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
-
-
Re: Do you like the pick and trade?
Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
Kid finally got a chance to play, and low and behold he produced? Bayless was the best player in that trade. We should have been in rebuilding mode. No use in trading a high upside guy like Bayless, for rentals and scrap. It was a stupid move then. Its a stupid move now.
If Bayless would have came here and got Rush,Jack, Earl Watson minutes. He'd be our 2nd option behind Granger right now. It would have probably eliminated the need to trade for George Hill.Comment
-
Re: Do you like the pick and trade?
No, actually, that's not the reality. Two people such as you and I can observe the same event and draw different conclusions while both being fair-minded and genuine. I didn't see it the way you saw it -- if you want to dismiss another person's opinion that's one thing. But when you pull out the crystal ball and use your psychic powers to divine my secret thinking (which is, apparently, that I have some grudgy bias against A.J. Price (what?)) then I have to reply.Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
You're wrong. Price's poor performance in the Chicago series did not confirm my previous notions, it defied them. I had previously felt that Price was a capable back-up. And I'm not referring to that series of sequences where he just seemed to completely fall apart. I felt throughout the series that his passes were late, that he dribbled the ball for too long, that his court vision seemed poor, and that the offense ground to a halt when he came into the game.
I was frustrated with his play long before the meltdown. I saw general bad play with occasional highlights. I saw inconsistency and selfishness. It took me by surprise. I have nothing against A.J. Price. I have no agenda of negativity against A.J. Price.
I thought he played badly. Do me the courtesy of simple disagreement, and don't try to discredit me by imagining my secret motives. If I'm wrong, then being wrong is discredit enough. I have no secret motives.
Thank you.Comment
-
Re: Do you like the pick and trade?
Interesting article from a San Antonio site. Not sure if it has been posted. Apparently Hill was NOT happy to be leaving the Spurs and his good friend DeJuan Blair. Relevant part of the article is quoted:
Link to the article: http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursna...-still-a-spur/Hill wasn’t happy to be the player traded to get him, and his pal, DeJuan Blair, was downright angry.
Selected in back-to-back drafts by a team that was older than dirt, Hill and Blair quickly became best buddies.
They hung out together, did commercials for a local business and created their own nicknames, “Big and Smalls.” The joke, of course, was that Hill, the 6-foot-2 guard, was “Big.” Blair, all 6-7 and 270 pounds, was “Smalls.”
Their goal, said Blair, was to become the “faces of the franchise” once Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker were done playing.
...
The fact Hill was traded to the team that plays in his hometown was no consolation. One of the most affable of Spurs was not up to speaking to the reporters he always accommodated, win or lose, hero or goat.
“He is real emotional right now,” said his agent, Michael Whitacre.
It seems quite possible that Hill will return to the Spurs once his contract is up. I wonder what the general opinion of this trade will be if that happens?Comment
-
Re: Do you like the pick and trade?
1. Look at the source.Originally posted by TheColdHardTruth View Post
2. He won't be going back to San Antonio if we have anything to do with it.
3. SA won't have the money to give him an offer. They traded him to make room.
PS- Multiple sources have said that he is HAPPY to be home.Comment
-
Re: Do you like the pick and trade?
all im sayin here is that u mention Bird "screwed up" the Bayless/Rush deal. your biased because u hate Bird, its that simple.Originally posted by aaronb View Post
im simply pointing out there was more to the Rush/Bayless deal than just those two.
so again the deal was Bayless/Diagu for Rush/McBob/Jack.
all things considered, McBob is a much better player than Diagu will ever be in this league, and Jack is one of the best b/u point gaurds in the league who outperformed our expectations and thus the reason we could not afford too resign him.
bottom line: its about winning a championship, not about potential. Potential rarely equates too talent.. dont believe me.. go back and look at the drafts of the past 10 years.. how many of those guys were expected too become the next big thing and yet where are they now ... Diagu was the 8th pick, and he sukks, just one example.
if that trade were on the table again today, i would hope Bird would do the same all over again.. Jack/McBob by themselves are better than Bayless/Diagu. like i said below, lets see what we get in return for rush before we close the book on that deal.
i have a hard time believing Bayless ever surpasses Jarret Jack in value for a contenting team.
and its not like Rush is awful, he can be a solid b/u sg/sf on a team, probably about all Bayless will ever equate too as well.
again.. if Bayless is so darn good why has he already played for 3+teams in only 3 seasons?Comment
-
Re: Do you like the pick and trade?
Only someone who hates Bird would suggest he screwed up the Rush/Bayless trade. Thats just plain old hatred or stupidity. One or the other.Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
The Pacers won that deal hands down. As a matter of fact, the deal was so much in the Pacers favor that they couldnt even afford to keep Jack. So really, Bird got to much for Bayless (who still stinks).
The 2 best players in that deal hands down were Jack and McBob. Period! End of discussion!Comment
-
Re: Do you like the pick and trade?
Roy just posted this:
I don't understand why people don't like our trade for G Hill and are questioning Larry. He knows what he doing. What do u guys think?@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!
Comment
-
Re: Do you like the pick and trade?
We utilized a portion of the Troy Murphy trade exception to make this happen. So Bird turned Troy Murphy into DC and George Hill! That man Bird is a bad mutha..Originally posted by Jaxxon View Post
Comment
-
Re: Do you like the pick and trade?
Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
Question. How many teams did Billups play on b4 Detroit? I'll save you the trouble of having to look it up. FOUR and he was 3rd in in his draft. My point is just b/c Bayless has been on a number of teams doesn't mean he won't be good. It just takes some people longer than others. Wrong team, bad fit, etc. I'm sure Billups heard the comments of loser those early years.Comment
-
Re: Do you like the pick and trade?
So I should be impressed with Bayless's last month of the season? You mean the stretch where his team went 2-6 while he was putting up points?"Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel
"And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "Comment
-
Re: Do you like the pick and trade?
Another guy that Hill could be compared to is Hinrich and many people here know how much I wanted that guy in the last few years
@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!Comment
-
Re: Do you like the pick and trade?
looks like arron doesnt have a sensible response too my post from eariler.. something i find in alotta the Bird critics i come across.
regarding AJ Price... i dont think this changes whether he stays with the Pacers or not. I like AJ and at one point in the season was thinking he was a better option than DC at starter. However, during the Bulls series when DC went down, it was obvious AJ will nvr be a starting point gaurd in this league, or capable of becoming one anyways.
maybe not news too anyone on here except Sookie, but if ur backup point gaurd plays that awful when given the chance too step in for the starter, then he is not a very good b/u point.
maybe it was nerves i dont know.. but Price played awful when DC went down vs. the Bulls.
I think AJ is a very good 3rd string point gaurd that is a capable backup on an average team. If AJ is ur b/u pg and the starter goes down, your team will be exploited at the position.
AJ"s ceiling is a very good b/u pg, and in time he may reach that potential, but right now he is a very good 3rd pg on the depth chart.
i will believe the Stephenson potential when i see it. who is the pacers 3rd string pg at this time...?? its not tj ford anylonger.
i see no reason why the pacers needed too include AJ Price in the deal with the Spurs. AJ has value and will likely get better, but he is a long ways away from being the b/u pg i want taking over if the starter goes down. 2-3 years from now maybe, but not next season.
Hill fills a huge need for this team and right now i feel very good about the gaurd rotation.
pg: DC, Hill, AJ
sg: George, Hill, DJ.. and wherever Lance fits into all this.
a year ago we had Earl Watson as our primary starter and PG was our most glaring weakness. one year later and PG is a postion that is no longer our top priority.. i think Bird critics need too take all this into consideration and give the man his due respect as one of the top GMs in the league.
its amazing how fickle some of the pacers fans are on these boards. DC may or may not be the answer at point for this team,, but right now im comfortable going into the season with the point gaurd rotation as it is today.
if you woulda told me last offseason before the draft that we would have DC, and George Hill I would not have believed it.
DC & Hill in exchange for Murphy, (15th pick in an average draft), euro prospect, 2nd rounder, and poseys contract...
Bird critics need too lay off the haterade.Comment
-
Re: Do you like the pick and trade?
then ur saying Bayless is going to become a pg on a championship contender and become a consistent allstar/ USA team member.?Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
i get ur point, i hope u see mine.
generally speaking, players that float around the league normally do not become allstars. most players who are traded frequently, its for a good reason.
question JT... is Bayless the difference b/t winning a championship.. because Billups is, and thats who ur comparing him too.
right now.. give me McBob/Jack over Bayless Diagu,, Rush sukks but he will still be in the league 5 years from now.. unless he is banned for substance abuse or something.
one more question just too emphasize my point.. how many other players have been traded multiple times and their first few season then go onto a HOF career.
Billups is one.. and since u saved us soo much time from me having too look up info i already was privy too.. pls take that time and give me a few more journeymen that are now allstars in this league.
can u name 5 active players?? cause i can go back and look at the last 10 drafts and find 20 players who were traded and am guessing are no longer in the league.
let me know how many guys u can find that were traded more than once during their rookie contracts and are now allstars like Billups.. or even consistent starters.Comment
-
Re: Do you like the pick and trade?
But see, that's what I am talking about. His nerves got the best of him for three minutes. At the end of the game, Price played probably the best PG play of the series (For the Pacers). But what do people remember....Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
Meanwhile, this entire board will still talk about how awesome Hans was in the playoffs, where as Hans had one good game. And was absolutely terrible, on both sides of the ball, the entire rest of the series.
I don't think it defines either of them. But I think it's unfair. Did it surprise me that Price reacted the way he did at first. Yea, it did. But given the circumstances, it wasn't really surprising that it happened. He's closed like, two games this season..and all of a sudden he got handed the reigns with a guy who hasn't played in three months to back him up if he fails. I however, think it says more about AJ with how he played at the end of the game, then what it says when he freaked out. But it seems like no one remembers that.
I just reacted to the "Price played terrible" mantra, because it's been said and exceedingly amount of times, and IMO, it just wasn't true. For instance, people whining about him holding on to the ball to long. Guys, that's a play. He dribbles the ball at the top of the key and calls for George/Granger/Rush/Dun to run off a screen and either get a shot or give it to a big. It's one of our better plays, but it takes a while, and it makes it seem like Price is just dribbling the ball for the heck of it. The bigger problem is if one of the wings doesn't come off a screen well, for whatever reason, the play breaks down..and the team doesn't have too much time to get another good shot. Shooting the ball too much? In most games, he was shooting quite well, and who was he supposed to pass it too? Rush? Foster or hobbled Josh? Dun - who was shooting at 30%. I thought he made the correct decision there.
I do think Price's ceiling is higher than some here. (Okay, a lot here). And that's okay. I can think others are wrong, others can think I'm crazy. I just personally think I've watched him enough to know it's there. But I really get the sense he's not going to get that opportunity here. Which is why I wouldn't mind seeing him traded. He was one of the better backup pgs in this league his rookie season, and no reason he can't play that way and improve when he gets to 100% and gets his mind right. The Pacers have DC and Hill, and their project Lance. There's no need for AJ.
Now, besides that.. I think Hill is a very good guard. And right now, he's probably the best guard we have at either position. (He won't be better than George forever, but he probably is now. And he's better than Rush, DC, AJ, and Lance - sorry Larry - ) So, for the 15th pick, and crap, it was very a very good trade. That said, it's not going to shock me if half the board is calling for his head at some point next season. Because he isn't perfect. But Larry did really really well this draft. I think we need an SG more than a PG, but we got someone to play both. So that works.Last edited by Sookie; 06-24-2011, 06:36 PM.Comment
Tweet
Comment