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

JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

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

  • #91
    Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    Agreed.

    I suspect a healthy Dunleavy is significantly more valuable than Redick. I don't get the love for him. He's a miniature SG who will amount to nothing. We are talking about a backup. I suppose if we can trade bad contracts it might be worth it...

    ...but tell me...is he worth acquiring if you have to sit Dunleavy or Rush on the bench AND lose whatever Foster can do for you?

    I think not.
    LMAO. If You Are Under The Impression That Mike Dunleavy, Healthy Or Not, Would Start For The Orlando Magic Or Any Other Team That Is Better Than Us For That Matter, You Are Painfully Mistaken. And To Answer Your Question, Rush Would Start And Dunleavy Would Be Strapped To The Bench.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

      One more thing....this is pure 'spitballin' on the part of the Writer. My guess is that he pointed out the obvious.....the Magic now have a huge platoon of Wing Players and they need to thin out the herd while looking for more depth in their non-existent Frontcourt. He essentially threw out a listing of Big Men that had expiring Contracts.

      IMHO.....the only trade scenario that I can come up with is to wait until the trade deadline and figure out some 3-team Trade with the Magic where the Pacers send out Foster and Dunleavy ( or TJ ) and get back JRich. Dunleavy would then be sent to some 3rd Team while that 3rd Team sends back another Player to the Magic. JRich is the only Player that makes any sense for the Pacers in the short term.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

        Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
        I asked before the Hornets game if Foster's 2nd start was for trade reasons, or perhaps he was just finally healthy.

        I think it's both, though I think he play recently will make the Pacers think twice before trading him.

        I'm perfectly fine keeping Jeff Foster if he plays like he did against the Hornets throughout the season, but I don't know the odds of that happening? I mean a few games ago he couldn't surpass Solo on the depth chart. What happens if he hurts his back again?

        Now I do agree Redick is overpaid, but I also think he's a better player than given credit for. We all know he can shoot, but he's actually been a pretty good defender and a nice passer as well.

        I agree we do have too many wings already, but if we could get Bass or Ryan Anderson as well I'd be fine with the trade, and use JMac as backup center off and on with Solo
        I agree on Foster.

        IMHO....I think that Foster is only going to improve and get back into "game-shape". Keep in mind that he's essentially played 16 games last season only 7 games this season...so it's not surprising that he has a lot of rust to shake off.

        My guess is that his performance will improve, he'll play more and get more consistent minutes...he'll start to do what he used to do....and as we get closer to the trade deadline...if we don't get the type of offers that are blowing Bird away....we'll keep him for the inevitable playoff push.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

          Originally posted by LA_Confidential View Post
          LMAO. If You Are Under The Impression That Mike Dunleavy, Healthy Or Not, Would Start For The Orlando Magic Or Any Other Team That Is Better Than Us For That Matter, You Are Painfully Mistaken. And To Answer Your Question, Rush Would Start And Dunleavy Would Be Strapped To The Bench.
          Clearly neither Redick or Dun is the answer but bringing in Redick to replace Dun and getting rid of foster is a commitment to prolonging the financial misery of the Murphy-Dunleavy trade.

          I can't imagine why any pacer fan would want to do that. Redick will never be an AS or anything more than he is. Upside is limited.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

            Originally posted by Hibbert View Post
            JJ Reddick as a starter this year:

            14.6 PTS, 3.4 AST, 3.2 REB, 1 STL, 3.2 FT attempts @ 93.75%, 5.4 3PT attempts @ .444%, and shooting 46% on FG's taking 10 a game.

            Mike as a starter this year:

            12.8 PTS, 2.2 AST, 5.6 REB, 0.63 STL, 2.7 FT attempts @ 76.92%, 5 3PT attempts @ .379%, and shooting 43% on FG's taking 10.1 a game.
            Reddick has started 5 games this year, pretty small sampling.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

              Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
              Clearly neither Redick or Dun is the answer but bringing in Redick to replace Dun and getting rid of foster is a commitment to prolonging the financial misery of the Murphy-Dunleavy trade.

              I can't imagine why any pacer fan would want to do that. Redick will never be an AS or anything more than he is. Upside is limited.
              No It Wouldnt. Dunleavy Still Comes Off The Books, Ford Still Comes Off The Books and Tinsley Comes Off The Books. Posey Is Still Tradeable, If Not He Comes Off The Books After Next Season. Who's In Line For An Extension? Nobody. Maybe 3-5Mil For Josh. Whatever Is Spent In The Off Season Will Be On New Pieces.

              Redick For Jeff, We'd Be Robbing Orlando.

              Most Seem To Be In Favor Of Seeing Dunleavy Retained "At A Much Cheaper Price". They Guy Makes 10Mil This Year, How Cheap Do You Think He's Gonna Be? Seriously?

              No Upside? Redick Is What, 25, 26? And He's Almost Automatic From Deep.

              Sometimes I Wonder.

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

                Originally posted by LA_Confidential View Post
                No It Wouldnt. Dunleavy Still Comes Off The Books, Ford Still Comes Off The Books and Tinsley Comes Off The Books. Posey Is Still Tradeable, If Not He Comes Off The Books After Next Season. Who's In Line For An Extension? Nobody. Maybe 3-5Mil For Josh. Whatever Is Spent In The Off Season Will Be On New Pieces.

                Redick For Jeff, We'd Be Robbing Orlando.

                Most Seem To Be In Favor Of Seeing Dunleavy Retained "At A Much Cheaper Price". They Guy Makes 10Mil This Year, How Cheap Do You Think He's Gonna Be? Seriously?

                No Upside? Redick Is What, 25, 26? And He's Almost Automatic From Deep.

                Sometimes I Wonder.
                The only reasons why I do not want to consider Reddick is because he's not Starting material and that we already have Posey sucking up most of the remaining SG/SF minutes behind Granger and BRush.

                On top of that....I don't see a SG/SF rotation of Granger/BRush/Reddick/Posey that much better then what we have now with Granger/BRush/Dunleavy/Posey....both spell "mediocre" to me. In order to get to that next level....we have to be better then Mediocre.

                Many of you don't think that there is a need to improve our SG rotation....but IMHO...I do not think that BRush is Starting material and that PG is going to be that guy for another two seasons. To me, the Starting SG spot is the easiest spot to improve between now and the offseason while providing the most impact to the Team at an acceptable price given the options that are out there ( at least in FA ). Yes, PF is the position that we need to improve the most on...but our options to improve at the PF spot is limited...even during the summer of 2011 offseason.

                I'd agree with you IF Posey were sent packing as well and Reddick were to fill the roll as a rotational SG.....but given that Posey is not going anywhere soon ( mainly due to his contract )...if we had to spend $$$ on another Wing Player....I'd rather use it on a SG that is considered Starting material rather then a Backup 6th-8th rotational Wing Player.
                Last edited by CableKC; 12-23-2010, 08:04 PM.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

                  Reddick is a step backwards for this team both offensively and defensively. Too many 3s, not enough defense.

                  I'm also not sure what his game will look like when he isn't getting the ball on kickouts when he's wide open. Hibbert does not get as deep in the paint or command as much attention from the other team's defense.

                  I would trade Foster for peanuts if it meant getting rid of Dunleavy, I sure as hell don't want Mike's minime coming back the other way.

                  Although, I fully support this trade if we can get Murphy back.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

                    The bottom line is that Redick will be a backup even on the Pacers. A backup is not worth that amount of money. Also, I don't think we have a worse contract on the roster simply due to the length. Dude will compete for minutes with George...who will be much, much better before JJ's contract is over, Rush who is already much, much better simply because he blows JJ off the earth on D, and Granger...who of course is on a different planet as well.

                    Seriously, what do you do next year when George, Rush and Granger are all obviously much better players? While he can shoot arguably better than even those three who are very good themselves, he is not even remotely as good defensively.

                    This really is Redickulous.

                    Comment


                    • Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

                      Originally posted by judicata View Post
                      Reddick is a step backwards for this team both offensively and defensively. Too many 3s, not enough defense.

                      I'm also not sure what his game will look like when he isn't getting the ball on kickouts when he's wide open. Hibbert does not get as deep in the paint or command as much attention from the other team's defense.

                      I would trade Foster for peanuts if it meant getting rid of Dunleavy, I sure as hell don't want Mike's minime coming back the other way.

                      Although, I fully support this trade if we can get Murphy back.
                      You forgot the green font buddy. That's beyond Redickulous.

                      Comment


                      • Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

                        Originally posted by LA_Confidential View Post
                        No It Wouldnt. Dunleavy Still Comes Off The Books, Ford Still Comes Off The Books and Tinsley Comes Off The Books. Posey Is Still Tradeable, If Not He Comes Off The Books After Next Season. Who's In Line For An Extension? Nobody. Maybe 3-5Mil For Josh. Whatever Is Spent In The Off Season Will Be On New Pieces.

                        Redick For Jeff, We'd Be Robbing Orlando.

                        Most Seem To Be In Favor Of Seeing Dunleavy Retained "At A Much Cheaper Price". They Guy Makes 10Mil This Year, How Cheap Do You Think He's Gonna Be? Seriously?

                        No Upside? Redick Is What, 25, 26? And He's Almost Automatic From Deep.

                        Sometimes I Wonder.
                        Sometimes I wonder also. The guy scores 9 ppg, does not start, and has been in the league 4 years. Assists and rebounds are not impressive and he is small for a SG.

                        Obviously you see something the rest of us can't or we see something you can't. Lots of guys are 25,26 so i don't know why that matters.

                        It's not between Dun and Redick. We have the potential to do better than both. As for Dun he will be cheaper than Redick. Exactly when did Redick become this awesome player? Kapono is also automatic from deep.

                        We need to think large. We don't need to denigrate Redick to suggest that he isn't the answer. He's just ok.

                        Comment


                        • Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

                          I probably would not do this, even though I think JJ is very underrated - I think he can start and his defense is pretty good.

                          Comment


                          • Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

                            I've changed my mind; I wouldn't do it. With Rush and/or Paul, there's no point.

                            Comment


                            • Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

                              If the Pacers could get their starting 2 guard by trading Jeff Foster, I'm all for it.

                              The problem is, that's not what they would be getting...and he's paid too much to sit him on the bench. You all know he's over a year older than Rush and is paid 7.5 million a year...don't you?

                              His strength is supposedly shooting and his 3Pt% is worse than both Rush and Granger's...even though there's a behemoth in the paint to distract the opposing defense. The reason why he's not shooting 50% from 3 is probably because he's a short SG...

                              Comment


                              • Re: JJ Redick for Jeff Foster trade rumor

                                Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                                I've changed my mind; I wouldn't do it. With Rush and/or Paul, there's no point.
                                Do you think we could get something better for Foster? I'm not sure. If we could, obviously we should take it, and we should hold out until the deadline (or until he's had a healthy stretch and we think his value is as high as it's going to be) for the best deal.

                                However, there is value to adding assets even if they're not a perfect fit. The Pacers are not a formed squad, there will be lots of additions and subtractions before this squad is ready to compete. If JJ is the best player we can get for Foster we should take him. Someone is going to want Reddick if he doesn't work out for us, and unlike Foster his value isn't diminishing every year. Of course, I personally think he's a pretty solid fit, as shooters who are decent defenders can always find a niche. But even if you think he's not, there's still a case to be made for this trade.

                                As I write this, the new-look Magic are drilling the Spurs and JJ is having a solid game. Just from the make-up of this squad, I think his stats will bump up, he's getting more opportunities now. He might not be available.
                                2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X