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

BLOCKBUSTER: Kawhi Leonard & Paul George both to the Clippers in massive deal

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

  • Basketball Fan
    replied
    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    Starting to sound as though Westbrook asked for a trade before PG. Had to believe PG and Westbrook were not happy with the team that was put around them and losing in the first round. I know, I know you can blame the two stars for that. But IMO this changes the narrative a little - both stars were looking to get out
    I think that something is going on with ownership in OKC the fact they wanted to trade these guys and are letting other talent go makes me think something else is going on with this franchise they were about to trade both of them to the Raptors so I really think PG/Russ don't have an issue with one another as much it is with ownership/mgmt.

    Leave a comment:


  • Basketball Fan
    replied
    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post

    One thing is giving hall of famers s*** for not getting a championship another thing is pushing some uniformed agenda that certain players style of play is never going to give them a championship.

    As far as we know Lebron would have never won anything if he didnít get together with two other hall of famers, KD had to go to a dynasty to get two rings that doesnít make his style of play unplayable and ďomg he gives you highlights but nothing elseĒ.

    Guys like Lillard, Westbrook, Harden, Beal can win you a championship without a problem but like with any other super star with rings they need to be surrounded by the right people.
    I definitely think LeBron would be ringless right now had he spent his entire career in Cleveland rather than two stints there. Hell it was the trade he was a part of that got him his last ring.

    Of course you need help to win a ring even Jordan, Kobe etc needed help the point is that's not how the narrative goes these players know it they don't want to be a punchline for "They never won a ring" like Barkley, Ewing etc have. I don't think its fair either but to pretend it doesn't exist is delusional because KD wouldn't have gone to GS and these other players wouldn't be teaming up to win it all just so they don't end up ringless.

    Leave a comment:


  • ECKrueger
    replied
    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post

    It will be fascinating to see how this plays out. Leonard has been in the league for just 8 seasons, yet has already left TWO different teams where he won a championship. Incredible. Furthermore, the star he wants to play with is obviously a snake. There will obviously be some successes there, but this might not last as long as some would think. There arenít two people on the planet who Iíd trust less to stay somewhere than PG and Leonard.
    On the other hand, they are both on "home" team by their own choice for once.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sollozzo
    replied
    Originally posted by dal9 View Post
    rofl, Kawhi signs for 2 yrs + player option...wonder if Clips gonna ask for some of those picks back...
    https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...ear-clips-deal
    It will be fascinating to see how this plays out. Leonard has been in the league for just 8 seasons, yet has already left TWO different teams where he won a championship. Incredible. Furthermore, the star he wants to play with is obviously a snake. There will obviously be some successes there, but this might not last as long as some would think. There arenít two people on the planet who Iíd trust less to stay somewhere than PG and Leonard.

    Leave a comment:


  • Unclebuck
    replied
    Starting to sound as though Westbrook asked for a trade before PG. Had to believe PG and Westbrook were not happy with the team that was put around them and losing in the first round. I know, I know you can blame the two stars for that. But IMO this changes the narrative a little - both stars were looking to get out

    Leave a comment:


  • dal9
    replied
    rofl, Kawhi signs for 2 yrs + player option...wonder if Clips gonna ask for some of those picks back...
    https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...ear-clips-deal

    Leave a comment:


  • ksuttonjr76
    replied
    Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post

    I wouldnt say everyone has a list of players they would of traded for but certianly the could of gotten picks even if they were second round picks for guys that were woefully underperforming like Joseph was. I mean you see the value of the players that got let go by what other teams were willing to pay for them and what we were not willing to pay for them.

    The team had something like 21 days to decide the fate of the expirings after VO went down and we choose to get embarrassed in playoffs. This is with the full knowledge of knowing that no all star level talent would choose the Pacers in FA and for good reason given VOs health and more certain terms on other teams.

    The only advantage that I can see in not trading away some marginal expiring starters is that the Pacers come off more like a player friendly franchise by not forcing players to uproot their lives in Feb.

    Freeing up the cap space is pretty moot since teams had cap space to spare and the trade for a guy like Warren could of easily been done last year at the trade deadline just to use an example.

    To your first overall point though that everyone thinks it is about that year and only that year so trade the worthless expirings contract. Teams that have poor cap management want expirings aka the suns or OKC or teams that can be major players in free agency for reasons like market or weather or just haveing a superstar already on the team want these expiring contracts. I have no clue where the assumption was made that they were worthless in the first place but for the Pacers they absolutely become more valuable and players abilities become less important that year after a catastrophic injury to an all star. And I understand KP likes his job and certianly he does cautious moves so he doesnt get fired again which is what I think this is all about.
    In the end...the Pacers shouldn't keep the expiring contracts for themselves and should be always trading contracts for draft picks aka lottery tickets.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gamble1
    replied
    Originally posted by BillS View Post

    I know everyone thinks that every year should be about that year and that year only and that an expiring contract t is only worth trading (because expiring contracts have no value except for other teams so you should trade them to turn them into something of value that the other team is willing to give for that valueless expiring contract...)

    I am one of the guys who thinks last off-season was absolutely meant to be running in place, that it was essentially sticking to a game plan created before Oladipo and Sabonis broke out their first year. It was focused on this off-season and the original expectation was that we would neither be coming off a season with Oladipo standing out nor would the run-in-place season be one that looked very successful in its own right before Dipo went down.

    I know everyone on this board has the list of players we should have traded for at the trade deadline who would have ... well, I don't know, I suppose ended up proving themselves to be All-Stars while still allowing the Pacers to tank out of the playoffs by losing every game?

    There was a plan. You may not have agreed with the plan, but to continually suggest that the lack of movement is proof of idiocy is getting old around here.
    I wouldnt say everyone has a list of players they would of traded for but certianly the could of gotten picks even if they were second round picks for guys that were woefully underperforming like Joseph was. I mean you see the value of the players that got let go by what other teams were willing to pay for them and what we were not willing to pay for them.

    The team had something like 21 days to decide the fate of the expirings after VO went down and we choose to get embarrassed in playoffs. This is with the full knowledge of knowing that no all star level talent would choose the Pacers in FA and for good reason given VOs health and more certain terms on other teams.

    The only advantage that I can see in not trading away some marginal expiring starters is that the Pacers come off more like a player friendly franchise by not forcing players to uproot their lives in Feb.

    Freeing up the cap space is pretty moot since teams had cap space to spare and the trade for a guy like Warren could of easily been done last year at the trade deadline just to use an example.

    To your first overall point though that everyone thinks it is about that year and only that year so trade the worthless expirings contract. Teams that have poor cap management want expirings aka the suns or OKC or teams that can be major players in free agency for reasons like market or weather or just haveing a superstar already on the team want these expiring contracts. I have no clue where the assumption was made that they were worthless in the first place but for the Pacers they absolutely become more valuable and players abilities become less important that year after a catastrophic injury to an all star. And I understand KP likes his job and certianly he does cautious moves so he doesnt get fired again which is what I think this is all about.
    Last edited by Gamble1; 07-09-2019, 10:31 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kstat
    replied
    Well, Houston lost a hall of fame point guard and had the mighty warriors on the ropes twice. They actually had to miss like 25 straight threes in game 7 before the warriors could even grab a lead. I guess the warriors werenít all that, huh?

    given that the rockets gave the warriors all they could handle, Iím going to go ahead and say they were the better team all along. Ditto for the Cavs in 2015. As it turns out, the warriors have really only been the NBAís best team for one total season.
    Last edited by Kstat; 07-09-2019, 12:59 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sollozzo
    replied
    Originally posted by Kstat View Post

    A battered rockets team nearly beat them the year before. A battered Cavs team nearly took them to 7 in 2015. This just ainít a solid narrative.
    I donít really think that the Warriorsí success is a ďnarrativeĒ as much as it is documented success.

    2015 was before Durant.

    I have no way to prove it, but I donít think Houston would have ever actually eliminated GS when push came to shove. Big difference between going to 7 and actually winning the series against a great team. Pacers took the Knicks to 7 in 94 but lost the series. Pacers took the Magic to 7 in 95 but lost the series. Pacers took the Bulls to 7 in 98 but lost the series. Pacers took the Heat to 7 in 13 but lost the series. Itís very tough to actually close out a great team.

    Given that the Warriors still gave the Raps trouble even in their bartered nature, my money would have easily been on them against either East team if healthy.

    Leave a comment:


  • ksuttonjr76
    replied
    Originally posted by Kstat View Post

    A win is a win. Sudden injuries often create new wrinkles that are hard to scout for. Itís not an apples to apples ďthey lost player X and player X averaged 30 points, so we need to win the next game by 30 points.Ē Sometimes it works out that way but it often doesnít. The only thing that matters is winning the games, which Toronto did.

    if you recall last season the rockets in games 6 and 7 without Chris Paul had double digit halftime leads on the warriors. Didnít matter because they won both games, but Basketball is funny that way.
    I agree overall. At the end of the day, a win is a win.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kstat
    replied
    Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post

    No way that a healthy Warriors team loses in The Finals to either team. A battered Warriors team almost forced a Game 7 against Toronto as it was.
    A battered rockets team nearly beat them the year before. A battered Cavs team nearly took them to 7 in 2015. This just ainít a solid narrative.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sollozzo
    replied
    Originally posted by Kstat View Post

    Thatís not the point I was trying to make. Iím saying you can put yourself in position to compete with smart roster building and a little good fortune. I thought a healthy golden state would have been slightly favored over Toronto, but I would have favored Milwaukee over a healthy warriors team and Toronto beat Milwaukee, so here we are. They earned that finals chance and for once the warriors were the team that suffered injuries in the finals. Thatís part of the game, but Toronto earned that chance.
    No way that a healthy Warriors team loses in The Finals to either team. A battered Warriors team almost forced a Game 7 against Toronto as it was.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kstat
    replied
    Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post

    A healthy Warriors team would have stomped Toronto. Toronto won it, but I wasn't that impressed with how they won it despite all the injuries for the Warriors.
    A win is a win. Sudden injuries often create new wrinkles that are hard to scout for. Itís not an apples to apples ďthey lost player X and player X averaged 30 points, so we need to win the next game by 30 points.Ē Sometimes it works out that way but it often doesnít. The only thing that matters is winning the games, which Toronto did.

    if you recall last season the rockets in games 6 and 7 without Chris Paul had double digit halftime leads on the warriors. Didnít matter because they won both games, but Basketball is funny that way.
    Last edited by Kstat; 07-09-2019, 12:23 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • ksuttonjr76
    replied
    Originally posted by Kstat View Post

    Thatís not the point I was trying to make. Iím saying you can put yourself in position to compete with smart roster building and a little good fortune. I thought a healthy golden state would have been slightly favored over Toronto, but I would have favored Milwaukee over a healthy warriors team and Toronto beat Milwaukee, so here we are. They earned that finals chance and for once the warriors were the team that suffered injuries in the finals. Thatís part of the game, but Toronto earned that chance.
    A healthy Warriors team would have stomped Toronto. Toronto won it, but I wasn't that impressed with how they won it despite all the injuries for the Warriors.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X