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

Pacers asking too much for Murph

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

  • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

    Originally posted by d_c View Post
    So what exactly is the purpose of keeping Murphy if he he has the equivalent trade value one year from now that Ilgauskas has now?
    Apparently Z's trade value is "last piece needed to compete for a championship".

    Y'all make it sound like they having to try to give him away. Troy's a pretty good player, despite his defensive and contractual liabilities.
    You're caught up in the Internet / you think it's such a great asset / but you're wrong, wrong, wrong
    All that fiber optic gear / still cannot take away the fear / like an island song

    - Jimmy Buffett

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

      Originally posted by d_c View Post
      So what exactly is the purpose of keeping Murphy if he he has the equivalent trade value one year from now that Ilgauskas has now? That's the point Naptown Seth brought up and I think it's a valid point.

      If you keep Murphy for at least up to this summer (as opposed to trading him for an expiring Z), then you had better get a pretty good deal for him. If you're unable to find any deal, then you just made your owner spend $12M to keep Murphy next season for no reason other than to say that you didn't help the Cavs.

      I'd be more interested in helping your own franchise than to take pride in not helping anyone else. If you can help your owner by saving him money and giving yourself more options to make other moves, then you do it.
      I agree with this, not only Big Z would bring you a Murphy, look at Houston trying to move 20mil in Tmac and they can't get a good deal, expiring contracts now are overrated, maybe two years ago, but now teams are paying more attention to their books and they are not willing to give up talent for expirings anymore.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

        The only reason that I want Murphy gone so that JOB would be forced to play a more inside/outside game with Roy Hibbert. As a side note, Big Z + Hickson/Powe + Draft Pick is a fair deal to me.


        Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

          I still think that with the new CBA looming our expiring contracts may have a lot more value next year then they do this year. At worst they give us cap space for the free agent market in 2011. If we can't make the team better in trading one I see no reason to do it now.
          Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

            Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
            The only reason that I want Murphy gone so that JOB would be forced to play a more inside/outside game with Roy Hibbert. As a side note, Big Z + Hickson/Powe + Draft Pick is a fair deal to me.
            We are not going to get Hickson. They would be crazy to trade him for Murphy. Possibly he could be included for Jamison but I doubt Hickson is leaving CLE.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

              Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
              We are not going to get Hickson. They would be crazy to trade him for Murphy. Possibly he could be included for Jamison but I doubt Hickson is leaving CLE.
              Hence the reason why I typed "Hickson/Powe".


              Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

                The way Cleveland is playing they really don't need to make a deal. I'll be surprised if they do.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

                  Why do pacers want Powe back ? They don`t need to add his money to payroll. If pacers can not get Hickson back, I would still do the trade for Z /1ST pick. but NO Powe back!

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

                    Originally posted by BBALL56HACKER View Post
                    Why do pacers want Powe back ? They don`t need to add his money to payroll. If pacers can not get Hickson back, I would still do the trade for Z /1ST pick. but NO Powe back!

                    Why don't you want Leon Powe?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

                      Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                      Excellent point, Seth. Excellent point.

                      I don't think the Cavs are balking at giving away the pick. Hickson seems to be the sticking point.
                      And don't dismiss that pick (not you, I mean in general). Right now you might be able to take a flier on 1 of 2 shooting guards, Lace Dunn (Baylor) and Poindexter (Wash). Both are iffy to make it, not sure either is quite enough the athlete for it, but both are scoring very well and have good shooting strokes. Personally I prefer Dunn but then I think he might play his way into the top 20-23.

                      People are also talking about Booker slipping to 29-30 range, so you bolster your bench PF which is basically what Hickson is anyway.

                      I don't love the deal but the team is in a tough spot and this is the kind of stuff you do.

                      How'd they move Artest? For 3-4 months of Peja, who sat half the playoff games even.

                      How'd they move JO? For expiring Rasho, TJ who we have been benching, and a 17th pick. Luckily that was Hibbert, but then Ford is now one of the 4 contracts we still want to move.

                      How'd they move Jackson? Don't get me started, that's how we got here in the first place.

                      How'd they move Tinsley? Buy out, which is a zero return trade for only MILD financial savings.

                      They have struggled to move Dun, Ford and apparently Troy. It all adds up to the reality that he's not worth a whole lot right now, even coming off his best season ever.


                      AND we are headed to a possible lockout. It's not so clear what 2011 expirings will be worth because it's not clear if there will even be a market or what shape it will be in if there is.

                      We've known for some time the team was kinda F'd. This is what that feels like, these are the kinds of deals teams send at you. Frankly I think the JO deal was a minor miracle and a triumph by Bird, a smaller deal you still don't want and a #17 pick.


                      It's not a 3 year plan, it's a 3 year waiting period till TPTB can start functioning with a healthy salary situation that is more in line with the amount of talent on the team. Next trade deadline is when the team STARTS the rebuild, not finishes it.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

                        2011 is starting to get me nervous with the lockout. The players have other options now days. European/Asian teams are paying out big salaries, and I can see the best players in the NBA going overseas for a few years while the NBA is on hold/dead. All it takes is 1 year of that to destroy the league.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          It's not a 3 year plan, it's a 3 year waiting period till TPTB can start functioning with a healthy salary situation that is more in line with the amount of talent on the team. Next trade deadline is when the team STARTS the rebuild, not finishes it.
                          That is now my firm belief as well.

                          As last season wrapped up and at the start of this season I bought into the entire "3 year plan" stuff they were saying. But as time has gone on this season the more I have thought about it the more I am convinced that this isn't really a plan as much as it is in waiting on the inevitable to happen. I mean yes they did sign a couple of their last contracts to coincide with the expiring deals of Murphy & Dunleavy but other than that it doesn't seem to be a real cohesive plan other than to say "well we now have money to work around with".

                          Which I guess is a plan but I'm not sure what the real plan is. Do we become competitive in year three? My guess is no.

                          I think maybe a lot of this is my own fault to be honest with you as I actually was stupid enough to think this year was going to be different than what we have gotten. Some of the season has gone down due to injury but not most of it.

                          We are just far worse than I ever dreamed we would be and I have a feeling that we are worse than the front office thought we would be as well.

                          I hope both you and I are wrong here and that two years from now we are considered one of the elite teams in the NBA, but I just have a feeling that we are years and years and years away.


                          Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

                            Originally posted by Peck View Post
                            but I just have a feeling that we are years and years and years away.
                            I have the same feeling, I think that next year they are going to do the same thing they did this one, sign cheap players and hope to make the playoffs and then next year and the year after that.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

                              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                              Next trade deadline is when the team STARTS the rebuild, not finishes it.
                              The rebuild plan we talk about is the one Morway and Bird refer to. Their plan will not end at next season's trade deadline because we could still have Murphy, Ford, Foster, and Dun's contracts on the roster. That means the rebuild Bird is talking about will end two summers from now when those contracts expire and the roster is rebuilt.

                              By then, barring trades etc., we could have these players under contract;

                              1) Granger
                              2) Hibbert
                              3) Rush
                              4) Hansbrough
                              5) Price
                              6) D. Jones
                              7) This years 1st rounder
                              8) This years 2nd Rounder
                              9) Next Years 1st Rounder (If no lockout)
                              10) Next years 2nd rounder (If no lockout)
                              11) Our 2nd rounder from Dallas (If no lockout)
                              12-15) The players we pick up from trading or letting Murphy, Ford, Foster, and Dun's contracts expire. As well as having Tinsley off the books.

                              In actual fact teams are always rebuilding, meaning trying to get better. And this is where we should be at the end of Bird's rebuild.

                              Another thought. With the CBA ending it might be a complete year before the teams play again. If so, we could have another college draft before teams play again.

                              And with a lockout looming it could also mean that there will be a lot of underclassmen declaring for the draft this year and trying to get salaries under the present CBA. Of course the underclassmen could just decide to stay in collage though the lockout.
                              Last edited by Will Galen; 02-07-2010, 03:37 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers asking too much for Murph

                                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                                Why don't you want Leon Powe?
                                He does not bring anything to the roster that you can`t get from Mcroberts . Plus with his salary and the extra we take back in the deal for Z-MAN will most likely put us in luxury tax range.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X