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

Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

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

  • Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

    Mike Dunleavy deserves a lot of praise for his play this year, IMO. He has done an outstanding job. I think his play alone makes that Golden State trade fair for us.

    I can't complain about anything Mike has done this year. He has just flat out had a great year for the Pacers.

    Here is what I can't figure out.

    Where does Mike fit in with the Pacers future plans?

    Half of me says trade him now. Go with the younger cheaper mold.

    The other half says keep him. He is a good player and will help the team win sooner rather than later.

    Do you see Mike Dunleavy as an Indiana Pacer for a while?

    I love how Mike plays the game. He is a different player.

    I have two concerns though with Mike.

    - How good is he?
    His five years in Golden State he was average for the most part. Nothing really special though and not worth his salary. Then last season after the trade he really didn't show much with Indiana however maybe it's a little bit unfair to judge that time since it was a mid season trade.

    Then finally this year under Jim Mike is having by far the best season of his career. He is averaging a career high in points yes but the thing that impresses me the most is he is shooting so well. 47% from the field, 38% three point shooter, 84% from the foul line, all are career highs for him.

    What i'm wondering is can Dunleavy keep up that type of production no matter who the coach is?

    - Are him and Danny a good fit?
    Neither of these two are power forwards nor should they be playing that spot.

    Both are really small forwards, but they can play some guard. Can these two be a winning team's starting shooting guard/small forward?

    On offense I don't really see a problem. On defense, I do.

    Neither is a defensive stopper. Can Danny be? Maybe so, but will he? Can he guard the guards in the league night in and night out? I think on every winning team you will find a defensive stopper somewhere and I guess if Dunleavy and Danny are gonna be on the same team that player is gonna be a big man for us.

    So, where do you see Dunleavy in the Pacers future? You think he is a keeper?

  • #2
    Re: Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

    One more thing i'm wondering about...the draft. How will this affect Dunleavy's future?

    There could be some real good guards coming out and with the Pacers likely having a lottery pick they could be taking one. You have Mayo, Gordon, Bayless, so what if the Pacers end up taking one of them?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

      Originally posted by rommie View Post
      I think his play alone makes that Golden State trade fair for us.
      Let's not get too high. GS would have traded us Dun for Jack straight up. Would have been a good trade for both teams.

      Do you see Mike Dunleavy as an Indiana Pacer for a while?
      Oh yeah. No way Bird trades him, under any circumstance. With Shawne out of the "core," it's a little bit less of a problem in the near term. But I still think one of them needs to go eventually, and I'd rather it be Mike.

      Then finally this year under Jim Mike is having by far the best season of his career. He is averaging a career high in points yes but the thing that impresses me the most is he is shooting so well. 47% from the field, 38% three point shooter, 84% from the foul line, all are career highs for him.
      You know who else had a career year under Jim? Antoine Walker. I like Mike a ton better as a person, and I think he has the discipline to avoid Twon's "ample booty," but I'm not convinced he'll carry this production through to the end of the season, let alone to another coach.

      - Are him and Danny a good fit? Can these two be a winning team's starting shooting guard/small forward?
      MAYBE with a lockdown defender at PG, another as a bench guy backing up both Danny and Dun, and a block-happy frontcourt. But other than that, I'd say no.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

        I get the feeling that GMs will still think that Dunleavy's contract is too much to absorb. It can even be argued that his increased Production is a result of the system that we run and that his Production may not be has high if he were in a different system.

        I have ZERO problem keeping him......whenever I talk about the future core of the Pacers....I always consider Dunleavy to be part of that core. I don't care that he is earning 8 to 10 mil per season until the 2010-2011 season...he's worth it right now.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
          I get the feeling that GMs will still think that Dunleavy's contract is too much to absorb. It can even be argued that his increased Production is a result of the system that we run and that his Production may not be has high if he were in a different system.

          I have ZERO problem keeping him......whenever I talk about the future core of the Pacers....I always consider Dunleavy to be part of that core. I don't care that he is earning 8 to 10 mil per season until the 2010-2011 season...he's worth it right now.
          Dunleavy has had a very good year and deserves praise for it and I think most GMs like Dunleavy, but this is the age of the luxury tax we're talking about.

          And in the age of the luxury tax, most team are going to consider Dunleavy a luxury item. He'd be a GREAT fit on a good number of teams, but I don't know if they'd be willing to pay for him.

          I think he'd work tremendously for the Spurs, for instance, but are they willing to add him to the payroll with Ginobili, Duncan and Parker already making big $$? That would all be up to the owner and if he's willing to open up the pocketbook. And that's to say nothing for the fact that they can't really offer anything good in return.

          He's probably going to stay a Pacer for the forseeable future.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

            Originally posted by d_c View Post
            He's probably going to stay a Pacer for the forseeable future.
            I agree, and I could see him turning into a super sub like John Havlicek.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

              I hope you're either kidding or black-out drunk, Will.
              Read my Pacers blog:
              8points9seconds.com

              Follow my twitter:

              @8pts9secs

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

                Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                I hope you're either kidding or black-out drunk, Will.
                All I meant by that is he could be a good sixth man who accepts the roll like Havlicek did. No way do I mean he would be a Havlicek quality sixth man. Most players today have in their head they have to start, whereas Dun I think would accept ther roll.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

                  The greatest compliment I can give Mike Dunleavy is that the team plays better when he's on the court. I don't care if he is hitting his shots or not, I don't care if his one-on-one defense is bad, I don't care what his individual stats are - the pacers play better when he is in the game. He makes things work.

                  It is often most noticeable when he goes out of the game - the ball movement slows down, the team defense suffers, the play is just much more disjointed.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

                    I think the thing Dunleavy brings to the team is his character. Right now I don't see how you could think about trading him until other matters are resolved.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

                      ^^^^^ Yes.

                      The Pacers need to improve in 2 areas. Basketball talent and character. Dunleavy is strong in both.
                      And I won't be here to see the day
                      It all dries up and blows away
                      I'd hang around just to see
                      But they never had much use for me
                      In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

                        Originally posted by Putnam View Post
                        ^^^^^ Yes.

                        The Pacers need to improve in 2 areas. Basketball talent and character. Dunleavy is strong in both.
                        Completely agree.

                        But I still don't think Mike/Granger is a long-term solution at the 2/3.
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

                          I think Granger and Dunleavy can play side by side, but you have to have a PG who can guard his position with them.

                          They can hold there own I think against many 2/3s in the league, but if you have a PG who is getting killed defensively you can't ask them to guard two positions out of their norm.

                          I think this the main reason the Pacers live and die by the gimmicky pseudo trap to compensate for this.

                          Just as a side note, Tinsley can't and won't guard his counterpart. (I just threw this in here, but I get a feeling Tinsely may have played his last game as a Pacer, I could be woefully wrong, of course.)

                          I really like Deiner and at least his really good for this offense, but he will obviously struggle against the quick point guards (see TJ Ford). So then you have to play Rush on Ford.

                          All I'm saying is you can play Granger and Dun out of position slightly you just have to have the other 3 guys on the court be able to take care of their counterpart too. Thats a flaw with this team and if you could get a Rajon Rondo type in this next draft it would be pretty big. The Flip Murray experiment will be interesting to see if he can help in this capacity (I know he's not a PG offensively, but he has to guard the PG defensively)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

                            Originally posted by Speed View Post
                            I think Granger and Dunleavy can play side by side, but you have to have a PG who can guard his position with them.

                            They can hold there own I think against many 2/3s in the league, but if you have a PG who is getting killed defensively you can't ask them to guard two positions out of their norm.

                            I really like Deiner and at least his really good for this offense, but he will obviously struggle against the quick point guards (see TJ Ford). So then you have to play Rush on Ford.

                            All I'm saying is you can play Granger and Dun out of position slightly you just have to have the other 3 guys on the court be able to take care of their counterpart too. Thats a flaw with this team and if you could get a Rajon Rondo type in this next draft it would be pretty big. The Flip Murray experiment will be interesting to see if he can help in this capacity (I know he's not a PG offensively, but he has to guard the PG defensively)

                            I agree with you 100% with everything. I like Diener also. The kid is good

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Mike Dunleavy, where does he fit in?

                              I am really enjoying watching Dun, Granger, Rush and TD all play. Murphy has shown some things recently that are quite encouraginng, as well. If Flip can make some consistant contributions, then that is a group that I would like to watch play together for awhile. You can add Foster to that, also. Graham? Well, at this point, who really knows? I'm hopeful, though.

                              I think if that group can maintain their play, it opens up some possibilites for grouping otherr players together in trades for players (expiring or not) and draft picks.

                              If I'm TPTB, that is how I would look to build. There are enough players in that mix with reasonable contracts to keep you out of LT trouble

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X