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

Harden traded to Houston

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

  • Re: Harden traded to Houston

    I think this hurts OKC, but does not give the West to LA.

    While Martin is not the scorer he was a couple of years ago, he is a good third option. And a potential 6th man of the year. If Reggie Jackson and Maynor are healthy, Westbrook can move to the SG and guard a slowing Kobe. Perkins will not be amenstyed because he has been known to guard Howard better than anyone else. Is he the same player than he was in Boston? No. But he is still an effective low post defender, an excellent screener, and boxes out so Ibaka and Durant can soar uncontested for those rebounds.

    Jeremy Lamb is the deciding factor, since OKC might not see an immediate return on those draft picks. If Lamb can contribute and essentially replacce Thabo as a defensive ace in 2 years, then OKC wins easily.

    Harden will show his true colors in Houston. I think he will struggle next to Lin.

    Comment


    • Re: Harden traded to Houston

      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
      The bench is depleted and I don't care, having a deep bench is overrated.
      Agreed. I'm not sure I've seen a deep bench be the reason anyone won a championship. It does help the W/L percentage in the regular season though.

      Comment


      • Re: Harden traded to Houston

        Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
        I think this hurts OKC, but does not give the West to LA.

        While Martin is not the scorer he was a couple of years ago, he is a good third option. And a potential 6th man of the year. If Reggie Jackson and Maynor are healthy, Westbrook can move to the SG and guard a slowing Kobe. Perkins will not be amenstyed because he has been known to guard Howard better than anyone else. Is he the same player than he was in Boston? No. But he is still an effective low post defender, an excellent screener, and boxes out so Ibaka and Durant can soar uncontested for those rebounds.

        Jeremy Lamb is the deciding factor, since OKC might not see an immediate return on those draft picks. If Lamb can contribute and essentially replacce Thabo as a defensive ace in 2 years, then OKC wins easily.

        Harden will show his true colors in Houston. I think he will struggle next to Lin.
        rather, i think Lin will struggle next to Harden.
        They were already using Lin off the ball a lot with Kevin Martin as the playmaker. Which made no sense, but now it will make a ton of sense with Harden instead of Martin. But what's the purpose in Lin off the ball, offensively?
        Hopefully in a couple years Lin becomes a reliable shooter. But right now they'd be much better off with a George Hill, imo.

        Comment


        • Re: Harden traded to Houston

          Comment


          • Re: Harden traded to Houston

            Originally posted by Pace Maker View Post
            That's funny and everything, but thats a complete joke considering Harden was a very mediocre defender. Lamb is probably a better defender than both him and Martin
            Exactly right. And Sefolosha is a guy who gives Kobe, or anyone else for that matter, fits. He makes him earn his points the hard way.

            That said, I now expect Durant to go north of 30ppg.

            Comment


            • Re: Harden traded to Houston

              i don't know about Lamb. i've seen no defense from him so far.
              but he has the body, and i've seen people calling him a potential stopper, so maybe they'll turn him into a defender in OKC. during the preseason, he just stood at the 3pt line and took bad shots for the most part.

              Comment


              • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                Well when you say it like that... Ouch!!! They also amnestied Scola to put the pieces together to sign Jeremy Lin.

                I haven't been impressed at all with the Rockets have done this offseason. I think they've essentially gutted their team for Jeremy Lin and James Harden. No sir, I don't like it.

                Comment


                • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                  if they did nothing, they'd have an old team that can't make the playoffs or get high picks. and remember, Lowry demanded a trade. so it was a chemistry mess waiting to happen too.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                    Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                    if they did nothing, they'd have an old team that can't make the playoffs or get high picks. and remember, Lowry demanded a trade. so it was a chemistry mess waiting to happen too.

                    And it's not going to be a chemistry mess after this trade? And they basically gave up 3 first round picks to get Harden (I'm counting Lamb since his was a lottery pick 1st rounder this year) and Kevin Martin a former All-Star quality player when he's healthy.

                    The more I think about it, the more I don't like this trade for Houston. It's not that bad for them right now but in 2-3 years I think they'll regret this trade and Harden's max contract.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                      wow good trade for Houston. i love Harden's game. He is a play maker! he also makes a lot of big shots. I think this is good for him to, a team that is his. He did choke in the finals though, but i wouldn't be too worried.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                        Houston's entire strategy is to find a way to get a top 15 guy. They acquired lots of assets with the sole purpose of doing that. Their GM has said that this was their strategy many times over.

                        Whether or not Harden will ever become a top 15 guy is up for debate, but he's got that level of potential. I think Houston paid a fair bit to get him, but both those picks will probably be between 10-20 and mid 1st round picks are hit and miss.

                        If nothing else, Houston now has a back court featuring 2 of the most recognizable players in the NBA.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                          Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
                          And it's not going to be a chemistry mess after this trade? And they basically gave up 3 first round picks to get Harden (I'm counting Lamb since his was a lottery pick 1st rounder this year) and Kevin Martin a former All-Star quality player when he's healthy.

                          The more I think about it, the more I don't like this trade for Houston. It's not that bad for them right now but in 2-3 years I think they'll regret this trade and Harden's max contract.
                          So when Ron Artest was pouting and asking for a trade, would you say our chemistry would be better off if we traded him or kept him? I understand what you are saying, they have many new guys who will need a couple months to get to know each other. But you don't actually believe it's a similar problem as a guy pouting and getting into arguments with the coach, do you?

                          and re the trade.
                          They traded a #12 (Lamb), Toronto pick (which could be another #12 for all we know), a 20s pick which they aren't likely to get for several years, some 2nd rounders.
                          None of those picks guarantee you a Harden. Harden was a good top 3 pick.
                          And Kevin Martin. He was an expiring and would be gone after the season. Considering his flaws and his tendency to get injured, he's as much an All Star as Troy Murphy was. Would you say they were smarter to extract some value? Just let him expire? Or maybe resign him to a multi year deal on a mediocre team?

                          I'm not entirely surprised that a Pacers fan would overvalue mediocre picks. Two of our mediocre picks (Hibbert, Granger) turned into marginal All Stars and another (PG) might end up there as well, hopefully even better. But that's not what typically happens with mediocre picks. We did insanely, unusually well. If we weren't so lucky, we might have spent 4 years with the Murphleavy team and had much less to show for it.

                          Houston's cut that corner. Instead of locking up Martin into a new deal, keeping Scola, locking up some decent but non-All Star youngsters into long deals (Dragic, Lee) and being a 35-40 win team for the next 3-4 years, they now have Harden, cap space and a bunch of young guys. 6 years ago, I would've much preferred this over Murphleavy.
                          Last edited by hackashaq; 10-29-2012, 04:13 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                            I've never been overly impressed with Harden; however, the way the trade worked out I think it works pretty well for both teams. OKC is good enough that Harden is a luxury, and his production can be replaced by a few less expensive players (or if it's production in the finals, it can be replaced by a bottle of gatorade.) I'm just glad the trade is done and Harden / Pacers speculation can be dismissed.
                            Danger Zone

                            Comment


                            • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                              I know OKC did this for money, but this hurts their vchances of getting back to the NBA Finals. Can't pick them as the favorites now

                              Comment


                              • Re: Harden traded to Houston

                                Originally posted by hackashaq View Post
                                So when Ron Artest was pouting and asking for a trade, would you say our chemistry would be better off if we traded him or kept him? I understand what you are saying, they have many new guys who will need a couple months to get to know each other. But you don't actually believe it's a similar problem as a guy pouting and getting into arguments with the coach, do you?

                                and re the trade.
                                They traded a #12 (Lamb), Toronto pick (which could be another #12 for all we know), a 20s pick which they aren't likely to get for several years, some 2nd rounders.
                                None of those picks guarantee you a Harden. Harden was a good top 3 pick.
                                And Kevin Martin. He was an expiring and would be gone after the season. Considering his flaws and his tendency to get injured, he's as much an All Star as Troy Murphy was. Would you say they were smarter to extract some value? Just let him expire? Or maybe resign him to a multi year deal on a mediocre team?

                                I'm not entirely surprised that a Pacers fan would overvalue mediocre picks. Two of our mediocre picks (Hibbert, Granger) turned into marginal All Stars and another (PG) might end up there as well, hopefully even better. But that's not what typically happens with mediocre picks. We did insanely, unusually well. If we weren't so lucky, we might have spent 4 years with the Murphleavy team and had much less to show for it.

                                Houston's cut that corner. Instead of locking up Martin into a new deal, keeping Scola, locking up some decent but non-All Star youngsters into long deals (Dragic, Lee) and being a 35-40 win team for the next 3-4 years, they now have Harden, cap space and a bunch of young guys. 6 years ago, I would've much preferred this over Murphleavy.
                                I don't think I need to address the Artest question because it has little to do with what I had said. I didn't deny that keeping Lowry would've caused chemistry issues. In fact I didn't mention him at all.

                                I guess it all depends on who those 1st round draft picks and Jeremy Lamb turn out to be. The Toronto pick could easily be within the 4-10 range. I expect them to be very bad defensively and they don't have much perimeter shooting. Only time will tell whether or not this winds up being a good trade or not. My opinion is that in 2-3 years the we'll look back at it and the consensus will be that the Thunder came out the winners in this trade.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X