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

Iguodala is tradable

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

    Iguodala is tradable

    Philly Inquirer
    By Kate Fegan
    http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/..._Iguodala.html

    Determining the correct move feels a little like navigating a labyrinth: so many corners, so many decisions, and even when you get to the end you might still find yourself dropping through a hole.

    It's a yes-or-no query, but the surrounding factors complicate the matter, especially considering that management's decision could be the difference between continued mediocrity and impending relevance.

    They can't get this one wrong, they just can't.

    As the calendar shifts from January to February, the NBA's trading deadline is no longer hidden. That deadline, Feb. 24, is like a floating neon sign over Iguodala's head.

    Will they or won't they? Should they or shouldn't they? Can they or can't they?

    Before we lay out the web of thoughts tangling each side of the debate, let's start with a hypothesis born from many phone calls, text messages, and research. Without this forthcoming hypothesis, there would be no need for discussion because Iguodala would be untradable. Under those circumstances, it would matter very little what the franchise did or did not want.

    Our hypothesis? Iguodala is tradable.

    Opportunities absolutely do exist for the Sixers to receive expiring contracts for Iguodala, although the level of "basketball value" the Sixers could find in return is probably uneven to the level of "basketball value" Iguodala possesses.

    The discrepancy exists because of Iguodala's over-the-top contract, on which he is still owed approximately $44 million through the 2013-14 season.

    Working forward from that hypothesis, Sixers fans must ask themselves: Do I want management to trade Iguodala for an expiring contract or player(s) who will likely be less talented? Am I prepared to give away a known asset for an unknown one?

    If you've answered "Yes, it's time to trade Iguodala," then here's the reasoning: Iguodala may be a known quantity, but that known quantity has never proven capable of leading his team past the first round of the NBA playoffs.

    Regardless of the value of return on a potential trade, whether the Sixers receive an expiring contract or a couple of similarly overrated players, the most important consideration is moving on from the "Iguodala era" and freeing the younger players - namely Evan Turner, Thaddeus Young, Jrue Holiday, and Lou Williams - for their chance at leading this franchise.Even if the Sixers have a shot at this season's playoffs, it's meaningless in the NBA to be the sixth, seventh, or eighth seed. The team would merely be delaying the inevitable: admitting they're not good enough to contend. Yes, trading Iguodala might make it more difficult for the team to earn one of the aforementioned playoff spots, but at this time the franchise can't concern itself with meaningless playoff appearances when faced with such a crucial decision.

    A disconnect exists right now among Iguodala, the fans, and the franchise. He's ready for his ticket elsewhere. The fans are ready. The only party yet to realize this is Sixers management.

    Make the trade. Make the best trade offered.

    If you've answered "No, let's wait a second," then here's the reasoning: The Sixers look as if they're starting to figure things out and now is not the time to disrupt that rhythm.

    Who knows what Doug Collins might be able to do with this roster? He's already exceeded expectations and has the team on a collision course with the playoffs. Losing Iguodala, especially for an expiring contract without on-court basketball value, would jeopardize what appears to be a jelling core of players.

    Of course a lower playoff seed is not precisely where this franchise wants to be, but as long as Collins has things moving from bad to better, management should keep this roster intact.

    The Sixers shouldn't want free-agent cap space, anyway. It's not as if the franchise can easily lure top-level talent away from other markets, so the end result might be a free-agent signing that is beneath what Iguodala already offers.

    The Sixers should wait, be patient, and let Collins reassess at season's end.

    Like we said, this question is tangled. The answer isn't easy.

    But the decision, whatever it may be, is crucial.
    Just some more Iggy trade buzz. nothing connected directly to the 76ers but offers an interesting read. him and Danny would make an awesome duo.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Iguodala is tradable

    This seems more like a journalists opinion instead of something from the 76ers organization. I believe they would trade Iguadala, but this article is nothing significant.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Iguodala is tradable

      Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
      This seems more like a journalists opinion instead of something from the 76ers organization. I believe they would trade Iguadala, but this article is nothing significant.
      Correct. It's the journalists opinion. League reports say the 76ers are keeping him this year.

      And really, if you agree with the sentiments of the writer (not that I do), wouldn't putting Igoudala on the Pacers' roster right now be duplicating the situation he's in with Philly? It'd just be one of those change of scenery things.

      And really, the 76ers asking price is most likely too high. Expiring contracts and a 2nd round pick won't cut it. There are plenty of teams with expiring contracts and they'd get some good offers.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Iguodala is tradable

        I think Dallas should make a strong push for Iguodala. With Caron Butler out they could use another wing. I think Butler's contract is expiring and paid mostly by insurance.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Iguodala is tradable

          I don't care whether he is available or not, I don't want us to make a run at him. I've totally reversed course on this one as the year has gone on, and Paul George is very close to being untouchable in my eyes, and I assume it would take him to land AI.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Iguodala is tradable

            Originally posted by cdash View Post
            I don't care whether he is available or not, I don't want us to make a run at him. I've totally reversed course on this one as the year has gone on, and Paul George is very close to being untouchable in my eyes, and I assume it would take him to land AI.
            Same, same as always. Iggy would probably be good for us for the end of the year to try to make a run, but I get a feeling that starting next season Paul George is ready to start- even over Igoudala.

            To trade for him would be somewhat shortsighted looking at his contract. Granted, he would be good for us.

            Let me just say that I would only approve of picking up Iggy only if Paul George isn't included.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Iguodala is tradable

              As long as he doesn't end up here.
              Go Pacers!

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Iguodala is tradable

                Originally posted by BobbyMac View Post
                As long as he doesn't end up here.
                Ok. I'll take that back. I'd be happy to trade Rush for him. Straight up! no draft picks, I might include rights to Stanko.
                Go Pacers!

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Iguodala is tradable

                  Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                  Same, same as always. Iggy would probably be good for us for the end of the year to try to make a run, but I get a feeling that starting next season Paul George is ready to start- even over Igoudala.

                  To trade for him would be somewhat shortsighted looking at his contract. Granted, he would be good for us.

                  Let me just say that I would only approve of picking up Iggy only if Paul George isn't included.
                  I agree, I've backed off.

                  I still want Iggy, but only if we can get him without offering Paul George.

                  An Iggy/Granger/George wing rotation is nice..It also allows for Paul George to not have as much pressure/come along slower. And there's plenty of minutes to go around in a three wing rotation.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Iguodala is tradable

                    Originally posted by cdash View Post
                    I don't care whether he is available or not, I don't want us to make a run at him. I've totally reversed course on this one as the year has gone on, and Paul George is very close to being untouchable in my eyes, and I assume it would take him to land AI.
                    i am right there with you. changed course as well, still would like to see the pacers get AI, but then again, the cap space is perhaps more valuable to me at this time as a fan of the pacers.

                    there is no way the pacers should trade paul george, unless its eric gordon. rush, dunleavy, 1st would be okay, add posey and d jones. AI as a player is great, but his contract brings down any value philly would recieve in return.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Iguodala is tradable

                      The Pacers need bigs. Powerforwards or centers.
                      {o,o}
                      |)__)
                      -"-"-

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Iguodala is tradable

                        I wouldn't give up Paul George for him anymore. Would Dunleavy and Rush be enough to get Iggy? It seems like his value is pretty low right now, could be a steal.
                        "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                        - ilive4sports

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Iguodala is tradable

                          Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                          I wouldn't give up Paul George for him anymore. Would Dunleavy and Rush be enough to get Iggy? It seems like his value is pretty low right now, could be a steal.

                          I would think one of the 2 would get it done if not walk away

                          Dunleavy, Rush, 1st or

                          Ford, Rush, 1st

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Iguodala is tradable

                            No way would I give up a 1st in a deal for anything other than a PF or PF/C. Keep that pick until we acquire the frontcourt man we need. Then, if the pick isn't involved in that trade, the Pacers can use it however they wish, even acquiring AI as far as I'm concerned.

                            But DO NOT risk losing out on an opportunity to acquire the right big man for this team because we don't have a 1st round pick to throw into the package.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Iguodala is tradable

                              dunleavy, Mcbob, and 1st rounder for josh Smith? Be able to move horford back to the 4.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X