Tweet
Originally posted by vnzla81
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
-
So, the Twin Towers approach?
Name-calling signature removed -
-
A rose by any other name is still a rose.Originally posted by Ozys Nepimpis View Post{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
-
Is Lonzo supposed to be a good defender? With him and Brogdon out front and Sabonis providing interior defense my eyes may start bleeding. I would much rather have SimmonsOriginally posted by CableKC View Post{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
-
https://eu.indystar.com/story/sports...rd/8012630002/
Show caption
Philadelphia 76ers' Ben Simmons (25) dunks against Indiana Pacers' Domantas Sabonis (11) during the first half of an NBA basketball game, Tuesday, May 11, 2021, in Indianapolis.
DARRON CUMMINGS, AP
FOR SUBSCRIBERS
FOR SUBSCRIBERSDoyel: Pacers want to win now, anyone can be traded, and anything (Ben Simmons?) can happen
GREGG DOYEL | Indianapolis Star
19 hours ago
INDIANAPOLIS – Ben Simmons is interesting. He’s playing for the Philadelphia 76ers, for now. Can’t shoot, but he’s 6-11 and frighteningly athletic and a beautiful passer and one of the best defenders in the NBA. The 76ers are trying to trade him, apparently. Ben Simmons to the Indiana Pacers? That would be interesting.
A rattlesnake is interesting, too. Nearly 7 feet of coiled muscle, with something that sounds like a child’s toy at one end and deadly fangs at the other. Rattlesnakes are very interesting. Doesn’t mean you want one on your kitchen floor.
That’s how some of you feel about Ben Simmons. No, not the fangs. But some of you don’t want him on the floor at Bankers Life Fieldhouse. Not playing for the home team, anyway. Some of you are experts. Some of you, to me, are interesting. Read into that anything you like.
We are entering the NBA’s silly season, when great players can get traded and Solomon Hill can get $48 million and the news comes fast and the rumors come faster and it’s fun in the way those spinning rides at the state fair are fun until you’ve thrown up all over yourself.
Some NBA team will throw up all over itself this offseason. It could trade away Damian Lillard, for example. It could sign Solomon Hill for another $48 million. It could miss the chance to add Ben Simmons.
Where are the Pacers, in all of this? Where they usually are, somewhere in the middle, trying to get better, hoping not to throw up all over themselves.
Ben Simmons, Dame Lillard rumors
Name an NBA team with a more delicate, a more difficult offseason than the Pacers.
Trading Dame Lillard or Ben Simmons? That’s not delicate, or even difficult. Portland knows what it has in Lillard, in the same way Philadelphia knows Simmons. Teams around the league know what those players are, too. You make the trade, or you don’t. Either way, you have a pretty good idea what the result will be.
Try being the Pacers, with a starting five that looks wonderful on paper but because of injuries and other health matters has never played one minute together. Do they keep that five, that backcourt of Malcolm Brogdon and Caris LeVert and that frontcourt of Domantas Sabonis, Myles Turner and T.J. Warren, and hope injuries don’t ruin another season?
Try being the Pacers, with two pure centers in an NBA moving away from the position, wanting on the one hand to evolve into a more modern-day approach but knowing, on the other hand, that young talent like Sabonis and Turner doesn’t come this way very often. Do the Pacers really trade one of those guys?
Try being the Pacers and answering those questions, right now, with a new coach in Rick Carlisle who has seen almost everything in his 19 NBA seasons in charge, but hasn’t seen this roster as its coach.
The ride hasn’t even started yet, but can you feel that? It’s the queasiness. It’s starting.
Doyel: Did Rick Carlisle just say Pacers are close to title contention?!
And the rumors aren’t helping, the murkiness being accepted as fact because someone said it somewhere on Twitter, and now it’s being accepted as truth that Dame Lillard will ask Portland for a trade and the Indiana Pacers did offer Malcolm Brogdon and the No. 13 pick in the 2021 NBA Draft to the 76ers for Ben Simmons, and everyone is using those “facts” as a foundation.
This is how #fakenews happens. People are just too damn gullible for their own good. The gullible never see it that way – surely he doesn’t mean me – but Lillard has repeatedly said “it’s not true” that he has already decided to ask out of Portland, and Pacers sources tell IndyStar insider J. Michael they didn’t make that offer for Simmons, and none of the handful of national, believable, they’re-connected-and-always-right NBA reporters has confirmed the Pacers’ offer of Brogdon for Simmons.
That’s not fun, though. More fun to believe everything we read, especially as it relates to Ben Simmons and the Pacers. Because Ben Simmons is interesting.
So are those spinning rides at the fair. Until, you know.
Seriously: Ben Simmons, a Pacer?
Here’s the thing: The Pacers are open for business. They are trying to get better. They didn’t hire Rick Carlisle, a no-nonsense, 61-year-old with an NBA championship on his coaching resume, to win down the road. Pacers owner Herb Simon is 86. You think he’s open to anything like “The Process,” that long, slow build they tried in Philadelphia?
Herb Simon is open for business. Here’s the way it’s been explained to me, by someone in the Pacers’ organization who’d know exactly what the franchise is thinking:
Don’t rule anything out.
In other words, there isn’t a player on roster who wouldn’t be used in a deal to make this team better. There isn’t an asset in the franchise coffers – like, the No. 13 overall pick in the draft – that is untouchable. Pacers President Kevin Pritchard and Rick Carlisle are treating this moment as if it’s their last shot, and in both of their cases, they’re probably right. Carlisle is 61, as I’ve said. Pritchard is younger at 54, but this is his second chance at running an NBA franchise. Odds aren’t great he’d get a third.
More Doyel: Rick Carlisle's $29M contract says Pacers want to win right now
This is their moment, and they know it, but that doesn’t necessarily mean this offseason. Could be next offseason. Could be a little now, a little later. Could be something seismic in the coming weeks.
Could be Ben Simmons.
Hey, it could. The 76ers are clearly entertaining the idea of trading him. The Pacers are open for business, but so are a lot of teams. Best offer wins, and the Pacers have enough pieces – including Brogdon, yes, and/or anyone else in the starting five, and/or the No. 13 pick – to make a good one. Assuming they want Simmons at all.
Interesting topic. Simmons has career averages of 15.9 points, 8.1 rebounds and 7.7 assists, and is a career 56% shooter from the floor. He’s a three-time NBA All-Star and has made the NBA’s All-Defensive first team each of the past two seasons.
On the other hand.
Simmons has made exactly five 3-pointers in 275 career NBA games, and while his 59.7% career free-throw accuracy isn’t much to look at, it’s a damn sight prettier than the 34.2% he shot from the line in the 2021 NBA Playoffs (25-for-73).
Simmons, who turns 25 on Tuesday, has been in the league long enough to suggest he’s not ever going to be Batman on an NBA contender. Might not even be Robin. You’ve seen the Pacers’ starting five, right? It’s a conglomeration of really good players who would benefit – duh – from having a Superman like LeBron James or Kevin Durant, or Devin Booker or Giannis Antetokounmpo. But in lieu of that, and since Reggie Miller there’s been nothing but lieu around here, the Pacers have the makings of a strong core. Five fingers forming a fist and all that.
Do you see Simmons as a thumb on that fist, or a rattlesnake on that floor? You have opinions, and so do I. First, and maybe this shouldn’t matter, but I’m saying it: Ben Simmons is someone I’d pay to watch. He’s unique, and I’m talking about NBA history. He’s bigger than LeBron, just as fast and skilled, almost as explosive. He just can’t shoot. But everything else he does is off-the-charts. Surely, with the right supporting cast, he’s a difference-maker.
Do the Pacers have that cast? Imagine Simmons breaking down defenses and kicking the ball to 3-point shooters like LeVert, Warren and Turner, then teaming on the defensive end with one of the best rim protectors in the league (Turner). Imagine Simmons and another skilled 6-11 giant, Sabonis, playing off each other on offense. Unless Simmons gets traded for Sabonis or Turner. Or LeVert or Warren. Or (yes, most likely) Brogdon.
More Doyel: Whereas Myles Turner is a special player, and Indianapolis a special city
Not my call, but the Pacers have a starting five that hasn’t played together and a team president, coach and owner knowing this is their moment. They don’t have to do anything this offseason, no – but if doing nothing is their ultimate move, pass the Pepto. Because someone’s about to be sick.Comment
-
Carlisle said the quickest way for a team to get better is through defense
I think the Pacers are serious players for Simmons who provides defense
like few others
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
-
Anybody in PD can write a better article than Doyel and that includes people like me where English is our 3rd language.
Indystar is not hiring the best.@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!
Comment
-
Originally posted by vnzla81What's worse is that at least with Myles, he was a decent floor spacer while Sabonis was the guy inside the paint.Originally posted by Banta View Post
Simmons is a non-existent 3pt shooter. That would mean that Sabonis is the floor spacer on the offensive end or Simmons would be the guy that would have to operate outside of the paint.
Defensively, Simmons and Sabonis would probably work as well as Myles and Sabonis. But offensively? It would be a very odd fit.
JMHO, but I still don't see Herb signing off on sending multiple 1st round picks and at least 2 Starters to the Sixers to trade for Simmons. This seems like a way too expensive "Swing for the fences" type of move that would be very costly that I can see him balking at.Last edited by CableKC; 07-20-2021, 12:28 PM.Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.Comment
-
I don't think that he's as good as Simmons ( who I think is supposed to be a top tier defender ), but I think that Lonzo considered to be a "slightly above average to above average" defender at the Guard position. No matter what, he's not as bad as Brogdon is when it comes to defending quicker guards.Originally posted by owl View PostAsh from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.Comment
-
He is. Lonzo is able to stay in front of his man and can be counted on to stop or slow down dribble penetration, he's long and gets more steals than anyone on this team not named TJ MCConnell, infact rated 13th in steals last year. at 1.5 compared to Simmons' 1.6. He's a defensive upgrade immediately.Originally posted by owl View Post
At half the price of a Simmons, where getting him won't cost us half our starters, with an outside shot that's improved dramatically, I'll take Lonzo in all honesty.Comment
-
Looks like Lonzo's weakness defensively is those quicker guards as well.Originally posted by CableKC View Post
Draft Davion and that'll solve that problem
Comment
-
What is your second language? (assuming Spanish is first)Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post"Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference
Comment
-
Portuguese even though my writing sucks because is very hard not to mix Spanish with Portuguese.Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
I need to practice more though that's the goal.@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!Comment
-
Ben Simmons price just went up, good luck in finding another 6’10” guy that can stay in front of Giannis for the next decade or so.
@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!Comment
-
I was actually going to joke that Thad Young’s price just went up seeing as how much his defending of Giannis got written about a few years ago lolOriginally posted by vnzla81 View PostI think KP is a Captain Planet fan. He believes that the collective will of five decent starters can outweigh the power of top-level talent. Too bad Herb won't cut the check for their Planeteer rings.Comment
Comment