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

So what do we think?

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

  • #46
    For a team that needs talent and help now, I would have stuck at 32, which had first round talent at that spot. How do picks in 2026 help us now? You have to keep that pick. 2nd round picks are trash unless they're a top 2-3 pick in round 2. Otherwise, they are not assets KP. Stack 1st round picks and you can start talking about being "asset rich"

    KZ has so much potential too. But if we keep that pick we probably don't even take him, MIA selected him

    LOVE the Goga pick

    Comment


    • #47
      Pretty sure this allows us to retain Thad and Bogie while adding Rubio:

      PG - Rubio/Holiday
      SG - Oladipo/Matthews?
      SF - Bogdanovic/Warren
      PF - Thad/Goga/Warren/Leaf
      Cc - Turner/Sabonis

      Love it.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Gremz View Post
        Pretty sure this allows us to retain Thad and Bogie while adding Rubio:

        PG - Rubio/Holiday
        SG - Oladipo/Matthews?
        SF - Bogdanovic/Warren
        PF - Thad/Goga/Warren/Leaf
        Cc - Turner/Sabonis

        Love it.
        Possible, but only if we sign a new contract with Thad BEFORE adding Rubio while re-signing Bogie AFTER adding Rubio.

        Even then the total salary for Rubio + Thad can not be more than approx. 23 million. Bogie's contract is not relevant as he can be signed over the salary cap with Early Bird Rights and cap hold is small enough.

        However, I don't want to retain Thad! Not at all!

        Comment


        • #49
          I see two major needs we haven't filled:

          - A second playmaker after Dipo. (Warren helps as a scorer but I don't know if he sets others up very well. Rubio is a playmaker but not as much a scorer.)
          - A scampering spidery big (a la Capela, Siacam, etc.) who can defend the rim and the perimeter. (Domas struggles, Myles has moments, I have no idea what the new guy can do or not do in this area.)

          So we have not really addressed either area. Unless these three bigs end up being a great combination, a trade is certainly in the works. Maybe Pritch is planning to use the first half of next season to really kick the tires on it, then make the necessary trade mid season around the time Dipo returns.

          My biggest concern is the need for a playmaker. I can't get the Dipo imagery out of my head of how much he struggled before the injury (and the injury itself certainly does not help with the imagery.) Not only is Dipo our only playmaker, even if he returns healthy, which is a big maybe, he needs help. If he is not fully recovered, we will suck so bad.

          Starting Domas and running the offense around him could help quite a bit with this problem. The issue was slightly addressed the past couple years by Collison with all his flaws. He did distribute well and was an offensive threat. Watching Cojo (a favorite of mine) run the offense . . . well, that's what we are in store for if we don't address the need for a creator/playmaker this summer.
          Last edited by McKeyFan; 06-21-2019, 09:08 AM.
          "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by PetPaima View Post

            Possible, but only if we sign a new contract with Thad BEFORE adding Rubio while re-signing Bogie AFTER adding Rubio.

            Even then the total salary for Rubio + Thad can not be more than approx. 23 million. Bogie's contract is not relevant as he can be signed over the salary cap with Early Bird Rights and cap hold is small enough.
            oh
            However, I don't want to retain Thad! Not at all!
            Many excellent comments in this thread. Reading between the lines on KP's comments, I'd say Thad and all our other FAs are gone except possibly Bogie. KP's comment about Domas playing some more 4 was interesting: I sensed that he was prodding Nate to try the Myles-Domas pairing some more, at least for next season. I'd be thrilled with Domas being 6th man at 4 or 5 with Goga & Leaf (or Warren?) in reserve, but it all implies that we sign or acquire a starting 4 who is better than Thad. Who might that be? And can we afford him AND a quality starting PG within the cap, and still re-sign Bogie above it (and below the luxury tax, given Monta)?


            "Sumner reminds me of a young Paul George."

            - Clyde Drexler.

            Comment


            • #51
              We’re clearly not done yet. We need a star caliber player to put along side of Vic. Unless one of the young guys steps up and fills that role, frankly I would rather have an established player than gamble on someone breaking out.

              Hopefully with all of these 2nd round picks we can use them to move McDermott. Having Warren and McDermott as our SFs concerns me. I would much rather use Warren off the bench and find a different starting SF...possibly Bogey.

              All in all, I think we did okay, but we need to wait and see what else KP has up his sleeve before we can really know how the day went.

              Comment


              • #52
                Pritchard
                "He fits us perfectly in terms of his shot-blocking. I think that's one of the things that impressed us the most on Goga."
                Does this mean he can replace Turner? Or does it mean they want a consistent team that always has a rim defender on the floor?
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Gremz View Post
                  Pretty sure this allows us to retain Thad and Bogie while adding Rubio:

                  PG - Rubio/Holiday
                  SG - Oladipo/Matthews?
                  SF - Bogdanovic/Warren
                  PF - Thad/Goga/Warren/Leaf
                  Cc - Turner/Sabonis

                  Love it.
                  Yikes this made me sad
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Reading through this thread, it sounds like some people were expecting the 18th pick to make us title contenders. Personally I like that the Pacers took their BPA, and reading up on him, I think he has a high ceiling too. He is only 19 and seems to have a lot of offensive skills. His shot blocking ability also fits into today's game.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Gremz View Post
                      Pretty sure this allows us to retain Thad and Bogie while adding Rubio:

                      PG - Rubio/Holiday
                      SG - Oladipo/Matthews?
                      SF - Bogdanovic/Warren
                      PF - Thad/Goga/Warren/Leaf
                      Cc - Turner/Sabonis

                      Love it.
                      I could live with that but I think it allows us to still offer Russel the max and keep Bogie which I hope we do but no matter what we should have Sabonis in the starting lineup not Thad.
                      If we keep Thad I hope it's a short term deal.

                      I'm fine with our pick, we just need a coach who will let him see the floor.
                      Last edited by Pacerized; 06-21-2019, 10:12 AM.
                      Larry Bird qouted March 25th. 2015:

                      Bird: I wanted to keep our group together because in the summer, if David and Roy opt out, we're back to zero, really. We don't have that much, so you leave your options open. If we did make a trade, I didn't want to take on a lot of contracts -- because that's what usually happens. Plus, I liked my guys. They're playing well. If we keep the core together and Paul comes back healthy, we'll be right back to where we were.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        All we really needed was a damn PG and a back up SF and keep Thad and Wesley Matt..WHAT THE **** ARE WE DOING?!?!?!

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Goga was named Euro League Rising Star and is in some pretty good company:

                          Former P great: Erazem Lorbek
                          Andrea Bargnani
                          Rudy Fernandez
                          Danillo Gallinari
                          Novica Velickvoic?
                          Ricky Rubio (:
                          Nikola Mirotic
                          Kostas Papanikalou
                          Bogdan Bogdanovic
                          Alex Abrines
                          Luka Doncic
                          Goga Bitadze

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                            I can't figure out how to embed the video, but KP had his Press conference on the draft.

                            https://www.nba.com/pacers/news/2019-draft-night-recap#

                            - KP and the Pacers scouted him live
                            - He was a top 10 on the Pacers Draft board.
                            - KP thinks that he's ready immediately for back up minutes ( I assume to take the place of O'Quinn ) even next to both Sabonis and Myles.
                            - Won't stop the Pacers looking at the 4 in Free Agency.
                            - He's a shotblocker and thinks that he's the best Euro Player after Doncic over the last couple of years.
                            - KP really thinks that he's far more polished and ready to play in the NBA than anyone else he's drafted.
                            - Thinks that there will be competition for Bojan's services but they will do their best to keep him.
                            - No news about Dipo
                            - Comments about DC and Thad, but I get the impression that they are not part of the plans ( it's more of his choice not the Pacers ).
                            - I don't get the impression that they will go after a huge MAX Contract Player. He doesn't want to dump it all into a single Player than have to fill in the rest of the needs with little $$. I know that many hate this, but this fits with the approach that the Pacers have taken over the last couple of years with Bojan, CoJo and DC. They brought in quality Players at multiple positions instead of a single top tier ( but Expensive ) Player and then filled in the gaps with lower tier Players.

                            But the most IMPORTANT and fascinating quote is this:



                            He mentions it again but he says again that he can't talk about it. I have no clue what that means. Maybe as part of draft night trade talk, some other things were discussed?
                            I know that many of you are smarting from having to sit through this then end up with some guy named Goga and TJ Warren. I would guess that the rest of this offseason would all hinder on what happens with Bojan.

                            I suspect that they have a:

                            "Re-sign Bojan and see what we can do with $21 mil in Cap Space" Plan

                            and another

                            "Don't re-sign Bojan and see what we can do with $34 mil in Cap Space" Plan

                            But watch the video, it's interesting. I get the sense that the FO is really trying to make some improvements to this roster and have a direction that they want to head..
                            I didn't get to see the Prichart on TV, but I am waiting to see what plays out. I'm guessing this will be a very interesting preseason.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Gremz View Post
                              Pretty sure this allows us to retain Thad and Bogie while adding Rubio:

                              PG - Rubio/Holiday
                              SG - Oladipo/Matthews?
                              SF - Bogdanovic/Warren
                              PF - Thad/Goga/Warren/Leaf
                              Cc - Turner/Sabonis

                              Love it.
                              4th to 5th seed at best first round exit next year and repeat for the following year.. also the floor spacing with Rubio and Thad in the same lineup is terrible

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by 31Since1990 View Post
                                All we really needed was a damn PG and a back up SF and keep Thad and Wesley Matt..WHAT THE **** ARE WE DOING?!?!?!
                                WE ARE DOING NOTHING BECAUSE FREE AGENCY HAS NOT STARTED YET.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X