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

Which teams will try and sign Lance?

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

  • bballpacen
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    Originally posted by wintermute View Post
    As KTT says though, Lakers probably go after a more high profile target.

    KTT: good list, mostly, though I'm not sure why you're ruling out Utah. Seems like Lance could play well with Hayward. Anyway, yeah, a large number of teams could possibly talk themselves into making a large offer for Lance.

    The Bulls would **** me off. IMO, he'd be a good fit there, and at the same time Lance going there would weaken us while strengthening a division rival. Hopefully though like the Lakers maybe they'll be aiming at more high profile guys, like Melo.

    Another thing to look at - who are the similar young swingman/combo guards who would be competing for the same FA dollars as Lance. The obvious ones I can think of are Bledsoe and Hayward, both RFAs. Maybe Avery Bradley and possibly Evan Turner. Parsons of course if Houston opts out of his contract, but that doesn't seem likely. Then there's older guys like Deng, Granger, Marion, Crawford, Stuckey who can soak up some FA money as well.
    Look at those names... I would make the case that Lance is already a high profile guy the way he is getting triple doubles... And if he makes the ASG, then you certainly say that he is more high of a profile than those other names... Lance is in the middle of becoming a high profile target, if he has not already become one...

    Leave a comment:


  • CableKC
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
    I think Lance is smart and knows how good of a situation this is for him. Hopefully he comes back
    If some other Team offers him some $9 mil a year offer and the Pacers can only offer him one that is $8 mil a year offer....I can see Lance doing what you suggest....stick with the Pacers. But if some Team offers him a $10 to 11 mil a year offer....which I think is entirely possible ( comprable to Tyreke and will likely overpay just to win his services ), I can see Lance taking more money and bolting.

    IMHO.... I think that $$$ will be the primary motivation for Lance ( the guy has been playing under a 2nd round rookie contract for the last couple of years ). Leaving $3 to 4 mil total ( or $1+ mil a year over 4 season ) on the table to have another chance to play for a championship? I think is within reason....I can see Lance ( or any Player doing that ). But leaving $8 mil total ( or $2+ mil a year over 4 seasons ) on the Table to play for another Team? I can see that giving pause to some Players ( most Notably Lance ) if they were given that option.

    Leave a comment:


  • docpaul
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    Originally posted by beast23 View Post
    Way too invested? I would say that Lance is obviously an important part of future plans. I would say that the makeup of the roster gains a big benefit by his skill set; he seems to be a very nice complement to GHill in he back court.

    But I wouldn't say we are heavily invested in him. He has been a very inexpensive investment in terms of what he is now capable of providing. We are about to become heavily invested in him because once we re-sign him, we will have very little flexibility regarding roster movement.

    The difficult thing will be that Larry Bird has to decide how big that investment should and can be, because it does have a limit that will be associated to it.
    Sorry, I didn't communicate fully. There are different kinds of investment that go beyond financial.

    We developed the kid for 4 years, so there's a very large time investment. There's also Bird's obvious emotional investment.

    Fans are in love with the guy.

    There's a chemistry investment amongst other members of the team.

    Again, I just don't see them having the same investment in someone like GHill, or Scola in the same way they do Lance on a number of levels. Lance has played himself this year into #3 or #4 in the team's pecking order, IMO.

    Maybe I'm wrong (shrug).

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueCollarColts
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    I think Lance is smart and knows how good of a situation this is for him. Hopefully he comes back

    Leave a comment:


  • PacersPride
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    Originally posted by docpaul View Post
    I would be absolutely shocked if Bird let Lance walk this offseason.

    I simply don't see it.

    He will trade anyone not named Paul, Roy, or David to ensure his future here if he has to, IMO.

    The franchise is way too invested in the kid, and now that he's paying big dividends? Fuggetaboutit.

    not sure why anyone would be shocked. Bird already stated in the interview posted a few weeks back that if they cannot afford Lance Pacers will simply sign someone else.


    I still have my doubts about Lance earning more than 8Million. to me a lot of his play his contract driven this season. There are still way too many careless turnovers,,, for every fancy pass there is going to be the lance moment as well,,, but in all fairness the ratio has improved. I like Lance,, but his maturity still is a bit of a concern. Also, when he gets the big contract will he continue to play as hard as he does now.

    Pacers are going to have to be very financially sound in decision making this upcoming offseason. If I gotta choose between Lance at 10 mill or Danny at around 6 for less years I might go with Danny.

    No doubt Lance is a special talent, but I am not 100% convinced he can be the player he is with the Pacers as he can be elsewhere.


    JR Smith was expected to get paid well previous offseason and a bad showing in the playoffs changed all that quickly. I don't expect that to happen but I want to see if Lance can keep his head and play sound fundamental basketball in the playoffs.


    Many variables to go into but its probably going to come down to keeping Lance or Danny and at what cost to the Franchise. I wouldn't be at all shocked to see someone overpay Lance and he bolt. If that happens then Danny will be back.


    Pacers win a championship and maybe Simon goes all in. I would really enjoy watching Lance reach his ceiling with the BnG but investing 10M is a bit much for a guy excelling on a very well rounded team.

    Lance is a tough minded somewhat tempermental (maturity) kinda player. we witnessed it the other nite between he and Hill. tbh I think theres been a bit of a rift there for sometime. nothing serious just Lance wanting the respect. Point is.. we pay Lance he is going to feel like a leader on the this team and will not back down to anyone. with DWEST here to keep him in check we should be ok,, but I don't want to see the money cause his ego to present chemistry issues down the road.

    with all this said, love to see Lance here w the BnG. but if the bidding war takes place like it did last season between Indiana and Portland, were gonna have to let Lance walk and bring back DG.

    I am going to hate seeing one of those two guys sign elsewhere esp w the way Danny's been playing of late.

    Leave a comment:


  • beast23
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    Originally posted by docpaul View Post
    The franchise is way too invested in the kid, and now that he's paying big dividends? Fuggetaboutit.
    Way too invested? I would say that Lance is obviously an important part of future plans. I would say that the makeup of the roster gains a big benefit by his skill set; he seems to be a very nice complement to GHill in he back court.

    But I wouldn't say we are heavily invested in him. He has been a very inexpensive investment in terms of what he is now capable of providing. We are about to become heavily invested in him because once we re-sign him, we will have very little flexibility regarding roster movement.

    The difficult thing will be that Larry Bird has to decide how big that investment should and can be, because it does have a limit that will be associated to it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sollozzo
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
    Yes he is so it has become everyone's favorite wet dream free agency move.
    Thank God the Pacers are elite. If Stevens-Hayward reunited in Boston while the Pacers were in the sewer, then the local Celtics gushing would give the Larry Bird era a run for its money.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trader Joe
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
    Hayward and Stevens reunion??? That has me giddy.

    Is Hayward a restricted Free Agent?
    Yes he is so it has become everyone's favorite wet dream free agency move.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trader Joe
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    There are a lot of players at the top of the draft that could change the landscape for Lance too....

    Wiggins, Exum, Smart, Harris, Parker (depending on the team that selects him)

    Leave a comment:


  • graphic-er
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    Hayward and Stevens reunion??? That has me giddy.

    Is Hayward a restricted Free Agent?

    Leave a comment:


  • cdash
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
    The Celtics might have their eyes on a different player from the 2010 draft.
    Yes no need to be cryptic--the Gordon Hayward connection is strong.

    Leave a comment:


  • PacersHomer
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    Since free agency starts after the draft a lot of these "maybes" might go away thanks to guys like Wiggins or Dante Exum or Gary Harris.

    Leave a comment:


  • PacersHomer
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    The Celtics might have their eyes on a different player from the 2010 draft.

    Leave a comment:


  • cdash
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
    Phoenix.

    EDIT: I see you have them as a no. I disagree. Bledsoe and Lance would be the most physical backcourt in the league and would fit perfectly in the tempo they are playing with right now. It seems an obvious fit to me. I see 5 teams on that list that I think would go for Lance depending on who they draft Phoenix, Charlotte, Utah (also a team you have as a no, but you don't think utah would be interested in a possible Trey Burke, Lance, Hayward trio?), Atlanta (Lance would be a great initiator for Milsap and Horford IMO), and Dallas.

    I don't see Lance as a fit in Philly. One MCW is extremely similar to Lance in many ways, two if they want to spend on a guard they may just re-sign Evan Turner.
    Would they really want to break up the fantastic Dragic/Bledsoe backcourt duo?

    Leave a comment:


  • Trader Joe
    replied
    Re: Which teams will try and sign Lance?

    Phoenix.

    EDIT: I see you have them as a no. I disagree. Bledsoe and Lance would be the most physical backcourt in the league and would fit perfectly in the tempo they are playing with right now. It seems an obvious fit to me. I see 5 teams on that list that I think would go for Lance depending on who they draft Phoenix, Charlotte, Utah (also a team you have as a no, but you don't think utah would be interested in a possible Trey Burke, Lance, Hayward trio?), Atlanta (Lance would be a great initiator for Milsap and Horford IMO), and Dallas.

    I don't see Lance as a fit in Philly. One MCW is extremely similar to Lance in many ways, two if they want to spend on a guard they may just re-sign Evan Turner.
    Last edited by Trader Joe; 01-08-2014, 01:52 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X