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

Pacers 2012 Off-Season Salary Breakdown

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

  • #31
    Re: Pacers 2012 Off-Season Salary Breakdown

    I kind of think that is more of a PR thing than anything. Most likely trying to get teams to do a sign and trade, or just trying to not look like a douche.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Pacers 2012 Off-Season Salary Breakdown

      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
      I would prefer to avoid signing anyone who is going to demand more than $12 million and isn't already on the team. I think we can get a lot more bang for our buck going after a lower tier PG than Williams. Williams is a good player, but he isn't $17 million good, at the price he is getting paid his team better be at least fighting for the 8th playoff spot. Instead they are closer to fighting for the first pick in the draft, not including Charlotte.
      Do you really believe a team that starts Deron Williams, Kris Humphries, Jordan Williams, Gerald Wallace and MarShon Brooks should have more than 22 wins in a 66 game season (The Nets were 1-10 without him this past season)? That team is basically a Charlotte talent-level squad plus Deron Williams. Ok, maybe they're not that bad. I just don't think 22 wins is underachieving all things considered. Detroit and Toronto have better talent with nearly equal results. Remember, this is a team that had virtually no fan support (The Nets were so bad attendance-wise that the Pacers beat them). I'd say he easily a top five point guard in the league next year, and he's going to have something to prove. I think he's worth the high price tag, but the question is whether or not the Pacers should go that route or attempt to move forward with better depth and flexibility.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Pacers 2012 Off-Season Salary Breakdown

        Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
        Actually that's what I meant. Meaning with Toronto having our 2nd round pick, we wouldn't have the money hold some were referring to.
        2nd round picks don't have cap holds. The 26th pick is our first rounder, which does have a cap hold. So I'm not really sure what you mean.

        Originally posted by shags View Post
        Just to reiterate, not only does Sham have Pendergraph's contract at $1.5 million, but so does RealGM and ESPN trade checker. So I think 1.5 million is accurate.

        Also, the Pacers would have one roster charge at $473,604, since they will have 11 players with cap holds or contracts.
        Actually, I trust Sham more because he has extremely detailed info on contracts (such as bonuses and unusual features) which leads me to believe that he has access to the actual contracts. I think I read somewhere that he has a contact in the law office that reviews all NBA contracts. As opposed to hoopshype who seems to get their info from the media or from agents.

        Yes, if Pacers don't make any moves, there will be 11 cap holds and thus just one roster charge. But if we intend to maximize cap space, it seems a given that we'll use our first rounder to dump D. Jones' salary to an under the cap team. Alternatively, we can use Collison or Hans to dump salary. Or we can just keep everyone and just go after cheaper (non-max) free agents.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Pacers 2012 Off-Season Salary Breakdown

          From the Pacers standpoint you have to look at more than just the salary cap for next year to figure out what they might try to do. For example, if we added Williams at $15m, and Roy at $12m, to go along with Danny at $13, how will that effect us in two years, and in 3 years? It stands to reason we would want to keep West after next year and he already makes $10m.

          So in a couple years those 4 would project out to about $60m. The luxury tax is going to get prohibitive fast, and Herb won't want to pay it. So we would be scraping the bottom of the barrel to get ten more players.

          So, capoligists(s?) need to not only look at next year they need to look a couple years down the road. This is probably the reason Bird said we weren't going after $17m players.

          This just goes to show what a balancing act NBA teams have to do to be competitive.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Pacers 2012 Off-Season Salary Breakdown

            I think we should start the www.bringAndreMillertoindy.com website
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Pacers 2012 Off-Season Salary Breakdown

              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
              I think we should start the www.bringAndreMillertoindy.com website
              It's your idea, go ahead.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Pacers 2012 Off-Season Salary Breakdown

                Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                It stands to reason we would want to keep West after next year and he already makes $10m.
                .
                West is showing his age and in another year will not be getting $10M. West can't play big minutes anymore. He is already pacing himself.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Pacers 2012 Off-Season Salary Breakdown

                  Originally posted by speakout4 View Post
                  West is showing his age and in another year will not be getting $10M. West can't play big minutes anymore. He is already pacing himself.
                  He just came off a knee injury and his minutes were held down. So West is a wait and see, not a fact. You could be right about him making less money, but it's more likely he will make more.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Pacers 2012 Off-Season Salary Breakdown

                    Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                    From the Pacers standpoint you have to look at more than just the salary cap for next year to figure out what they might try to do. For example, if we added Williams at $15m, and Roy at $12m, to go along with Danny at $13, how will that effect us in two years, and in 3 years? It stands to reason we would want to keep West after next year and he already makes $10m.

                    So in a couple years those 4 would project out to about $60m. The luxury tax is going to get prohibitive fast, and Herb won't want to pay it. So we would be scraping the bottom of the barrel to get ten more players.

                    So, capoligists(s?) need to not only look at next year they need to look a couple years down the road. This is probably the reason Bird said we weren't going after $17m players.

                    This just goes to show what a balancing act NBA teams have to do to be competitive.
                    I think Danny takes a big paycut when his contract expires and a West will be almost 33 years old when his contract expires so I'd expect a slight annual paycut for him as well with perhaps a long term deal if he's healthy.
                    Larry Bird qouted March 25th. 2015:

                    Bird: I wanted to keep our group together because in the summer, if David and Roy opt out, we're back to zero, really. We don't have that much, so you leave your options open. If we did make a trade, I didn't want to take on a lot of contracts -- because that's what usually happens. Plus, I liked my guys. They're playing well. If we keep the core together and Paul comes back healthy, we'll be right back to where we were.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Pacers 2012 Off-Season Salary Breakdown

                      Just a heads up.

                      Tim Donahue (count55) posted that the max salary will actually go up next year, even though the cap won't. Here you go:

                      http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.co...-to-add-player

                      The two columns of importance to the Pacers are the 25% column and the 30% column. Eric Gordon (and Roy Hibbert) can be paid up to the amount in the 25% column, with a starting salary of $13.669 million. Deron Williams’ maximum is in the 30% column, with a starting salary of $16.403 million.
                      So instead of $12.9m and $15.5m max salaries described earlier, they go up to $13.7m and $16.4m apparently.

                      In the comments, he cites the CBA section indicating the increase in max salaries:

                      “For purposes of this Section 7 only, the Salary Cap shall be calculated in accordance with Article VII, Section 2, except that the percentage of Projected BRI to be utilized for such calculation shall be 42.14% for all Salary Cap Years. Notwithstanding the foregoing, (i) the Salary Cap for the 2011-12 Salary Cap Year for purposes of this Section 7 only will be $51.689 million, and (ii) the Salary Cap for the 2012-13 Salary Cap Year for purposes of this Section 7 only will equal the greater of (x) the Salary Cap as calculated pursuant to this Section 7(f), and (y) $54.675 million.”
                      It's not a huge increase (about 800k for the 25% max and 900k for the 30% max), but when we're talking about barely having enogh cap room, every little bit counts.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Pacers 2012 Off-Season Salary Breakdown

                        I would not resign Amundson. Pendergraph can fill that role. Next year Lance needs to get playing time at the 2 behind George.
                        I would not resign Barbosa as much as I like his demeanor for the team. I severely doubt Lou or Leandro will return.
                        I want to see what Fes can do also. He flashed some skill and has the mental make-up for the pros.
                        To back up Danny you several good SF available in the draft. Sign Nash and let Collison go.
                        {o,o}
                        |)__)
                        -"-"-

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Pacers 2012 Off-Season Salary Breakdown

                          Originally posted by D0NT SH0OT ME View Post
                          Numbers aside, we do have a chance to offer Deron Williams a maximum contract. We would have to alter our roster drastically to do so however. If Deron would accept a less than maximum offer, we could potentially keep one or two of Lance Stephenson, Louis Amundson, and our first round pick.
                          With the likely cost being:

                          Originally posted by D0NT SH0OT ME
                          *(Bird Rights for Leandro Barbosa, George Hill, Louis Amundson, and A.J Price renounced, Bird Rights for Roy Hibbert retained, player option declined by Dahntay Jones, Lance Stephenson released, 26th pick in the draft traded in return for no players or current picks, additional roster charge of $2,368,270 for only having 7 players under contract.)
                          The highlighted parts is is too much to pay and the unlikely chance that Inferno will decline his Player option for the chance to make a MAX offer to Deron....especially if there is a chance that he won't want to come to Indy.

                          D0NT SH0OT ME, I'd figure that I'd ask you....what other Teams are in a position to make a MAX Contract offer to Deron?

                          It seems that the Pacers are in the position to do so...but it would require the Team to pay a hefty cost.

                          Originally posted by D0NT SH0OT ME View Post
                          On the other hand, we could offer Steve Nash a contract worth around $10,000,000 a year, which would allow us to keep George Hill and two of Louis Amundson, Lance Stephenson, and our first round pick. Or we could simply use the other ~$7,000,000 in remaining cap space to pursue another free agent.
                          This is the most likely scenario......if the Team wanted to make a run at a difference maker....although I am inclined to believe that Bird and Co will make slightly smaller moves to sign a steady floor general like Dragic, Lowry or DreMiller....while trying to shore up the 2nd unit with some high quality depth at the backup SF, PF and Center spots through Free Agency and/or some combination of trades involving DC and Hansbrough.
                          Last edited by CableKC; 05-28-2012, 08:35 PM.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X