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

THE OFFICIAL 2019 OFF SEASON/TRADE RUMORS THREAD

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

  • If the Lakers pick up a point guard who is a threat from 3, I think Lance can be a good two for them. Lebron, Kuzma and Davis are all three point threats.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • Originally posted by SaintLouisan View Post

      Agreed.

      People love picks for the same reason others buy scratchers.

      “A boat’s a boat but the mystery box could be anything. It could even be a boat.”
      Honestly there is a good reason for that, and that's because in the NBA it takes mega stars to win. If you don't have a top 3 or 5 guy in the league on your roster, you aren't winning anything. If you could trade 100 Thad Youngs, George Hills, and Luis Scolas for 1 Kawhi Leonard you do it without question. Since it is pretty clear a mega star isn't signing here via free agency and it looks unlikely we are trading for one, you are really only left with hoping you get lucky in the draft. The more picks the better the shot, no matter how slim.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Wage View Post

        Honestly there is a good reason for that, and that's because in the NBA it takes mega stars to win. If you don't have a top 3 or 5 guy in the league on your roster, you aren't winning anything. If you could trade 100 Thad Youngs, George Hills, and Luis Scolas for 1 Kawhi Leonard you do it without question. Since it is pretty clear a mega star isn't signing here via free agency and it looks unlikely we are trading for one, you are really only left with hoping you get lucky in the draft. The more picks the better the shot, no matter how slim.
        Personally, I have more faith in trades. Which is why if I’m the Pels I do my best to get an All-Star or at least a player close to that caliber for someone like AD, ie CJ McCollum. Or a player of promise stuck in a dirt franchise, like Dipo. But it seems even this trade’s proponents are mostly focusing on the picks...so they must be pretty good, right? Except, in all likelihood, they won’t be (this year’s pick aside, and I consider this a weak draft, though I know many on here think otherwise). So if I’m a Pels fan, I’m asking, “where’s the beef?”

        By all means, if you have a chance to get a top-5 or even top-10 pick, go right ahead. But not all picks are created equal, and so a trade centered on fewer potentials and more known qualities would have been preferable IMO. Especially considering the realities of those potentials.

        Comment


        • Randle declined his option, unrestricted now
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by SaintLouisan View Post

            Personally, I have more faith in trades. Which is why if I’m the Pels I do my best to get an All-Star or at least a player close to that caliber for someone like AD, ie CJ McCollum. Or a player of promise stuck in a dirt franchise, like Dipo. But it seems even this trade’s proponents are mostly focusing on the picks...so they must be pretty good, right? Except, in all likelihood, they won’t be (this year’s pick aside, and I consider this a weak draft, though I know many on here think otherwise). So if I’m a Pels fan, I’m asking, “where’s the beef?”

            By all means, if you have a chance to get a top-5 or even top-10 pick, go right ahead. But not all picks are created equal, and so a trade centered on fewer potentials and more known qualities would have been preferable IMO. Especially considering the realities of those potentials.
            Those picks may end up being complete busts, but it doesn't really matter. There is a chance one or more of them becomes a superstar. There is ZERO chance CJ McCollum becomes a superstar. He is what he is, a damn good player. Damn good players don't win championships. This doesn't even touch on the cap ramifications and long term benefits these draft picks add.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Wage View Post

              Those picks may end up being complete busts, but it doesn't really matter. There is a chance one or more of them becomes a superstar. There is ZERO chance CJ McCollum becomes a superstar. He is what he is, a damn good player. Damn good players don't win championships. This doesn't even touch on the cap ramifications and long term benefits these draft picks add.
              Firstly, damn good players help win championships and so have value on their own merits. But secondly, those are the type of guys who can be traded for elite players. Derozan got Toronto Kawhi. Isaiah Thomas got Boston Kyrie. If NO becomes good, and Zion becomes the player people think he’ll be, and they’re a step away, McCollum is the kind of guy who could be moved for a disgruntled star who could put them over the line.

              Maybe one of those picks will return a player of that quality. It is pretty likely they won’t. In fact, it’s probably more likely, if those picks are in the 20s, that you’ll end up with the type of guy who plays 5-10 MPG for two or three seasons before heading off to Europe.

              This is kind of what my initial post alluded to: some people see picks as the be all end all. They can help for sure, but they are not the lifeline they are assumed to be and should not be relied on at all costs. Which is more or less what the Pels are doing by taking this deal. (Though granted, I do have some belief in Ingram). People hear picks and think they’re all valuable, but as I said above all picks are not created equal, and sometimes a known quality is far far better than some pie in the sky vision of what you theoretically could uncover late in the first round.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by SaintLouisan View Post

                Firstly, damn good players help win championships and so have value on their own merits. But secondly, those are the type of guys who can be traded for elite players. Derozan got Toronto Kawhi. Isaiah Thomas got Boston Kyrie. If NO becomes good, and Zion becomes the player people think he’ll be, and they’re a step away, McCollum is the kind of guy who could be moved for a disgruntled star who could put them over the line.

                Maybe one of those picks will return a player of that quality. It is pretty likely they won’t. In fact, it’s probably more likely, if those picks are in the 20s, that you’ll end up with the type of guy who plays 5-10 MPG for two or three seasons before heading off to Europe.

                This is kind of what my initial post alluded to: some people see picks as the be all end all. They can help for sure, but they are not the lifeline they are assumed to be and should not be relied on at all costs. Which is more or less what the Pels are doing by taking this deal. (Though granted, I do have some belief in Ingram). People hear picks and think they’re all valuable, but as I said above all picks are not created equal, and sometimes a known quality is far far better than some pie in the sky vision of what you theoretically could uncover late in the first round.
                Of course a dude like McCollum has value. The entire point is those draft picks have MORE value. If New Orleans wants to turn those picks into Oladipo, I love ya Vic but you gotta go.
                Last edited by Wage; 06-16-2019, 09:46 PM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Wage View Post

                  Of course a dude like McCollum has value. The entire point is those draft picks have MORE value. If New Orleans wants to turn those picks into Oladipo, I love ya buddy but you gotta go.
                  They don't though.

                  This is the mistake people make: they value the pick according to what it might get. And since it might theoretically get the next LeBron, or Jordan, or whatever, people apparently value the pick accordingly.

                  However, their value is not actually the potential of what you might possibly draft; it is whoever that pick is actually used to draft, or whatever player it turns into via trade or whatever. So it might as yet be undetermined, but it will be someday years after that draft, and that will be what it was worth.

                  Now, since we can't see into the future, we have to do our best to predict. And the data shows that lower draft picks provide lower value on average, just as you'd expect. Hell, even high picks can bust, so without stockpiling known quality, your picks will inevitably regress to the mediocre mean so that, even if you do luck out with an elite player, he will be surrounded by a weak supporting cast. In which case he's gone the moment his rookie contract expires, and you're back to zero.

                  You need players you know can play in the NBA, to play on your team, to trade for assets, whatever. And the draft is not the best way to acquire them because you don't even have that much information.
                  Last edited by SaintLouisan; 06-16-2019, 10:19 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    Randle declined his option, unrestricted now
                    If we traded one of Turner or Sabonis I would hope that we would pick up a guy like him to go next to whoever is remaining.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by SaintLouisan View Post

                      They don't though.

                      This is the mistake people make: they value the pick according to what it might get.

                      However, their value is not actually the potential of what you might possibly draft; it is whoever that pick is actually used to draft, or whatever player it turns into via trade or whatever. So it might as yet be undetermined, but it will be someday years after that draft, and that will be what it was worth.

                      Now, since we can't see into the future, we have to do our best to predict. And the data shows that lower draft picks provide lower value on average, just as you'd expect. Hell, even high picks can bust, so without stockpiling known quality, your picks will inevitably regress to the mediocre mean so that, even if you do luck out with an elite player, he will be surrounded by a weak supporting cast. In which case he's gone the moment his rookie contract expires, and you're back to zero.

                      You need players you know can play in the NBA, to play on your team, to trade for assets, whatever. And the draft is not the best way to acquire them because you don't even have that much information.
                      I think part of the disconnect is that those who are excited about the picks are not assuming those are going to be low picks. They very well may be, but there's plenty of chance they'll be pretty good picks as well.

                      And the draft isn't always about getting the absolute same quality of player. It's about being able to manipulate the cap by having players who are much better than their salary, and the almost guaranteed 7-8 years of team control if they are good.

                      The biggest advantage of most picks is that it gives you a free bite at the apple. You have a chance at getting a great player, but you have to use minimal cap resources which leaves your whole cap to use on your team now. So for example if New Orleans wants to build around Zion/Jrue, soon enough they'll have plenty of cap space to do so because the draft picks won't be eating up the cap like another solid veteran would. They can start to acquire those solid veterans as they get a little deeper in the team building process.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by SaintLouisan View Post

                        They don't though.

                        This is the mistake people make: they value the pick according to what it might get. And since it might theoretically get the next LeBron, or Jordan, or whatever, people apparently value the pick accordingly.

                        However, their value is not actually the potential of what you might possibly draft; it is whoever that pick is actually used to draft, or whatever player it turns into via trade or whatever. So it might as yet be undetermined, but it will be someday years after that draft, and that will be what it was worth.

                        Now, since we can't see into the future, we have to do our best to predict. And the data shows that lower draft picks provide lower value on average, just as you'd expect. Hell, even high picks can bust, so without stockpiling known quality, your picks will inevitably regress to the mediocre mean so that, even if you do luck out with an elite player, he will be surrounded by a weak supporting cast. In which case he's gone the moment his rookie contract expires, and you're back to zero.

                        You need players you know can play in the NBA, to play on your team, to trade for assets, whatever. And the draft is not the best way to acquire them because you don't even have that much information.
                        They do though, which is why AD is wearing purple and gold now. If the Spurs could flip the package they got for Kawhi with the one the Pels got for AD, Pop would be tripping all over himself trying to get DeRozan and Poeltl on the first plane out of town. Even if the Pels took Ball, Ingram and Hart out of the package the Spurs would still be elated. No one is treating these picks like they are the next LeBron or Jordan. No one would trade 6 LeBrons or Jordans for Anthony Davis. They are acting like they give you a shot at a game changer, and they do.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                          If the Lakers pick up a point guard who is a threat from 3, I think Lance can be a good two for them. Lebron, Kuzma and Davis are all three point threats.
                          You dontd want to take the ball out of Bron or Davis' hands just to give it to Lance. Plus, Lance isn't a starter defensively in my opinion. His offense isn't either most of the time.

                          I think LA should really bring in a solid 2 way guy at that spot. Just someone consistent. You don't want aging Bron to have to pickup the other team's best wing every night.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Wage View Post

                            They do though, which is why AD is wearing purple and gold now. If the Spurs could flip the package they got for Kawhi with the one the Pels got for AD, Pop would be tripping all over himself trying to get DeRozan and Poeltl on the first plane out of town. Even if the Pels took Ball, Ingram and Hart out of the package the Spurs would still be elated. No one is treating these picks like they are the next LeBron or Jordan. No one would trade 6 LeBrons or Jordans for Anthony Davis. They are acting like they give you a shot at a game changer, and they do.
                            Well I'm not saying teams don't value them, they clearly do; I'm saying they overvalue them. And sure they give you a shot at a game changer, just as scratchers give you a chance to win a fortune; it's just not a realistic one, let alone a reliable one. Picks don't have no place in a deal (or a team-build), but they should not be the primary component, especially if it's picks of this quality and especially for a player at AD's level.

                            I have to think if the Spurs wanted a team that could give them picks, they could have found one.

                            We'll just agree to disagree man.
                            Last edited by SaintLouisan; 06-16-2019, 11:21 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Yah, we are discussing perceived value of NBA players and draft picks. This stuff is the very definition of subjective and there is no right or wrong answer. I just see the value in draft picks over role players and even near all-stars in a lot of situations. It is one of the reasons I would get so upset every time the Pacers traded away a draft pick for some new role player. Now if we would have had a top 5 player on the roster and would have been on the cusp of a championship, suddenly the values shift, and that role player may well be worth a lot more than the unknown draft pick.

                              Comment


                              • picks are basically universally overvalued but especially in the NBA since the draft is so small. the Pels got the rights to 3 picks from the AD lead Lakers.

                                they're not going to be valuable picks. I think Griffin did incredibly well considering the circumstances. in 10 years when we look back it's gonna be "damn, that's all they got?"

                                I'm also incredibly high on Lonzo so y'know.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X