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

What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

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

  • Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

    Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
    It is a bad idea to trade any of the starters just to keep Lance. Lance isn't that good.

    You can't trade Mahinmi to keep Lance unless you want a bench that can't play defense. He obviously isn't Hibbert on defense, but he has a similar affect on our bench defense. I know this isn't popular opinion, but losing Mahinmi without being able to replace him would do more harm to this team than losing Lance and replacing him with Granger or an MLE level player.

    You can get rid of Scola, but then you just gave up 2 first round picks for a one year rental who wasn't worth 2 1st round picks. Simply put you don't make that trade if you plan on dropping Scola after the first year.

    The only real option is to try and trade Copeland for an expiring contract, or 2nd round picks.
    Believe me......I am ALL for trading Copeland with as many 2nd round picks as we can send along with OJ and Cash that can fit in a duffle bag....that is my very 1st option. But my whole point in my long-winded post is that I do not think that Copeland could be dumped at the price. Why? cuz if it could have happened....it would have ALREADY happened. I would be STUNNED ( and jumping for joy ) if Copeland was in another uniform on February 21st ( the day after the Trade Deadline ).

    As I have said before....after February 21st....the price to dump Copeland for nothing goes up exponentially. Why? Cuz NOW the Pacers HAVE to clear $4 to 5 mil in Salary so that they can get under the LT. You think that other Teams are going to go easy on the Pacers if they pretty much know that the Owners have a
    "provebial Gun to Bird's head" telling him that he CANNOT go over the LT? Do you think the Pacers can get a TPE for Copeland + Two 2014 2nd round picks + OJ at that point? My guess is not....the price would likely go up to swap out OJ for Solo.

    Now, I will admit that I am HUGE pessimist when it comes to trades and what it takes to dump salary.....but look at the price it took just to dump Green and get Scola. I love what Scola brings to this Team....but I really hate that it cost us Plumlee ( Mahinmi's replacement and the only other guy on the roster that would make Mahinmi expendable ) or the loss of the 1st Round draft pick ( yes, it's just a draft pick...but drafting Players is the CHEAPEST way to fill the roster with Talent that you want...something that you HAVE to do to have a top $$$ Starting Lineup ). I DO NOT doubt that it would cost the Pacers a lot more than I think that they should pay to simply dump Copeland's Contract.

    Color me pessimistic when it comes to dumping Copeland's contract at a cost that will no impact the Pacers in a meaningful way.

    If anything...I guess the 3rd Option that I can see if to dump Copeland's contract at the cost of losing Solo. Would you be willing to include Solo in any deal to dump Copeland for nothing?

    My answer is simple. This goes back to what I hate doing....sacrificing the only options that the Team has to build a cheap bench that can develop into a key rotational Player.
    Last edited by CableKC; 01-31-2014, 11:31 PM.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      If we can trade Copeland for an expiring contract, it would be a miracle.

      Ian is an important backup, but are you saying that a player we pay 4M/yr is more important than Lance? If so, we have a heckuva deal going on with Mr. Butterfingers. I realize he's an important backup but he's not stopping LeBron any more than Josh McRoberts. Also, for 4M we could pickup another body. Solomon Jones would be a decent replacement and he's not in the league.

      BTW, Lance will get paid more than our starting PG. Lance is better than Hill and the entire known world knows it or should.
      With Plumlee gone...Mahinmi became untouchable IMHO. My hope is that we either draft a replacement for him in the 2nd round or sign Nazr Mohammed in the offseason for the Veteran's minimum.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
        With Plumlee gone...Mahinmi became untouchable IMHO. My hope is that we either draft a replacement for him in the 2nd round or sign Nazr Mohammed in the offseason for the Veteran's minimum.
        I realize we are thin on real centers. But Ian is untouchable?

        Look at the big picture. This is 2014 and Lance is 23 years old. People would have never dreamed he'd be this good this year. He will probably be on the all-star team and if he gets any better there will be no doubt of that.

        Ian is only important to this team because we are thin on centers but trades can be made to fill that hole adequately. That's all Ian really is...is adequate.

        Comment


        • Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
          I realize we are thin on real centers. But Ian is untouchable?

          Look at the big picture. This is 2014 and Lance is 23 years old. People would have never dreamed he'd be this good this year. He will probably be on the all-star team and if he gets any better there will be no doubt of that.

          Ian is only important to this team because we are thin on centers but trades can be made to fill that hole adequately. That's all Ian really is...is adequate.
          Ok...sorry...untouchable is the wrong word to use. I just feel that he's further down the line when it comes to Players that are expendable...not that he can't be replaced....just difficult to get rid of.

          But unlike Copeland.....I have no idea what Mahinmi's trade value is. I'd hope that he can be traded for a huge TPE......cuz I do think that he's a quality Backup Center....but again ( I'm a pessimist ) I'm not holding my breath.

          I will say this.....all of the options that we have to make are all considered VALID. I can see valid arguments for trading 1 player over the other...most notably trading GH or dumping Scola. But IMHO...I think that there are costs to keeping 1 Player over another.....the question is which options costs ( hurts ) the least to the FO and the Simons.
          Last edited by CableKC; 01-31-2014, 11:50 PM.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
            Ok...sorry...untouchable is the wrong word to use. I just feel that he's further down the line when it comes to Players that are expendable...not that he can't be replaced....just difficult to get rid of.

            But unlike Copeland.....I have no idea what Mahinmi's trade value is. I'd hope that he can be traded for a huge TPE......cuz I do think that he's a quality Backup Center....but again ( I'm a pessimist ) I'm not holding my breath.
            Now I agree with that. I guess my position is that players like Copeland, Scola and Mahinmi are all expendable when it comes to Lance. We are talking an all-star calibre starter vs backups.

            Now, if I thought we could never acquire another C in the NBA, I might think differently. I know they are hard to come by, but we traded Darren Collison and acquired Ian. Perhaps it would be tough to do this year, but it's not happening this year. It will be over the summer.

            Comment


            • Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

              I hate to say this, but if Lance gets taken via FA due to high cost, I also punt on Granger and sign Deng to replace Lance/Danny. I mean if I had to also lose Danny to have the money. I love 33 and it will kill me if/when he has to go to another team, but right now Deng >>> Granger, as sad as it is to say.

              I've been all for the conciliation prize that if Lance goes at least you have Danny money, but this last month is not giving me any level of confidence. His game is really just not up to his standards by any stretch. I'm almost a little worried he might be done-ish. He looks more off his game than just "slow start", but maybe/hopefully I'm wrong.



              This season might be the "dream season" when all the money and pieces just fit, never to be replicated again. It happens to teams all the time. But I do think Lance has gone from "guy who benefits from others" to "guy who is making everyone else better". His hyper puppy act throws people off, as does his rebound stealing, but regardless of that he's often one of the few guys really creating problems for defenses on his own and in a way that's much stronger than "bench scoring specialist". He's certainly been a better offensive player than Paul the last couple of weeks.

              So I'd think you are keeping Paul, Roy, West and Lance 100% no matter what else must be done, with Hill at a 80% keep level perhaps and then all bets are off after that. I'd think CJ Watson might by the 5th guy on the most likely to remain on the team list actually simply because of how well he fits his role.

              Comment


              • Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

                Unless you're expecting to sign Deng for the MLE, I don't know that that's possible even without Lance or Danny around. It's not about being under the tax, it's about being under the cap if you want to sign a big name like that.

                Comment


                • Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  Unless you're expecting to sign Deng for the MLE, I don't know that that's possible even without Lance or Danny around. It's not about being under the tax, it's about being under the cap if you want to sign a big name like that.
                  It isn't and there is no way the Cavs would do a S&T with us for Deng. We won't be able to sign anyone near Lances ability if we let him walk. Maybe a Mo Williams if he opts out or Caron Butler, Shawn Marion, and maybe Paul Pierce would take a MLE deal. It is really slim pickins out there in free agency this summer.

                  Comment


                  • Re: What are you willing to see the Pacers pay to keep Lance?

                    Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                    It isn't and there is no way the Cavs would do a S&T with us for Deng. We won't be able to sign anyone near Lances ability if we let him walk. Maybe a Mo Williams if he opts out or Caron Butler, Shawn Marion, and maybe Paul Pierce would take a MLE deal. It is really slim pickins out there in free agency this summer.

                    Yeah, the bottom line is that we're going to have a maaaaaaaaaasive reduction in talent if we lose Lance. There's just no way to spin it.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X