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

Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

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

  • #31
    Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

    Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
    We are sort of good at going small our self.
    If they're both starting and playing 30+ minutes a game, you're not going small very often.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
      If they're both starting and playing 30+ minutes a game, you're not going small very often.
      That would depend on match ups and how small we went. If we played a whole game with just one of them playing at a time, they could still get 24 minutes each that game. That happens to players now and they still average 30 + minutes.

      They could each play 20-24 minutes alone, and 12-15 together and both average somewhere between 32-39 minutes. If they only played together 12 minutes a game, (one quarter) they could still average 30 + minutes a game.

      As for small ball I don't think we would always be at a disadvantage when a team went small against us. Sometimes going small would get the other team killed, it would depend on matchups.

      It might not be feasible, I don't know enough to even guess if it would work, but if it did work it would give other teams big problems. I know Roy is not very fast laterally, but I have no idea about Perk. My thinking is if they are both good enough to start then they could probably play some together, especially in a high/low post setup.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

        Landry's one-dimensionality worries me. He can score and...

        I like Chandler as a rebounder and a solid defender. I just can't see him playing PF next to Roy and a long-term backup center, while needed, isn't the top of my wish list. His recent injuries are also a factor.

        I don't see L.A. and New Orleans letting Odom and West walk.

        Battier doesn't seem that good anymore to me. He's 32, so I doubt that it's a fluke.

        I like Jason Richardson. He'll be 30, but he's still as productive as he was at 25. He'd be a big upgrade as the starting SG while George is groomed to be his (hopeful) successor.

        If Caron Butler could return to his All-Star form of two years ago he'd be a good pickup. I'm skeptical.

        Jeff Green's young and has proven he can be a productive player on a winning team. He's versatile as well. I don't like him as our starting PF and he's not starting at SF with Danny here, but I think he'd make an excellent 25-30 mpg backup at both forward spots.

        I like DeAndre Jordan as well. Not as a primary target, but an interesting young big man with great size and athleticism who could be groomed as a rebounder/defender to compliment Roy.

        Carmelo Anthony... HA! Yeah right.

        Joel Przybilla is old and injury prone.

        I like Samuel Dalembert for the right price. An excellent backup big man who could possibly play some PF next to Roy.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

          Three PFs...McBob, Tyler, Landry...why not? But no one mentioned in here is the missing piece that takes us over the top to contender status. We need four bodies for 2011-12, if we keep Josh. Four good ones, but not all-stars, and we compete. To get to contender status...?

          By trade, or somehow, we need a Carmelo level acquisition. Someone besides Melo would be good. Not a big Carnmelo fan myself.
          Last edited by kester99; 11-22-2010, 01:03 PM.


          [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

            Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
            I think they could make a devastating Twin Towers combination.

            They could both start and get 30-35 mpg.

            When they play together Perk would play the low post and Roy the high post.
            Defensively would never work. And offensively it always sounds a lot better than it actually plays out. Theres very few instances of it ever working effectively for any extended periods of time if both bigs are a bit on the slow side and true centers. Thats just it, they are both true centers-something you dont see so much of. So the idea of having both on the same team to play together seems a bit flawed. Especially since they both will command top dollar for legit starting center material.
            The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

              When I think of twin towers I think of Olajuwon and Sampson. 2 starting caliper centers both starting together and dominating. I can't think of a recent attempt at this in the nba other then Duncan and Robinson if you want to think of Duncan as a 5 and I think that worked out well for the Spurs. It's just as possible today as it was then but there are really just not that many good centers in the NBA right now. I'd be willing to bet that in any case where this didn't work one or both of the starting centers were scrubs. Our next trade should be for a starting big man and I'd be just as happy with another starting level 5 such as Kaman, Gasul or Perkins as I would be with a starting level 4. If the opportunity is there to obtain another starting 5 then I say do it and let other teams worry about matching up to us instead of our matching up to them.


              Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
              Defensively would never work. And offensively it always sounds a lot better than it actually plays out. Theres very few instances of it ever working effectively for any extended periods of time if both bigs are a bit on the slow side and true centers. Thats just it, they are both true centers-something you dont see so much of. So the idea of having both on the same team to play together seems a bit flawed. Especially since they both will command top dollar for legit starting center material.
              Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                Here is my list of people we should focus on signing in the off-season:

                Roy Hibbert (extension)
                Brandon Rush (extension)
                Josh McRoberts

                That would be my focus. We still have to look out for the long-term. We can probably get Rush and McRoberts signed for fairly cheap. Signing all of them after their third years is a much better idea than waiting. Hibbert we need to extend. He will probably cost us around 8-10M per year under the current CBA, which I would adjust depending on the new CBA.

                We still are looking at extensions for Price, Hansborough and Collison the following summer. And then extensions for George, Lance and Granger the summer thereafter. There will be significant cap space utilization for the players currently on our roster, so we can't go making too big of a splash and still retain them all.

                Roster for next summer:

                PG - Collison, Price
                SG - Rush, George, Stephenson
                SF - Granger, Posey, DJones
                PF - McRoberts, Hansborough
                C - Hibbert

                Assuming we bring McRoberts back, we have to fill four roster spots, two of which will go to draft picks.

                An interesting player outside of our team in my opinion would be Nene. He fills that vital PF/C role. He is big enough to play center at times and would be some beef next to Hibbert. I think he would benefit from better conditioning, which after his knee surgery would benefit the health of his knee while making him quicker. He blocks shots and is a solid rebounder. His rebounding numbers aren't spectacular, but often times Kenyon Martin is the more aggressive rebounder of the two. He and Hibbert would be very good rebounders as a tandem IMO.

                Our rotation would start Hibbert and Nene, with Josh and Tyler filling in. I don't expect Foster or Solo back. I wouldn't be upset with bringing back Solo as an end of bench big for what he makes. Or even Jeff for a one-year veteran minimum. I would prefer Jeff as a coach though. I think he could be a very good coach one day.
                "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


                • #38
                  Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                  correct me if i'm wrong, but Hibbert and Rush are already extended.

                  I say No to Roberts unless they want to keep him as a 10 or 12th man. Keep Hansbro as a backup and sign a really good PF free agent.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                    No, neither are "extended". They are still on their current rookie deals and the timeframe to be able to sign them to an early extensions begins 7/7/2011 and ends I believe 10/31/2011. They can only be extended the summer prior to their fourth year on their rookie deal. Typically teams will do this because they either have an All-Star caliber player they will sign regardless of money or they think they can get good young talent at a discount early rather than waiting until they are worth more.

                    I believe that our roster as it stands going forward, and how Bird described "10 core players", is right where we want to be. We are stong throughout our guard rotation with young guys. Granger/George/Rush and Collison/Price makes me feel rather comfortable. I just think we need one piece to add to our front court after Hibbert and before Josh/Hansborough. Even if we bring in another young guy to compete for the starting job, I think we have the core for a great team.
                    "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


                    • #40
                      Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                      Hibbert and Rush are in rookie deals till 2012...

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                        Originally posted by pacergod2 View Post
                        No, neither are "extended". They are still on their current rookie deals and the timeframe to be able to sign them to an early extensions begins 7/7/2011 and ends I believe 10/31/2011. They can only be extended the summer prior to their fourth year on their rookie deal. Typically teams will do this because they either have an All-Star caliber player they will sign regardless of money or they think they can get good young talent at a discount early rather than waiting until they are worth more.

                        I believe that our roster as it stands going forward, and how Bird described "10 core players", is right where we want to be. We are stong throughout our guard rotation with young guys. Granger/George/Rush and Collison/Price makes me feel rather comfortable. I just think we need one piece to add to our front court after Hibbert and before Josh/Hansborough. Even if we bring in another young guy to compete for the starting job, I think we have the core for a great team.
                        I agree, I think we need a backup for Hibbert, and a starting PF. (only because I don't expect Foster to be healthy/play for many more years..)

                        Although, I think it's plenty possibly to have a
                        Hibbert/Josh
                        PF/Hans

                        Rotation..

                        With the guard rotation, my only concern is Rush and his consistency. I think Paul George will eventually be our starting SG..and a rather good one (great one..possibly All Star Level one) My question is..how long will it take him to get there, and can Brandon hold down the starting SG position until then.

                        That's one of the reasons why I thought a trade for Rip wouldn't be that bad. Having a wing rotation of Rip/Granger/Brandon/George, for three years would give George time to grow, and give us a veteran, that's actually pretty good. (Personally, I just think he needs a new place to play..and playing in a system with a lot of ball movement would help him a lot.)

                        Of course, if Brandon was consistent (I don't mean offensively, I mean with his effort) I'd be fine with just giving him the starting spot until George is ready. I think that's something though, that we should be paying attention to, at the trade deadline.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                          I prefer the option of maintaining cap flexibility as opposed to overpaying any free agent from this class. Make a Michael Beasley or Eric Maynor sort of trade, or at least leave that sort of option open. I fear we are going to spend a lot of money on Carl Landry, which doesn't get me very excited.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            I prefer the option of maintaining cap flexibility as opposed to overpaying any free agent from this class. Make a Michael Beasley or Eric Maynor sort of trade, or at least leave that sort of option open. I fear we are going to spend a lot of money on Carl Landry, which doesn't get me very excited.
                            Agreed, big money on Carl Landry is what I'd be afraid off too. Unless it's Zach Randolph, David West, J-Rich, just keep the cap and add role players.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                              I like Rip but have heard he's gone down hill of recent. Has he lost a step? If so, would resigning Dun be a better option? Or sticking with Dahntay with a new coach and system?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                                Originally posted by MyFavMartin View Post
                                I like Rip but have heard he's gone down hill of recent. Has he lost a step? If so, would resigning Dun be a better option? Or sticking with Dahntay with a new coach and system?
                                paul /Dahntay/lance rip is no where near being worth 12 mill at his age and mike ugg. Wilson Chanler woulnt be bad but he is a RFA and will get lots of money.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X