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

Players to stay away from and to target

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

  • Players to stay away from and to target

    Looking at the top tier teams in this league you will notice all these teams have great guard combos or guard and forward combos. If the pacers want to get better here are some guards to target via trade or sign and also stay away from.

    Stay away from
    Rozier - Why? Inefficient, terrible season and had one good playoff series last season.. sounds like a player we had named in the pass.
    Rubio- Not the answer
    Conley- Health issue, has not played 80 games in years, the contract as well is an issue at his age.
    Dragic- Pretty overrated

    Players to we can realistically target
    Jrue- Can play with the ball in his hand and move without the ball can be a great pickup
    Beal- Same as holiday and can take the team to the next level.
    Kemba- All star Pg and a great fit next to Victor
    Middleton- Upgraded version and younger version of Boogie
    Brogdon- Bigger Combo guard that can guard 1-3 and can play off the ball or with the ball.


  • #2
    If you are including trade targets then I say Diniwiddie. He is the player George Hill could have been.


    Name-calling signature removed

    Comment


    • #3
      D’Angelo Russell is great on paper, but I am not sure he is the right guy for the team. Was not a great teammate in LA.

      Comment


      • #4
        Pursue in Free Agency (in order of my preference): Tobias Harris, Jimmy Butler, Kemba Walker, Bojan Bogdanovic, D’Angelo Russell, Nikola Mirotic, Julius Randle, Terrance Ross, Seth Curry, Al-Farouq Aminu

        Pursue via Trade: Jrue Holiday, Bradley Beal, Mike Conley

        Avoid at all cost: Ricky Rubio, Corey Joseph, Goran Dragic, Harrison Barnes

        Comment


        • #5
          For the love of God and everything holy, I implore the Indiana Pacers to please avoid signing Terry Rozier of the Boston Celtics.

          On the surface, Rozier makes some sense for Indiana. He’s a young, scoring point guard who played well in the 2018 playoffs (well not really) and had a down year on what was often dysfunctional Celtics team. He put up 16.5 points, 5.7 assists and 5.3 rebounds per game in the 2018 playoffs. What’s not to like?

          Fans and writers have floated around cap numbers for Rozier, with potential AAV in the $10m+ range. Now, this may sound hyperbolic, but I am dead serious: I would not pay Terry Rozier the minimum.

          I’d rather bring Joe Young back from China to let him sit on the bench and post videos on Instagram hyping himself up. Rozier is that destructive of a player. Hilarious!

          Basketball is a game of decisions. Decision making is one of if not the most important skills for a basketball player can possess. Terry Rozier might be the worst decision maker in the entire NBA. His Offensive PIPM of -2.2 is quite generous.

          This decision making leads to Rozier being horribly inefficient. Efficiency directly correlates to winning basketball and adding Rozier drags down the efficiency of the entire team. His true shooting percentage of 50.1 is quite poor and his playoff mark of 43.9 percent is horrid.

          Even in the 2018 playoffs, where Terry is so often lauded for his performance, his inefficiency hurt Boston, notably, in the Eastern Conference Finals. In their series against Cleveland, Rozier put up 13.6 points on a harmful 46.4 true shooting percentage.

          In the 2019 playoffs, Rozier’s offense hit all-time garbage levels. Sporting an anemic true shooting percentage of 43.9, the Celtics posted a high school level 93.1 offensive rating with Rozier on the floor.

          For comparison, the Knicks held the title of worst regular season offensive rating at a towering 104 when compared to the Rozier-led Celtics.
          For the love of God and everything holy, I implore the Indiana Pacers to please avoid signing Terry Rozier of the Boston Celtics.
          Sittin on top of the world!

          Comment


          • #6
            Smart would be a great addition
            "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
              Smart would be a great addition
              He would have been last year. Wouldn't it have been great if the Pacers signed him instead of spacing out money for McDermott & Evans? It's to late now though, he ended ups signing a 4 year deal with Boston where he's going to make around 13 a year. In other words what we paid Evans.

              Last off season was a horrid failure.


              Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Peck View Post

                He would have been last year. Wouldn't it have been great if the Pacers signed him instead of spacing out money for McDermott & Evans? It's to late now though, he ended ups signing a 4 year deal with Boston where he's going to make around 13 a year. In other words what we paid Evans.

                Last off season was a horrid failure.
                It was really a lost opportunity. We truly gained nothing from spending 25M for that year. We have nothing to show for it. McDermott being paid 7.3M is overpaid IMO. Not terribly, but he really amounts to a nothing burger.

                But the good news is that I don't think it hurts long term. Dipo isn't leading this team to the promised land. The two headed monster of Myles and Domas, IMO, will remain in Indiana and be an effective combo. They are young enough such that a one year setback from last summer shouldn't hurt too bad. The Pacers just need to make better moves this coming year or they will be topping out about where they are now or a bit lower if Dipo doesn't get to at least 80% of 2018 Dipo.
                Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Peck View Post

                  He would have been last year. Wouldn't it have been great if the Pacers signed him instead of spacing out money for McDermott & Evans? It's to late now though, he ended ups signing a 4 year deal with Boston where he's going to make around 13 a year. In other words what we paid Evans.

                  Last off season was a horrid failure.
                  Or signed another 6th man of the year in Montrezl Harrel for half of Tyreke for 6 millon a year and still signed Smart
                  {o,o}
                  |)__)
                  -"-"-

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It's easy to look back and say that now. If you told me I could get a 19ppg (21 PER) player and a guy shooting 49% from three BOTH off the bench, you'd be a fool to say that you should take Marcus Smart (coming off 30% from three) over them. No, you take Tyreke and Doug every day of the week. Easy to say otherwise now though! Plus, Marcus does nothing for us this year anyway. Maybe a game or two in the first round... yay.

                    I don't blame the signings. They were the right moves. I blame the coaching staff for not utilizing them to their optimal potential as well as the organization (and players to some degree) for not being more involved in keeping them on the straight and narrow off the court. Maybe that's asking too much or they did what they could, but that's how I feel.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Bricklayer View Post
                      It's easy to look back and say that now. If you told me I could get a 19ppg (21 PER) player and a guy shooting 49% from three BOTH off the bench, you'd be a fool to say that you should take Marcus Smart (coming off 30% from three) over them. No, you take Tyreke and Doug every day of the week. Easy to say otherwise now though! Plus, Marcus does nothing for us this year anyway. Maybe a game or two in the first round... yay.

                      I don't blame the signings. They were the right moves. I blame the coaching staff for not utilizing them to their optimal potential as well as the organization (and players to some degree) for not being more involved in keeping them on the straight and narrow off the court. Maybe that's asking too much or they did what they could, but that's how I feel.
                      No, it's not easy for me to say now. I said it then. I was adamant that these were horrid signings when we signed them and continued to believe they were horrid signings all throughout the season.

                      All you had to know about Tyreke Evans was that just prior to the trade deadline last season the Memphis Grizzlies put him on the shelf for a short period of time openly trying to trade him. They had no takers. Then the second thing you could know about Evans was this, he did score 19 ppg (21PER) and he had to sign a one year deal at far less value than what someone with those stats on other teams would have had to sign. He is the epitome of one on one player (used to be known as a streetballer) who's game has never translated into winning or team play. The fact that the Pacers only wanted to commit one season to him should also have been a key point. It didn't work here and frankly it's never really worked anywhere he has ever been.

                      As to Doug McDermott, we were his 5th team in 4 years (now it is 5th team in 5 years). Steve Novak has a career 430% from 3 point range (better than Doug's 404% btw) and I wouldn't want him on the team either. One trick pony's who are weak defensively are only good when their one trick works.

                      Sorry I don't meant o jump on your post but it drives me crazy whenever someone say's that we could only see this in hindsight when some of us were calling it the moment it happened. I about burnt my own house to the ground when i read at the stroke of midnight that the Pacers signed McDermott.

                      That is why I am looking forward to our new dynamic duo of DeMarre Carroll and Kentavious Caldwell-Pope.


                      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by kent beckley View Post
                        D’Angelo Russell is great on paper, but I am not sure he is the right guy for the team. Was not a great teammate in LA.
                        He was also like 19/20 years old.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Peck View Post

                          All you had to know about Tyreke Evans was that just prior to the trade deadline last season the Memphis Grizzlies put him on the shelf for a short period of time openly trying to trade him. They had no takers.
                          I just want to add something in case Tyreke's grandkids ever read this thread. Cause there's a little bit more they should know. Memphis was going to be capped out in the off season. They only had Tyreke's non-bird rights so they had no chance of re-signing him except for the $8.5M MLE. Rumor was they were only willing to give him up for a first round pick. There were no teams willing to meet that price for a half year rental.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Peck View Post

                            He would have been last year. Wouldn't it have been great if the Pacers signed him instead of spacing out money for McDermott & Evans? It's to late now though, he ended ups signing a 4 year deal with Boston where he's going to make around 13 a year. In other words what we paid Evans.

                            Last off season was a horrid failure.
                            Well that’s a four year contract for a very limited player (who’s also pretty injury prone, missing much of last season and basically all of this year’s playoffs). I like him but he’s no big loss, especially for that price.

                            Others wanted us to sign Will Barton who also got a 4/$54m deal (so an average of about $13.5m); would he have moved the needle? No. Not to mention he missed about half this season and averaged 11 PPG. His career best is 15.

                            Was there anyone else worth targeting? I wouldn’t have minded going harder for Joe Harris but he seems like he wanted to stay in Brooklyn anyway.

                            Point is that everyone knew years out this summer was going to be where the action was, which is why I have no problem with the Tyreke signing and, like you, hated the McDermott signing (apart from the fact he sucks at basketball, of course). The goal should have been to give us maximum flexibility this summer, and for the most part I think KP did that while still trying to make a savvy signing that would have made us better this year and put us in pole position to resign Tyreke if he produced like he did in Memphis.

                            Now obviously McDermott’s $7m isn’t *too* much of an albatross, and I’m hoping we can pawn him off to some team desperate for shooting (maybe Philly for their early second?), but even if not I’m not terribly broken up about it. We still have the opportunity to get some talent with the money we got which we wouldn’t have if we’d signed some of those mediocre guys to long term deals.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              As for Montrezl Harrell, he would have ended up sitting on the end of the bench like KOQ anyway given the logjam we have in the front court.

                              But at least he would have been worth what we would have paid him, yes.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X