Tweet
Originally posted by dal9
View Post
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.
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
-
Herro, Nunn, Robinson? If there is anyone on the Heat that scares me it's Robinson, not Butler. Robinson torched the Pacers in both games so far. -
Herro > DipoOriginally posted by dal9 View Post@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!
Comment
-
Nunn is a flash in the pan (granted, the Heat are great at getting the best out of those guys). Robinson literally started at a D-III school. He's not a legit starter in this league. Herro I have serious doubts about too.Originally posted by BornIndy View PostComment
-
I don't have a logical argument for why I feel that he may not possibly be a Pacer next year or beyond...but the feeling I got when reading about this, is the same feeling I got about Paul right before he asked for a trade, and especially when the Hibbert moment ("selfish players") happened. I had a 'something's not right' feeling.Originally posted by ECKrueger View PostComment
-
If LeBron gets sick this whole thing will be cancelledComment
-
We might be better off if he "PGs" the Pacers. I mean, if he announces a year before, we can still trade him. Now if he says he will "only" go to the heat or something like that . . .Originally posted by owl View Post"Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference
Comment
-
Pretty much.Originally posted by Motion Offense View Post@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!Comment
-
Give me Tyler Herro, KZ Okpala, and a future 1st.
I don't want Vic to go, but if he wants to, would much rather move him because the cap situation is about to be grim for the next couple years probably.Last edited by Ichi; 07-10-2020, 03:33 AM.Comment
-
Kravitz: Victor Oladipo’s odd decision leaves Pacers in a bind
There is something weird about Victor Oladipo’s decision to opt out of the NBA restart. Something unsettling. Something that doesn’t add up in my brain’s abacus.
It was odd because the Indy-area media Zoom-chatted with Oladipo last Wednesday, and while he acknowledged the injury risk due to the quick ramp-up process, he gave every reason to believe he would head to Florida and test himself in 5-on-5 competition.
That’s what the Pacers anticipated, too, at the time. Earlier, team president Kevin Pritchard extolled Oladipo’s worth ethic and said, “I don’t think I’ve seen him in better shape than he is today.”
On that day, Oladipo sounded like he was ready to roll.
“I’m feeling stronger in general, stronger than ever in my mind,” he said. “I think the quarantine was a blessing in disguise for me. It did more for me internally than it did externally. My mind is as strong and sharp as it’s every been in my entire life, which is scary for others.”
Again, this was last Wednesday.
Then on Saturday, Oladipo did an interview with The Athletic’s Shams Charania, explaining the reasons behind his decision to not play.
Somewhere in Indianapolis, Pritchard was having Paul George flashbacks.
So this is what I keep asking myself: What happened during the two, three intervening days, and why not have at least given it a shot? That doesn’t mean playing in actual games. But 5-on-5 drills, other conditioning drills could help his game and his surgically repaired quad and knee. The circumstances were a little odd. What was the rush?
Even Pacers coach Nate McMillan was taken by surprise, saying again this week he expected Oladipo would make his decision in Florida.
Everything about this blindsided the Pacers; not that they didn’t understand an opt out was an option – they’ve known that all along – but that he would decide so quickly.
And the way they learned the news … from the media? Wouldn’t you hope, or at least assume, that Oladipo or someone in his camp would personally inform the franchise before releasing that information through the media? Isn’t that the way things are supposed to work in healthy working relationships? But this isn’t new for Oladipo, who unilaterally announced his return to action Jan. 29 against the Bulls, much to the shock of the organization.
Look, I’m not blaming Oladipo for not playing. He’s a grown man who can make his own decisions without being guided or held by the hand by the Pacers or anybody else. I don’t care if it was a business move (he’s a free agent at the end of next season) or fear of COVID-19, now exploding across Florida. I don’t care if he just chose to spend more time at home, and I don’t care if it’s a desire to concentrate on social-justice issues.
Some guys simply don’t want to be quarantined with Mickey and Goofy for two, three months, and who can blame them, no matter how big the paycheck is? (Let’s be honest, if they’ve been smart with their money, most of them can absorb the financial hit for not playing). I mean, there are worse places they could be, and the NBA is going to do whatever it takes to keep everybody healthy both physically and mentally, but honestly, what a drab existence it figures to be in the Truman Show bubble (although the golf sounds cool). It’s no surprise that several NBA teams, including the Pacers, are employing a sports psychologist (Dr. Adam Shunk) to help with whatever mental challenges might appear.
Understandably, a lot of Pacers wrestled hard with this decision. Myles Turner, whose father had COVID-19, wasn’t sure it was worth the risk, especially as Florida’s cases explode and social-justice issues continue to be a front-burner subject.
Justin Holiday did not publicly commit until just recently, writing a heartfelt letter about the internal debate that led to his decision to play. When the media spoke to Holiday this week, he spoke emotionally of having to leave his wife behind with a 2-year-old and a 3-month-old – he’d been potty training his older one – and you could feel his conflict. (Holiday will become a free agent, but he’s not in line for quite the massive payday Oladipo expects at the end of next season).
Publicly, Oladipo’s teammates all say they respect and support his decision, but if you shoot them up with sodium pentothal, what would they say? Who wants to expose themselves to the Florida bubble when you know you have no chance to play beyond the second round, and winning the first round is a bit of a long shot despite the Pacers’ early-regular-season success without Oladipo?
My sense is, unless you’re the Lakers, Clippers, Raptors, Bucks or Celtics, you just want to get down there, survive without illness or incident, play a little ball and get out of there unscathed.
Pritchard said recently that he believes the bubble might be “the safest place in the world,” but this is an undeniably difficult decision for everybody.
It’s just … odd.
Since Oladipo opted out, the rumors have been flying, and while I haven’t been able to confirm anything just yet, let’s just say some of the rumors are ones you don’t want to hear and some are very favorable about Oladipo’s relationship with the Pacers and Indianapolis.
In other words … I. DON’T. KNOW.
I know a lot of fans are crushing Oladipo on social media, and after getting burned by George and then watching Andrew Luck walk off into the sunset, I can’t say I completely blame them. Throw in Josh McDaniels (but we won’t) and Indy has been left at the altar too many times for it not to leave an emotional mark. Fans see the Oladipo decision and feel like the first shot has been fired. It’s George in the softball dugout again, telling everybody what they want to hear.
I genuinely believe Oladipo enjoys Indy and enjoys playing here. Just as he did in Bloomington, he’s endeared himself to this region with his game, his energy and his “this is my town” gesture. Over time, he could own this city as a sports luminary, at least for as long as it takes the Colts to find their quarterback of the future. The fervent hope is he signs and stays in the place where his once-stuttering career took flight.
But if you spend enough time around Oladipo, you know he’s got other interests, things that aren’t readily available in Indianapolis. He’s particularly passionate about music, having appeared on The Masked Singer (which makes The Gong Show look like Masterpiece Theatre). Like so many players – they’re three-dimensional humans, you know – he wants to plant the seeds for his life after basketball. This is largely why LeBron James left Cleveland to go to the Lakers, where he could continue to pursue his many passions in media and business. (And the weather doesn’t stink).
It is, by any rational measure, a smart thing to do.
I’m not saying Oladipo is poised to ask for a trade to a bigger market. He may, he may not – I don’t know (and I can’t say that strongly enough). I’m just saying it’s within the realm of possibility given the circumstances if you want to be coldly realistic about it. Players go to huge markets (although it’s interesting that Peyton Manning played in Indy all those years and became a marketable athlete. But he’s an anomaly).
I’ve seen this movie before, or at least I think I have. Hopefully, I’m wrong; Pacers basketball is always better and more entertaining with Victor Oladipo playing and being Victor.
Comment
-
Here's an IU hoops podcast that covered the Dipo situation with Scott Agness: https://www.insidethehall.com/2020/0...-scott-agness/
Several points are shared with Kravitz's take also in this thread - Nate/Pacers lack of knowledge of his decision not to play in the restart, Vic's announcing through media w/o telling them compared to Bradley Beal, for example, making a joint announcement with the Wizard's organization. Agness states the Pacers have become frustrated with with this approach on the part of Dipo and his handlers.
Agness also suggests there would be at least a month's ramp up before the playoff games in the re-start. So he thinks Vic could have worked himself back in a similar way to how he prepped for his Covid shortened return in the late fall and winter, especially given his own assessment of how well he feels mentally and physically. Agness also reports he thinks the Pacers would extend Vic this summer, but doubts they'd be willing to give him a max deal, especially given they haven't seen him play enough to get a sense of how far back he is/will be. Of course, Dipo's biggest money making prospect (assuming he's made a sound recovery as evidenced through his play) is having the contract question resolved next summer as a URFA.
To be fair, Agness also brings up the fact that there are questions out there about susceptibility to soft tissue injuries given the layoff and restart format. The main takeaway for me was that the Pacers like this core and it's all secured for the next 2 or 3 years except for Dipo. They are willing to commit to him, but they don't have a good idea if that is mutual. And there is some frustration between that and how Vic has interacted with the organization since the injury.
Personally speaking, all this adds up in my mind to a potential appearance/reality gap. Vic is the self-proclaimed leader of the team, the alpha player, and had become a massive fan favorite. Yet despite going w/team to the bubble even though not playing, it sounds as if he's gravitating more into his own orbit than being transparent or simply involving the organization in his thinking process. Makes me wonder if the "team" thing is not becoming performative at this point. Others here have referenced that eerily similar vibe to the beginning of the PG fallout with the Pacers. I have to admit it's hard to deny that it is a distinct possibility. As I've stated in this thread, if I'm the Pacers, I'm not rushing to pay him before I see sustained, high-level basketball from him.I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.
-Emiliano ZapataComment
-
I'm legitimately asking because I don't know - isn't there a training camp, conditioning, practicing (full 5-on-5 at least some of the time I assume) and preseason games all before the regular season normally? How long is it from first the official reporting day until opening night?Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
In this case, the Pacers just reported a couple weeks ago, have only individual workouts (I believe have no 5-on-5 practice so far), no preseason games (only 3 scrimmages) and start games that count on July 31st.
Maybe time-wise it is similar, I don't know, but it definitely doesn't seem the same intensity-wise. Not saying the guys shouldn't be in pretty good shape even, but I think all players agree that the only way to be in game shape is to play games, and with the current rules they can't really do that until it counts.Comment
-
That's fair, and to clarify I am speaking solely on his decision to sit out, not how he communicated it or whether he wants to be here.Originally posted by pogi View Post
I guess I would say that I am not necessarily worried he wants out (yet), but I'm also not certain that he'll be here in a couple years either. I just have no idea and won't try to guess what a stranger is thinking.Comment
-
It's definitely not the same. I read reports on some teams first practices and they really didn't do much. The next stage is 3-on-3 then later on 5-on-5. With that said, something does feel off. Could the relationship have been burned when they had extension talks and the Pacers didn't offer him a max?Originally posted by ECKrueger View Post
I can't blame them either for not offering it, but if Oladipo doesn't get injured again...how does he not play at a high level? We saw a little bit of his old self in that Boston game.Comment
-
Have you ever wondered to yourself why you have put so much effort and energy in following a franchise that plays in the one sport where for whatever reason location more than it does in almost any other sport? Oh and that location your team plays in is not one of the desirable locations?
Not that this is what is happening here, this is just purely crappy crappy circumstances. But overall it is just frustrating as hell to every few years not be able to get grade A players to come here while whenever you have a player who is B+ or higher look to head to the coasts whenever they can.
This Dipo thing just could not be any worse other than him walking away at the end as a free agent with us getting nothing.
Right now it who could blame either party. You can't blame Victor for wanting Max money, this is going to be his last big payday and prior to the knee injury he had one season where he was true star player. You can't blame the Pacers because although he had a couple of decent games, for the most part his return looked pretty bad and nobody knows the long term impact of his injury. So the Pacers can not afford to give him a long term max contract only for him to miss several games every year to (rest) his knee, or not even be the player he was before the injury. Also to be fair he only has ever had one season where he truly exceeded expectations and prior to that he had a good but unspectacular career.
No the only people here who get screwed, once again, are Pacer fans. We will be chastised ad nauseam by the local media telling us how we are wrong for not support the team totally if he signs away from here or demands a trade. Or we will be chastised for not supporting Victor if he signs a max contract and does not live up to it.
Sometimes I wish I was born a Lakers fan, how life must be so much easier being a fan of a team where people demand to go to.
Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13Comment
-
I would give serious thought to trading him. And if he was I do not think his teammates would be all that upset as they probably know he does not want to be with the Pacers.{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
Comment