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

Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

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

  • #31
    Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
    you can say the same thing about TJ there is more info about your guy:

    http://blog.oregonlive.com/behindbla...erupts_at.html

    Trail Blazers practice on Thursday was halted nearly 60 minutes into the workout when veteran point guard Andre Miller and coach Nate McMillan engaged in a shouting match that lasted for nearly 30 minutes.
    I KNOW ABOUT PORTLAND - unless you have actual information about Philly like the info coming out of Portland, this is the very first incident.
    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

    “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

      Aj Price's play is making me think twice about bringing in a PG.

      It's not that I necessarily think he's the answer, but he's been playing really well lately, and adding an Andre Miller would likely send him back to the end of the bench with Watson backing up for the most part

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

        Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
        Aj Price's play is making me think twice about bringing in a PG.

        It's not that I necessarily think he's the answer, but he's been playing really well lately, and adding an Andre Miller would likely send him back to the end of the bench with Watson backing up for the most part
        Who should we bring in then? A center? Got Hibbert. A SF? Got Granger. Sure a top-notch PF would be nice, but it's not necessarily realistic. And a PF that's not top-notch is just gonna take development minutes away from McBob/Tyler.

        Honestly, I'd like to target a premiere shooting guard. But who knows what we'd have to give up for that.

        If we can get Andre for spare parts, we should go for it. Let Andre start and AJ back him up.
        This space for rent.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

          I agree with Anthem.

          Shooting Guard would be the ideal position to fill, if you had a choice. You can't approach the draft that way and take a lesser player just because he's a two, but still. The team needs an influx of talent, period.

          But if you have an Andre Miller caliber player you can get, you take what you can get.

          Mainly, because it's doubtful Earl Watson will be here next year, so you have to look longer term. TJ's not viable, Denier is gone, Luther Head is gone and not playing at the Point. So right now, draft aside, you have AJ Price under contract for next year. This draft looks like one you won't get a point guard with your first round pick where the Pacers will draft.

          Plus, if you get Andre Miller you are not likely giving up anything that has an impact in the process. In fact, included Earl Watson would make sense.

          It all depends on what you think of Andre Miller the player and Andre Miller the guy who his Phillie team didn't want to pay past a year (even though they desperately needed him), and the Andre Miller who just got into it with his head coach.

          I'd wonder what TJ Ford's value is vs. Andre Miller across the league right now?

          If Miller comes here, plays well, he could become a commodity. I don't see that happening with TJ under the current circumstances.

          The last thing I'll say is I think Earl Watson probably helps AJ Price in his development, I don't have any idea if Andre Miller would. It would be nightmare if you got Andre Miller here and he was actually a detriment to AJ, so maybe you don't take the chance.
          Last edited by Speed; 01-12-2010, 10:48 AM.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

            Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
            We have AJ Price now, move along, nothing to see up in Portland.
            No disrespect intended but

            How people think we have got the PG of the future , in AJ Price after a few games is mind boggiling to me


            Give him time before you crown him or pass judgement. I know we are looking for silver linings in a very clouded season but a couple of games is nothing. Look at Brandon Jennings and how far he has fallen now that teams have gotten a hold of film on him
            Sittin on top of the world!

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
              Who should we bring in then? A center? Got Hibbert. A SF? Got Granger. Sure a top-notch PF would be nice, but it's not necessarily realistic. And a PF that's not top-notch is just gonna take development minutes away from McBob/Tyler.

              Honestly, I'd like to target a premiere shooting guard. But who knows what we'd have to give up for that.

              If we can get Andre for spare parts, we should go for it. Let Andre start and AJ back him up.
              I would humbily cry tears of joy if we somehow got Joe Johnson. He is a complete stud and never ever has had any off court issues

              Man he was on fire against Boston last night. I would trade anyone and anything not named Danny Granger or Roy Hibbert
              Sittin on top of the world!

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                Originally posted by Speed View Post
                I agree with Anthem.

                Shooting Guard would be the ideal position to fill, if you had a choice. You can't approach the draft that way and take a lesser player just because he's a two, but still. The team needs an influx of talent, period.

                But if you have an Andre Miller caliber player you can get, you take what you can get.

                Mainly, because it's doubtful Earl Watson will be here next year, so you have to look longer term. TJ's not viable, Denier is gone, Luther Head is gone and not playing at the Point. So right now, draft aside, you have AJ Price under contract for next year. This draft looks like one you won't get a point guard with your first round pick where the Pacers will draft.

                Plus, if you get Andre Miller you are not likely giving up anything that has an impact in the process. In fact, included Earl Watson would make sense.

                It all depends on what you think of Andre Miller the player and Andre Miller the guy who his Phillie team didn't want to pay past a year (even though they desperately needed him), and the Andre Miller who just got into it with his head coach.

                I'd wonder what TJ Ford's value is vs. Andre Miller across the league right now?

                If Miller comes here, plays well, he could become a commodity. I don't see that happening with TJ under the current circumstances.

                The last thing I'll say is I think Earl Watson probably helps AJ Price in his development, I don't have any idea if Andre Miller would. It would be nightmare if you got Andre Miller here and he was actually a detriment to AJ, so maybe you don't take the chance.
                Great point man.

                I would like to believe that TJ's value is slightly higher due to age 26 vs 33
                Sittin on top of the world!

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                  Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                  I will kill you and then Rick roll you, in that order.


                  I would hate to lose McBob, but I get the "give to get". I'm a big Dre fan myself. But I would never give up Price because he's a lot like Dre in the sense that he's a team-first PG who makes the group better, and he's obviously much younger.

                  If this was to push into the playoffs this year, sure. But Dre isn't your long term solution and that's the only thing this team needs to be focused on now.

                  If you can swap TJ for Dre, awesome. Or Dunleavy.

                  Troy you keep because it's sure looking like he could be the CLE for expiring move the team needs.

                  I'd be thrilled to wake up and see TJ and Troy moved (as would they) and Dre and Big Z here.

                  Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                  That threw me.

                  I thought he was known for good defense.
                  He is. Or was at least. Haven't watched closely in POR.


                  ps - I do worry about the growing buzz of some attitude issues because that seems out of character. I also thought that buzz started in Philly.
                  Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 01-12-2010, 11:20 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                    How people think we have got the PG of the future , in AJ Price after a few games is mind boggiling to me
                    I agree. But as I said above, Dre isn't the PG of the future either.

                    With Price it's not so much "stop looking, position filled", but rather that we don't need to thrash about in the water looking to find a savior either. That's true for Roy, Rush and IMO McRoberts. I think all 4 of those players will have plenty of guys in the league better than them, so all can be upgraded. That's not the same as having a total void at a position.

                    Prior to letting Price get out there, and especially after JJack was let go, it seemed like PG was that. I'm not a Tyler believer, most of you aren't McBob believers, so split the difference and say that we all feel that there is something of an empty spot in the big rotation still, but that it looks better than going into last year.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                      I agree. But as I said above, Dre isn't the PG of the future either.

                      With Price it's not so much "stop looking, position filled", but rather that we don't need to thrash about in the water looking to find a savior either. That's true for Roy, Rush and IMO McRoberts. I think all 4 of those players will have plenty of guys in the league better than them, so all can be upgraded. That's not the same as having a total void at a position.

                      Prior to letting Price get out there, and especially after JJack was let go, it seemed like PG was that. I'm not a Tyler believer, most of you aren't McBob believers, so split the difference and say that we all feel that there is something of an empty spot in the big rotation still, but that it looks better than going into last year.
                      I agree that at 33 Andre Miller is not the best option, however if we can get him for someone like Foster or Duns, I would say he would be a great stop gap and also tutor to Price
                      Sittin on top of the world!

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                        That threw me.

                        I thought he was known for good defense.
                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        He is. Or was at least. Haven't watched closely in POR.
                        From what I remember of his time in Philly, his on-ball defense was poor and, in general, he seems less mobile than he used to be. I guess that could have been due to injuries instead of age, hating DiLeo or other lurking variables. "Liability" was too strong on my part -- he's not a Nash or Arenas. But I wouldn't say he was known for good defense, either. That leaves somewhere delightfully in between.
                        This is the darkest timeline.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          I agree. But as I said above, Dre isn't the PG of the future either.
                          Sure. But his contract's not bad... no longer than TJ's.

                          How drunk would we have to get TBTB (The Blazers' Top Brass) to swap TJ for Dre?
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                            I really like Dre Miller myself. If we could work a TJ and one of our bigs for Dre and filler I would say why not try it. It is pretty obvious that TJ is not the PG of the future and AJ still has a ton to prove that he can be good with extended minutes and be consistent over a period of time. I know Dre is not the PG of the future for here, but he could help groom our young PG's (thinking AJ plus draft pick) for a few years during our rebuilding process.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                              Sure. But his contract's not bad... no longer than TJ's.

                              How drunk would we have to get TBTB (The Blazers' Top Brass) to swap TJ for Dre?
                              Pretty drunk. TJ is an even worse fit for the Blazers than Miller.

                              I think the Blazers would do Foster for Miller, but for the Pacers, it probably won't do much for them outside of lowering their lottery pick. Someone of Miller's age just doesn't fit in with a rebuilding plan.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Andre Miller and the Blazers Headed for Divorce?

                                I'm not saying Price is the answer after a couple of games, I'm just saying I would hate to hinder his development and put him back on the bench

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X