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

Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

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

  • Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

    http://www.indystar.com/article/2010...ers-trade-talk

    Pacers notebook
    Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

    By Mike Wells
    Posted: February 20, 2010


    NEW ORLEANS -- T.J. Ford didn't expect there was a possibility that he would be traded. Brandon Rush said he was "shocked" four times during a 40-second interview.

    The two Indiana Pacers were caught off guard when they heard the team was working on a deal to send them to the Charlotte Bobcats for Gerald Henderson, Nazr Mohammed and D.J. Augustin on Thursday.
    Advertisement

    The deal fell through when the Bobcats pulled out about 10 minutes before the trade deadline.

    "I was definitely more shocked than anything," Rush said. "I didn't see it coming. Nobody told me anything about being on the trade block. It was more of a shock."

    Many of Rush's teammates thought he had been traded because he was running late for their 3 p.m. flight to New Orleans. It wasn't until then that he learned he was close to being dealt.

    Team president Larry Bird has talked about having a core group of players to go with when they finally have some salary cap space.

    Thursday's proposed deal shows that the Pacers aren't sure if Rush, one of the most talented players on the roster, fits into their future plans. Rush has had an up-and-down first two seasons. His inconsistent play has frustrated many in the organization.

    "I know (I can get traded) down the road because it's part of basketball," Rush said.

    Ford was on his way to the airport when his agent called him and said the two teams were working on a deal.

    "I didn't have too much of a reaction because I didn't anticipate being traded," he said. "I figured I'd be here for the rest of the year. You can look at it two ways. You can be upset or look at it as a good thing because that means people still want your services around the league."

    Ford was so certain he was going to be traded that he was dancing around in front of his teammates with a big smile on his face before getting on the plane.

    Almost being traded just added another twist to an already bizarre season for Ford. He has gone from starting to being benched to being back in the rotation.

    "You look at the situation and understand the direction they're going," he said. "It's not anything I'm upset about at all. All my trades have been during the summertime and never in the course of the season.

    "This whole season has been very challenging and I think I've dealt with everything that has come my way pretty good. I'm just going to continue to try and finish the season up strong."
    Loading up on tickets

    Pacers forward Danny Granger spent part of his time in the locker room before the game getting tickets for friends and family members in his hometown.

    Granger came up with his customary 40 tickets, but it didn't cost him as much as usual. He only had to purchase a few tickets because his teammates helped out by giving him their tickets.
    ------------------------------------

    I would hope that almost getting traded would light a fire under Rush, but I didn't see any change in him against NO.

    Also, I wonder if Ford was upset about getting traded or just putting on when he was dancing around in front of his teammates. Remembering his tweet, I'm of two minds. No one wants to have to move, but everyone likes another shot. I figure he felt both ways.

  • #2
    Re: Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

    I think this trade will be revisited during the summer so Ford will have to keep his dancing shoes on.

    "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

      As to Ford my guess is he was probably ready to get out of this nuthouse and away from this coach.

      Well that is until he realized that Larry Brown would have been his next coach. That would have been fun to see.

      However again I want to actually in all honesty show some admiration for the way that Ford has handled everything this year. He is not really a good point guard at all but to go from starter to 12th man would take its toll on anyone and I can tell you from sitting near the bench and watching him that the guy never once pouted or stood away from the team. He usually was the first person to greet the players coming off of the floor and he was always telling Price things whenever he would go by him.

      Think what you will of him as a player but as a team mate I would have to say that at least in public view you could not ask for much better than that.


      Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

        I think Ford would be receptive to coaching, especially when he hasn't seen any the last couple years. Plus, he's still young enough that it could make a real difference in his career. Guys hate playing for Brown, but the smart ones always admit he made them a better player.

        Btw, I've been out of town, this is the first I heard that Henderson and Rush were involved. Man, that would have been nice. I actually would have been impressed if we'd gotten that done.
        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

          Ford was so certain he was going to be traded that he was dancing around in front of his teammates with a big smile on his face before getting on the plane.
          SEASON SUMMERIZED

          It says it all.


          And Rush has a fire in him already, otherwise he'd start phoning in the defense rather than continue to be one of the only guys playing it. I'm really fed up with the "Rush doesn't try" talk, it flies in the face of the on court play.

          I'm sorry Rush isn't jacking up 15 3PA a game, but that's not him. His game is closer to what I'd like to see, but he's a stranger in a stranger land right now. That doesn't make him wrong.


          (and I was a guy happy about the upgrade from Rush to Henderson even)

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

            I am actually VERY surprised that Rush was going to be a part of a trade such as was proposed.. I mean I could halfway see it , if we offered him in a trade with tj or murph only IF it netted us a VERY good young player who is already on his way to borderline starter/all-star.. But COME ON!!..
            I just do not understand the logic.. Hell Rush is already ON HIS WAY to one day making the All Defensive Squad... Seriously if he keeps it up I can envision it one day...
            His defense is damn good for only being a 2nd year player.. Not to mention he is already probably our top on-man defender..

            I really think it was a "vote of no confidence" by the Pacer's Front Office in Rush...
            And quite frankly, I don't think Rush deserves it.. and the flak that JOB talks out the side of his mouth about him..

            Sure he may have been overly passive the 1st half of the season.. but COME ON!!! this is only his 2nd year !! (restating AGAIN!)

            I really hope that this doesn't affect Brandon's fragile personality

            I was half being sarcastic/ half serious on that last line.. cause if I were him, I would be kinda hurt that my team has no confidence in me and wants to trade me after
            only 1 and 1/2 season from being drafted by them...

            I think for a 2nd year player he is coming along just fine.. I mean sure I wish he had become more assertive/consistant sooner and earlier on the offensive end.. but you couldn't ask more from him on defense as a 1 and 1/2 year player..


            I really think Bird and co. fumbled the ball with Rush on this one.. Let's hope not...

            .
            Last edited by Kemo; 02-20-2010, 09:57 AM.
            "They want to be famous. We want to be champions. They want to be rappers and backup dancers. We want to play football." - T.J. Ward, Denver Broncos

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

              Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
              I think Ford would be receptive to coaching, especially when he hasn't seen any the last couple years. Plus, he's still young enough that it could make a real difference in his career.
              what is that supposed to mean. How would you have any idea if he has received any coaching or not. I mean it may not be the type of coaching you approve of, but to suggest he hasn't been coached at all is just untrue and a completely unfair statement

              I would venture to say that JOB has spent dozens and dozens of hours working with Ford in film sessions and on the court work

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                SEASON SUMMERIZED

                It says it all.

                You do realize the dancing around part was not part of Wells articles

                Edit - oops I am wrong, sorry - it was part of wells blog
                Last edited by Unclebuck; 02-20-2010, 10:44 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

                  My take on Ford and Rush is this.

                  Everyone has always tried to make Ford a point guard, in the coach's image of a point guard. That isn't what he does. I would be more tempted to make a shooting guard out of him. Except for 3 pointers.

                  With Rush, what did TPTB expect? Heck, they only had FOUR YEARS to watch him. Wasn't their TV able to get the Kansas games? They should have very well known what his game is, and isn't, when they drafted him. Why did they expect anything different than what they had seen?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    You do realize the dancing around part was not part of Wells articles
                    Yes it was. Read it again.
                    The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                    http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                    RSS Feed
                    Subscribe via iTunes

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

                      Originally posted by Tom White View Post
                      My take on Ford and Rush is this.

                      Everyone has always tried to make Ford a point guard, in the coach's image of a point guard. That isn't what he does. I would be more tempted to make a shooting guard out of him. Except for 3 pointers.

                      With Rush, what did TPTB expect? Heck, they only had FOUR YEARS to watch him. Wasn't their TV able to get the Kansas games? They should have very well known what his game is, and isn't, when they drafted him. Why did they expect anything different than what they had seen?




                      Or maybe the person doing the picking isn't that knowledgeable about talent.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

                        Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
                        Yes it was. Read it again.
                        you are correct, sorry, I was wrong

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

                          Ford was so certain he was going to be traded that he was dancing around in front of his teammates with a big smile on his face before getting on the plane
                          Hopefully the dancing around showing that he really would like to be on another team will get him to opt out of his final year. If he's not traded. I like TJ but if he's not gonna be used we need to get someone we can use with his money.
                          I'm not perfect and neither are you.

                          Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the esteem of Elohim,
                          Ephisians 4: 32 And be kind towards one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as Elohim also forgave you in Messiah.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

                            Originally posted by Tom White View Post
                            Everyone has always tried to make Ford a point guard, in the coach's image of a point guard. That isn't what he does. I would be more tempted to make a shooting guard out of him. Except for 3 pointers.

                            I would argue though that Ford is only good when he has the ball. he isnt a point guard, no argument there. He is a one-on-one player who can't play off the ball. So i'm not too sure what you do with him. But putting him at shooting guard and having another guard control the ball will not help Ford at all

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Well's> Ford, Rush taken aback by Pacers' trade talk

                              The putting of Rush in a trade says:

                              A) Bird missed judged Rush's talent when he went for a "NBA ready" pick.

                              B) TPTB have come to the conclusion Rush is never going to be the starting SG they wanted for the future.

                              C) That Rush is not Jimmy's type player.

                              D) That Jimmy will be the coach most of next season if not all of the season.

                              E) It shows another failed pick by Bird. Lets hope Tyler isn't ANOTHER one.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X