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

Keeping Paul George and David West

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

  • #46
    Re: Keeping Paul George and David West

    Originally posted by wintermute View Post
    To teams like the Pacers, the tax line is a virtual hard cap now - there is no way they are possibly crossing that line. Whereas before, we've seen teams like Memphis and Minnesota, and yes even the Pacers, pay the tax on occasion in order to keep key players or to add more pieces. That's not going to happen anymore.
    OK, I guess I am going to need a reference because this isn't what I remember. I remember the tax starting at 1-for-1, like before, then increasing, so going over the tax is no more expensive than it was before this CBA. I also remember that going over the first tax threshold does not disqualify you from receiving revenue from the tax for teams that crossed higher thresholds - a provision that makes going over the tax LESS of a financial impact than it was previously.

    If I am remembering incorrectly, please let me know, but that's where I'm coming from in this discussion.
    BillS

    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Keeping Paul George and David West

      I would just be happy to get PG signed for an extension so we don't have to watch the Lakers offer him a max contract and a chance to go home to Ca.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Keeping Paul George and David West

        Originally posted by Cousy47 View Post
        I would just be happy to get PG signed for an extension so we don't have to watch the Lakers offer him a max contract and a chance to go home to Ca.
        And that is the very reason he will not sign an extension........ ...

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Keeping Paul George and David West

          Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
          I think OlBlu will be proven wrong this year. If the Pacers extinguish the Heat in the playoffs I believe they will win the title

          They aren't going to beat the Heat in the playoffs if they even get to play them at all. If they did, they cannot beat any team from the West. The Pacers will be fortunate to win one round in the playoffs when the superstars start playing extended minutes. ...

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Keeping Paul George and David West

            Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
            yes, small market teams like San Antonio and Oklahoma City are just doomed to be doormats forever.

            You need a dish on that motorhome.
            I have one with every available channel. I will give you Oklahoma City but I think that is a special circumstance with what amounts to a city getting a new team and they are a challenger.... They haven't won anything yet. You forget that I work in the media and I am currently in Texas. We run programs in San Antonio that also encompass Austin. We sell programs there based on their being about 3.5 million people in their viewing area. That doesn't make them a small market team. We pay a premium to run programs in that market equal to what we pay in Houston, Atlanta and cities of that size. It is less than NYC, Philly or Washington D.C. and Chicago. It is much bigger than Indy and other small markets. ...

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Keeping Paul George and David West

              Originally posted by Cousy47 View Post
              I would just be happy to get PG signed for an extension so we don't have to watch the Lakers offer him a max contract and a chance to go home to Ca.
              It won't matter if another team does offer him the max. By then every team will know we're just going to give him the max 5 year offer so none of them will even try. If he does sign another offer sheet it still won't matter because he won't have a choice. If the Pacers give him the same max offer he has to play here he can't just choose another team.
              Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Keeping Paul George and David West

                If the Pacers trade PG before he is 30 I would consider not watching them anymore. This town needs an elite player to get familiar with and come to love and embrace like Reggie/Peyton.
                I'm a Beast

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Keeping Paul George and David West

                  Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                  They aren't going to beat the Heat in the playoffs if they even get to play them at all. If they did, they cannot beat any team from the West. The Pacers will be fortunate to win one round in the playoffs when the superstars start playing extended minutes. ...
                  So you don't think the Pacers could beat Brooklyn, Chicago or Atlanta in the first round home series. Even with the experience they gained in last years playoffs.
                  I'm a Beast

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Keeping Paul George and David West

                    Originally posted by PaulGeorge View Post
                    So you don't think the Pacers could beat Brooklyn, Chicago or Atlanta in the first round home series. Even with the experience they gained in last years playoffs.
                    Ignore him, his purpose on this board is just to derail topics.
                    Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Keeping Paul George and David West

                      Isn't David West an Early Bird Free Agent. That limits the amount the Pacers can go over the cap to resign him to 175% of his current salary or $17.5M. He will be a 10 year player which qualifies him for the 35% max as you said. Neither of these seem to be important, because any team willing to pay David West that much would get him. I doubt the Pacers would be willing to pay Granger/Hibbert money for David West under any circumstances.

                      Theoretically. Couldn't a team offer David a contract of $18 or $19M a year that the Pacers couldn't legally offer. Since he is not a RFA, they couldn't match it. Interesting detail of the CBA.

                      Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                      West's max is a good deal higher than the rookie max that Roy got or that Paul G. is going to get. Roy and Paul's first year started/will start at around $14m. As a 10th year player next year, I believe that West qualifies for 35% of the cap, or approximately $19m on the first year. That's a big investment for any team. Personally I don't think he'll get THAT max ($19m), but anywhere in between $12m to $15m won't surprise me.

                      I also think that the Pacers will use their designated player status to extend Paul George next year. That's the deal that Harden got this year, i.e. same thing that Hicks/MAStamper is talking about a few posts up. The Pacers don't HAVE to do it of course, but when you have an obvious max type player on your hands, you do everything you can to keep him sweet. That would be the reasoning as to why we should extend him early versus letting him get to the FA market a la Hibbert.
                      What to do with Lance is an interesting question. If you have 4 clearly superior players in Paul, Danny, David and Roy, should you sacrifice one of them to save money for a guy that might or might not someday be a good player. I don't think that is a good way of looking at it. If the Pacers are making a title attempt with this bunch, dumping Danny to keep Lance would seem to be making a choice that keeps you from success both now and in the future. If you keep David West, you are going for a win right now. If you keep Lance, you are going for a win in the future. I think the real question about keeping Danny is the question about Danny and Paul being able to both play at the same time. Can Paul play the SG spot as he gets older and slower and bigger. If the answer is no, then it seems you have to choose between Paul and Danny. If he can play the 2 and you keep David, then keeping Danny makes more sense.

                      I suspect the Pacer FO will be looking at things from a short term gain view point. If they think they have a chance to win now, they will. I expect David to be resigned and next summer to be worried about next summer.
                      In addition, I suspect we'll need to reserve a pool of money for Lance Stephenson, assuming he continues to develop. Put together, that's a lot of money in future contracts. Which is why a lot of people (including myself) think that someone from the core will be sacrificed eventually in order to stay under the tax.
                      Last edited by xIndyFan; 02-14-2013, 05:37 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Keeping Paul George and David West

                        Originally posted by BillS View Post
                        OK, I guess I am going to need a reference because this isn't what I remember. I remember the tax starting at 1-for-1, like before, then increasing, so going over the tax is no more expensive than it was before this CBA. I also remember that going over the first tax threshold does not disqualify you from receiving revenue from the tax for teams that crossed higher thresholds - a provision that makes going over the tax LESS of a financial impact than it was previously.

                        If I am remembering incorrectly, please let me know, but that's where I'm coming from in this discussion.
                        Beginning with the 2013-14 season, the Tax rates for teams with team salary above the Tax level are as follows:
                        Incremental Team Salary Tax Rate

                        $0M – $5M $1.50-for-$1
                        $5M – $10M $1.75-for-$1
                        $10M – $15M $2.50-for-$1
                        $15M – $20M $3.25-for-$1
                        Tax rates increase by $0.50 for each additional $5M above
                        the Tax level (e.g., for team salary $20M-$25M above the
                        Tax level, the Tax rate is $3.75-for-$1).

                        Also, there's the apron:


                        23. Other than financial penalties, are there restrictions on taxpaying teams?

                        In addition to the tax payments described in question number 21, taxpaying teams have the following restrictions. Note that most of these restrictions aren't triggered unless the team would be over the "apron" -- the point $4 million above the tax level -- following a signing or trade.

                        Teams above the apron cannot use the Bi-Annual exception (see question number 25).
                        Teams above the apron have a smaller Mid-Level exception (see question number 25). Teams above the apron can offer contracts no longer than three years, while other teams can offer four. The starting salary is also lower (for example, in 2011-12 it is $3 million for teams above the apron, versus $5 million for other teams).
                        Taxpaying teams can acquire less salary in a simultaneous trade (see question number 82).
                        Starting in 2013-14, teams above the apron cannot receive a player in a sign-and-trade transaction (see question number 89).
                        Teams above the apron do not have the same protections under the Gilbert Arenas provision (see question number 44). Under the Arenas provision other teams can offer restricted free agents salaries starting at the Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level exception. If a team with the right of first refusal does not have Early Bird rights to the player and is over the apron, it will have only the smaller Taxpayer Mid-Level exception at its disposal, and cannot match an offer for the full Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level exception.

                        In addition, taxpaying teams do not receive a distribution from the leaguewide tax fund. However, they do receive a distribution from the escrow fund (see question number 22).
                        It's the repeater tax and apron mechanisms that will trip the teams that don't care about the tax.

                        Every luxury tax system will hurt the poorer teams first. The goal is to make it hurt enough (most) teams to force it to behave as a quasi-hardcap. It never works particularly well.

                        http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.co...nt-the-answer/

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Keeping Paul George and David West

                          Originally posted by Coopdog23 View Post
                          I know West will re sign because he wants to stay in Indiana to win a title here. I'm certain that PG won't ask for a max deal but he can ask for more
                          Hibbert said ('I'm not a max player,' among other statements etc.) Which led me to think he was different and would give the Pacers a break. Brad Miller wanted to stay here too, yet he took the money.

                          Granger could probably have got max or near max but he gave the Pacers a break. There's not many like Danny that will give their team a break. We will see.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Keeping Paul George and David West

                            Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                            West is not getting a max offer.
                            Vnzla is still right, West is going to get an offer for way more than we want to pay.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Keeping Paul George and David West

                              Originally posted by PaulGeorge View Post
                              If the Pacers trade PG before he is 30 I would consider not watching them anymore. This town needs an elite player to get familiar with and come to love and embrace like Reggie/Peyton.
                              What if the Lakers make PG a poison pill offer after next year with a BIG payday(ala Lin) in it. We would be pressed to find the money to match, if we even can, and still re-Danny and Lance in the same year. That's my worry and why I would like to see an extension before he becomes a RFA. Basically what we did with Granger back in the day. No Max money, but REALLY good money.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
                                And that is the very reason he will not sign an extension........ ...
                                We could still match it, makes no sense.

                                Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X