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

Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

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

  • Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
    Weren't all three of those guy UFAs?
    No, they were RFAs. Plus, those weren't "Poison Pill" contracts, they were "Gilbert Arenas Provision" deals.

    The purpose of the "Arenas Provision" was to help teams match contracts for players for which they have limited rights to (Early Bird or Non-Bird). It only affects players with one or two years experience in the league, and it only affects offer sheets on restricted free agents. Effectively, the most a team can offer in such a situation for another team's RFA is the Non-Taxpayer MLE...the second year gets a 4.5% raise, then the third can jump quite a bit, dependent on cap space and the average of the year deal. The offering team must have the space for the average salary, while the matching team need only the space for the MLE in the first year.

    The "Poison Pill" only applies to players who are traded between the time they sign a rookie scale extension and the time it takes effect. John Wall would be an example. If he is traded between now and the start of the 2014/15 season, the receiving team would have to have room to receive the average of the final year of his rookie deal ($7.5mm) and the total extension (5 years, $80mm), so $87.5mm/6 years = $14.6mm. However, the Wizards could only accept back the $7.5mm as a matching salary.

    Lance doesn't qualify for latter, because he wasn't a first round draft pick. He doesn't qualify for the Arenas provision, because he will have been in the league for 4 years (and the Pacers hold his full Bird Rights, and he's not a restricted FA).

    Teams can get Lance, simply by offering more than the Pacers can fit under the tax, or by offering more than the Pacers want to pay.

    Comment


    • Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

      I like the Pelicans uniforms. Then again, I am more conservative with my tastes. I guess they could have gone the cartoonish route the Rockets and Raptors did a few years ago.

      Comment


      • Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
        Not that easy because if you lose Danny you are pretty much "rebuilding"


        Bills bait
        What? If the team keeps Paul, Lance, Hibs, West, and others - but lose Granger - they are rebuilding? That can't be what you mean, is it?

        Comment


        • Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

          Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
          I've never considered Danny being back after this season feasible for either party. We don't even know if he can play. I've said this before, but if Granger turns out to be a guy worth keeping, we probably can't keep him.
          My thoughts, as well.

          If you're choosing between Granger and Lance at similar price points, that's a really, really easy choice.
          Sorry, I don't have my scorecard handy. There are posters who would mean "pick Danny," and posters who would mean "pick Lance." Which one are you, again?

          Comment


          • Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

            Originally posted by Tom White View Post
            What? If the team keeps Paul, Lance, Hibs, West, and others - but lose Granger - they are rebuilding? That can't be what you mean, is it?
            Don't listen to him. He's being his usual self, and leaving out 3/4ths of the argument that was presented, in order to mock the argument. People had pointed out that he was wanting a rebuild by the entire bench gone, along with Danny and West.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

              Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
              Conversely, insinuating that he is a max player after half a season of great play is also completely ridiculous.

              Just look at Danny Granger after his All star season. the next year his production and play dropped off just because NBA defenses game planned for him.
              I agree and all the more reason to wait it out if instead of paying him a super max deal now.
              I love PG but he isn't on the same level and never will be on the same level as Lebron or KD. He isn't on the same level as Reggie in his prime yet but could get to that next year only if he takes the next step. People here are looking at PG like it's a given he'll be the best player in the league after next season. You could go back and pull up the same post about Granger during his all star year, people just couldn't wait until he took the next step that he never took. If Bird can lock PG up to a 5/80 max or less then he should do it otherwise I'd rather wait and deal with him next summer by matching any offer he gets.
              Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

              Comment


              • Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                Originally posted by count55 View Post
                My thoughts, as well.



                Sorry, I don't have my scorecard handy. There are posters who would mean "pick Danny," and posters who would mean "pick Lance." Which one are you, again?
                Lance. Because if they are at similar price points, it means Granger is broken.

                Comment


                • Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                  The one thing that separates Paul from the elite, elite players is his consistency. If we want to use age as an excuse that's fine, but it shouldn't factor into his contract. 5/80 is more than fair given what he's shown and done so far in the league thus far.

                  As far as Lance, he can't receive a poison pill contract, but I think we value him more than other teams would at this point. He had some big games in the playoffs, but he also had some extremely quiet/non-effective games as well. He is also very hit or miss when it comes to production (which is the case for young players) but anything over 5 or 6 million is overpaying for him at this point.

                  Bottom line at what point do you make a guy prove himself before you pay him a bunch simply based off of potential? It's a tricky question/predicament.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                    Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                    Lance. Because if they are at similar price points, it means Granger is broken.
                    Also, we would have 3+ years of vnzla quoting himself in posts where he was saying Danny was "broken" all along. For all parties: the Pacers, Danny Granger, Lance Stephenson, PD, the ignore function on PD...let's hope Danny is not "broken."

                    Comment


                    • Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                      Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                      Unlike Danny Granger, NBA offenses must also game plan for Paul George.

                      Paul is on a totally different level than Danny ever has been.
                      If you you mean by totally different level that his offense hasn't hit the level of where Granger has yet then yes. Defensively he's better but PG still needs to take the next step to be where Granger was his all star year offensively. Granger averaged 25.8 ppg that year I'm not sure if PG will quite get there if he were a level beyond that he'd be on a Kobe or Lebron level. We can't count those next steps until he takes them and while I hope he does I'm not going to pretend we have Lebron James on our hands. I'm happy to have a solid all round all star player and I hope Bird plays hard ball to try to keep him at a salary we can build around.
                      Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                        http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...aid-in-the-nba


                        Great great read( I say it is a must read) Grantland is so good shocked they haven't went all insider model on us like ESPN. I have been preaching this for the past few seasons so many cheap role players that could be had overseas.



                        While I am on the topic still kind of shocked Gal Mekel left Greece after an MVP season and a title. I don't think he translates to the NBA at all and he settled for the Vets min for 3 years and 3rd string at best role. I just dont get that one at all. The only issue with guys coming like him and Bobby Brown. They are like the All star of their league so it is hard to convince them to take a small role on an NBA team. That is the very reason Bo McCalebb never comes over.

                        Comment


                        • Grantland loves them some pistons....

                          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: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            Also, we would have 3+ years of vnzla quoting himself in posts where he was saying Danny was "broken" all along. For all parties: the Pacers, Danny Granger, Lance Stephenson, PD, the ignore function on PD...let's hope Danny is not "broken."
                            Cool another post that is going to prove you wrong again I already know your future answer by the time I bring this post up "please don't bring the pass and let's talk about the future "
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                              Cool another post that is going to prove you wrong again I already know your future answer by the time I bring this post up "please don't bring the pass and let's talk about the future "
                              I've had many debates about prospects before the NBA Draft and cdash is the first to admit when he is wrong. One of the few on here actually.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Off Season News, Rumors, and Trades, etc. 2013

                                Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                                If you you mean by totally different level that his offense hasn't hit the level of where Granger has yet then yes. Defensively he's better but PG still needs to take the next step to be where Granger was his all star year offensively. Granger averaged 25.8 ppg that year I'm not sure if PG will quite get there if he were a level beyond that he'd be on a Kobe or Lebron level. We can't count those next steps until he takes them and while I hope he does I'm not going to pretend we have Lebron James on our hands. I'm happy to have a solid all round all star player and I hope Bird plays hard ball to try to keep him at a salary we can build around.
                                Not to mention that though Paul is great defensively, he can improv there as well as he wasn't exactly completely shutting down big time scoring wings.

                                In the playoffs:

                                J.Smith: 17ppg on 43% shooting (not bad, but Smith isn't a big scorer really)
                                C.Anthony: 26ppg on 43% shooting(forced Melo to shoot tough shots, which led to 2 subpar shooting games)
                                Lebron: 30ppg on 50% shooting(didn't really stop Lebron from getting what he wanted)

                                So yes Paul is great defensively but the statement that NBA offenses are game planning for him can be a bit misleading. Maybe they have a scouting report that says to run him off screens and/or post him up, but I don't think they're creating game plans for Paul offensively the way teams need to gameplay for Roy.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X