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

Offseason Moves Poll

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

  • #46
    Re: Offseason Moves Poll

    Originally posted by Speed View Post
    I see your point about leverage. I'm saying that the Pacers don't have attractive enough young pieces to give them the best offer. I completely disagree about the #10 pick. I think Devin Harris is worth the 10 pick and more. Who can you get at the 10 pick that is even close to what he'd give you, instantly. I agree Granger is too much. They don't need Hibbert. I'm just saying there isn't a match there for the Pacers. I think it will take a good draft pick, a promising young player, and cap relief, at least. Maybe I overate him, but I think maybe he's undervalued because he was on a horrible team. The only thing that makes me blink about all of this is health, not sure about that one.

    So, my two points, Nets/Pacers won't be a good match for a trade and Nets will get more than just relief for him and should, imo.
    I could see them biting on an offer of Ford/Murphy/Dunleavy, Hans/Rush, and #10. I don't really know if it's worth it, but it seems like a fair deal.

    Dunleavy would actually be the best fit for their roster.
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Offseason Moves Poll

      I went with trading TJ but I see this as just one of several moves that we need to make. I wouldn't mind see us trading up in the draft if our guy is available to us for the right price. I also wouldn't mind us trading down if we fill a position of need with a quality veteran at either PG or PF spots.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Offseason Moves Poll

        And who knows? While it's virtually mathematically impossible, we could still get a top 5 pick. That could result in us being able to make and receive some offers.


        (A guy can dream, right?)

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Offseason Moves Poll

          Originally posted by Day-V View Post
          And who knows? While it's virtually mathematically impossible, we could still get a top 5 pick. That could result in us being able to make and receive some offers.


          (A guy can dream, right?)
          To clarify, we could still get a top 3 pick, not a top 5. The lottery only determines 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. The rest of the teams (the ones that lose the lottery) remain sorted by record.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Offseason Moves Poll

            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
            To clarify, we could still get a top 3 pick, not a top 5. The lottery only determines 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. The rest of the teams (the ones that lose the lottery) remain sorted by record.
            Really? I did not know that.


            Hmm, well I guess I can't say I didn't learn anything today. Thank you, Hicks.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Offseason Moves Poll

              Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
              I could see them biting on an offer of Ford/Murphy/Dunleavy, Hans/Rush, and #10. I don't really know if it's worth it, but it seems like a fair deal.

              Dunleavy would actually be the best fit for their roster.
              I will compare Devin Harris' value to Antawn Jamison.

              Antawn Jamison:
              +Plays PF
              +Antawn Jamison has been the epitome of health over his career. Great worker and takes care of himself. Great teammate.
              +Excellent basketball player
              +Cavs had a need for a better second option and an offensive vacancy at PF
              -34 years old
              -Owed 28,435,620 over 2 years
              -His former team was going in a new direction (rebuilding)

              Devin Harris:
              +Plays PG
              +27 years old
              +Has shown flashes of brilliance in his career
              +Good offensive player and distributor of the basketball
              -Injury riddled career
              -Inconsistent play
              -Owed 26,800,000 over the next three years
              -His current team is going in a new direction (drafting John Wall's upside)

              These two players IMO compare well in terms of their value across the league. Cleveland needed him but was more in the driver seat than Washington. The Nets won't have leverage in dealing him if they do get the number one pick (unless they have a deal in place to swap the number one and number two pick). Jamison went to Cleveland for #30 and an expiring. That's it. I would think that is on par with what Devin would go for, but I think Devin would have more value, just not a whole lot more.

              I don't think there will be a bidding war over Devin Harris, just because I think the list of teams that would trade for him is not very long. I think the only possible teams would be the Grizzlies, Pistons, Knicks, Heat, Lakers, Sixers, Indy, and Charlotte. The Heat and Knicks can get crossed off because they will blow their load on the superstars and Harris is not in their plans. The Grizzlies and Pistons are dependent on the progress of Mike Conley and Rodney Stuckey. They would probably both be willing to take him for a lower offer, but would be quick to pull out of talks. That leaves Indy, Philly, Charlotte, and LA.

              Philly - Very young PGs in Holiday and L. Williams; young talent in Speights, Jason Smith, and Thad Young; expiring contracts of W. Green, Kapono, and Dalembert; Only have pick #6. Likely trade scenario: Kapono, Speights or Thad Young, and future heavily protected first or second rounder.

              LA - Farmar as a backup, and possibly resigned Fisher; Sasha Vujacic's expiring; Not much in the way of young talent (S. Brown and Farmar); they have the 43 and 58 picks this year. Likely trade scenario: Farmar, Vujacic, pick #43, future first rounder, and Cash.

              Charlotte - Very young PG in Augustin; young talent in D. Brown, Henderson and Ajinca; an expiring in Nazr; and no draft picks this year to work with. Likely trade: Nazr, Henderson, and a future mid-first (probably not protected).

              Indy - Price as a backup; Ford, Murphy, Foster, or Dunleavy's expiring; Rush, Hansborough, Hibbert, and McRoberts as prospects; This year's #10 and #40. Likely trade: Hansborough/Rush, Ford/Dunleavy/Foster and #40.

              I think we have the most to offer out of the teams who would be truly interested. The only other scenario that I could see happening is if NY gets shut out or only one of the bigger free agents this summer, they could take Harris back for one of their young players. They have both the #38 and #39. I don't really see this happening though since NY sent away most of their future first rounders so they could spend big and they will get two big time free agents regardless.

              When looking at what these teams have to offer, I think that Indy and Philly have the most to offer. I don't know that Philly would be willing to give up Speights or Thad Young, but it would definitely take one of the two. The Sixers could offer a future protected first too, but they certainly won't give up one of those two and the #6. Indy could offer a better expiring veteran to help their young guys. I think that Rush and Hansborough are similar in value to Thad and Speights, but Speights has probably the most value of the four. I think we could send a similar future first as the Sixers could.

              I think there will be a couple of teams interested, but I think we would be close to having enough to get him. There will only really be two or three teams in legitimate negotiations for him, IMO.
              "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Offseason Moves Poll

                I think Kirk Hinrich would do well here and help us out. He's forced to play the 2 guard next to Derrick Rose which is not his primary position.

                If Chicago wanted to get one of our expiring contracts for Hinrich, they can have even more cap space next summer as opposed to this summer having to owe Hinrich for another 2 or 3 years at around 9M.

                I drew up a 3-way trade, but I forgot who the third team was that I included.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Offseason Moves Poll

                  Originally posted by Trophy View Post
                  I think Kirk Hinrich would do well here and help us out. He's forced to play the 2 guard next to Derrick Rose which is not his primary position.

                  If Chicago wanted to get one of our expiring contracts for Hinrich, they can have even more cap space next summer as opposed to this summer having to owe Hinrich for another 2 or 3 years at around 9M.

                  I drew up a 3-way trade, but I forgot who the third team was that I included.
                  I like Hinrich and I'd have interest, but I still don't see him as the answer at Point Guard. He might be as close as you can get for now, though.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Offseason Moves Poll

                    Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                    I doubt that the Nets would do that....they are looking to retain as much 2010 Capspace as possible. Ignoring that.....if you are judging productivity from the PF from the Offensive end.....Yi isn't that much better then Murphy. In fact, on the Offensive end...Murphy probably is considered solid. Defensively, neither Yi nor Murphy is going to make that much off a difference. That being said...Yi to Murphy is a lateral move at best.

                    There's a lot of assumptions to be made here....if the Nets get one of the top 2 picks, I can see them considering moving Harris....but it's not a foregone conclusion that they will land either Wall or Turner.

                    But ignoring Harris and the Nets, what other Team is looking to shed Long-Term salary from a Starting quality PG that would be interested in an Expiring Contract for one of the Big4 Expiring Contracts?

                    I think that there are Teams that would be looking to shed Long-Term salary that is a solid Starting quality Player....but I don't think that there are many that would part with a Starting quality PG.
                    True, but Yi is going into his 4th year, so he has room to improve. Some experts are expecting Yi to be a poor man's or equal version of AK-47. I would roll dice on him, if it meant getting Devin Harris. Next year roster's could look like this...

                    Harris/Price/Ford
                    Rush/D. Jones
                    Granger/Dunleavy
                    Hansbrough/Yi/McRoberts
                    Hibbert/Foster/S. Jones


                    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


                    • #55
                      Re: Offseason Moves Poll

                      http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_ar..._trade_rumors/

                      Luol Deng and Kirk Hinrich are both candidates to be moved this summer if the Bulls are able to manufacture a sign-and-trade.

                      "I would love to be here my whole career, but you have to understand the business side of it," Deng said. "There are always going to be changes."

                      "I've been part of rumors for years," Hinrich said.
                      Although this isn't much news, I wanted to post this as a segway into what I think the Pacers will be doing with ( at least ) one of the Big4 Contracts during the Offseason. I wouldn't be surprised if TPTB tries to trade one of the Big4 for someone like Hinrich or Rip....specifically Starting quality Players with long-term contracts ( ranging between $7 to $10 mil a year ) that are on Teams that are looking for SalaryCap flexiblity and/or in the process or rebuilding. This type of move would be a "win now" move while filling a long-term need for the Pacers.
                      Last edited by CableKC; 04-30-2010, 01:49 PM.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X