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

Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

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

  • Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
    I agree with this but this isn't what I'm trying to say.

    What I'm trying to say is that there's a distinctive difference between FAs and RFAs. FAs can go out and say "I will sign with team X". RFAs cannot do this. RFAs can only say "I will sign the X contract".
    Yeah, but I wasn't commenting on the technical aspects of Roy's contract situation. I was responding to another question asking why Roy would personally want to leave Indiana for Portland.

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

    Comment


    • Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
      Correct but that wasnt my point.

      The pacers can open up sign and trade for every team in the NBA if they want. It wont matter because Roy will only sign with Portland, and they would need his cooperation.

      Yes, he could make more money, but he has already picked his team. If he was willing to play anywhere, he wouldn't have made up his mind on the first visit.

      I have to give you kudos for getting an interview with Roy and his agent to get the inside scoop while no one else could.

      From what you are saying if the Pacers come back and offer the 5 yr/78 million max to Roy, before the July 11 signing date, he would turn it down because he has already made his decision and say he wants to play for Portland for less money. I wonder if he gave you any insight during the interview why this is the case?

      Comment


      • Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

        My insight in this matter can be generally referred to as "common sense."

        If the Pacers were going to max out Roy for 5 years, it would have been done already. Roy would not be making his intentions to sign the offer sheet if Indiana hadn't already informed him that they were not going to raise their offer.

        I'm not sure what has to happen before some people wake up and smell the coffee. Roy is done negotiating. The pacers have long since been done negotiating with Roy.
        Last edited by Kstat; 07-06-2012, 08:14 AM.

        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

        Comment


        • Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

          Originally posted by Kstat View Post
          Yeah, but I wasn't commenting on the technical aspects of Roy's contract situation. I was responding to another question asking why Roy would personally want to leave Indiana for Portland.
          Oh, ok then. I was commenting upon the technical aspects
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

            Okay people....let's back up the drama train for just a minute....I am not an NBA analyst, nor do I claim to have any inside information, but this is what seems very apparent to me....

            Mid season Roy talks about how he doesn't see himself as a Max contract player. Pacers agree...

            Roy and his agent decide to wait until free agency hits to see where the contracts fall rather than to undervalue him and sign a low-ball extension from the Pacers.

            Roy gets a Max offer from Portland....Something even he didn't expect.

            Roy and his agent agree to sign said offer sheet, NOT with intentions to leave, but to cause Indiana to **** or get off the pot, and finally admit and come to terms that he IS a max player in someones eyes.

            This does nothing more than force the Pacers to match....That is all.....

            Now from the Pacers FO standpoint, they are trying to land FA's and do so quickly. Please keep in mind that NO ONE can sign any contracts or offers until July 11th (which just happens to be my birthday). Once Roy signs his offer sheet with Portland, it does 3 things:
            1. Puts a $14M cap hold on Portland in which they can't go after any other FA's.
            2. Forces the Pacers to pay him what he, and other people, think he is truly worth.
            3. Gives the Pacers 3 days to match the offer.


            That being said, the Pacers FO, still trying to attract more FA's, have a better chance, and more money, to negotiate with if they don't match Hibbert's contract immediately. Currently Roy's cap hold is only $7.765M. Once they offer to match, his cap hold would go somewhere between the $14.5M - $15M. That is $7M - $8M LESS that could be used to attract FA's. We have Hibbert's Bird rights, so as long as we sign the other FA's BEFORE we match Hibbert, we can go over the cap....Not to mention, the longer that we don't match Portland's offer to Roy, the longer Portland can't use that $14M to entice other FA's, and in a sense, force them out of competing for/being able to afford other quality FA's.

            Seems to me that Portland's interest in Roy is a bit of an attempt to get at Pritchard and make his job a little harder and a little more uncomfortable. Think of it as the woman scorned....Pritchard used to be in Portland and now he is here. I am not sure what the circumstances were in which he left, but my understanding is that there is no love lost between him and Portland. Portland, seeing Roy as a major piece of the Pacer's success, comes at him with guns blazing, as an FU to Pritchard....

            My guess is that we make a a signing or two using that $7M - $8M that is currently not tied up, then we swoop in at the last moment, match Roy's offer sheet using his Bird rights, and give Portland the big ole' Pritch-slap.

            It just makes too much sense all around....Why would we give up the flexibility to spend $7M - $8M on more talent just to match an offer that we are under no obligation to do UNTIL July 14th. Expect to see Hibbert matched, and resigned on the 14th....

            Just my 2c.....
            http://www.nba.com/gamenotes/pacers.pdf

            Comment


            • Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

              ok...where do I begin...

              The Portland Trailblazers are not committing $58 million to Roy Hibbert because they want to "get at Prichard."

              Likewise, Roy Hibbert did not commit to said $58 million offer sheet from Portland and still have "no intentions to leave."

              You know, I think I'll just end it there.
              Last edited by Kstat; 07-06-2012, 08:50 AM.

              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

              Comment


              • Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

                This is harder for many of us because Roy got so involved with the community and the fans. It seemed like Roy became "one of us," so the "it's just business" rationale that he will give in his goodbye letter to Pacers fans will ring hollow in this case. This should probably be a lesson to players. Don't do things like Area 55. Don't tweet right after the draft justifying the teams' pick when you are a pending FA. If its just business, then treat it like one. And if its a business then we need to start treating it like a business. Don't get attached to players. Root for the laundry. I never seem to learn that lesson and keep getting burned.

                But have you ever been to Portland? If someone offered me more money and I would get to live there, I would be calling realtors in 5 seconds. Its one of the truly great cities in America. And on top of all that, he gets to play with Aldridge? Sounds like a good deal to me. So I totally get where he's coming from, but my feeling are hurt. Yes, like a 6 year old.
                Slug 'em Sabres!!!!!
                http://youtube.com/watch?v=cj1SUF4wzu0

                Comment


                • Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

                  Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                  ok...where do I begin...

                  The Portland Trailblazers are not committing $58 million to Roy Hibbert because they want to "get at Prichard."

                  Likewise, Roy Hibbert did not commit to said $58 million offer sheet from Portland and still have "no intentions to leave."

                  You know, I think I'll just end it there.
                  I am sure "to get Pritchard" wasn't the only motivating factor, but you can bet you *** that it does factor in. If the Pacers match, they are flirting with cap issues again. If they don't, Portland lands the most important piece of the Pacers puzzle....It's a win/win for the Blazers either way....Hibbert will do amazing things wherever he plays, so if Portland does get him, kudos to them on landing a hell of a player....

                  As far as "intentions to leave", that is where it gets tricky....If I remember correctly the Pacers only offered him between $10M-12M on his lowball extension. Portland offers him between $3M-$4M more a year....Do you really expect loyalty to win out over a possible $16M pay increase over 4 years? I don't think that you can classify that as "intentions to leave" as much as you can classify it as "willingness to leave". Intensions means that is what he WANTS to do, where willingness means that he is not opposed to doing so to get what he deserves....
                  http://www.nba.com/gamenotes/pacers.pdf

                  Comment


                  • No. Adults do not commit $58 million of their boss's money to settle a grudge.

                    For all i know there is a grudge, but if they didn't feel Roy was worth the max, they wouldn't have offered the contract, no matter how much they dislike Pritchard.

                    Do you really expect loyalty to win out over a possible $16M pay increase over 4 years?
                    Quite the opposite. I expect loyalty to switch to the side that made him feel more valued as a professional. That was the reason I gave for Roy wanting to be a Blazer, in addition to the big payday.

                    I think Roy's intentions (what he wants to do), changed after that first meeting with Portland. Most any normal human being would want to work for a boss that made it clear he was the cornerstone of the business, vs. a boss that gave lukewarm offers and only opened up the pocketbook when forced to by a competitor.

                    Again, not saying he no longer wants to work for Indiana. If he hated being a Pacer, he'd eat the 1-year tender and bolt next year.

                    I do think he wants to work for Portland's management. They made the aggressive push for his services that his old bosses never did, and that's pretty powerful persuasion.
                    Last edited by Kstat; 07-06-2012, 09:21 AM.

                    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                    Comment


                    • Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

                      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                      Again, not saying he no longer wants to work for Indiana. If he hates being a Pacers, he's eat the 1-year tender and bolt next year.

                      I do think he wants to work for Portland's management. They made the aggressive push for his services that his old bosses never did, and that's pretty powerful persuasion.
                      Makes better sense with the update Kstat. Hibbert has built too good of a relationship with the fans for it to not have some emotional involvement for him as well.
                      You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

                      Comment


                      • Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

                        Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                        No, but he AGREED to sign with Portland. He WANTED to sign with Portland. That was his decision, and he made it on day one. That ship is sailed. People keep treating this like Roy is still open to other options. He's not. He made his decision.
                        Carlos Boozer.
                        Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

                          If anything PACERS can thank Portland for saving them money. Would have cost PACERS alot of more money if they would have offererd THE max. My opion is the PACERS wanted to see some another team make an offer so the could actually save money on the contract by matching (also 1 less year on contract). I feel this was a good move that gives them 3 extra days to sign a free agent (o.j.mayo/kaman )

                          Comment


                          • Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

                            Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
                            Carlos Boozer.
                            ...which is the example everybody loves to use.

                            The problem with that is, there was never any public good faith agreement between Cleveland and Boozer.

                            There was likely an ILLEGAL, under-the-table agreement that was never made public, but that was a scam from the start, and does not apply to this situation.

                            Besides, you're holding out hope that Roy Hibbert thinks like Carlos Boozer? Is this how bad things have gotten already?

                            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                            Comment


                            • Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

                              If we don't want to keep Roy, why don't we just match the offer and essentially do what Denver did with Nene: sign him and ship him as soon as the right opportunity arises. There will ALWAYS be a market for a center of Roy's caliber. Losing Roy for nothing would be a terrible waste of an asset that we spent years developing.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Portland offers Roy max (via Sam Amick)

                                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                                ...which is the example everybody loves to use.

                                The problem with that is, there was never any public good faith agreement between Cleveland and Boozer.

                                There was likely an ILLEGAL, under-the-table agreement that was never made public, but that was a scam from the start, and does not apply to this situation.
                                Illegal? Boozer had a verbal understanding with Cleveland for a 40 million dollar extension when Booz was getting paid 600,000 in his contract's final year. After Cleveland relinquished his rights making Boozer a RFA, Booz signed an offer sheet with the Jazz for 70 million that Cleveland couldn't match.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X