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

Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

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

  • #76
    Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

    Originally posted by CableKC View Post
    Given that we have also shifted to a Team mentality and culture where it is normal for us to have 5 to 6 Players in double figures...I'm not as concerned about sharing the ball. On top of that...I don't see Kaman as being the type of guy that is going to demand "touches" on the offensive end. That doesn't mean that the Team shouldn't get him involved...it just means that the Team would be stupid not to get him involved on the offensive end given his solid offensive game.
    Our days of getting 6 guys in double figures on the reg was over even without adding another scorer. Danny is getting his shots at a high clip since getting tossed earlier this year and along with West getting back in shape the bench looks had been plummeting in the process unless someone gets into foul trouble and Hill gets more run.

    Kaman's per-36 attempts would ranked only behind Danny on people who play this year and its well lower than his previous two years per-36 so he will no doubt expect to shoot and shoot often. The person this is going to hurt most is likely Hibbert because West will be needed to get his shots more with the starters rather than being the go to guy when he and Tyler would play together with one acting as the center. Roy needs 12-14 shots a night and is coming up short of that total to much this year as is.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

      If the Pacers were able to Bring in Kamen, you absolutely play him at the 4 and 5. First big off the bench in what ever situation. Hansbrough gets demoted to spot minutes, which quite frankly he deserves right about now with Lou being just as productive currently.

      Gosh what an exciting thought, Full on Twin Towers for about 10 mins a game.
      You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

        Originally posted by shockedandchagrined View Post
        I'm not going to comment on the merits of the trade for each party, but to me, this is the kind of thing I'm expecting the Pacers to try to do.
        The way I look at it:

        For the Hornets - they get the TPE that they would have gotten from the Pacers. If they want Courtney Lee or TWill as some insurance for added Guard depth...they can have him. If not...they can be left out of the deal entirely or the Pacers can take them on if they want.

        For the Pacers - If they don't want to give up a 1st just for a rental of Kaman but don't mind being the "facilitator" so that they can get back assets....the Pacers can get a 1st, Jordan Hill ( a Backup PF/C that you can justify to give 15 to 18 mpg that can play next to the rest of the Frontcourt ) and ( if they want ) Courtney Lee or TWill to help with the scoring. If either are taken out...the Pacers may be able to still swing some deal involving Morrow.

        For the Rockets - they get Kaman while sending out the necessary assets to get him...but the assets go to the Pacers....while the Pacers send the TPE to the Hornets.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

          Originally posted by QuickRelease View Post
          Kaman doesn't have the athleticism to stay with Bosh.
          Nobody does but at least he can bother his shot.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

            Originally posted by D0NT SH0OT ME View Post
            I didn't respond to it earlier because it is absolutely ridiculous. No way would Houston trade their 1st PLUS Jordan Hill PLUS Lee or TWill for a player the Hornets are looking to move for virtually nothing but cap space. Also did you even look at what you have the Pacers receiving? Sorry that this is a bit harsh but it's an absolutely ridiculous trade idea.
            There ARE reports of Houston wanting Kaman. And if that's true, they cannot just acquire him for cap relief, because they don't have cap relief to offer. That means they'd need a 3rd team like the Pacers to help facilitate the deal. So they'd have to trade something that NO wants and something that the Pacers want in order to end up with Kaman.

            So maybe they send Hill to the Pacers along with garbage contracts (Thabeet?). New Orleans gets the 1st round pick and a cheap young player. I could see something like that happening.

            That's the kind of trade I expect the Pacers to use their cap space to facilitate.

            And that's the only kind of trade that Houston is likely to pull off since they're over the cap. If they want Kaman bad enough, they have to satisfy two teams to get him.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

              Originally posted by Asher99 View Post
              Our days of getting 6 guys in double figures on the reg was over even without adding another scorer. Danny is getting his shots at a high clip since getting tossed earlier this year and along with West getting back in shape the bench looks had been plummeting in the process unless someone gets into foul trouble and Hill gets more run.

              Kaman's per-36 attempts would ranked only behind Danny on people who play this year and its well lower than his previous two years per-36 so he will no doubt expect to shoot and shoot often. The person this is going to hurt most is likely Hibbert because West will be needed to get his shots more with the starters rather than being the go to guy when he and Tyler would play together with one acting as the center. Roy needs 12-14 shots a night and is coming up short of that total to much this year as is.
              Maybe I'm reading it the wrong way....but this season...the Pacers have had several games where 5 to 6 of the key rotational Players have all scored in double-digits.

              By no means am I suggesting that everyone HAS to score double figures...I'm suggesting that the culture of the Team has changed where the scoring ( and therefore the distribution of shot attempts ) have leveled out where the FGA are spread out among several different Players...as opposed to just a few.

              I am not concerned about the touches on the offensive end when it comes to adding Kaman or any other Player.....I think that this Team has bought into the Team concept and that they don't have to "touch the ball or score so many times" from game to game and that this concept has contributed to winning games.
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

                Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                If the Pacers were able to Bring in Kamen, you absolutely play him at the 4 and 5. First big off the bench in what ever situation. Hansbrough gets demoted to spot minutes, which quite frankly he deserves right about now with Lou being just as productive currently.

                Gosh what an exciting thought, Full on Twin Towers for about 10 mins a game.
                We would be better off trading Tyler with DC to get a elite PG and make a real run at a title rather than cripple Hansbrough's value any farther than whats been done by attempting to turn him into a passer seeing his numbers go from 11.67 PPG to 6.3 PPG all for a +.45 assist per game gain.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

                  Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                  Nobody does but at least he can bother his shot.
                  Nobody does? This is Chris Bosh, not LeBron James. A lot of people can match his athleticism. Chris Kaman just isn't one of them.

                  I'm leery of playing Kaman at PF. The "Twin Towers" thing sounds great in theory, but in practice, with slower, less athletic guys like Hibbert and Kaman, I'm not so sure it would work well in practice.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                    Nobody does but at least he can bother his shot.
                    I agree...the only way that the Pacers can truly compete against ANY TEAM is to throw as much Quality Depth at the opposing Team as they can.

                    The hope is that the sheer amount of quality Players that we have at our disposal over the course of a 7 game series is going to overwhelm any Team.
                    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

                      lets get this done. We would have the deapest frontcourt in the NBA...
                      "We've got to be very clear about this. We don't want our players hanging around with murderers," said Larry Bird, Pacers president.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

                        Kaman does make us a contender in the East, not sure if he alone gets us by the Heat or Bulls in 7 but he increases our chances. We still need some more scoring, so if we can get that somewhere along the line as well I like our chances. Our frontline would be set with Kaman & Hibbert. But I do think it would most likely be for this year only. He will want to get paid next year as well as Hibbert, and I doubt we can sign both. This would be a let's try to win it this year move, IMO. It is exciting regardless ... oh the possibilities with this team!
                        Avatar photo credit: Bahram Mark Sobhani - AP

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

                          You can't pass this up. I have been hoping we would get another scorer, but with Danny and PG stepping up their game we don't need another scorer.

                          We are way to undersized when Roy isn't in the game Kaman solves that. Before the season people on here were talking about Kaman starting for us over Roy. Kaman would be the best backup center in the league.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            Nobody does? This is Chris Bosh, not LeBron James. A lot of people can match his athleticism. Chris Kaman just isn't one of them.

                            I'm leery of playing Kaman at PF. The "Twin Towers" thing sounds great in theory, but in practice, with slower, less athletic guys like Hibbert and Kaman, I'm not so sure it would work well in practice.
                            My bad I meant to say nobody from the Pacers, Bosh to me is too long for West to guard him and Roy is too slow, if you only have West or Tyler on Bosh we would hit jumpers all day long over them, Kaman at least has a chance to bother his shot and stay in front of him.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              My bad I meant to say nobody from the Pacers, Bosh to me is too long for West to guard him and Roy is too slow, if you only have West or Tyler on Bosh we would hit jumpers all day long over them, Kaman at least has a chance to bother his shot and stay in front of him.
                              Ahh, gotcha. Bosh doesn't really concern me all that much to be honest. He's mainly a jump shooter. I'm actually fine with West/Tyler guarding him.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Are Pacers Contenders With Kaman?

                                If we got Kaman, I think we could beat the Bulls in a 7-game series. We already match-up pretty well with them.

                                Miami is another story, however. Depends on Wade's status at that point.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X