Tweet
Originally posted by Eleazar
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
-
Domas plays 6 more minutes a game which is why the points and assist measure is about the same. If you adjust it to per 36 minutes Embiid is 5 points higher than Domas. -
hot new simmons shooting video dropped ... lmao
https://www.libertyballers.com/2021/...ideos#commentsComment
-
LolOriginally posted by dal9 View Post
This trainer's working with Simmons and Rondo? Boy he's sure got his work cut out for him.Comment
-
I remember Kareem worked with Hibbert when he was traded to the Lakers. Then once the season started Kareem was like- I don’t know who that Hibbert guy is.Originally posted by SaintLouisan View PostComment
-
Comment
-
Philly asking for too much at this point. Pacers not implicated at all, which is fine by me. Something like Brogdon and Turner (who they probably have 0 interest in) would be roughly as far as I'd go. Or something approximately similar. While Simmons is talented, he hasn't done enough and shown enough to command a "Harden-like" haul.Originally posted by Ozys Nepimpis View PostI'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.
-Emiliano ZapataComment
-
NotOriginally posted by D-BONE View Post
happy at all...we need to do something big ....or this is another 
season
Comment
-
Bumping because I was once against going after Simmons. Now that I see the makeup of this team, and have a better idea about it’s identity, I think Ben would be an amazing fit. What would it take now? Is Philly in a bit of a pickle with Ben saying he won’t report to training camp?Comment
-
Would love adding Ben and agree, but sounds like he would NOT want to be here, which makes it a hard pass, unfortunately.Comment
-
doesn't seem like philly is a big enough market for him, so indy's not exactly gonna flyComment
-
Who cares about if he doesn't think Indy is a big market? That doesn't matter in a trade. His basketball stock has fallen from grace, he doesn't get to have a say in all this crap with this next team. If he wants to leave in 4 years, so be it. He makes this team better and if he gets his shooting to a respectable form, then we really got a shot at doing something special.You can't get champagne from a garden hose.Comment
-
I think many believe his stock is still high enough to sulk his way out of town. It would likely reduce the amount the Pacers get back in a trade, but he doesn't care about that. He could just play at half speed until the Pacers ship him out again.Originally posted by graphic-er View PostComment
-
He has a trade kicker he'd have to wave, so yes he does have a say on where he goes.Comment
-
He hasn't felt this to be a need up to this point of his life/career - what makes anyone think he's going to turn himself into a shooter now ??Originally posted by graphic-er View PostComment
-
https://theathletic.com/2802291/2021...-might-be-too/
Ben Simmons’ trade demand: Everything about this situation is weird and unprecedented. Its outcome might be, too
Derek Bodner 5h ago
155 
From the moment that Ben Simmons passed up a wide-open dunk in the Sixers’ Game 7 loss to the Atlanta Hawks on their home floor, the Sixers and Simmons have appeared headed towards an eventual, public divorce.
The question all summer long has seemingly been one of when, not if. When would the quality of offers that the Sixers were looking for start coming in? Or when would Daryl Morey lower his asking price to facilitate a trade? And if neither of those happens, when would Rich Paul, Simmons’ super agent, try to make things uncomfortable to help expedite the process?
It appears we have an answer to one of those questions, at least, as sources confirm that Simmons has informed the Sixers that his preference is to be traded and that he does not intend to report to training camp. Keith Pompey of The Philadelphia Inquirer was the first to report the news.
There’s almost no way to argue that this is a positive development for the Sixers. The question becomes where on the scale, from annoyance to unmitigated disaster, it truly falls.
The segment of the fan base where this is truly disastrous would be for those who were hoping that the Sixers and Simmons could work out their differences and keep the union going long term. Some words, when spoken, can’t be taken back, and this has certainly steered the relationship into that territory. That’s not entirely surprising — The Athletic’s Shams Charania reported less than 24 hours earlier that a Simmons deal was widely perceived to be more of a when, not if, question — but this is certainly a tough development for those who had been holding on to the slimmest of hope that this could be salvaged.
It is also undoubtedly a negative development for the Sixers’ ability to maximize Simmons’ trade value. Once the draft and free agency came and went, the ideal world from the Sixers’ perspective was to get Simmons back on the court, not only to remind other teams of what he does well but also to maintain the appearance that this is a tenable situation and stave off any impression that the Sixers are stuck squarely between a rock and a hard place. Neither acts of rehabilitation — of Simmons’ trade value or of the Sixers’ leverage — are helped by Tuesday’s public developments.
If Simmons’ trade value can’t be significantly rehabilitated, the question now becomes how much negative impact this news has.
At this point, it’s worth mentioning how unusual of a situation this is. In recent years, the team for whom the star played continued to hold significant leverage in trade negotiations, almost irrespective of how the situations around them deteriorated. From Anthony Davis to James Harden, from “That’s All Folks!” T-shirts to cross-country club-hopping instead of reporting to training camp, teams were able to weather the absurdity and continue to get fair value for their superstars.
But Simmons isn’t a superstar, and he’s not going to have the appeal of Davis or Harden. His trade value even before his public wilting in the playoffs was narrower than that of a traditional All-Star caliber player, and that certainly has not changed with the developments of the last few months. Across the league, he’s more often referred to as a floor raiser than the final piece of a dynasty. That has value, to be sure, but it doesn’t put the Sixers in the same position of strength that the Pelicans or Rockets enjoyed.
The Sixers are also significantly different than your typical team that’s in the midst of selling off an All-Star caliber talent. Perennial 50-win teams that have an MVP candidate aren’t typically in the position where they’re auctioning off their second-best player to the highest bidder. Usually, a team trading a player of Simmons’ caliber would be doing so because they failed to put a winner around him.
When the Pelicans traded Davis for Brandon Ingram, Lonzo Ball, Josh Hart and a bunch of picks, they weren’t just banking on Ingram or Ball growing into players who impact winning, but also had the knowledge that if they didn’t, there’s a chance they could get some lottery luck and land their star that way — which they did with Zion Williamson in 2019. The win-win is baked into the calculus. The Rockets can wait to see if one of their seemingly endless future picks has lottery-ball luck.
The Sixers, trying to build a winner around an in-his-prime Joel Embiid, aren’t afforded the grace period that teams trading a player of Simmons’ stature typically enjoy. That substantially complicates the Sixers’ situation, especially since most of the teams that would be interested in Simmons aren’t flush with ready-now players capable of contributing to winning right away. They’re teams such as the Timberwolves, who are in the cellar.
Simmons’ unique game makes the list of teams interested in offering fair value to acquire him more narrow than that of your typical All-Star available on the trade market, and the Sixers’ unique position as a contender auctioning off an All-Star caliber player makes the list of teams that have what they need more narrow than typical, as well. That’s offset a little bit by Simmons having four more years on his contract, which is far more team control than an acquiring team typically has. Everything about this situation is weird and unprecedented.
So, do the Sixers need to simply take the best offer that’s on the table right now? I’m not so sure that’s the case, at least not yet. The Sixers, as long as Embiid is reasonably healthy, should be a playoff-caliber team. The goal isn’t to take the steps to have the best supporting cast available to him by the season opener on Oct. 20, but to have the most talent possible by the time the playoff run starts. That’s done by maximizing the Simmons trade, however possible.
There’s nothing that’s likely to happen between now and the start of training camp that will provide a boost to Simmons’ trade value. And Simmons being a distraction in training camp if he’s still here, while annoying at the moment, may not be all that damaging to his value around the NBA. League executives are already well aware of Simmons’ strengths and weaknesses, and the holdout isn’t likely to decrease interest from the teams already intrigued by Simmons.
What could be impacted is the Sixers’ leverage, as teams are now left with every incentive to hold back from making their best offer to see if the discomfort of the situation forces the Sixers to accept an offer they wouldn’t have considered even two weeks ago. But leverage is more fickle than value. How much leverage could be recouped by the Sixers showing that they’re willing to live through the awkwardness to maximize their return on a Simmons trade? How much leverage do the Sixers gain if something outside of their control happens to force another team into the Simmons sweepstakes, which then forces the rest of the interested suitors to step forward with more earnest offers?
Which makes this situation sort of fascinating. Could Morey call Simmons’ bluff and see whether he would actually follow through on his threat to not report to camp? If Simmons does cave in and reports to camp, would Morey be willing to tolerate an exceptionally awkward situation with Simmons around the team if he thought it could buy him a few weeks — or perhaps even months — to maximize his trade value? If Morey does pull the trigger on a trade, how much leeway does he have to take back an offer full of draft picks and young players who may not help the Sixers in the short term but could be flipped for players who would help at the trade deadline in February?
Morey didn’t inherit a perfectly rosy situation when he took over the Sixers a little more than 10 months ago. No lead executive does, otherwise the job wouldn’t be available. But the Sixers had an MVP candidate in Embiid and another assumed star in Simmons, and a few moves around the margins got them to the point where they had the best regular-season record in the conference. The path forward has become substantially trickier in the blink of an eye, and Morey’s tenure in Philadelphia could be heavily defined by the next steps that he takes.
Tyrese Maxey’s future with the team
Could Tyrese Maxey be included in a Ben Simmons deal? (Bill Streicher / USA Today)
One of the reports to come out of Tuesday’s developments was that Paul, who represents not only Simmons but also second-year guard Tyrese Maxey, would like Maxey off of the team, as well.
Maxey being included in a potential Simmons trade was always a possibility, mostly because Maxey has significant positive trade value, and if the Sixers were to maximize the quality of the player they get back in a trade, including Maxey was a realistic way of doing so.
But Paul demanding Maxey be included in a trade is a development that I didn’t see coming, in large part because it’s not what’s best for Maxey himself.
Maxey’s value offensively comes from his ability to create in the half court off the dribble, something he showed glimpses of during his rookie season and then took to Vegas to dominate during his two games at NBA Summer League last month. Playing alongside Simmons for the next three years would not only force Maxey to share ballhandling responsibilities with a player in Simmons, who demands the ball in his hands, but would also cramp the spacing that Maxey’s dribble-drive game feeds off. If Simmons were to be traded and Maxey remained with the team, he’d instantly be placed in a better position to showcase his talents and succeed — and thus on the path toward earning a bigger following contract than if he were to continue to play alongside Simmons.
It’s Paul’s job to look out for the best interests of his client, not to take whatever petty squabbles he has with the team and use Maxey’s career as a pawn in those battles. And if Paul can’t do that, then the decision ultimately rests on Maxey to hire an agent who is focused on Maxey’s own interests.
This is one bluff that, if I were the Sixers, I would have no fear calling nonsense on. It comes off as saber-rattling from an agent overplaying his hand and overlooking the needs of his client.
Simmons’ contract extension was not a mistake
Simmons signed his five-year, maximum rookie extension back in 2019, days before his 23rd birthday, as he was fresh off his first All-Star season. The contract just kicked in this past year, leaving four years (and roughly $140 million) left.
Given that he still had a year left on his rookie contract when the extension was signed, and given what now looks like an imminent divorce just a year into the new deal, it has left some to question whether it was wise to lock the flawed Simmons into such a high-dollar, long-term deal.
But just because Simmons hasn’t developed as expected does not mean the Sixers would have been better off letting him walk.
Some people will try to argue that “Simmons would have more trade value if he were making $20 million instead of $30-plus.” Well, duh. Decreasing the salary of any productive player in the league would make them worth more in a trade. But there was never a world where that was actually a legitimate possibility. Simmons wasn’t accepting a less-than-max extension because there was a 100 percent chance he would get a maximum contract offer from some team (any team capable of doing so, really) if the Sixers allowed him to hit the open market.
The Sixers had three choices with Simmons: offer him the max, let him walk or preempt the market and look to trade him before his warts became even more glaring. That’s it. Those were the three options.
Letting Simmons walk in no way would have put the Sixers in a better position than they are currently in.
Even with Simmons’ entire $33 million salary off the books, they’d still be over the $112 million salary cap for this season. And even if they were under the cap, it’s tough for a non-destination market like Philadelphia to lure max-level free agents, something we saw play out firsthand when Bryan Colangelo and his regime made doing so a centerpiece of their strategy in the summers of 2017 and 2018.
With no way to replace him in free agency, the only way to make a cogent argument that signing Simmons was a mistake is to contend that he has negative trade value, that the Sixers will have to give up assets in a trade just to get off his contract. Despite how far the perception of Simmons has fallen over the last few months, that is very much not the case. The Sixers could trade Simmons to the Timberwolves for positive assets in return right now if they wanted to. But the Timberwolves don’t have enough positive trade assets to tempt the Sixers to do so. When you start getting into phrasing like that, you’re not talking about a negative value contract.
What is fair to say is that Simmons doesn’t have as much value now as he did two years ago, and it would be tough to dispute that. Given that the marriage between Simmons and the Sixers appears to be irreconcilable, it’s not out of line to say that the Sixers could have fetched more in a trade if they had been able to predict this ahead of time.
But that would have been an exceptionally tough decision for the Sixers (or any franchise, really) to arrive at. Simmons was a 22-year-old who the Sixers had just invested the No. 1 pick in the 2016 draft on, coming off an All-Star season with a decade of high-level play ahead of him. The Sixers didn’t need massive, outlier-level growth from Simmons to reach a very high level as a team; they just needed him to not completely stagnate (or, arguably, regress) as a half-court offensive player. It was a reasonable ask from the team.
Given how closely the Sixers were able to work with Simmons in the early days of his career, they were certainly in a better position to predict Simmons’ development than you, me or any other team was. Even so, that would have been a tough conclusion to arrive at so early on in Simmons’ career.
But after five years of offensive stagnation, three playoff runs featuring second-round ineptitude and two public stints on the trade block, it’s undeniable that moving on early would have left the Sixers in a better position going forward. Instead, the Sixers have to find a way to make the most of the current situation and move on from the Simmons era.
Comment
Comment