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.
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
-
Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??. -
Re: Take my big man, please.
But ... Sonics need a big man
By DAVID LOCKE
SPECIAL TO THE POST-INTELLIGENCER
The calendar says we are within two weeks of the NBA trade deadline, and Sonics fans are singing the same anthem: "Get us a big man."
In the NFL, the quest is for a pass-rushing defensive end. In baseball, it is a No. 1 starter. And in the NBA, it is the big man. Each is equally elusive.
As the Sonics front office makes calls around the league, they are finding few big men available. Those who are available all have one significant problem: They are available.
The big guys that teams are willing to move come with a serious "BUT" statement.
The players we dream of -- Kevin Garnett, Dirk Nowitzki or Jermaine O'Neal -- are not obtainable. Even Kwame Brown, the former No. 1 overall pick of the Washington Wizards, once the bust of the league, has been withdrawn from trade talks.
According to league sources, the available players include Shareef Abdur-Rahim, Eddy Curry, Tyson Chandler, Rasheed Wallace, Michael Olowokandi and Scot Pollard.
The thought of Abdur-Rahim brings visions of grandeur. Ray Allen, Rashard Lewis and Abdur-Rahim, can you imagine?
Abdur-Rahim's numbers are terrific -- career averages of 20.9 points and 8.6 rebounds. He is a legitimate low-post player. He does a great job getting to the free-throw line. He is remarkably consistent night to night. Just 27 years old, he is playing his eighth season.
BUT, he is the biggest anomaly in the NBA. Year in and year out he puts up wonderful numbers and year in and year out his teams crank up 50 losses. If he were that good, his teams would have at least broken .500 once. He is notoriously soft and turnover-prone. His defense makes you wish for Lewis.
Abdur-Rahim has two years left on a maximum contract; he is not a max player. The kicker? His agents are the Goodwin brothers, the same people the Sonics brawled with over Gary Payton. Do the Sonics want to deal with that again?
Eddy Curry's combination of size and skills makes one drool. He stands 7 feet tall and is just 21. The former No. 4 draft pick has great touch around the basket and has flashed the ability to be a low-post threat. His size is his top asset.
Last season, he led the league in shooting percentage. In the second half of last season, he shot 62 percent and averaged 17 points and 6 rebounds. His past two games, Curry has scored 27 and 25 points against the Blazers and Sonics.
BUT, he is openly referred to as a "mutt" inside NBA circles. He was nearly 70 pounds overweight when he was a high school senior. If he can't take care of himself, why should you invest your future in him? His rebounding is inadequate for a center. In January, he averaged 4.8 rebounds a game. His commitment, desire and effort to get any better are seriously in doubt. Is that what you want out of a franchise piece?
Curry's teammate is Tyson Chandler. Nate McMillan said Chandler has "the ability to do Kevin Garnett-type things with his body." It is a fair comparison at 7-1 and 235 pounds. Chandler loves to rebound and defend ... a rare combination in a 21-year-old. The No. 2 pick of the 2001 NBA draft is averaging 12 points and 10 rebounds. In the first two weeks this season, he had one night of 22 points and another of 22 rebounds.
BUT, he has played just 12 of 49 games due to a sore back. Are you willing to rest your franchise on a 21-year-old with back problems?
Wallace has Tim Duncan-like skills. His body is brilliant. His offensive versatility is dynamic. He is capable of scoring 30 points without a great deal of effort.
BUT, he is Rasheed Wallace. Enough said.
The last two names being bandied about exemplify how difficult it is to get big men.
In the off-season, the Minnesota Timberwolves were convinced they had filled their gap in the middle with Olowokandi. The Indiana Pacers believed the same when they replaced Brad Miller with Pollard.
However, before reaching the All-Star break, both the Timberwolves and Pacers are accepting calls from around the league regarding both players.
Olowokandi, the first overall pick of the 1998 NBA draft, has played just 15 games this season due to injuries. Even when healthy, he managed just 21 minutes a night, with averages of six points and four rebounds. That certainly is not the answer.
Pollard can't contribute in Indiana. Thirteen times this season Pollard hasn't left the bench. Indiana was convinced Pollard would pick up the slack of Miller's departure, and be a better rebounder and a tougher presence inside. He hasn't come close.
Which gamble are you willing to take with your franchise? That is what it comes down to. If a big man is "available," there is a reason, and you have to gamble on that reason.
The scary fact is, any of the first four players would be an upgrade for the Sonics.
David Locke hosts "Locked on Sports" from 7-10 p.m. weeknights on Sports Radio 950 KJR-AM. His column appears Wednesdays in the P-I. You can e-mail him at Davidlocke@clearchannel.com.Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
And life itself, rushing over me
Life itself, the wind in black elms,
Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you
-
Re: Take my big man, please.
I'd give them Pollard for a pound of Starbucks, and I don't drink coffee.
Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
And life itself, rushing over me
Life itself, the wind in black elms,
Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you
Comment
-
Re: Take my big man, please.
I figured the Pacer reference would be in regards to Al Harrington. Pollard's available, which is really not new or earth-shattering news. Anyone have ideas who we could realistically acquire for Pollard?
<edit> I'm thinking we could get like 5 pounds of Starbucks for Pollard. Maybe even a mocaccino or something as a kicker.
Comment
-
Re: Take my big man, please.
Why in the heck did they think Pollard would be a better rebounder and tougher presence inside? I know some people on here deluded themselves into thinking that but to me that was more wanting to believe than actually thinking that. I could be wrong I dont know I was one of the people pointing out that he has never ever gotten more rebounds or scored more points.
But for the pacer brass to think that would be the case is incusable. It is there job to notice little things like Pollard had peaked and was on the downslope and Brad was getting better. But I digress.
Please please dump Pollard for either an ending deal or to the Jazz for nothing. At least then the Brad fiasco will have left us with money to pay Tins and maybe pick up someone with the mid level. Or trade him to the Magic for Howard. He is no center but try telling me that Pollard is. They want to run and gun which is where Pollard was tolerable so they might be tricked into taking him.Comment
-
Re: Take my big man, please.
I like Starbucks...works for me.
How about a draft pick? Which brings me to something I had thought of for a new thread, but since this is my thread I'm not really stealing it...am I??
I often read where LB isn't availabe for comment because he's out on a college scouting trip...or scouting in Europe or Africa. Seems like that is a rediculous waste of his time considering we're going to draft like 29th or so. I can only see this as one of 3 options:
1) He has nothing else to do with running the P's... other than a being a glorified scout
2) He considers EVERY draft pick really really important
3) He intends to move well up in the draft and wants to be ready with a rabbit to pull outta the hat.
4) It's a simple ruse to avoid commenting. (nah that isn't much fun to ponder)
Is that thought worth commenting or is it only interesting to me?Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.Comment
-
Re: Take my big man, please.
Yet he always seems to be at the gamesComment
-
Re: Take my big man, please.
It's a stunt double. That way a fan can attack the SD instead of Larry for not resigning Brad...Yet he always seems to be at the games
ed:
Originally posted by Natston;n3510291Comment
-
Re: Take my big man, please.
I'm normally sympathetic to comments like that one, but DW and Bird did say publicly in the summer/ preseason that they expected Scot to elevate his game and be our starting center; he was the preseason starting center; and he started the first two regular season games at center.You have NO IDEA that's what they thought. This writer has NO IDEA that's what they thought. They never said anything close to that publicly, or to a Seattle writer. The only people that did were people on message boards, and beat writers not affiliated with the team. Let it go.
http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/column_030725.html
http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/bird_030818.htmlWalsh is not trying to present Pollard as a better player than Brad Miller. But he is a player whose profile seems to fit perfectly with the rest of the roster. He won’t need the ball but he will go get it. He gives up his body to do the dirty work necessary to make teammates look better. He can play as many, or as few, minutes as the coaching staff determines are necessary to get the job done – without complaint.
“He’s a different type player than Brad,” Walsh said. “He’s bigger, longer, probably a little more tenacious under the backboard. But he does a lot of things like Brad. He can run the floor like Brad did. I don’t think he’s as good an outside shooter, but he is a good shooter in his range. Both of them are good passers and this guy is a good defender and he’s got a great body.
“He brings a lot to us that I wouldn’t say is any better than Brad but it’s a little different than Brad. It gives us some elements we didn’t have last year with Brad, but we’ll lose some elements Brad gave us.”
Walsh also pointed out another similarity: the circumstances under which each player came to Indiana. Miller had been primarily a backup, and was certainly a journeyman, when the Pacers acquired him in the seven-player deal with Chicago. The Pacers wanted him to defend centers, allowing O’Neal to move full-time to power forward, get rebounds and make the occasional basket. Pollard is walking into precisely the same role. This is not to say he will blossom into an All-Star, but that is not the expectation – just as it wasn’t for Miller.
The Pacers don’t have all the pieces to the puzzle. But the pieces they do have fit better.
And here’s the thing: it’s July.
The 2003-04 schedule hasn’t even been released yet, and the knee-jerk critics would have us believe the season already is over.
As for Walsh and Bird? They’re just getting started.
I've not complained a lot about the Pacers no longer having Brad. When he got too expensive, I was fine with letting him walk to Denver. I just didn't want to the Pacers to trade him for a third-string center.Q. If I'm not mistaken, one of the biggest fan favorites of most Pacers fans was a hard-nosed, blue-collar, defensive-minded, rebounding fool named Dale Davis. Scot Pollard seems to be that type of guy to me. I think Pacer fans need to see past the weird hair and painted fingernails, and just maybe they will find a Dale Davis type of player who is willing to give everything he's got when he is on the floor in a blue and gold uniform. What are your expectations from Pollard? Do you see him as a 10-point, 10-rebound type of player? Or do you envision much more out of him? (From Travis in Indianapolis)
A. It’d be nice if we could get 10 points and 10 rebounds out of anybody. Dale Davis brought a presence to our team that I don’t think anybody else can. Dale did all the dirty work, played under control, did exactly what he had to do for us to win games. Hopefully, Scot can fill that role.
Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
And life itself, rushing over me
Life itself, the wind in black elms,
Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you
Comment
-
Re: Take my big man, please.
It said better rebounder and tougher. Not hard to accomplish. Hardly saying "be a better player".yes, I remember all that. They, however, did not say he would be an upgrade over Brad, as was implied earlier.
He can't catch, no one said otherwise. He can't shoot, some of us thought he had a chance at developing, but no more than we think Jeff can learn to shoot. He can't pass. No one said he could pass.
But if he banged inside with less whining and had grabbed about 8 or so rebounds as a starter, I wouldn't have been shocked.Comment
-
Re: Take my big man, please.
Fair enough.yes, I remember all that. They, however, did not say he would be an upgrade over Brad, as was implied earlier.
I'm trying to track down the Indy Men's Magazine interview with Bird, I think he said some flowery things about Pollard in that interview (but I guess its not available online.)
If my folks still have it, I'll try to post the contents of that interview this weekend when I'm in Indy...Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
And life itself, rushing over me
Life itself, the wind in black elms,
Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you
Comment
-
Re: Take my big man, please.
it was a prevailing thought that Pollard would be just as good a rebounder and a better low post defender.
I do think Pollard is a better low post defender than Brad.
Pollard's hands are so bad that it hurts his rebounding.Comment
-
Re: Take my big man, please.
Indiana trades:
C Scot Pollard (1.6 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 0.1 apg in 11.2 minutes)
Indiana receives:
SG Brent Barry (10.6 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 5.5 apg in 30.8 minutes)
Change in team outlook: +9.0 ppg, +0.9 rpg, and +5.4 apg.
Seattle trades:
SG Brent Barry (10.6 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 5.5 apg in 30.8 minutes)
Seattle receives:
C Scot Pollard (1.6 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 0.1 apg in 36 games)
Change in team outlook: -9.0 ppg, -0.9 rpg, and -5.4 apg.
TRADE ACCEPTED
Seatlle seems to think that they won't re-sign him.
It seems to me that Seattle SHOULD NOT want to do this deal, but if hey would, I'd be all over it.
The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).Comment
-
Re: Take my big man, please.
I can't understand why (apparently) Seattle is interested in trading Barry to Boston for the also-expiring contract of Chris Mills. The C's must be kicking in a draft pick, but STILL that seems lopsided for Boston.The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).Comment
-
Re: Take my big man, please.
I've had the thought that he should play with wide receiver gloves, or maybe see if Lester Hayes has a few buckets of stickum he doesn't need....Pollard's hands are so bad that it hurts his rebounding.
PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731Comment
Tweet
Comment