Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Buy out of Tinsley's contract...best thing for the pacers to do ?

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

  • #61
    Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contact...best thing for the pacers to do ?

    Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
    I disagree.

    Why would he take less even if that is the case? He may as well still take the 80% that Indy owes him and then sign for $3 to $4 million anyway. I find it hard to believe someone's position would be "well I will still make just as much as I expected" when the other option is "I'll make more than I expected."

    Additionally, Jamaal's minimum salary has to be at least $1.07 million next season...So I don't find it too hard to believe that someone will sign him to a two-year, $4-million contract.
    I think it's possible he gets more than $1 million from someone, sure, but the main point is the Pacers know roughly how much he'll get on the open market and won't be willing to pay much more than the difference. Remember, their economic interests enter into this too. It's not a question of getting more than you expected, but the Pacers only being willing to pay what you were expecting anyway.

    Look at it this way: you have a job you absolutely hate and a one-year contract right before you plan to retire. The contract pays you $100K a year. The only other place you can work will only pay you $50K for the year. Your employer hates you as much as you hate him. He's not going to buy you out for the full $100K, because he knows you can walk down the street and get another job for $50K. Your employer knows that if they offer you $50, you'll still get $100 total w/ the other job and you'll be more happy there.

    You have two choices:
    -Tell your employer to stick it on the $50 buyout, in which case you still make $100, but your boss makes your life miserable for the next year, or
    -Take the $50 and get the other $50 from the guy down the street, and get out of your current situation.

    You could try option three (split the difference), and if your employer dislikes you as much as you dislike him, he'l probably tell you, "No thanks. You've made me miserable over the past two years and payback this year will be hell. We're relocating your office to the broom closet."
    Last edited by ChicagoPacer; 06-30-2008, 02:38 PM.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contact...best thing for the pacers to do ?

      Originally posted by ChicagoPacer View Post
      Look at it this way: you have a job you absolutely hate and a one-year contract right before you plan to retire. The contract pays you $100K a year. The only other place you can work will only pay you $50K for the year. Your employer hates you as much as you hate him. He's not going to buy you out for the full $100K, because he knows you can walk down the street and get another job for $50K. Your employer knows that if they offer you $50, you'll still get $100 total w/ the other job and you'll be more happy there.
      Yeah, but the reality is that Jamaal flat-out knows the team's not going to bring him back this fall. They'll buy him out. That means that he can barter with his boss for 80k or 90k, then walk down the street and get the 50k job.

      He walks away with an extra 30-40 grand, plus he gets the job he wants. What's his downside again? There's no reason for him not to do this.

      Jamaal's got a great BATNA.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contact...best thing for the pacers to do ?

        Originally posted by ChicagoPacer View Post
        You have two choices:
        -Tell your employer to stick it on the $50 buyout, in which case you still make $100, but your boss makes your life miserable for the next year, or
        -Take the $50 and get the other $50 from the guy down the street, and get out of your current situation.

        You could try option three (split the difference), and if your employer dislikes you as much as you dislike him, he'l probably tell you, "No thanks. You've made me miserable over the past two years and payback this year will be hell. We're relocating your office to the broom closet."
        Yeah...But the Pacers really don't have "the broom closet" option.

        There are Player Union rules and historic precedents at play here that make simply suspending Tinsley indefinitely for no reason other than "We don't like you anymore" a non-option. With Artest, there was a clear reason, although the longer that went on, the Player's Union had to be more and more upset with it. The Pacers simply cannot just "hold Jamaal hostage" on their roster and not let him suit up. J'OB could bench him all season, but they can't just tell him to "stay home for the next three years."

        If they can't trade Jamaal, Herb and Larry's only two options really are (1) let him be a member of the team, or (2) buy him out for the historically established amount of around 80% of his future guaranteed salary.

        Jamaal and his lawyers really have all the power here.
        Read my Pacers blog:
        8points9seconds.com

        Follow my twitter:

        @8pts9secs

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contract...best thing for the pacers to do ?

          Does anyone know who Tinsley's agent is?

          Do we have any idea of the agent's track record (if there is any) in regard to buy-out or trades in disgruntled player/disgruntled management situations?

          If his agent has had a player or players in similar situations, perhaps the result of those situations might give us a clue what to expect from their side.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contract...best thing for the pacers to do ?

            I am just wondering ... do the Pacers have the option to send JT out to the D-League?

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contract...best thing for the pacers to do ?

              Raymond Brothers is his agent

              http://hoopshype.com/agents/raymond_brothers.htm
              "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

              "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contract...best thing for the pacers to do ?

                Originally posted by wjs View Post
                I am just wondering ... do the Pacers have the option to send JT out to the D-League?
                I think a player has to be in his first two years in the league to be able to go to the D league.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contract...best thing for the pacers to do ?

                  I think we're more or less arguing over how the 80% is constructed rather than the 80% estimate of what it would take to buy out Tinsley's contract.

                  There are two separate adjustments here that lead to the 20% discount. The first is taking salary lump sum rather than receiving it over the next three years. The salary is virtually guaranteed, so the applicable discount is really low (somewhere between 4% and 7% per year.) If you present value Tinsley's contract, he should expect to get about 90% to 93% of his salary, not 80%. Tinsley is not going to get a 90-93% buyout, so what is the other 10 to 13% discount? It means he (like most other players accepting buyouts) MUST be considering something else, namely how much $$$ he will get elsewhere and his general happiness playing here vs. elsewhere. If this were not the case, then guys wouldn't be accepting buyouts in the 80% range--they'd probably only accept buyouts over 90% of full salary.

                  Union rules or not, a franchise has ways to make a player really, really, unhappy, and Tinsley is smart enough to realize that. Why do you think Bird is commenting on Tinsley right now? He's telling him (as directly as possible) to accept the buyout or expect hell to be paid.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contract...best thing for the pacers to do ?

                    Originally posted by Arcadian View Post
                    Thanks for the link. I see that he is Zack Randolph's agent, so he does have SOME experience in dealing with a player with problems, and whose team is wanting him gone.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contract...best thing for the pacers to do ?

                      Just askin':

                      What are the chances that the other owners would pass on Tinsley? There is such a thing as a pariah in professional sports (e.g., Spreewell). Mightn't all the other owners agree to help the Simons teach this guy a lesson?

                      Tinsley isn't anybody's idea of an attractive player. The Pacers have a very high standard now for character, but no team wants what he brings to the community. Plus, remember Tinsley's falling-out with O'Brien after the notorious Phoenix game. That lost him all the friends he had among TPTB very quickly. It wasn't an ordinary difference of opinion -- it was a 5h17 fit! Suppose the other managers and owners decide Tinsley's character is bad enough to make him undesirable for any team?

                      Tinsley can insist on the present value of his full contract, but he has no guarantee of a new contract with another team.



                      EDIT: As Arcadian says 2 posts below, Tinsley's poor record of durability also augurs for him not being attractive to any other team.
                      Last edited by Putnam; 06-30-2008, 03:35 PM.
                      And I won't be here to see the day
                      It all dries up and blows away
                      I'd hang around just to see
                      But they never had much use for me
                      In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contact...best thing for the pacers to do ?

                        Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                        Yeah...But the Pacers really don't have "the broom closet" option.

                        There are Player Union rules and historic precedents at play here that make simply suspending Tinsley indefinitely for no reason other than "We don't like you anymore" a non-option. With Artest, there was a clear reason, although the longer that went on, the Player's Union had to be more and more upset with it. The Pacers simply cannot just "hold Jamaal hostage" on their roster and not let him suit up. J'OB could bench him all season, but they can't just tell him to "stay home for the next three years."
                        Yes they can. The Knicks did it to Marbury. Barred him from the Garden. The problem is that it doesn't get them $1 back, takes up a roster spot, and doesn't improve any remaining trade possibilities.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contract...best thing for the pacers to do ?

                          It would really be hard to make me unhappy and at the same time pay me some 20 mil dollars over 3 years. Especially considering that will be the last payday like that I will ever get.

                          Also the NBA doesn't blackball people who they think can contribute. I'm mean look at the number of "accused" rapist, suspended licenses and stories other stories you hear in the league. If tins doesn't make it back it is because teams don't believe he can put together a season.
                          Last edited by Arcadian; 06-30-2008, 03:31 PM.
                          "They could turn out to be only innocent mathematicians, I suppose," muttered Woevre's section officer, de Decker.

                          "'Only.'" Woevre was amused. "Someday you'll explain to me how that's possible. Seeing that, on the face of it, all mathematics leads, doesn't it, sooner or later, to some kind of human suffering."

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contract...best thing for the pacers to do ?

                            Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                            Just askin':

                            What are the chances that the other owners would pass on Tinsley? There is such a thing as a pariah in professional sports (e.g., Spreewell). Mightn't all the other owners agree to help the Simons teach this guy a lesson?
                            Two reasons this won't happen:
                            1-It only takes one team to give him a contract, and someone will take a chance on him. If not immediately, then when the injury bug hits and they are in desperate need of point guard help.

                            2-If the other owners did this, they would actually be hurting the Simons' position. If Tinsley has nowhere to turn, then this only increases the cost of the buyout for the Pacers.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contract...best thing for the pacers to do ?

                              it took a long time and a LOT of offenses for spree to become a pariah. spree was given another chance after choking his coach. i'm pretty sure tinsley hasn't earned that type of label from anyone but the pacers.
                              This is the darkest timeline.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: Buy out of Tinsley's contract...best thing for the pacers to do ?

                                The best thing to do with Tinsley is try as hard as you can to move him any trade that does not net us a contract ( both in # of years and Salary owed per season ) that is any worse.

                                But since I doubt that any GM will take on Tinsley....I am guessing the likely thing that the Pacers will do is simply buy him out.

                                My preference is to make sure that Tinsley is off the Pacers roster...one way or another....by the start of Training camp so that we can get a clean start from Day 1 of Training Camp. This way, the question of what happens with Tinsley is not a distraction ( either as an On/Off Court or PR distraction ) at the beginning of the season.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X