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
-
I think it's slightly weird people are acting like the price is so high, they want an all star caliber player. So it sounds like a one for one type move could even be on the table. That seems pretty reasonable tbh -
Out of every player rumored to be traded for Ben I think Brogdon has to be the top guy, he is just the perfect guy to put next to Embid.Leave a comment:
-
https://theathletic.com/2703448/2021...more-nba-news/
Sixers opening up Ben Simmons trade talks, Knicks interested in Collin Sexton, plus more NBA news
By Shams Charania 1h ago
161 
With the 2021 NBA Draft less than three weeks away and free agency shortly thereafter, teams are beginning to discuss their offseason plans both internally and externally with colleagues. The discussions have consisted of draft prep during the NBA Draft Combine in Chicago, plus more roster-building discussions around individual team workouts in home markets, conversations between front-office and roster personnel, discussions with rival teams about trade scenarios and more.
Things are starting to pick up, especially around the 76ers.
After a disappointing defeat in the second round of the playoffs to Atlanta, the 76ers and president of basketball operations Daryl Morey has been surveying the landscape for ways to improve their roster. Philadelphia lost to the Hawks in seven games in the Eastern Conference semifinals, culminating in coach Doc Rivers and MVP runner-up Joel Embiid singling out Ben Simmons’ play.
The mandate was for Simmons and Embiid to coexist on the court this past season under their new head coach and regime and to make a deep playoff run. Neither was accomplished. By all accounts, Embiid and Simmons have never been closer — off the court. But from Simmons’ inclusion in trade packages for James Harden with the Houston Rockets during the season to critical comments made about him from key 76ers people after Game 7, the writing is on the wall for Simmons and his future with the franchise.
The 76ers have opened up trade conversations surrounding Simmons and have engaged with teams, sources told The Athletic. Those sources also say that teams that have engaged with the 76ers about Simmons have been met with a high price threshold for the three-time All-Star.
“(The 76ers) want an All-Star-caliber player in return,” one source with knowledge of the ongoing talks said.
Make no mistake: Interest across the league in Simmons remains robust. He’s turning just 25 this month, was an All-NBA team member in 2019-20, is a two-time All-Defensive first-team member and a Rookie of the Year award winner. Simmons is under contract through 2025, making him the type of superstar talent that rarely becomes available at an attainable price at this juncture of his career.
Simmons decided to skip the Tokyo Olympics this summer with the Australian national team to spend time on his individual game. For Simmons, this is the crossroads of his career. So far, there appears to be renewed determination within him about bettering his game, even if he could be playing elsewhere soon.
Leave a comment:
-
Russell and Beasley is a pretty good starting point for a Wolves trade. I think it could also help both teams. Philly could have good depth at that point, and maximum space for Joel to eat any given team's lunch. Tobias, Curry, Beasley, Russell, Milton, Maxey, Thybulle, and Korkmaz gives them tons of options.The unfortunate part is that only like two of the guys could realistically play the bigger wing position next to Embiid/Howard.Originally posted by CJ Jones View PostLeave a comment:
-
Actually KAT and Ben do seem like a pretty good pairing. With that rookie (forgot his name) looking like a potential star, dealing Russell to Philly makes sense and might help both teams.Leave a comment:
-
I talked to a diehard Sixers fan today about the rumored Simmons for Brogdon + 13 deal. He said while it wouldn't be his first, second, third, or fourth preferred option; it would be a deal that he'd understand and accept because of what Malcolm could bring to their team along with a young, cost-controlled player.
Just thought it was an interesting perspective because he seemed surprised other fans even wanted Ben on their team. Guess we're all the same.Leave a comment:
-
I'll be honest I just skimmed the article. Are you talking about his quote here?Originally posted by kent beckley View Post
“Based on the stage of our team and the market that we’re in, trade will always be the primary platform of team building for us,”
Or something else that I missed?
Because if it is this part not to be nit picky but he didn't say he couldn't sign big name free agents it's just not a primary way of doing it. However the point does stand, Minnesota can't sign free agents either. It truly is something the league should look into.
But still they have not come out and told their fan base that they won't have great players, unless I missed it later in the article.Leave a comment:
-
There you go Peck, another GM is saying that he can’t sign the top free agents. It is not just the Pritch.Leave a comment:
-
https://theathletic.com/2693883/2021...shared_article
Could the Timberwolves add Ben Simmons? A look at the fit, price and context
By Jon Krawczynski and Danny Leroux 7h ago 115
While the Phoenix Suns and Milwaukee Bucks are throwing down in the NBA Finals, the rest of the league’s attention is on Minneapolis for draft preparation and trade discussions.
Officials from 25 teams are in town this week for a set of draft workouts held jointly by the Timberwolves and Utah Jazz, giving league executives a one-stop shopping opportunity to see a bunch of NBA draft prospects at once.
And while they’re all here, you can be sure that trade talks will intensify as the draft approaches. With no draft picks at the moment and a salary cap sheet that is stuffed with expensive contracts, offering little room for free agents, this will be an important weekend for Timberwolves president of basketball operations Gersson Rosas and the front office to lay some groundwork for potential deals.
“Based on the stage of our team and the market that we’re in, trade will always be the primary platform of team building for us,” Rosas said. “It gives us creativity, it gives us the opportunity to acquire players to address needs in different shapes and forms.”
After more than a year of being unable to meet face to face, league executives and agents gushed at the Chicago draft combine in June about the possibilities granted by renewed personal interactions. That door opening again can help facilitate deal-making, and the Timberwolves could use that help as they try to bolster their roster for next season.
“There’s a true human element there that’s been missing over the last year or 14-16 months that have taken place,” Rosas said. “Chicago was great in that regard. There was a lot of in-person communication. There was a lot of interaction, not only for trade purposes, but evaluation purposes, teams and individuals are seeking that. That’s why there’s been so much support for this combine, the opportunity to have another platform to see players as we prepare for the draft to be efficient with our work, not only us but all the other teams that will be involved.”
A lot of the discussion from Wolves fans has centered on Ben Simmons. The All-Star flamed out spectacularly in the playoffs for Philadelphia, leading to widespread speculation that Daryl Morey will have to break up the Joel Embiid-Simmons core to try to reconfigure the roster and get over the hump.
The Timberwolves pride themselves on getting involved in trade talks, and sources indicate that they will be in on Simmons in addition to a number of other players as they try to vault into playoff contention in the Western Conference.
But it’s one thing to talk about trading for a player of Simmons’ caliber and salary. It’s another to actually do it.
So I teamed up with The Athletic’s resident salary cap guru, Danny Leroux, to look at some of the key factors in consideration if the Wolves are going to go big-game hunting.
The fit
Take a poll of 76ers fans and a healthy contingent of them would probably trade Simmons for Jarrett Culver and a conditional second-round draft pick. Unfortunately for the Timberwolves, Morey is a little more … level-headed.
Simmons’ reluctance — refusal? — to shoot late in games against Atlanta in the playoffs was one of the biggest reasons Philly was upset by the Hawks. Embiid needs more floor spacers around him to take some of the offensive pressure and playmaking off of him. Simmons, quite literally, never shoots from the outside to suck the defense out of the paint and give Embiid room to operate.
That makes him an ill-suited wingman for one of the best bigs in the league, albeit one whose strong suit is not on the perimeter.
In some ways, you could see a Simmons trade to Minnesota as a much more souped-up version of the Andrew Wiggins deal to Golden State. One of the big reasons the Warriors were so happy with Wiggins, and Wiggins appears to be so happy in the Bay Area, is that they do not need him to carry the franchise like he was asked to do in Minnesota. He can be a good role player in support of Steph Curry, Klay Thompson and Draymond Green.
In Minnesota, while the Wolves would certainly need Simmons to shoot more than zero times in the fourth quarter, they wouldn’t need him to be a No. 2 option on offense. Karl-Anthony Towns, Anthony Edwards and D’Angelo Russell (the Timberwolves view Russell as a part of the core and want to keep it that way, sources said) give coach Chris Finch three accomplished offensive players to get buckets down the stretch.
That would free up Simmons to do what he does best: defend every position on the floor the way an offense-heavy Wolves lineup would need him to do and get out in transition, which would be a fit with how Rosas and Finch want to play.
Simmons is one of the very best defenders in the league and a terror when he’s on the break, so if those attributes could be accentuated in Minnesota and his weaknesses as a shooter could be covered up by Towns, Edwards and Russell, the fit from a stylistic standpoint would be exceptional.
From a financial standpoint, a deal gets much trickier to pull off.
Leroux: Few teams are hurt more by the cap rising more slowly than expected due to the pandemic than the Timberwolves, because they had already signed their biggest contracts. Those deals increase at 5-8 percent a year whether or not the salary cap goes up, which means that even retaining their full 2020-21 roster puts them right at the 2021-22 luxury tax line.
Minnesota has $127.7 million in fully-guaranteed salary, and presumably, Naz Reid will join them to make that $129.5 million with a projected tax line of $136.6 million. Even filling out the roster with minimum signings cuts that margin significantly, so using the full $9.5 million non-taxpayer mid-level exception likely requires offloading some salary.
It is an exceedingly tight spot for a non-playoff team. The idea all along was that the Russell and Towns would be good enough, at minimum, to lift this team to the playoffs, changing the perception of the franchise across the league and helping to establish something more sustainable than models attempted before them.
Who knows? Maybe the pair, with Edwards’ better-than-expected offensive feel, are enough for a playoff push. They were 11-11 after Russell returned from knee surgery, 7-5 down the stretch with some quality wins in that batch. But you also look at the playoff field in the West and wonder which team, or teams, would fall out to open the door for the Wolves to enter.
That is why there is a feeling internally that they are still a few moves away from vaulting into the conversation. In some ways, the Wolves roster is primed to make trades, with mid-tier contracts like Ricky Rubio ($17 million) and Malik Beasley ($13.5 million) there to help match up salaries. Juancho Hernangomez ($6.5 million) and Culver ($6 million) provide intermediate-sized deals and Jake Layman ($3.7 million) is there on the lower end if a deal just needs a little tweak.
The deal
As Leroux points out, Rubio is entering the final year of his contract at more than $17 million, which would give them a little bit of flexibility after he comes off the books. It also could make his deal more palatable for another team to take on in a trade.
When it comes to adding a player like Simmons, though, it becomes a pretty daunting financial task.
Leroux: Let’s start with the basics. Simmons makes $33 million for the upcoming season, so the Collective Bargaining Agreement requires the Timberwolves to include at least $26.4 million in the deal whether those salaries end up with the 76ers or elsewhere. There are ways to get to that $26.4 million without including Towns, Russell or Edwards, and an offseason trade has more roster flexibility, allowing for something like a four-for-one if both sides agreed to the terms. Either Rubio or Beasley must be included with those parameters and just the two of them would get it done, though a combination like Rubio, Culver and a cheaper contract would, too.
Timberwolves fans, by and large, would pull the trigger on a deal of Rubio and Beasley for Simmons in a heartbeat, which is probably the first sign that it is unrealistic.
But let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that Rosas hypnotizes Morey into taking such a package. Beasley would certainly help the Sixers’ floor spacing, after all, and Rubio’s playmaking and defense would give the Sixers a more traditional, if still offensively limited, option at point guard.
Again, this will not be the deal. But even in a best-case scenario, one element looms large for the Wolves.
Leroux: Beyond figuring out a trade package Morey would accept, the other big challenge is the luxury tax. Remember that the Wolves are roughly $6 million below the tax line as of now, so any trade where they take on more salary makes the math much harder. Rosas could conceptually start the 2021-22 season in the tax and then duck under at the trade deadline, but most GMs do not get that kind of latitude, especially before the team is a serious contender. As such, expect that a deal is closer to even on salaries whether the 76ers take all of that or a third team gets involved.
Wolves owner Glen Taylor has a history of being willing to go into the tax if — and this is a big IF — the team is poised for a deep playoff run. He is anticipating an influx of $250 million as Marc Lore and Alex Rodriguez join the ownership group, but the luxury tax penalties progress over the years to get so restrictive that it compels most teams in the league to be in the running for a title before they make it a habit of blowing past the number.
Another issue for the Wolves is that even if they get the green light to be a tax-paying team, would a core of KAT-Edwards-Simmons-Russell be enough to attract veterans to play in Minnesota for the league minimum to help fill out the roster?
This is where hits down the draft board like Jaden McDaniels and Reid are essential for the Wolves, as would be Leandro Bolmaro turning into a rotation player. And if Edwards develops into a multi-time All-Star, that opens much more.
In reality, for the Wolves to outbid other teams for Simmons’ services, they will likely have to include several draft picks, which would also hamper their ability to fill out the roster, and/or the inclusion of more desirable pieces like McDaniels into the offering.
Putting Russell into a package, a shot-making point guard who in theory would complement Embiid well from an offensive standpoint, would make the math work much more easily.
Leroux: Russell makes just $3 million less than Simmons, so a straight-up swap is legal and there is a ton of wiggle room for additional players going in either direction. It just comes down to what trade terms both front offices would accept.
It is unclear if Morey would be interested in Russell as a headliner in a Simmons package. As good as Russell looked down the stretch, that max salary would give some teams pause. On the flip side, Russell is Rosas’s signature move to this point. He and Towns started to show some promising signs as the season wound down, and Rosas believes that a full summer of work followed by a full training camp with Finch at the helm will help the pair take things to another level.
Russell’s close relationship with Towns, while not a driving force, certainly plays into things as well. In an era where offense rules, a trio of Towns, Edwards and Russell could prove dynamic. There are those in the league who doubt the toughness of Towns and Russell, but in some ways that only appears to have strengthened Rosas’s belief.
But Rosas and Finch know the team has to find a way to improve defensively if they are going to make significant strides next season. There are few defenders in the league, if any, better than Simmons. On a roster filled with offensive-minded players, he could cover up a lot of weaknesses.
It would seem the most plausible scenario for Simmons landing in Minnesota would be to orchestrate some kind of multi-team situation to get Philadelphia more win-now assets for parting with a three-time All-Star. Maybe Kyle Lowry would end up back home in Philly.
The role
Simmons has been the point guard in Philadelphia since he was taken No. 1 overall in 2016. But his limitations offensively, especially at the free throw line, make it hard to play him at that position late in close games.
It remains possible that the struggles and criticism Simmons has received since the Sixers were eliminated will motivate him to address some of those shortcomings during his workouts this summer. But a change of scenery could also bring a change of role.
Let’s place the cart all the way before the horse and put Simmons in Minnesota with Russell, Towns and Edwards. Simmons would not have the pressure on his shoulders to initiate the offense. Russell and Edwards both excel in that department. Towns would be the center, literal and figurative, of the system.
It would be up to Finch to get creative with Simmons in the half court, but his defense and ability to push the ball quickly would fit in seamlessly.
If the Timberwolves could roll out a starting five of Russell, Edwards, McDaniels, Simmons and Towns, what they would surrender in bulk could be compensated for with length and versatility.
Who knows if acquiring Simmons without surrendering McDaniels is possible. But the possibilities of a lineup like that should be tantalizing enough to get the Timberwolves to at least explore it, and consider the luxury tax implications that could follow, as they mull all of the options available to improving the roster this summer.
Truth be told, landing Simmons has to be considered a long shot for the Wolves at this point. Getting a player of his caliber is exceedingly difficult for any team, let alone one without a first-round pick this year to include in an offer and a limited amount of high-end talent with which they seem willing to part. Other teams like Portland, Houston and Golden State could get into the mix and assemble bids that could get Philly’s attention. And despite Rosas’s long history with Morey when they worked together in Houston, Morey is a notorious stickler in negotiations. Nothing will come easy.
There will be numerous other names they call on and contemplate, with a power forward being the main priority. Many more conversations will certainly happen this week with the mini-combine in town, while also giving the Timberwolves a chance to scout players in case they end up trading back into the draft.
“Just because we don’t have a pick on whatever day today is doesn’t mean we’re not going to have a pick on draft night,” Rosas said. “The worst thing you can do is be caught unprepared and we’re fortunate we have players on our roster that are valued by other teams.”
But the biggest prize out there is Simmons, and Rosas has always wanted to be right in the middle of a conversation of that magnitude.
Leave a comment:
-
Wolves would be a good fit for Ben. Him and Kat would have alot more time to play fortnite if they had the same schedule.Leave a comment:
-
Would we (or Boston) consider a LeVert or Brogdon for Marcus Smart swap? I can't see Dame and Domas plus Brogdon/LeVert not getting toasted. If Dame and Domas (it's a dream offensively), we need a bonafide all defensive guy or two. If we had Dame and LeVert, we'd def need to stagger some minutes to not underuse Domas' best skill of playmaking from the high post. Otherwise, Domas' strengths aren't as needed as Myles' strengths imo.Originally posted by SaintLouisan View Post
If the backcourt looked like Dame and Smart, I could reallllyyyyy get behind a Domas centered front court. I mean, Dame just had CJ (similar strengths of Brogdon/Levert combined) and Nurkic (hospitalized poor man's Domas), along with Covington and Powell/Trent Jr. and that defense was just.... Gross. I don't see a RoCo being available anywhere right now, not that I'd say I really want him anyway.
Of course, the team's front office would probably never even consider a move like this, and this is just good ole fashioned Pacers-style early offseason during the postseason brainstorming.Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: