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:
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

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

Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

    Could Runi become the starter next year (at some point?).

    This train of thought started after considering the fab four being discussed at present:


    If Runi is on that squad, I have at least two questions:

    1. Do the other four have the ability to make up for Runi's defensive liabilities?

    2. Does Quis provide as good (or even better) ball handling/creating skills at two guard, like Freddy did, to help Runi in a ball-handling pinch?

    I do think Runi can be the shooting threat we're looking for--with confidence and playing time. He also could work nicely with the other four very athletic players.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

  • #2
    Re: Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

    I suspect he'll have a better year than last year. My hope is that he will work on his weaknesses this summer, dribbling the ball up court, and defense.

    The league is full of succesful teams with poor defensive point guards (Miami, San Antonio, Sacramento, Dallas, et al.), I don't think his defensive weakness is that much of a concern, especially if the four guys behind him are solid.

    My bigger concern is whether or not he will keep his conditioning for the full season, and whether he will learn to move with the ball against an NBA defense.

    But based on the few flashes he showed last year - I think he has it in him to contribute, maybe even start, if he puts the effort in.

    "Like [Jonathan Bender], AMC's Pacer was supposed to be fitted with a rotary engine--but both rotaries had technical problems late in their development (read: after incurring heavy research costs) that prevented them from seeing the light of day. Of course, both vehicles had plenty of problems that did reach production. The Pacer was a dud in terms of quality, execution and particularly styling. Make your own assessment about its bizarre proportions, but don't miss the one door that's bigger than the other."


    • #3
      Re: Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

      certainly interesting ... but does it matter who starts so much as whos in different units and whos in at crunch time .... i think that line up could be played at times possibly even with White in to play either 2 or 3 with Quis, then one of 3 could handle ( talk about Multi positions)... certainly allow us to get out with the balll .. lots of handling skills! Problems with that from lack of experience :S

      as far as Runi starting ... i doubt it! ... u cant ignore what happened at the end off last yr ... mind u .. if were left with the PGs we got now .. and Tins gets injured (again) he may start a few games ...!
      'All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.'
      Animal Farm, by George Orwell


      • #4
        Re: Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

        Well, I guess, even the Runi haters have a little doubt that he will start a lot of games next year
        My concern is that Rick will play him 2 again because of the lack of the 3pt. shooters.
        BTW, Runi mentioned (in local news site) that he would like to play for Pacers. It seems like he isn't alienated with coach or players.
        I'm really sorry because of my english (which is my 3-4 language) and I really appreciate Your patience. I hope this board will make me better


        • #5
          Re: Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

          I just ask that he be given a chance this year, all things considered after his rookie season.

          Going into this season it needs to be made clear what everyone's role is. If Sarunas is on this team these DNP 's Coach's Decision will not help anyone this year.

          If he does not start, he needs to have significant playing time, in order to provide a consistent contribution to the team.

          I know Sarunas was apparently not ready conditioning wise for last year's season, and lost at times. I would expect that he has been preparing himself though for the gruling 82 game season this year.

          Defense is what is, you can only improve on that so much and their are alot of one dimensional players that have succeeded in this league to some degree.

          Off the bench or starting I look for significant improvement this season given the chance and used in the right role.

          Why Not Us ?


          • #6
            Re: Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

            If he's your starting PG, you've got big problems.
            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
            And life itself, rushing over me
            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


            • #7
              Re: Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

              I agree with Frank. Well said man.

              BTW, if Carlisle plays Sarunas at the 2 more than the 1 (like he did last year), I'm going to go nuts. The guy is not a Shooting Guard. He's played PG his whole life and I dont see why Rick doesn't understand that.


              • #8
                Re: Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

                Let's look at 04-05 for help. With Tinsley out how much did Gill play, especially down the stretch? How about the playoffs vs Boston? He came in one game, got ripped in the backcourt a couple of times, struggled to advance the ball all game, hello bench for the rest of the playoffs (except scrub time).

                Cabbages MUST have improved his ball handling in the back court and must be capable of initiating some plays on his own. He can't cry about how phycial things are or how he needs picks all the time. And he definitely needs to STFU about how he is a PG and not a SG and shouldn't be misplayed when he is on a team with Jack at SF, Danny at PF and Foster at C. Seriously, that's a crap attitude.

                If he has worked on the ball handling skills, put his ego in check, and can at least keep track of his man on the court

                - I posted at RATS about him literally losing where his man was in the HC last year, complete with frantic looking around like hide and go seek and then the "I F'd up" look after his dude busted the shot on the other side of the court

                then he can certainly be a productive PG for this team, though he will not beat out a healthy Tinsley if it comes to that. He's good, but not that good.

                He is almost as good a passer as Tinsley and he understands floor movement just as well as him. He has a better 3 than Tinsley, but nowhere near the handles and speed, nor the defensive hands for the steals. To me that rates him as a nice solid BU, just like AJ became once he learned to advance the ball safely after his own rough 04-05 effort.


                • #9
                  Re: Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

                  He needs to improve:

                  crossover on offense
                  footwork on defense

                  That is a lot to ask for in one offseason.

                  I think that Jeff Foster will start reliably making three pointers before Sarunas can overcome all of those deficiencies and be an effective 35-minutes-a-game starting PG on a winning NBA team.
                  The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).


                  • #10
                    Re: Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

                    Let's not

                    08 and Beyond


                    • #11
                      Re: Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth
                      - I posted at RATS about him literally losing where his man was in the HC last year, complete with frantic looking around like hide and go seek and then the "I F'd up" look after his dude busted the shot on the other side of the court
                      My favorite was in the home opener. He was standing in the paint, pointing out where everyone else should be.

                      The ball rotated to Korver, who was unguarded in the corner. As the shot went up and in (as Saras sprinted out as fast as he could), you could see the "oops!" expression on his face.

                      Way to make a first impression. Its no wonder the team was not interested in his alleged "leadership" skills. (And its why I call him "bossy", but not a "leader.")

                      + + + +

                      I am concerned about how much stuff we seem to agree on.
                      Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                      Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                      Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                      Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                      And life itself, rushing over me
                      Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                      Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you


                      • #12
                        Re: Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

                        He needs to improve his entire overall game. And become faster. And at the age of 30 or is it 31. I don't see that as happening. He can't bring the ball up under pressure, he yells at his teammates when he screws up. He passes to teammates when they are covered so well that they can't get control and TO the ball, his shot was second worst on the roster only Gill had a worse percentage. And he thinks he is above Defense, He is not a quality player.

                        Greene can bring the ball up the floor just as poorly as runi, but he plays Defense. I don't care what Bird says, when you get down to it. Tinsley, Daniels, and Greene are superior all around players at the point. And White could be. If we have too, I could see us having somebody besides Greene bring it up the floor when hes in.


                        • #13
                          Re: Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

                          Originally posted by Destined4Greatness
                          Greene can bring the ball up the floor just as poorly as runi, but he plays Defense. I don't care what Bird says, when you get down to it. Tinsley, Daniels, and Greene are superior all around players at the point. And White could be. If we have too, I could see us having somebody besides Greene bring it up the floor when hes in.
                          I haven't seen a ton of Greene, but I thought his handles were decent. Do I remember wrong?
                          This space for rent.


                          • #14
                            Re: Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

                            Originally posted by Robertmto
                            Let's not


                            • #15
                              Re: Let's Discuss Runi as Starting PG

                              Originally posted by Anthem
                              I haven't seen a ton of Greene, but I thought his handles were decent. Do I remember wrong?
                              The only time I saw him it was rather poor. But so was his Defense, I just knew his defensive Rep. I could be wrong about his ability to bring the ball up on the floor.