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

#2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

    Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
    My idea is to build a Championship team, not just take the approach with the least risk. It's about making the team better, not holding on to some guy just because he's my favorite player.

    What you don't seem to understand is that younger doesn't mean WORSE. You seem to think if Danny Granger gets dealt, the team falls apart. But you have no evidence to support that. You also seem to be stuck on this idea that these young guys will always be young. We are not going to contend for at least 2-3 more years at best. By then Granger will be 30 and starting This decline and his trade value will have vanished. A younger player like Derrick Favors will just be entering his prime.

    We also would still have money to spend on quality vets like a Shane Battier or a Tayshaun Prince. Just trading one veteran for a younger player doesn't mean you can't go out and bring in a few veterans to provide some experience to the roster.
    If the trade went through the way that we think it will go, below would be lineup that we have of core Players:

    PG - Rubio/DC
    SG - PG / ????
    SF - Beasley / DerrickW
    PF - ????? / Hansbrough
    C - Hibbert / ????

    Not included Players that may or may not get minutes - AJ, Inferno, Posey, Lance.

    That would be 6 core Players that are relatively young that would have to be guaranteed some # of minutes playing between 18 to 32 mpg ( depending on the Player ). Assuming that we stick with either a 8 or 9 man rotation....with the likely 6 Core Players.....that would mean adding 2 or 3 Veterans to fill the Starting ( or Backup ) SG spot, the Starting PF and a Backup Center. Again, the question is whether Veterans would be willing to come here to be the Leaders and Mentors of this younger core.

    But for me, making a move like this....there is a chance that we could simply pick up where we left off and be a Playoff Bubble / 1st Round Playoff Team.....but you have to be prepared for the likelihood that we COULD be going back in the other direction towards another rebuilding phase for the next 2 to 3 seasons due to the lack of experience.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

      Originally posted by trailrunner View Post
      I want young players that will become stars. Only George has that potential currently. Rubio, Williams and possibly Beasley have that potential. OK City is the template and they are led by their young stars. Sign a veteran FA in 2012.
      OKC was lucky to draft at the number 2 spot a prolific scorer. Can you imagine what they would be like had Portland gone another direction with that draft?

      There is no template.

      There is no one way to win a title and there is no one way better than another. If there was every single team would be doing the exact same thing to get there.

      So far the only template in the NBA is to be a franchise in Boston or have the name Lakers on your uniform.

      Youth in and of itself is no better than veteran players. Conversely Jim O'Brien should have taught us all that veteran players by themselves are no better than youth.


      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

      Comment


      • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

        beast23;1239278]It occurs to me that you, and a lot of others on here, don't seem to realize that the Pacers have already gone young. The core of the team contains Hibbert, Hansbrough, Collison, George and Granger. Primary backups still under contract are Price, Rush and DJones.

        That is 6 youngsters out of 8 primary players. How freaking much younger do we need to get? But what the hell? Let's go ahead and trade Granger for what will amount to 3 more youngsters. Let's see, that would make 9 youngsters out of 10 players. Plus Posey and Stevenson of course, but I don't count them because they are not going to play much anway.

        9 freaking youngsters out of 10 players. Is that what you want our roster to become? I don't know about you, but for me, that leaves us with a roster lacking of diversity. Who will be there with the experience and NBA know-how to show the way? Who will be there that can honestly say "been there, done that" to most situations?
        I don't know if you know this but an NBA roster can have up to 15 players, we could still have 10 young players and five veterans.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

        Comment


        • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

          Originally posted by trailrunner View Post
          I want young players that will become stars. Only George has that potential currently. Rubio, Williams and possibly Beasley have that potential. OK City is the template and they are led by their young stars. Sign a veteran FA in 2012.
          I think Hibbert has "star" potential. Not Super-star potential, mind you. But the 16-10-4 assists 3 block that Hibbert was for nearly half the season last year was a "star level player".

          Granger is currently a "star"

          If George reaches his potential we aren't as far off from being a pretty good team.
          Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

          Comment


          • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

            Originally posted by daschysta View Post
            I think Hibbert has "star" potential. Not Super-star potential, mind you. But the 16-10-4 assists 3 block that Hibbert was for nearly half the season last year was a "star level player".

            Granger is currently a "star"

            If George reaches his potential we aren't as far off from being a pretty good team.
            When Roy and PG reach their potential Danny is going to be like 32/33.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
              When Roy and PG reach their potential Danny is going to be like 32/33.
              Thats why i want to trade Danny. We are wasting his career. I dont think it will take that long for Roy but I also dont think he has much more room to grow. He will always disappear in big games in my opnion just because of his mentality.

              Comment


              • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

                I don't think Roy's mentality will limit him much...

                Part of his mentality is to work extremely hard, and be too hard on himself.

                The reason he gets taken out of big games has been more his slight frame than his mindset. If he improves his core he'll be fine.

                Also Danny should age splendidly he doesn't rely on athleticism like the vast majority of players as good as he is.

                If he ages well, but is still at a good level we'll be able to sign him for a good price, while still retaining utility, he'd be a nice vet, and we can use the savings to sign another good player.

                Most teams have good vets, you can't just have a team that's all the same age. Not every team is the thunder.

                The bulls also contenders have people like Deng...

                Randolph is part of memphis's core despite being older...

                And there are tons of other examples.

                there is nothing wrong with a mix of vets and youth... If Danny is truly at a lower level by that time we can sign him to a more reasonable contract as part of the team...

                Lets not get obsessed with youth at this point, we are obviously not going to tank for more of it, and taking a step back is no way to build on the fans goodwill after the playoff run.
                Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                Comment


                • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post

                  There is no template.
                  Yes, there is a template.

                  You move your franchise to a warm climate on the coast near a large city. All-star players will simply move there and you are assured of a championship. Of course, we have the Clippers to disprove that...but the way they have been managed explains that and more.

                  Comment


                  • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

                    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                    Yes, there is a template.

                    You move your franchise to a warm climate on the coast near a large city. All-star players will simply move there and you are assured of a championship. Of course, we have the Clippers to disprove that...but the way they have been managed explains that and more.
                    I've never seen a person so butt hurt about something that didn't even involve the team he roots for. You sound more scorned that Cleveland fans.

                    Comment


                    • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

                      Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                      Whatever happens, this is the year we find out if Larry Bird is a good GM or not. I'm anxious.
                      I'll tell you right now he's not. Morway is the GM.

                      And this probably isn't the year we do anything big.

                      A lot of you guys are expecting Bird to produce players when it doesn't look like there are but a handful of worthwhile players out there to get. Last I heard there will be 20 teams with some money to spend and there will be a couple GM's that will overpay to get those worthwhile players.

                      I don't want Bird paying to much for players like Atlanta did for Joe Johnson, and like Joe Dumars did up in Detroit for C. Villanueva, and Ben Gordon. If he can't get anyone without overpaying them I want him to sit on the money and wait for next year. If you are going to overpay players get a difference maker.

                      Comment


                      • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        If you trade Granger and get good but younger value, the team will be better off in the long run (i.e. 4-5 years from now).
                        No, the team MIGHT be better.

                        the only way the Indiana Pacers will ever even contend is to time their talent to peak at the right time similar to the way they did that in the 90's.
                        1. What you recommend isn't what the Pacers did to build that team.

                        2. Making a move to push winning basketball back 4-5 years ensures they won't be the INDIANA Pacers.
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

                          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                          No, the team MIGHT be better.


                          1. What you recommend isn't what the Pacers did to build that team.

                          2. Making a move to push winning basketball back 4-5 years ensures they won't be the INDIANA Pacers.
                          Yeah because keeping Danny Granger and winning 37 games a year would pretty much keep this team in Indiana........

                          Man I didn't know he had the equivalent to Lebron and Kobe here.....
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            Yeah because keeping Danny Granger and winning 37 games a year would pretty much keep this team in Indiana........

                            Man I didn't know he had the equivalent to Lebron and Kobe here.....
                            And not trading danny granger for young unproven players doesn't mean that we can't do other moves to improve the team, and it doesn't mean that our young players won't continue to improve.

                            Comment


                            • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              Yeah because keeping Danny Granger and winning 37 games a year would pretty much keep this team in Indiana........

                              Man I didn't know he had the equivalent to Lebron and Kobe here.....
                              I honestly think with a real coach the entire year (Vogel, Brown, etc.) and with this team's natural growth and confidence from this year's playoff run, we will be at least a 43 win team next year with no major changes. People keep talking about templates, I think the best comparison is Atlanta. We need one or two more savvy moves to jump us from young upstarts to legit contenders in the East. The Hawks stood pat too long and now they are between a rock and a hard place.

                              Comment


                              • Re: #2 pick, Michael Beasley, Ricky Rubio for Danny rumor? Woah.

                                Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                                No, the team MIGHT be better.


                                1. What you recommend isn't what the Pacers did to build that team.

                                2. Making a move to push winning basketball back 4-5 years ensures they won't be the INDIANA Pacers.
                                How does #2 have to do with anything?

                                You're thinking ridiculous things. Teams out there have sucked and sucked and why the **** does the location of the Pacers have to do with a thing. This is a business. Teams rebuild all the time and they don't worry about the location. The Pacers don't have a thing to worry about playing in Indianapolis at Conseco Fieldhouse. Luckily it's not Sacramento in Arco Arena like the Kings and having no brightside.

                                We have a damn lot.

                                As vnzla had said, Danny Granger is not the equivlent to a superstar. There are plenty fish in the sea and you're going to need to give up talent to get it and continue to add on. Luckily with the cap space, that will come in handy.

                                So, I'm really looking forward to what the near future has in stock for the Indiana Pacers and this city is very excited for the first time in quite a while. Everyone seems to be hopping back on board one by one and pretty soon, Pacers basketball will be back like it was in the late 90s-early 00s.
                                In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X