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

Vic contract *Rumor*

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

  • #16
    I have a feeling that either this is inaccurate or there is more to the story.

    Vic is the face of the franchise. I think that maybe the Pacers told Vic that if he wanted to sign right away, they would give him the 4 year 20 million per year deal, but if he wanted to wait and see how he recovered, they would adjust accordingly.

    Even if Vic does not recover 100%, he is still a good player and a good representative for the team. Between his playing ability (2 time all-star) and his talent (Masked Singer appearance and who knows what else he will do), he is a player that people are going to start to recognize. Players that become recognizable even out of NBA circles is good for the league and the team. That means more nationally televised pacer games and, in my opinion, more favorable calls from the refs.

    I can't see the Pacers doing anything to hurt their relationship with Vic. I think they see Vic, Sabonis and now Warren as the nucleus of the team.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by jrwannabe View Post
      The articles I've seen has had no numbers. All it said was he rejected an extension and wanted to wait till after this season to talk again. It also said that there was teams asking about trades and projected more teams will be calling if an extension is not reached this summer. The articles also stated that money could be tight and that Simons might be hard pressed to pay the tax with him losing money like crazy with malls right now. And the Pacers were reluctant to trade Turner at the deadline and may still be that way.
      Chances are, one of the big 4 may have to go. Vic is going to command the most salary and if the cap sinks, it's a tough sell. Turner makes the most sense. But IMO, Brogdan is the one they should look at. Brogdan maybe the most important piece to this team, but the missed games for his contract is tough to bare.
      My humble opinion is that due to the unusual circumstance of this virus, the NBA will make adjustments. They may lower the salary cap but I think the tax cap will stay the same. In other words, I think the Pacers will be able to keep the key pieces of their team in place (if they desire) and pay little to no tax.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by able View Post
        New York hick
        How dare you tarnish the Knicks vs the Hicks rivalry by *******izing the term!
        "man, PG has been really good."

        Comment


        • #19
          The more I think about it the more I think just staying as is will better the better option, at least for next year.
          We have no idea what the teams ceiling is, we have no idea what Oladipo we are getting & post All-Star was (in my mind anyway) the time we were going to find those answers.
          Literally every key player (except Sampson if you count him as key or not) is under contract for next year. We run it back to see how good we are & how good Oladipo is. If Oladipo proves to be the guy he was when he first arrived then maybe you look at making to move to free up cap-room for his extension, if he isn't then maybe we can get him back a bit cheaper meaning we don't need to get rid of a contract or 2 in order to create room.

          Not going to lie I really wish we knew the answers, but Oladipo & (a healthy) Brogdon still have a chance to be one of the best back-courts in the East along with Turner & Sabonis being one of the best front-courts. I still think Turner is the most likely to get traded, but that's simply because of how good Warren's deal is. Time will tell.....

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by sav View Post

            My humble opinion is that due to the unusual circumstance of this virus, the NBA will make adjustments. They may lower the salary cap but I think the tax cap will stay the same. In other words, I think the Pacers will be able to keep the key pieces of their team in place (if they desire) and pay little to no tax.
            maybe, but the players didn't go for cap smoothing when the cap exploded one year, and so the owners may conclude turnabout is fair play. also, i'd assume the tax cap is defined in the cba, which would make it fairly difficult if not impossible to change

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by festar35 View Post
              Literally every key player (except Sampson if you count him as key or not) is under contract for next year.
              Justin is not under contract and he was pretty muche a key one for this season's team. Part of that was due to injuries, but personally I thought he was much better than Lamb.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by dal9 View Post

                maybe, but the players didn't go for cap smoothing when the cap exploded one year, and so the owners may conclude turnabout is fair play. also, i'd assume the tax cap is defined in the cba, which would make it fairly difficult if not impossible to change
                The problem is that there is incentive for owners to want some sort of cap concession. Deciding to do a sudden cap/tax drop because the players wouldn't go for cap smoothing on the rise hurts owners as much as players because they end up all being taxpayers and they can't change teams except by trades and exception. It hurts players who are non-Bird-rights FAs but I suspect they'll just take very short contracts to get past it if needed, as has happened in the past. Or go to the Lakers, Bucks, or the Warriors for the MLE or vet minimum for a year and a shot at a ring - once again bringing out the armchair GMs acting as if the Pacers could have gotten the same deals.
                BillS

                A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                Comment


                • #23
                  I want to keep Dipo but I'm hoping we get to see a little more from him before the team signs him to a big dollar long term deal. Dipo has had one standout season in his career followed by an injury plagued season where he made the all star team but wasn't the same player as he was in 17. All we've seen so far since his return in 19 are flashes but nothing that makes me confident that he'll ever return to his 2017 form. I'm glad that I haven't seen vet Max numbers suggested and I don't think 4/80 is an insult considering it was made at a point when he hadn't ever returned yet. I think it's best for both parties to wait until we see what Dipo is like to finish this season assuming there is an end to this season. If he doesn't show significant improvement over where he was we the season was suspended I hope the Pacers either offer a shorter term deal with more per year or stay close to the offer they've made.
                  Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by PetPaima View Post

                    Justin is not under contract and he was pretty muche a key one for this season's team. Part of that was due to injuries, but personally I thought he was much better than Lamb.
                    Very true, forgot about him, but mainly because I don't really see him (or Aaron for that matter) on the roster next year.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I don't see why we wouldn't resign JHo if at all possible

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                        I don't see why we wouldn't resign JHo if at all possible
                        And Aaron is on a rookie contract for 3 more years. For his salary - he's a keeper too - unless a really good deal comes up for him.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                          I don't see why we wouldn't resign JHo if at all possible
                          My assumption comes not from a player/ability standpoint, but more a cap standpoint.
                          We have $125mil in committed money for next season & the hard cap before all this Covid stuff was projected at $115mil putting us over the cap. Now I know that's not the luxury, but we don't tend to flirt too closely to the luxury at all. We are currently $6mil over this season & that'd be $10mil (projected) next year without bringing back Holiday.

                          Justin is top 10 in 3pt shooting & an extremely good defender, there will be teams willing to pay him $6mil+ next year & I'd bet there would be a team or 2 that views him as a starter at SG/SF his more natural position than us using him as a makeshift PF off the bench. Just because we want to keep him, doesn't mean he will stay he has played himself into a position to cash in when 3/D wings are at a premium. If we get him for $6/7mil then we are up to $131/132mil in salary & I'm not sure our front office would be comfortable with that, also still expecting a drop in the cap with loss of revenue from the league.

                          As for Aaron, I think he is a potential salary dump situation & not because of him. I think we look to move TJ Leaf & a guy like Aaron potentially thrown in to get that $4.5mil off the books, it could very well be Sumner as well.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by dal9 View Post
                            I don't see why we wouldn't resign JHo if at all possible
                            How much you want to spend on Justin depends on how likely the front office thinks that he will repeat his success; This has been a career year for Justin. His shooting has been off the charts. It would not necessarily wrong for the front office to decide that the Pacers have gotten Justin's best year and that it would not likely be repeated.

                            JMO, but spending $5M/yr on Justin is OK, but $10M/yr is too much. Unless you decide that he will play at this level for the next couple of seasons. His play this year is certainly worth more. But it is not likely he will play this well again.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Why is anyone using 20-21 numbers when any Oladipo extension would become active in the 21-22 season? (where we then have to reduce his 21 mio first) the difference between his current salary and his extension = the rise in "team salary" Nobody knows the 20-21 cap let alone the 21-22.
                              So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

                              If you've done 6 impossible things today?
                              Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by dal9 View Post

                                maybe, but the players didn't go for cap smoothing when the cap exploded one year, and so the owners may conclude turnabout is fair play. also, i'd assume the tax cap is defined in the cba, which would make it fairly difficult if not impossible to change
                                I do not think it would be that hard to change. To make that change they would just need to get the players to agree to the change, since this would most likely benefit the players just as much or more than the owners I see little reason why they would not agree to it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X