton, and Thad so clearly those two are not 100% coming back to the team, even if that is the most likely scenario.Comment
-
Lots of potential ways to go this off-season. First, I'd definitely let DC, CoJo, and Tyreke walk. Holiday and Sumner should step into the backup roles next season, and if the fit is good the rest of the way and he's willing to stay on a very team-friendly deal, Matthews seems like a good guy to keep on the bench as well.
I'd love to see the Myles and Domas frontcourt duo become the plan. But if it's not going to work or if Nate refuses to do it, then I'd be in favor of going for Tobias Harris. I also really like the idea of trading for Aaron Gordon. I wanted to give him an offer sheet last off-season, and with the contract he has, he'd still be a great get.
I'm on board with keeping Bogey. If Matthews works out, and McDermott ever finds consistency, and Alize can come up from Ft. Wayne, that's pretty good depth on the wing.
Thad is the real sticking point. Thad is a role player extraordinaire. His defense, hustle, leadership, and consistency have all been invaluable to this team. He's a captain, and he's a first class citizen. But he's not elite. And he's not going to suddenly reach an elite level - he is absolutely the best he's gonna get. And as much as I like him, as much as I think he's a winning player who I'd like to keep in our locker room, I also don't think we're going to get past the elite teams with Thad as our starting PF. So, if he wants to stay, I'll be happy to have him - but I want him moving to the bench, and I want a contract that reflects that. I don't care if it's a 5-year contract, as long as the $/year is low enough that we can make moves around it. The other major concern with keeping Thad, is that unless KP comes down and says "Thad is moving to the second unit" (which he won't do), Nate will continue to start him.
Now, Thad could be a starter on a contender, if he's the fifth best starter. Vic is our best player. Bogey is having his best year and has become a high-level player, but ideally he's your third-best starter. Myles may have finally turned a corner and put things together, and he may even have more room to grow - but as we've seen, it'll be on his own schedule - and he's another guy probably suited to be about your third-best starter. That means we'd need an absolutely top-notch point guard added, continued improvement from Myles (to an All Star level), and continued excellence from Bogey.
Could all of that happen? Sure. But if you're looking at this on a longer-term plan, especially if you're banking on Myles to improve further, and banking on Vic coming back at his previous All-NBA level at some point, you have to look at the likelihood that Bogey and Thad are both at their peak, and they might both start slipping, as soon as next year, so you've got to take that into consideration.
I'm not sure how the money is all going to work out, so rather than try to detail the exact lineup or anything, I'll just give my list of guys and a general philosophy for me.
Kemba
Bledsoe/Brogdon
Jrue
Beal
Rubio
Oubre
D'Lo Russell
Rozier
A. Gordon
Tobi Harris
Conley
Klay (with apologies to Rule #1)
Middleton (doesn't thrill me much actually)
I'd also look to be a third team in any potential Anthony Davis deal. I have a suspicion that Ingram is going to finally break out after leaving LA, but it's just a hunch. But in general, my philosophy would be to first look for guys who fit between Vic and Myles in age, and can match that level of production, or exceed it. Kemba is on the upper end of the age range, but I see him as the most obtainable, if he's going to leave Charlotte. If Kemba is indeed an option, the window shifts to a more immediate timeline and thus keeping guys like Thad and Bogey makes a little more sense, but I'd want to keep it to shorter contracts. If you're able to get a guy like Aaron Gordon, or even Bradley Beal, you have a few years to build and try to win since their ages match better and they're obviously All Star level guys. I don't think Jrue is going to come cheap, unless he asks to be moved out of NOLA as well. Unfortunately, since Jrue is not quite elite (very, very good though), I'd be inclined to let Thad go in pursuit of another PF. Ultimately, I view the guys we have (Vic, Myles, Sabonis) as less than elite players, which in my mind means we have to fill the team with guys of a similar level, or better. I also really like our young guys to fill out the bench, with a Wesley Matthews/Kyle O'Quinn veteran presence. So I'd look to sign guys at the PG and PF positions that are a level above Bogey and Myles, closer to the level of Oladipo. Easier said than done, and of course there's the matter of "free agents never sign in Indy." But overall, that's my thought process, and landing two of the guys on that list would be a dream summer.It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.Comment
-
Thad has been the good soldier but this team needs to move on if we intend to be better than a perpetual 4th/5th seed. We need more out of that position.
I’m a fan of either finding an upgrade or rolling with the Turner/Sabonis 2 big lineup instead of simply committing to mediocrity."As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."
- ilive4sportsComment
-
I’d be a fan of picking up Middleton I just don’t see any way Milwaukee lets him walk. I also think you’d have to give him the max and he’d be overpayed at that money anyway.Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post
Its just really tough to improve in free agency."As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."
- ilive4sportsComment
-
Turner has improved a lot and Bogie is playing well, but this is regular season. How will they fair in the playoff atmosphere?
Will Nate ever play Turner and Sabonis together for more than 5-6 mpg? If he does, how will they do?
It's tough to speculate until we have answers to these questions.
I read an article early in the season that speculated the Pacers going after Brogdon in the summer. That may be an interesting move.
One thing I do know is that standing pat is not the answer. We need some kind of upgrade, most likely at PF or PG...or find a SG that can handle the ball (like Beal) and roll with him and Vic in the back court.Last edited by sav; 02-13-2019, 02:57 PM.Comment
-
Dream scenario would be to sign Tobias Harris and still bring back Thad if possible.
I’m open to dealing Sabonis now too for an upgrade somewhere. It would have to be a huge return though. All star level player only.Comment
-
My dream off-season:
#1: Get an extension done for Domantas Sabonis, hopefully like Myles we can get a "team deal" done with a little bit of a discount for the future. After next season is when I expect us to 100% know if our bigs can play/succeed together.
#2: Trade for Jrue Holiday. The package I'd put together wouldn't be 2 x 1st Round Picks with no outgoing salary as we will have cap to absorb him.
#3: Bring back Bogdanovic for around $14-15mil a year for 3years (player option to maybe get a discount out of him)
#4: Trade McDermott away for a little cap relief to re-sign Thad at around $12mil for 3 years.
#5: This should put us around the $102mil mark (With Monta on the books), I would try bring back Wesley Matthews at around that $2.5mil mark again ad our back-up wing & try for a Robin Lopez as our 3rd big man, I do like the idea of a good 3rd big I'm not sure O'Quinn would come back, but awesome if he did. Another vet PG maybe a Jameer Nelson or someone like that to round out the roster & Vince Carter haha
C. Turner/Sabonis/Lopez or O'Quinn
PF. Young/Leaf/Johnson
SF. Bogdanovic/Matthews/Carter
SG. Oladipo/Sumner
PG. Holiday/Holiday/Vet PG
Hopefully see a small decline in Young's minutes as Sabonis' go up.
Comment
-
Not a bad idea actually.Trade McDermott away for a little cap relief to re-sign Thad at around $12mil for 3 years.
You don’t need to spend 7 million a year for a one dimensional shooter.Comment
-
Not really answering the OP question here...
I think the most desirable players Pacers have are Sabonis, Bogie and Young in that order. Sabonis could certainly be the centerpiece of a deal to bring in a substantial talent but his low salary makes dealing difficult.
Now I LOVE Sabonis but if trading him could bring about a Pacers team with more balanced top tier talent then I would be fine with it.
Also, I reject the OP ground rules. Dream offseason for me is bringing in Kyrie and Durant while retaining Myles, Bogie, Vic, Holiday, Young and CoJo.
Name-calling signature removedComment
-
I do really like this scenario, what I'd look at doing is moving McDermott to a team that can better utilize him. I would bring back Wesley Matthews hopefully at the vet minimum of $2.5mil again if he enjoys the time with the team.Originally posted by Cubs231721 View Post
Obviously $5mil is likely to get us Young, Collison or CoJo back, but we could probably get another vet or in at that money at hopefully either of big man spots. A guy like Markieff Morris who might want to prove something this season. Not too mention our 2019 draft pick & still have Alize Johnson on the roster.
PG. Walker/Holiday
SG. Oladipo/Matthews/Sumner
SF. Bogdanovic/Mathews
PF. Sabonis/Morris/Leaf
C. Turner/Sabonis/O'QuinnLast edited by festar35; 02-14-2019, 05:03 AM.Comment
-
Re-sign:
Bogdanovic
O'Quinn
Sign: (use McDermott as a potential sign-and-trade for any of these, the advance stats love Mcdermott so I'm betting we could flip him for something)
Kemba Walker or De'Angelo Russell
Danny Green
Jake Layman
PG: Walker(Russell)/Holiday
SG: Oladipo/Green/Sumner
SF: Bogdanovic/Layman
PF: Sabonis/Leaf
C: Turner/O'QuinnComment
-
Coming off a 50-win season, the Pacers advance to the second round and earn a lot of respect. During Free Agency, they go after Kemba Walker with their best shot and convince him to sign. They've been thirsty for him the past couple of seasons anyway so I don't think there is anyway they don't make a serious run at him. This will mean the end of the brief Corey Joseph/Darren Collision era. They'll need to renounce those 2 and Tyreke to create the cap space needed to make a Max offer.
Re-signing Thad is an easy decision and he probably won't command more than 15 million or so. If they have any chance at signing Tobias Harris, they have to take it. I love how Bogey has played but he doesn't rebound or pass as well as Tobi. Didn't Tobi play with the Magic during Vic's rookie season? That could be a plus in their favor.
Jimmy Butler would be the next player I would target if Harris isn't interested. If he's not interested, re-signing Bogey is the right way to go.
Last edited by naptownmenace; 02-13-2019, 06:36 PM.Comment
-
My dream is to get heavily involved in a New Orleans, Boston trade. I want to land Jrue Holiday and Jaylen Brown, with Domas being the biggest piece going out, I’m not going to work out all the details of the trade.
A Jrue, Vic, Jaylen, Thad, Myles starting lineup is absolutely filthy defensively, like all-time level greatness.
The 2nd unit would be the young guys leftover from the trade, with Dougie, and another vet or two. Hopefully after a full offseason we can figure out how to use him.Comment
Comment