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

NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

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

  • #46
    Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

    Originally posted by yoadknux View Post
    So according to your theory if you give Lance the number of shots Durant takes, he's going to be a top 5 scorer?
    I think the number of shots you can take is based on your role on the team and your ability to get your type of shot. If you are a number one option but you are slow and all you can do is dunk, you won't get many good chances, and won't score many points even if you chuck up 20 shots. A player like durant can get his shot at will because of his handling, athleticism, iq, and shooting ability. Durant also gets to the free throw line a lot which is the main reason why he is a top 5 scorer. He is only taking 18 shots a game. Lance can create shots off the dribble, drive, now he can spot up shoot, and he can get good looks for himself on fast breaks. He doesn't get to the free throw line at all right now but I would expect he would if he was handling and driving a lot more. I don't think lance would be able to get as many good looks or free throws as durant so i don't think he would do well in that role. I do think he has the ability to be a number 1 or 2 option, taking at least 14/15 shots. Also i don't mean that he needs to be taking that many shots, just that he could. I prefer him being a facilitator and using his abilities.
    Last edited by vincognito; 03-03-2013, 12:38 PM.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

      Originally posted by PR07 View Post
      Have to think this is a very "sunny" picture of Lance Stephenson. Not saying some of it isn't true, but let's not act like Lance can do no wrong with the basketball. His jumpshot is still fairly hit or miss, and he still has a tendency to play out of control at times. Even with Granger's past shot attempts, I'm not sure he's suddenly an efficient 20+ ppg scorer if he'd be at all.
      I agree he's not there yet but he's on his way at 22 years old.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

        I've thought about this a lot over the last week or so, and Danny's unlikely be a Pacer much longer. I've always liked the guy, but Paul and Lance moved into the starting lineup and made him a cap causality. It's pretty simple.

        Hibbert: max. ($13-15 mil)
        Paul George: inevitable max. ($13-15 mil)
        D-West: ~10 mil
        George Hill: $8 mil

        four guys, ~$46 mil

        Gerald Green ($3.5 mil - 2 more years...sigh)
        Ian M. - ($4 mil)

        total: $7.5

        Committed to six players:
        $53.5 mil

        Luxury tax threshold: ~$70 mil

        So there's basically one more decent-sized chunk we could give someone, and then fill out the bench. I believe that someone will be Lance, but one thing is for sure: Granger and Lance can't coexist for much longer.

        It should be noted that all of this could change if we don't bring back D-West, but I don't think there's anyone that doesn't want to bring back D-West.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

          Originally posted by vincognito View Post
          I think the number of shots you can take is based on your role on the team and your ability to get your type of shot. If you are a number one option but you are slow and all you can do is dunk, you won't get many good chances. A player like durant can get his shot at will because of his handling, athleticism, iq, and shooting ability. Durant also gets to the free throw line a lot which is a big reason why he can score so much. Lance can create shots off the dribble, drive, now he can spot up shoot, and he can get good looks for himself on fast breaks. He doesn't get to the free throw line at all right now but I would expect he would if he was handling and driving a lot more. I don't think lance would be able to get as many good looks as durant and wouldn't have a great percentage or as high point totals if he tried. I doubt lance can get 20 quality shots a game and get 10 free throws but he has the ability to be a number 1 or 2 option, taking at least 14/15 shots. Also i don't mean that he needs to be taking that many shots, just that he could. I prefer him being a facilitator and using his abilities.
          There's a very good reason why only about 10 players in the league average 20+ ppg. That reason is talent. If you're a talented scorer, then you're going to get many shot opportunities. Lance is not a talented scorer. His range isn't all that great, he hasn't shown to be a superb slasher, finisher or a guy who gets to the line. Granger on the other hand always had great range, developed a decent post game and managed to get to the line consistently, and that's the reason he was able to score so many points.
          This really reminds me of the start of the season when people predicted Gerald Green would score 18 ppg on 45% from the field. The fact a rotation player has good sample size scoring doesn't mean that if you expand that sample he's going to be a good scorer. If this were the case, every team in the league would have some "hidden superstar" on the bench just waiting to get 18 FGA and lead the league in scoring.
          Originally posted by Piston Prince
          Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
          "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

            Originally posted by yoadknux View Post
            There's a very good reason why only about 10 players in the league average 20+ ppg. That reason is talent. If you're a talented scorer, then you're going to get many shot opportunities. Lance is not a talented scorer. His range isn't all that great, he hasn't shown to be a superb slasher, finisher or a guy who gets to the line. Granger on the other hand always had great range, developed a decent post game and managed to get to the line consistently, and that's the reason he was able to score so many points.
            This really reminds me of the start of the season when people predicted Gerald Green would score 18 ppg on 45% from the field. The fact a rotation player has good sample size scoring doesn't mean that if you expand that sample he's going to be a good scorer. If this were the case, every team in the league would have some "hidden superstar" on the bench just waiting to get 18 FGA and lead the league in scoring.
            Fair point but lance does have a lot more talent than gerald green. I'm not basing it on his stats, i believe in his actual talent to be a scorer. I've seen a player that can get to the rim very well from his dribble drives, finish in traffic, he is a threat from 3, and he is great in the open court. I think you are underrating him a bit.

            Also I never was trying to suggest that he should be taking more shots, his role is perfect for this team
            Last edited by vincognito; 03-03-2013, 01:06 PM.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

              Originally posted by CooperManning View Post
              I've thought about this a lot over the last week or so, and Danny's unlikely be a Pacer much longer. I've always liked the guy, but Paul and Lance moved into the starting lineup and made him a cap causality. It's pretty simple.

              Hibbert: max. ($13-15 mil)
              Paul George: inevitable max. ($13-15 mil)
              D-West: ~10 mil
              George Hill: $8 mil

              four guys, ~$46 mil

              Gerald Green ($3.5 mil - 2 more years...sigh)
              Ian M. - ($4 mil)

              total: $7.5

              Committed to six players:
              $53.5 mil

              Luxury tax threshold: ~$70 mil

              So there's basically one more decent-sized chunk we could give someone, and then fill out the bench. I believe that someone will be Lance, but one thing is for sure: Granger and Lance can't coexist for much longer.

              It should be noted that all of this could change if we don't bring back D-West, but I don't think there's anyone that doesn't want to bring back D-West.
              trade Danny for a quality backup PG, I think we should resign Hans too

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                I didn't see your other post....but your response doesn't really answer my question.

                Are the Pacers able to go over the Salary Cap and Luxury Tax to sign West?

                Because he's a UFA, can the last Team that he signed with sign him to a longer contract?

                What advantages ( if any ) does the Pacers have that may allow him to sign with them ( over other Teams )?

                I know that he can leave for any Team that he chooses....but the question is whether the Pacers have any built-in Advantages to re-signing him.
                He has early bird rights so yes we have an advantage over other teams.

                http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...vid-West/page6

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

                  Originally posted by vincognito View Post
                  Fair point but lance does have a lot more talent than gerald green. I'm not basing it on his stats, i believe in his actual talent to be a scorer. I've seen a player that can get to the rim very well from his dribble drives, finish in traffic, he is a threat from 3, and he is great in the open court. I think you are underrating him a bit.

                  Also I never was trying to suggest that he should be taking more shots, his role is perfect for this team
                  I think his ceiling is a decent all-around starter or a 6th man. I just don't see him as a good scorer. He doesn't have that mentality, I haven't really seen him go on fire and start torching the opponent (maybe just once and even then it was 9 points or something)
                  Originally posted by Piston Prince
                  Bobcat fans telling us to cheer up = epic fail season
                  "Josh Smith Re-building the city of Detroit one brick at a time"

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

                    Originally posted by yoadknux View Post
                    I think his ceiling is a decent all-around starter or a 6th man. I just don't see him as a good scorer. He doesn't have that mentality, I haven't really seen him go on fire and start torching the opponent (maybe just once and even then it was 9 points or something)
                    we'll see if he becomes a more agressive scorer when coming off the bench

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

                      Originally posted by PacerPenguins View Post
                      trade Danny for a quality backup PG, I think we should resign Hans too
                      Hans has what, a $4.5 million qualifying offer? i think you can find similar production for cheaper

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

                        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                        After watching West abuse Landry, I would leave Carl off the list. I think Jefferson, Smith and possibly Millsap are at a higher level.

                        I hope we get him to sign for about 12M/yr...or if he needs more a shorter 2 year contract again. By the time a 4 year contract ends, he will be well into his decline.
                        I'm inclined to either go after Landry as a Backup PF or just live with Hansbrough. Landry is a very efficient scorer and is also good at doing what Hansbrough does....get to the Free Throw line.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

                          Originally posted by mrknowname View Post
                          Hans has what, a $4.5 million qualifying offer? i think you can find similar production for cheaper
                          I hadn't checked.....what Backup PF free agents will be available this upcoming Season?
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

                            Originally posted by PacerPenguins View Post
                            trade Danny for a quality backup PG, I think we should resign Hans too
                            There's a lot of variables for the Pacers. If they win the championship or make the Finals, then I'd imagine they'd keep their top 7 (current starting five plus Granger and Mahinmi).

                            But if they lose before then, especially before the ECF, then a smart thing could be to do what the Spurs did with George Hill. Remember, the Spurs LOVED George Hill. But they knew they couldn't pay him, so they traded him to the Pacers for Kawhi Leonard, and re-set the clock back 4 years before they had to pay a big amount for a contributor.

                            Could the Pacers get a lottery pick for Granger and re-set the clock, like the Spurs did, to pay a player? It'll be interesting to see how the rest of the season plays out and how it affects what the Pacers do this summer.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

                              I hadn't checked.....what Backup PF free agents will be available this upcoming Season?
                              i haven't checked either, but they could target somebody like http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/...michael-19449/ in the late first/early second round

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: NBA PM: Ranking the 2013 Free Agents

                                Originally posted by mrknowname View Post
                                Hans has what, a $4.5 million qualifying offer? i think you can find similar production for cheaper
                                Pendergraph is worth a shot and the Pacers will have to go cheaper on the backups since a lot of money is being spent on guys like Green who aren't even playing.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X