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

  • #31
    Originally posted by BornIndy View Post
    And you will still see some people say "It was the right moves at the time".

    I really don't have any hope this off-season after what happened last summer. I thought Pritchard was about Pritch slapping. Don't forget the rumors about when he went to PG about the master plan of signing Jrue Holiday and Gallo.
    Too bad though because a team of PG, Jrue, Gallo, and Myles is probably up there with Milwaukee.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post

      Too bad though because a team of PG, Jrue, Gallo, and Myles is probably up there with Milwaukee.
      Throw in Thad at the 4 and how do you score against that team?

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
        I'm 100% on board with Domas and Myles starting together so I'd look for a cheap 3rd big to fill Domas' role that can get you extra possessions whether that's offensive rebounds or steals or a high FT rate. Ed Davis and Kevon Looney are intriguing options for that role as well as Brandon Clarke in the draft. Stay away from Randle. He's literally not even half the defensive player Thad is and is about the same type of rebounder Thad is and he's likely going to cost around that $10 mil range. Not worth it. He gives up more points and possessions than he brings in.
        Brandon Clarke’s wingspan and standing reach is sooo bad, but that college production and his athletic testing is so good not sure what to make of him. We definitely need a guy with his defensive ability to help guard those superstar SFs if we cut Thad loose. Those guys will drop 40 per if we’re guarding them with Bogey and McDermott all gm.

        My guess is someone breaks the bank for Randle after the numbers he just put up. He’s young with still room to improve. I think he gets closer 15-20 mil. I haven’t watched him enough to have much of an opinion on him but his numbers look nice.

        Comment


        • #34
          It's easy to say you "hated" the signings. It's another to have advocated for an actual viable solution at the time vs. just complaining. If Marcus Smart is the best you can do... well, I'd say you were just as wrong (if not more so).

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Bricklayer View Post
            It's easy to say you "hated" the signings. It's another to have advocated for an actual viable solution at the time vs. just complaining. If Marcus Smart is the best you can do... well, I'd say you were just as wrong (if not more so).
            Bingo. I’ve still yet to hear who we should have spent our money on aside from Tyreke (apart from an insinuation of Smart and from memory Will Barton...so we’d be on the hook for four years for two limited injury-prone players paying slightly more than what we payed Tyreke...yay. Aren’t those the EXACT type of deals a certain set of Pacers fans constantly whine about?!?)

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Bricklayer View Post
              It's easy to say you "hated" the signings. It's another to have advocated for an actual viable solution at the time vs. just complaining. If Marcus Smart is the best you can do... well, I'd say you were just as wrong (if not more so).
              If you are addressing this to me I would tell you that I have advocated trades. I have never believed we were going to be able to build through free agency. However knowing that last season we had more money than anyone to spend I held out hope that they would surprise me. I mean I know you can get mid level guys to come here so that was never unexpected but I was hoping that we would bring in a difference maker. I wasn't expecting it mind you but I held out hope. However to me we had many trade worthy assets. All of our expiring contracts were assets, maybe not top notch but they might have been able to bring in assets that you could later bundle to get even better assets. We should never have just let Al Jefferson's expiring contract go unused, even if it was to bring back second round picks, it would have been far superior to just letting him walk for nothing. I could go player by player and every trade that I thought might have worked but in the end we will never know.

              My problem was then and it is now that the Pacers have had a lot and I mean a LOT of fans convinced that this upcoming off season they are going to be big players in the free agent market. I have been saying that they might be players but it will not not be for players that will make any real difference and a lot of that vaunted money they have will go to signing our own free agents. We have to many free agents and we will need to sign some back just to fill the roster. As to Marcus Smart, we will just agree to disagree. I believe he would immediately have become one of our top 3 players on the team and we need players who have some dog in them.

              So call it just complaining if you want and I won't argue, but you can't say it's a new position I took when it failed after it didn't work. I said it wouldn't work to begin with.


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

              Comment


              • #37
                You don’t watch the NBA or you are just trying to troll if you keep acting like Marcus Smart is some kind of scrub.

                For a team like the Pacers he would have probably been the best free agent (restricted) signing in like ten years, there is a reason why Boston couldn’t wait for him to get back, not only his defense but the guy is their leader, he is like a young PJ Tucker, he does all the little things you need to win a game.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  You don’t watch the NBA or you are just trying to troll if you keep acting like Marcus Smart is some kind of scrub.

                  For a team like the Pacers he would have probably been the best free agent (restricted) signing in like ten years,there is a reason why Boston couldn’t wait for him to get back, not only his defense but the guy is their leader, he is like a young PJ Tucker, he does all the little thing you need to win a game.
                  He’d also be the the ONLY restricted free agent signing we’ve had in the last 10 years. It’s actually not that easy to sign another teams restricted free agent. It doesn’t happen very often and I’m not sure we’ve ever done it. At least I can’t remember the last time. Getting guys like Gordon, or even lower level guys like Smart, was just never very realistic when those teams had the money to bring back their players. In Smarts case, he wanted to be back with the Celtics anyway so it likely would have taken more than the 13mil the C’s gave for him to leave.

                  Smart was really terrible offensively too prior to this season. I’m talking worse than this years Tyreke. That was the reason why no teams were going after him free agency last year despite his elite D

                  Here’s last years Smart vs this years Tyreke...

                  https://www.basketball-reference.com...01&idx=players

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by CJ Jones View Post

                    He’d also be the the ONLY restricted free agent signing we’ve had in the last 10 years. It’s actually not that easy to sign another teams restricted free agent. It doesn’t happen very often and I’m not sure we’ve ever done it. At least I can’t remember the last time. Getting guys like Gordon, or even lower level guys like Smart, was just never very realistic when those teams had the money to bring back their players. In Smarts case, he wanted to be back with the Celtics anyway so it likely would have taken more than the 13mil the C’s gave for him to leave.

                    Smart was really terrible offensively too prior to this season. I’m talking worse than this years Tyreke. That was the reason why no teams were going after him free agency last year despite his elite D

                    Here’s last years Smart vs this years Tyreke...

                    https://www.basketball-reference.com...01&idx=players
                    Actually according to Larry Bird Herb Simon had a hard rule against signing other teams restricted free agents. I have no idea why other than probably some gentleman's agreement that some of the old owners had to not jack up the cost on teams free agents. Portland signed Roy Hibbert and I think that rule went out the window.

                    On the other hand I feel that going after restricted free agents can sometimes be strategically a good idea. Let's use Smart as an example. You make Boston make a hard choice. Either they pay more than they want and have less money to spend elsewhere in the future or they don't match and you get your guy in free agency. To me its a win win. I mean you don't do it to a player you don't want because it might backfire on you and you end up paying for someone you don't want. But let's look at Terry Rozier this off season. He is restricted and I'm sure Boston would want him back at the right price, however they are kind of stuck waiting to find out what happens with Irving. If Irving bails on them then Rozier's cost will increase dramatically in value to them because if Irving leaves after Rozier they have nobody. Is Rozier the player we should be shooting for? He's better than either Joseph or Collison IMO so he would be an upgrade there but there might be better out there. But it would be good to make Boston make a hard choice.


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

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Banta View Post
                      If you are including trade targets then I say Diniwiddie. He is the player George Hill could have been.
                      If the Nets somehow go after Kyrie, I don't mind making a run at either Dinwiddie or D'Angelo. My preference is to go after Dinwiddie so that we have more $$$ to go after more Free Agents.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        I don't want Rozier, I want a point guard that is more assisty.

                        The downside of signing restricted free agents is you tie up your available cap room while you wait to see if the other team will match. You spend 3 days watching other teams scoop up free agents.

                        The one restricted free agent the Pacers signed was Chris Copeland. But he was a special case because it was impossible for the Knicks to match the offer due to cap rules.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                          If the Nets somehow go after Kyrie, I don't mind making a run at either Dinwiddie or D'Angelo. My preference is to go after Dinwiddie so that we have more $$$ to go after more Free Agents.
                          I prefer quality to quantity. D'Angelo Russel with Victor Oladipo? Not sure it works but it sure as hell would be worth finding out because if it did they automatically become the best backcourt in the east.


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

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Please keep the discussion civil. Thanks! I'm not saying he's a scrub and I'm not going to debate a point about restricted free agents that makes no sense (Peck is absolutely correct about the Simons' philosophy, which I also don't agree with). What I am saying is that he's not Kevin Durant and wouldn't have made a significant difference in the final result anyway. Tyreke and Doug were risks worth taking at the time vs. Smart. You guys have unrealistic expectations with free agent signings. This isn't NBA2K... There are real constraints we face. You need to come to grips with that or you'll be unhappy every offseason.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Bricklayer View Post
                              Please keep the discussion civil. Thanks! I'm not saying he's a scrub and I'm not going to debate a point about restricted free agents that makes no sense (Peck is absolutely correct about the Simons' philosophy, which I also don't agree with). What I am saying is that he's not Kevin Durant and wouldn't have made a significant difference in the final result anyway. Tyreke and Doug were risks worth taking at the time vs. Smart. You guys have unrealistic expectations with free agent signings. This isn't NBA2K... There are real constraints we face. You need to come to grips with that or you'll be unhappy every offseason.
                              In what way do I have unrealistic expectations for free agents. I've stated several times in several posts that under no instance do I blame the Pacers organization for the fact that they can not sign big name free agents. We do not have crystal clear warm water nor do we have world famous night life. For whatever reason the NBA is a league where that matters more than it does in other sports. The team does virtually everything above board and professionally, we have a culture that does not advocate losing and we have a history of paying and sometimes overpaying our own free agents. We have an owner who is supportive and let's basketball people make basketball decisions. The Lakers and Knicks have been absolute dumpster fires from both the on floor product and the their front office and ownership. Yet this summer the Durrant's, Irivng's & Leonard's of the world will entertain the thought to going to both of these franchises and the Pacers will not even get an audience. Again, not their fault. They are a victim of geography.

                              That is why I said in my post above we need to work via the trade route. It is the only way we will ever really bring in a difference maker or getting lucky in the draft. Now the one advantage of being below the cap is we can take back uneven trades so maybe we can do something along those lines. As to Smart? Again I think he would make a difference however I will absolutely concede he would not make the impace of a Durrant..


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

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                You don’t watch the NBA or you are just trying to troll if you keep acting like Marcus Smart is some kind of scrub.

                                For a team like the Pacers he would have probably been the best free agent (restricted) signing in like ten years, there is a reason why Boston couldn’t wait for him to get back, not only his defense but the guy is their leader, he is like a young PJ Tucker, he does all the little things you need to win a game.
                                He’s not a scrub, but he’s not the answer to anything except maybe as a defensive minded bench guard.

                                This team needs scoring and we’re going to hand a $50 million contract to a guy who averages 9-10 PPG?

                                I like the guy but c’mon.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X