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

Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

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

  • #31
    Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

    Originally posted by count55 View Post
    As a note, Luc Mbah a Moute is not a free agent. Milwaukee has him under contract for one more year. Hoopshype, as usual, is wrong. Shamsports shows him with a guaranteed contract next year, and unguaranteed in the following.

    Over last weekend when I scoured each team on Shamsports for FA, Mbah a Moute isn't listed as such on the Milwaukee team roster. I didn't realize he's listed as the "Fresh Prince"! Even after reading your post, I went back and still couldn't find his name. Then the light clicked on after a couple of times running up n down the list of players. I guess I need to be on my toes when looking at Shamsports. I do think Ben Wallace's name on Shamsports is funny! Thanx for pointing out the error.

    Maybe next year the Pacers will have enough money to make an offer for him.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

      I just do not see many options that are better than what we currently have at PF. The only player I would want would be BASS. I do not think we need to make any other moves other than a good PF though. But that is just me.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

        PF/C:
        Solomon Jones - Athletic, but unskilled
        ZaZa Pachulia - Skilled and big, but slow
        Mikki Moore - Overrated
        Glenn Davis (R) - Not worth paying more than Boston will match
        Leon Powe (R) - torn ACL
        Sean May (R) - skilled but overweight and undersized
        Joe Smith - Will probably want to sign with a contender
        Anderson Varejao (PO) - Would be great, but too expensive
        Brandon Bass - I like him, but we'd probably have to overspend to get him
        Chris Anderson - Character issues, but would be a nice fit
        Rasheed Wallace - Skill Set = great, attitude = not great
        Antonio McDyess - Solid vet., but I don't see him in Indy
        Josh McRoberts (R) - I hope we keep him
        Hakim Warrick (R) - SF/PF tweener, active and athletic, poor rebounder
        Charlie Villanueva (R) - soft, too expensive
        Shelden Williams - Already been discussed
        David Lee (R) - Good fit, way too expensive
        Chris Wilcox - Athletic but unskilled
        Robert Swift - Not a Larry Bird type of guy
        Channing Frye (R) - soft, very soft
        Ike Diogu (R) - He's not coming back
        Drew Gooden - Would be a nice fit, bad attitude, too expensive
        Carlos Boozer (PO) - He's not opting out.
        Paul Millsap (R) - Way too expensive.


        Does anybody know if you can do a sign and trade with multiple players in the same deal? For example, I'm thinking of a deal where we could include a re-signed Jack in a trade to the Lakers for a re-signed Lamar Odom.
        "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

        - Salman Rushdie

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

          Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
          Over last weekend when I scoured each team on Shamsports for FA, Mbah a Moute isn't listed as such on the Milwaukee team roster. I didn't realize he's listed as the "Fresh Prince"! Even after reading your post, I went back and still couldn't find his name. Then the light clicked on after a couple of times running up n down the list of players. I guess I need to be on my toes when looking at Shamsports. I do think Ben Wallace's name on Shamsports is funny! Thanx for pointing out the error.

          Maybe next year the Pacers will have enough money to make an offer for him.
          Yeah...love Shamsports, but the guy's occasionally too clever for his own good.

          I had to talk to one of the mods on the Milwaukee RealGM board to confirm.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

            Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
            PF/C:
            Solomon Jones - Athletic, but unskilled
            ZaZa Pachulia - Skilled and big, but slow
            Mikki Moore - Overrated
            Glenn Davis (R) - Not worth paying more than Boston will match
            Leon Powe (R) - torn ACL
            Sean May (R) - skilled but overweight and undersized
            Joe Smith - Will probably want to sign with a contender
            Anderson Varejao (PO) - Would be great, but too expensive
            Brandon Bass - I like him, but we'd probably have to overspend to get him
            Chris Anderson - Character issues, but would be a nice fit
            Rasheed Wallace - Skill Set = great, attitude = not great
            Antonio McDyess - Solid vet., but I don't see him in Indy
            Josh McRoberts (R) - I hope we keep him
            Hakim Warrick (R) - SF/PF tweener, active and athletic, poor rebounder
            Charlie Villanueva (R) - soft, too expensive
            Shelden Williams - Already been discussed
            David Lee (R) - Good fit, way too expensive
            Chris Wilcox - Athletic but unskilled
            Robert Swift - Not a Larry Bird type of guy
            Channing Frye (R) - soft, very soft
            Ike Diogu (R) - He's not coming back
            Drew Gooden - Would be a nice fit, bad attitude, too expensive
            Carlos Boozer (PO) - He's not opting out.
            Paul Millsap (R) - Way too expensive.


            Does anybody know if you can do a sign and trade with multiple players in the same deal? For example, I'm thinking of a deal where we could include a re-signed Jack in a trade to the Lakers for a re-signed Lamar Odom.
            Odom is going to come expensive. For some reason I can see us getting Frye. I just have a feeling
            "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

              Solomon Jones = Mc Roberts right?

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

                Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                Drew Gooden - Would be a nice fit, bad attitude, too expensive
                Where do you get this from? Did something happen?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

                  Originally posted by QuickRelease View Post
                  Where do you get this from? Did something happen?
                  Attitude has always been a knock on Gooden since he's been in the NBA. I think "bad attitude" makes it sound worse than it really is, however. The book on good has always been that he frequently takes plays, sometimes even entire games off. It's basically wild inconsistency that stems from not always playing very hard.
                  "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                  - Salman Rushdie

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

                    Originally posted by Smoothdave1 View Post
                    I'd like to see the Pacers look at a backup 4 along the lines of a Shelden Williams, Sean May or Drew Gooden as well as someone like a Richard Hendrix or Rod Benson from the D-League.

                    I know people will question May's weight, Williams' desire and Gooden's willingness, but I could definitely see the Pacers looking at one of them.
                    Pass on Sean May. Being overweight and out of shape is the main reason why he didn't get that many minutes under Brown. In fact, I think that he was benched for a good part of the season because of it.

                    Besides, I don't get the sense that he's that atheletic anyway.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

                      I'm pessimistic when it comes to how much we will be able to spend this offseason on any FA since I think that the majority of however much $$$ that we can spend is going to go to Jack and likely McRoberts. Given how our likely roster is going to be set; I don't think that we need to look for starting quality players...but players that can get 5-10 minutes a games on a regular basis but solidly contribute between 15-20 20 minutes a game when the inevitable injuries come our way....basically a 8th to 12th rotational-type player.

                      Since I am pessimistic at our chances at getting solid FAs like Chris Anderson, Bass, Powe, any PG ( except for Jack ), Milsap ( all of which are mere "pipe dreams" given our SalaryCap situation ), my "wish list" would be as follows ( in this order ):

                      1 ) SG - Quinton Ross
                      2 ) PF/C - Channing Frye
                      3 ) PF/C - Shelden Williams
                      4 ) PF/C - ZaZa Pachulia
                      5 ) SG - Morris Almond

                      At least for the frontcourt for this upcoming season, I think that the best that we can do to find our "Dale Davis" is to try to draft Blair with the 13th pick ( if he is available ) just to see if he can become that "bruiser" that we want.

                      If he's not available or TPTB want to draft a PG or GF....then I would look to sign some PF Frontcourt player for cheap during THIS Offseason and then continue our search for our "Dale Davis" like player later through some trade before the 2009-2010 season ( unlikely ) or simply wait until the 2010-2011 season to address that need ( either through the draft, through FA or some trade ). As you can probably note, the PF/Cs that I have on my list probably aren't worthy of being mentioned in the same breath as Dale Davis. At best, I look at them as "stop-gap" solutions for the next 2 sesaons until we can find the type of player that we are all hoping for.

                      For the 2009-2010 season, the unfortunate truth is that I don't think that we will be able to find the "Dale Davis" like player that all of us are hoping to get.
                      Last edited by CableKC; 04-22-2009, 01:50 PM.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

                        I don't understand the desire to sign Channing Frye, and I very well understand you all intend him to be a rotational player and are looking at this from a realistic standpoint, but isn't our front court soft enough? I would much rather balance it out with someone who is physical, nasty, and can rebound (see my avatar).

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

                          Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
                          I don't understand the desire to sign Channing Frye, and I very well understand you all intend him to be a rotational player and are looking at this from a realistic standpoint, but isn't our front court soft enough? I would much rather balance it out with someone who is physical, nasty, and can rebound (see my avatar).
                          If you can find me someone that is physical, nasty and can rebound THAT WE CAN AFFORD this offseason; let me know who that FA is.

                          Short of Blair, I don't think that there is a "physical, nasty PF that can rebound" that we can add to our roster in the 2009-2010 season. As I suggested, any FA Frontcourt Player that I would want to sign during this offseason should be a "cheap stop gap" solution that we can afford to fill out our Frontcourt depth.

                          Now, if we choose not to resign Jack....then yes, we may have a better shot at players like Brandon Bass or Leon Powe....but remember, our SalaryCap situation isn't as great as many of you think it is. We can probably sign a single $3.5 to $4.5 mil a year player ( likely Jack ) and then have enough left over to sign some $1-2 mil a year type player.

                          I don't think that we will be in a better position to acquire/trade/draft the type of PF that we all want until after the 2010-2011 ( when a better cast of FAs are available ) or ( more then likely ) the 2011-2012 offseason ( when we have more SalaryCap room to spend on a better "tier" of FAs ).

                          Also, I have no clue who the player in your avatar is....I always thought that it was TJ Ford from his days with the Raptors
                          Last edited by CableKC; 04-22-2009, 02:20 PM.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

                            Pops Mensah Bonsu

                            Doubt Toronto lets him go though.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

                              Originally posted by JB24 View Post
                              Pops Mensah Bonsu

                              Doubt Toronto lets him go though.
                              He is an undersized PF but very athletic. Does he posses a mid range game?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Official 2009 Free Agency Thread

                                Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
                                I don't understand the desire to sign Channing Frye, and I very well understand you all intend him to be a rotational player and are looking at this from a realistic standpoint, but isn't our front court soft enough? I would much rather balance it out with someone who is physical, nasty, and can rebound (see my avatar).
                                agreed

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X