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

point guard options decreasing

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    point guard options decreasing

    Article from realgm thats interesting. i like the hinrich trade idea involving dunleavy.

    http://pacers.realgm.com/articles/19...ng_for_pacers/

    An already thin point guard market dried up further on Monday night when the Cavaliers acquired Ramon Sessions in a multi-player trade with the Timberwolves.

    In need of a point guard, with little-to-no money to spend, the Pacers are counting on a trade to bring them the passer they have desperately needed for quite some time. Minnesota’s deal with Cleveland takes two names off the list of potential targets -- Sessions and Jonny Flynn.

    The Timberwolves signed free-agent Luke Ridnour earlier this month, a move that general manager David Kahn admitted would lead to a trade of either Sessions or Flynn. The Pacers appeared to be an ideal trade partner, but that’s now of course a moot point.

    As their roster currently stands, the Pacers will likely open the season with second-round pick Lance Stephenson or the often-shunned T.J. Ford as their starting point guard. A.J. Price can be a serviceable backup, but his knee leaves question marks.

    Looking through the remainder of options that might be available via trade (without even beginning to dream about Chris Paul), here are Indiana’s best opportunities ranked in order of plausibility:

    Kirk Hinrich, Wizards

    The Wizards claim they are keeping Gilbert Arenas, who can also play the two-guard, which might make the backcourt cramped with the trio of Arenas, Hinrich and first overall pick John Wall. The Pacers would have to be willing to add about $8 million to their payroll for next season, but it’s a risk they may have to take.

    The possibility of adding Hinrich is increased by Washington’s need of a guy like Dunleavy or Murphy. A clean swap of either Dunleavy or Murphy for Hinrich would work, but would Pacers president Larry Bird and general manager David Morway be content with that haul?

    Jose Juan Barea, Mavericks

    Barea is an ideal option for the Pacers because they know what he can do (score, run) and his contract expires after the 10-11 season. Dallas has a few options at point guard behind starter Jason Kidd: Rodrigue Beaubois (who they love more than any team in the league) and super-sub Jason Terry.

    Still, Barea is a significant part of what the Mavericks do having averaged close to 20 minutes per game last season. Beaubois is expected to see an increase in minutes though, and the Pacers have a few pieces that are attractive to a team like the Mavs that like to add pieces (no matter the cost) all the time. The problem there is Barea’s $1.8 million contract, meaning Indiana might have to take on someone like DeShawn Stevenson just to get the point guard.

    Jose Calderon, Raptors

    Changes have come with the Raptors and Jarrett Jack has become the de facto leader in the locker room. It remains to be seen if Bryan Colangelo and Jay Triano are comfortable handing over the starting job to Jack full-time, but it’s believed that Calderon could be had for the right price.

    Calderon isn’t an elite scorer, but Indiana has plenty of offensive weapons when healthy. He’d be a much-needed steadying influence on the court, but he may come too expensive for Indiana’s liking. He has roughly $30 million left over three years on his contract and the Pacers don’t have the long-term contracts to match up with that. However, if the Raptors are interested in Troy Murphy or Mike Dunleavy (I doubt they want Ford back) they can make a move and clear an additional $10 million or so in cap space for next summer.

    George Hill, Spurs

    Depending on their plans with Tony Parker as he enters the final season of his contract, George Hill could become expendable for San Antonio. The Spurs have added Curtis Jerrells, Gary Neal and Alonzo Gee this offseason and are all of a sudden loaded with bodies on the perimeter.

    Hill, another Indianapolis product, is one of the more proven options on this list and he can create his own offense when needed. The downfall here is that the Spurs would have to covet someone on Indiana’s roster and likely be willing to part with another moderately-salaried player to in order to make a trade happen.

    Eric Maynor, Thunder

    It’s not certain that Oklahoma City would even consider dealing Maynor, who they acquired as a rookie from Utah back in February, but Indiana’s soon-to-be expiring contracts could be attractive to a focused general manager like Sam Presti.

    Maynor needs to work on his ball-handling, but he’s very quick and showed with both the Jazz and Thunder that he can score when called upon. He also has decent size, which is nice when you face Derrick Rose four times per season. Bird and Morway might even be able to convince Oklahoma City to take Ford, who would be a calculated risk in a defined role on a winning team and with a contract that won’t impede the team’s financial future.

    Mike Conley, Grizzlies

    The Grizzlies aren’t sold on Conley as their starting point guard, but they aren’t going to replace or trade him unless they acquire one as part of the deal. Conley is the only true point on their roster, as O.J. Mayo struggled a bit in Las Vegas trying to learn on the job.

    Conley may be a good fit for the Pacers because of his Indianapolis roots, penetrating ability and high basketball IQ, but he’d need to add a consistent jumper to be a perfect fit and it’s unlikely that Memphis and Indiana can match up as trade partners unless the Grizzlies are interested in Ford. The Pacers don’t have another point guard to give up.

    Jeff Teague, Hawks

    Adding Teague almost depends on too many factors to even consider him as a realistic option. Mike Bibby is getting older and his contract will expire in 2012 and Jamal Crawford is entering the final year of his deal, although there have been reports that he has requested an extension.

    Teague’s speed is perfect for Jim O’Brien’s system, but he hasn’t yet shown flashes of his potential for Atlanta. If the Hawks were definitely set at the position that might be an advantage for the Pacers in trade talks, but there are quite a few question marks.

    Jerryd Bayless, Trail Blazers

    This is another possibility that is heavily contingent on an additional trade. Andre Miller is Portland’s only other traditional point guard and he may not even be long for Oregon; the Blazers have a $7.8 million team option on his contract for the 11-12 season.

    However, if the Blazers are in the race for Chris Paul as rumored, they might be willing to part with the young Bayless, who fits the mold of an uber-quick guard but has yet to flash above-average passing skills at the NBA level.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: point guard options decreasing

    I'm looking more for minimum+ sarary veteran PG's as realistic options.
    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: point guard options decreasing

      I still think Hinrich makes sense for us.
      This space for rent.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: point guard options decreasing

        Originally posted by Anthem View Post
        I still think Hinrich makes sense for us.
        Me too, but I still don't get why Hinrich can't just back up both guard spots for the Wiz and be a really nice fit.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: point guard options decreasing

          Originally posted by Speed View Post
          Me too, but I still don't get why Hinrich can't just back up both guard spots for the Wiz and be a really nice fit.
          Sure, it's not like they can't use him. But he's hardly untouchable.

          Murphy for Hinrich is a no-brainer from our perspective. Not sure what Washington's trying to do or would want from us, honestly.
          This space for rent.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: point guard options decreasing

            Why did the Wiz take Hinrich?
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: point guard options decreasing

              IMO everyone here is in love w/ the K.Hinrich up to '07, not the one since. KH's stats & his overall D have been declining. Besides, he will eat 8 mil into our cap space in '11 - not worth it IMO for what I see as NOT a long term fix.

              Stats
              Year Team GMs MPG FG% FT% 3PT% RPG APG SPG BPG PPG
              03-04 CHI 76 35.6 38.6 80.4 39.0 3.4 6.8 1.3 0.3 12.0
              04-05 CHI 77 36.4 39.7 79.2 35.5 4.0 6.4 1.6 0.3 15.7
              05-06 CHI 81 36.5 41.8 81.5 37.0 3.6 6.3 1.2 0.3 15.8
              06-07 CHI 80 35.5 44.8 83.5 41.5 3.4 6.2 1.2 0.3 16.6
              07-08 CHI 75 31.7 41.4 83.1 35.0 3.2 6.0 1.2 0.2 11.5
              08-09 CHI 51 26.2 43.7 79.1 40.8 2.4 3.9 1.3 0.4 9.9
              09-10 CHI 74 33.5 40.9 75.2 37.1 3.5 4.5 1.1 0.3 10.9
              CAREER 514 34.1 41.5 80.9 37.9 3.4 5.8 1.3 0.3 13.4
              TJ would seem more logical to me then moving Murph or Dun, but that adds 500k to the payroll. We could add Solo & save 1 Mil & free up a roster spot to add a young player at the min., but again, is that worth giving up the cap space (& draft positions w/ wins) n/y? IMO, NO. Also I just hate to spend 17 mil for 2 yrs for a player on the decline when we are not contending for anything.
              Not even sure Wash would have interest anyway...
              "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
              (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: point guard options decreasing

                That'd be nice if we could find a way to pick up Bayless. His stats have been unimpressive so far, but I think if he played here, he'd flourish in JOB's system.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: point guard options decreasing

                  Originally posted by PacerGuy View Post

                  he will eat 8 mil into our cap space in '11 - not worth it IMO for what I see as NOT a long term fix.

                  Not even sure Wash would have interest anyway...


                  LOCKOUT 011-012 season. It won't be settled quickly, and most of the season if not all will be lost. His 8 mil salary won't be paid, so it makes no difference.

                  I don't see the Wiz trading him unless they feel they can get by with Arenas at PG with Wall and Nick Young as the SG b/u behind Arenas. Young has shown flashes of being good in his 2 years in Washington.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: point guard options decreasing

                    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                    Why did the Wiz take Hinrich?
                    They got him because they feel that he could be a nice mentor to Wall and do the same stuff he did in Chicago to Rose.
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: point guard options decreasing

                      Interesting to consider you won't pay part of 11-12 lockout season salary.

                      It makes me wonder about Watson again.

                      He's still out there, really be a nice bridge to next year. I wonder if he'd be more amicable to a 2 year deal for the Pacers, since it was originally stated they were only offering one year deals.

                      You could go in with the idea that it will only be a partial payout in the second year, if there's a lockout.

                      I'd guess Watson is losing leverage by the minute, at this point.

                      I see on twitter that Peewee asked Micheal Grady about Earl Watson's status and MG said he'd look into it today. He makes the most sense, if they are still wanting to go in that direction.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: point guard options decreasing

                        Originally posted by Speed View Post
                        Interesting to consider you won't pay part of 11-12 lockout season salary.

                        It makes me wonder about Watson again.

                        He's still out there, really be a nice bridge to next year. I wonder if he'd be more amicable to a 2 year deal for the Pacers, since it was originally stated they were only offering one year deals.

                        You could go in with the idea that it will only be a partial payout in the second year, if there's a lockout.

                        I'd guess Watson is losing leverage by the minute, at this point.

                        I see on twitter that Peewee asked Micheal Grady about Earl Watson's status and MG said he'd look into it today. He makes the most sense, if they are still wanting to go in that direction.
                        I believe Wells said the Pacers can't afford Watson else after they sign Magnum. (I'd assume that would mean even if they cut Price or McBob they still couldn't afford them.)

                        With Larry's "not going to do a move that doesn't make sense" AJ's recent news of being back in October and the "Lance can play point" talk..I think they've been preparing us for a couple of weeks to say that we are going into the season with these three.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: point guard options decreasing

                          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                          Why did the Wiz take Hinrich?
                          They got him for "free" along with the #17 pick in the draft... Chicago was trying to dump salary in order to nab Wade.

                          The pick was a positive value asset and Hinrich (or rather, his salary) was a negative value asset.

                          It's not like Washington hates Hinrich, certainly, but it's just not the case that he was a major acquisition who they'd be unwilling to part with. He was a throw-in for the #17 pick.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: point guard options decreasing

                            Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                            With Larry's "not going to do a move that doesn't make sense" AJ's recent news of being back in October and the "Lance can play point" talk..I think they've been preparing us for a couple of weeks to say that we are going into the season with these three.
                            Agreed.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: point guard options decreasing

                              Originally posted by Speed View Post
                              Interesting to consider you won't pay part of 11-12 lockout season salary.

                              It makes me wonder about Watson again.

                              He's still out there, really be a nice bridge to next year. I wonder if he'd be more amicable to a 2 year deal for the Pacers, since it was originally stated they were only offering one year deals.

                              You could go in with the idea that it will only be a partial payout in the second year, if there's a lockout.

                              I'd guess Watson is losing leverage by the minute, at this point.

                              I see on twitter that Peewee asked Micheal Grady about Earl Watson's status and MG said he'd look into it today. He makes the most sense, if they are still wanting to go in that direction.

                              In order to sign Watson, with already having 14 guaranteed contracts, the Pacers are not going to sign Rolle or if the sign Rolle they will have to cut a player like Solo.

                              Maybe reason the Pacers haven't signed Rolle, they are hoping to get Rolle to go play in Europe to develop since he won't get much PT here. This allows them to pick up a vet PG like Watson at the minimum.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X