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

  • Feeling better about Goga with all the talk about going full into the summer developing the Sabo Turner tandem. Goga has a very high floor as a shooting rim protector off the bench from day one with potential for having a Jokic/Porzingis breakout in 3-5 years.
    https://soundcloud.com/geoclipse

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Ratking View Post
      Feeling better about Goga with all the talk about going full into the summer developing the Sabo Turner tandem. Goga has a very high floor as a shooting rim protector off the bench from day one with potential for having a Jokic/Porzingis breakout in 3-5 years.
      Do you have a link where they say they are going to develop the Sabonis/Turner tandem?
      Proud owner of 'Dutch Pacers'

      Comment


      • One way or another; whether it be a 2 or 3 man combination of Myles/Sabonis/Goga, get used to the idea about having either the vast majority of or some minimal amount of playing time where we will be playing with a 2 headed Big Man frontcourt.

        Even if Myles or Sabonis is traded, in the coming week; we will be have a frontcourt where Goga will be playing with either Myle or Sabonis for the next couple of seasons.

        BTW.....remember that old joke that we had here on PD?

        "This Player's trade value isn't going to be any higher ( or something along those lines )"?

        I think that it's safe to say that the trade value of either Sabonis or Myles isn't going to be any higher than it is now.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by DEEman View Post
          Do you have a link where they say they are going to develop the Sabonis/Turner tandem?
          Latest Locked On Pacers podcast talked about it quite a bit.
          https://soundcloud.com/geoclipse

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Ratking View Post
            Latest Locked On Pacers podcast talked about it quite a bit.
            Wow, they're speculating that Sabonis will get around 24 mpg at PF. That would seem to imply that we're going to manage the 4-spot by committee (Domas, Myles, Warren? Leaf??). They also mentioned, though, the idea of freeing up $10M in cap space by trading Leaf & McDermott, something I'd love to see.

            In fact, I've been wondering, "What percent, on average, are playoff teams' salaries taken up by their top eight players?" I would think a playoff team would want to keep the payroll for players #9-14 (or 15) to under $15M (certainly under $20M) ... meaning the team is probably spending at least 85% of its total team salaries on its top eight players. The bottom line is we want to stay lean in bench salaries -- which, outside of McDermott's (rather modest) $7M salary, I think we're doing well.


            "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

            - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by DrFife View Post

              Wow, they're speculating that Sabonis will get around 24 mpg at PF. That would seem to imply that we're going to manage the 4-spot by committee (Domas, Myles, Warren? Leaf??). They also mentioned, though, the idea of freeing up $10M in cap space by trading Leaf & McDermott, something I'd love to see.

              In fact, I've been wondering, "What percent, on average, are playoff teams' salaries taken up by their top eight players?" I would think a playoff team would want to keep the payroll for players #9-14 (or 15) to under $15M (certainly under $20M) ... meaning the team is probably spending at least 85% of its total team salaries on its top eight players. The bottom line is we want to stay lean in bench salaries -- which, outside of McDermott's (rather modest) $7M salary, I think we're doing well.
              Naptown Seth had a good rule of thumb to use for the salary cap. The first 5 guys should make $50M, the next 5 should make $15M and the last 5 $5M. Now that can't be used today, because the cap has gone up so much, but if you change it from a $70M luxury cap level to the $132M level of 2019, it becomes about 85% for the first 5, 25% for the 2nd 5 and 5% for the last 5.

              Note: The actual math is 86%, 26% and 9%. Some rounding and some belief that the last 5 guys are making minimum salaries and their percentage will always be lower as the cap goes up. The percentages add up to 115%. That models most teams being over the salary cap number, 100%, and the luxury cap number ~121%.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post

                Naptown Seth had a good rule of thumb to use for the salary cap. The first 5 guys should make $50M, the next 5 should make $15M and the last 5 $5M. Now that can't be used today, because the cap has gone up so much, but if you change it from a $70M luxury cap level to the $132M level of 2019, it becomes about 85% for the first 5, 25% for the 2nd 5 and 5% for the last 5.

                Note: The actual math is 86%, 26% and 9%. Some rounding and some belief that the last 5 guys are making minimum salaries and their percentage will always be lower as the cap goes up. The percentages add up to 115%. That models most teams being over the salary cap number, 100%, and the luxury cap number ~121%.
                Ha! Well, Seth (and TJ) spend generously on Pacer trips to other arenas and hob-nob with players in posh hotel elevators, so his math may be different.

                It's a fun question, though. Note the 50:15:5 ratio. If we use that for playing time and value minutes equally (which is quite a stretch), then a starter should be playing 50/70 of the 48 minutes, or about 35 minutes. Accurate in the playoffs, though perhaps we could agree that "crunch-time" minutes should be valued more highly than mid-quarter minutes. Accordingly, the top five perhaps deserve slightly more than 5/7 of the total team salary. By extension, The top eight should make a bit more than 6/7 of the total salary. If we focus on the approximately $132M luxury-tax limit, we arrive right around the $109M salary-cap limit.

                Take-away: If you expect to make the playoffs, fill your cap with your rotation.


                "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

                - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by DrFife View Post
                  In fact, I've been wondering, "What percent, on average, are playoff teams' salaries taken up by their top eight players?" I would think a playoff team would want to keep the payroll for players #9-14 (or 15) to under $15M (certainly under $20M) ... meaning the team is probably spending at least 85% of its total team salaries on its top eight players. The bottom line is we want to stay lean in bench salaries -- which, outside of McDermott's (rather modest) $7M salary, I think we're doing well.
                  Toronto was extremely efficient this season in putting their money into whom plays... If we discount an outlier of Siakam (late draftee with a very cheap rookie contract), the other 7 playoff regulars made about 130 million between them, the inactive ones (including injured Anunoby) were paid about 4,3 million in total & waivees (Justin Hamilton, Lorenzo Brown) 1,8 million. That is 95 % share of payload for "players".


                  In comparison - Milwaukee paid 16 million to non-contributors (mainly Tony Smell) and another 10 million for waivees (Teletovic, Meeks, Hawes, Larry Sanders).

                  Golden State got returns (as minutes) for their buck, but Houston "wasted" 11 million on Iman Shumpert. If you add seldom-seen Gerald Green & Nene, they had about 15 % of the payroll paid to non-contributors.

                  For a WCF team, Portland sure had skewed payroll... Okay, nothing could be done about Nurkic' injury, but The Villain & Meyers Leonard were paid 25 % of their total salaries to average 15 and 10 minutes in playoffs, respectively.

                  Comment


                  • Actually, Pacers need to forget the "Win now" mode if they want to incorporate Goga (if they want Goga to be a core player). Goga wont be as efficient as Sabonis playing backup in the second unit. Sabonis wont be as efficient playing PF as he is playing C. Therefore Nate will need to choose between (possible) victory and project. And, i think, we know what Nate will choose.
                    I'm really sorry because of my english (which is my 3-4 language) and I really appreciate Your patience. I hope this board will make me better

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by DeS View Post
                      Actually, Pacers need to forget the "Win now" mode if they want to incorporate Goga (if they want Goga to be a core player). Goga wont be as efficient as Sabonis playing backup in the second unit. Sabonis wont be as efficient playing PF as he is playing C. Therefore Nate will need to choose between (possible) victory and project. And, i think, we know what Nate will choose.
                      Maybe, but according to 82Games Sabonis was equally efficient as a PF as a C last year, and was better defending as a PF than a C.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by DeS View Post
                        Actually, Pacers need to forget the "Win now" mode if they want to incorporate Goga (if they want Goga to be a core player). Goga wont be as efficient as Sabonis playing backup in the second unit. Sabonis wont be as efficient playing PF as he is playing C. Therefore Nate will need to choose between (possible) victory and project. And, i think, we know what Nate will choose.
                        To be fair, we have no idea what #s that Goga will put up in the 2nd unit given that he hasn't played a single minute in the NBA.

                        But based off of what I have seen from Goga's scouting Videos, I doubt that he will be putting up significantly less efficient #s compared to what Sabonis put up. If we were going from Sabonis ( whose more of a janitor clean up type of scorer whose a very solid finisher ) to a more jump shot oriented scorer ( which Goga does not appear to be ).

                        I know that Sabonis was one of the most efficient scorers in the NBA ( which I loved ). But anything north of 48% on 6 to 8 FGA is fine with me given that Goga is going to be playing against backup Players.

                        I doubt that we will see a huge drop off unless Goga is a total trainwreck from the Offensive POV ( which he does not appear to be ).
                        Last edited by CableKC; 06-24-2019, 08:16 PM.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • Did KP really say in that Dakich interview that teams can have TOO MUCH talent on the roster to develop? Wth, sounds like a weak excuse for dealing our picks. If he’s all but saying we can’t lure stars here, then he damn sure shouldn’t be dealing away draft picks if that’s, like he says in the same interview, the best way to acquire talent in Indiana.

                          And then we got Nate saying “we’re gonna TRY to play faster”” lmao we’ve heard that more than a few times. We ain’t playing faster with a Rubio/FA/ Bogie/Domas/Turner lineup. That’s probably the slowest team in the league 1-5. Hell it’s probably the slowest even with a healthy Vic.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by kent beckley View Post
                            Boston is going after Vuc, as right now they have nothing at center. If they miss out on him, Domas is the player that we have that best matches what Horford did for them. I still think Domas for Jaylen Brown makes so much sense. Gives us the dynamic wing to be the guy till Vic comes back, and can be the Robin to Vic’s Batman. A backcourt of Rubio, Vic, and Brown is pretty great defensively, add in TJ and Myles and you have Rubio with four shooters. It really makes for a dynamic two-way lineup.
                            The problem is that Brown has 5 times the value of Domas. Not a knock on Domas. Long, defensive, 3 pt shooting wings are the most valuable type of player.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by bumpercar3 View Post

                              The problem is that Brown has 5 times the value of Domas. Not a knock on Domas. Long, defensive, 3 pt shooting wings are the most valuable type of player.
                              uh he's definitely not a 3pt shooter, and some of the other things you list are little dubious too

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                                To be fair, we have no idea what #s that Goga will put up in the 2nd unit given that he hasn't played a single minute in the NBA.

                                But based off of what I have seen from Goga's scouting Videos, I doubt that he will be putting up significantly less efficient #s compared to what Sabonis put up. If we were going from Sabonis ( whose more of a janitor clean up type of scorer whose a very solid finisher ) to a more jump shot oriented scorer ( which Goga does not appear to be ).

                                I know that Sabonis was one of the most efficient scorers in the NBA ( which I loved ). But anything north of 48% on 6 to 8 FGA is fine with me given that Goga is going to be playing against backup Players.

                                I doubt that we will see a huge drop off unless Goga is a total trainwreck from the Offensive POV ( which he does not appear to be ).
                                It was not the numbers, i was thinking when i was writing about efficiency. I was thinking more about his leadership and overall impact on the game of the second unit. How many times the second unit made a comeback and many times Sabonis was a centerpiece of that comback. While being efficient scorer he also makes other players of the second unit better. That's why Nate sometimes left the second unit intact sacrificing some efficiency of the first unit (by playing KOQ).
                                But my point was not - if Goga will be able to replace Sabonis. Actually - i would be happy, because i would like Sabonis to become a part of the first unit. My point was that Nate is not going to go away from what is working so well.
                                I'm really sorry because of my english (which is my 3-4 language) and I really appreciate Your patience. I hope this board will make me better

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X