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 our best player?

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

  • #16
    Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

    Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
    Defense is 50% of the ball game. Mike is a decent team defender, but a turnstile on man defense. I honestly feel that Danny is more of a complete player when defense is figured into the equation.

    As for Bird in his comment, I think it was more of a throw away comment then anything else.

    You may be right about it being a throw away comment, but you don't throw it away to the media. That's just not smart.

    Bird may truly feel that way about Dunleavy, BUT he should have better sense as to who he's making that type of comments to. The old saying about "one should engage brain before opening one's mouth" truly applies here. He has to remember he's in a position that whatever comes out of his mouth will be printed for all to see when he's talking to the media.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

      Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post

      Defense is 50% of the ball game.

      I couldn't agree with you more. Unfortunately, the Pacers' coach doesn't have the same belief.
      Last edited by Justin Tyme; 12-29-2008, 06:46 PM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

        Originally posted by joew8302 View Post
        Because that is clearly what I meant. Comprehension doesn't seem to be your strongsuite.
        Let's keep a general level of respect going, please.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

          I don't feel that Bird is taking a cheap shot at Granger at all. He's simply stating that Dunleavy is a very important part of our team because of what he brings to the table.

          I personally think Dunleavy does a lot of things well, and that is what makes him so important. He can handle the ball, pass the ball, shoot the ball, rebound the ball, move well without the ball, and I think he's a pretty good TEAM defender.

          And I presonally feel Danny and Mike compliment each other well, and fit well into the system. A lot of you don't feel that Dunleavy will make that big of difference when he returns, but I have to kindly disagree.

          Though Marquis Daniels has had a really good season so far, and is doing a lot of things well... he's no Mike Dunleavy. For one Mike Dunleavy can shoot and stretch the defense. Which I think will help our PG duo a lot. He also passes the ball well, and gets others involved.

          He's a bigger body at 6'9 and he'll bring depth to the wing position, so Jack doesn't have to play the 2.

          Didn't I mention he spreads the floor, which only Danny has been able to do, with Murph, Diener and Rush sometimes being the exception.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

            From a pure basketball IQ standpoint, I believe that Dunleavy is indeed our best player. He understands the type of offense that we have currently installed better than any current player on the roster, including our best (?) point guard, TJ. Granger is still learning the nuances of both our offense and defense (?), and his occasionally tentative play due to his uncertainty at some points leads to weak passes for turnovers, or poor decisions that leave whoever he passes the ball to in bad positions offensively.

            From a purely athletic standpoint, Granger is currently our best player, though. He should benefit from Dunleavy's return due to improved offensive flow. Longer term, he should benefit from the presence of Brandon Rush on the roster to practice against. Brandon may not have picked up the concepts of team defense yet, but he is definitely an effective and athletic man to man defender with both the quickness and leaping ability to make things far more challenging for Danny going forward in practice. Conversely, Rush should benefit greatly from being mentored by Danny. Hopefully Danny's work ethic and character will help Brandon mature more quickly as a person and a player and make Brandon a force to be reckoned with sooner than later as his potential seems to suggest.

            Our most important player so far this season, though, IMO is the surprising Marquis Daniels. He probably has the most overall impact on both ends of the floor, defensively with his deflections / steals, offensively with his insane ability to penetrate. He definitely has major flaws, though, from outside shooting to bad decision making at times. When he has things going, he is probably much more effective than nearly anyone would have given him credit for in the past.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              I thought last season he was our most important and most valuable player.
              Bingo. Agreed.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

                Dunleavy was clearly the best player last year. If he can come back the same as he was last year he will be again.
                "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                -Lance Stephenson

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

                  Dun isn't our "best" player, but he is extremely valuable to the team in many ways. The argument could be made last year that Dun was our best player (though a more accurate descriptor would probably be that they were equals). However, Granger has stepped his game up to a notch I don't believe Dun is capable of, and I'm not knocking Dun when I say that.

                  Although, I'm certainly not in the "When (if) Dun comes back this season our problems will be solved" camp. Quis has done a very solid job as a stand in and about the only place I see Dun providing a significant improvement over Quis is in the jump shooting department.
                  I think it's very possible we'll also see Quis regress when he hits the bench, but that is a discussion for another day.

                  The one thing I worry about, is that Danny will defer to Dun. Like it or not, chances are Dunleavy isn't a Pacer for the long term (unless Bird really loves him). So I don't want to see us focus on him too much. What I mean by this is that I would be a bit surprised if Dunleavy is still our starting shooting guard at the end of the 2009-2010 season or more aptly the beginning of the 2010-2011 season.

                  You know what I see the most when I look at a comment like this, a guy who has a tendency for hyperbole and also doesn't always think when he speaks. (See a certain comment about the race of certain people and how he felt about them guarding him) I think we're just seeing Bird get ahead of himself here more than anything else.
                  Last edited by Trader Joe; 12-30-2008, 03:13 AM.


                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

                    Originally posted by Indy View Post
                    However, Granger has stepped his game up to a notch I don't believe Dun is capable of, and I'm not knocking Dun when I say that.

                    The only real phase of Granger's game that has been stepped up is his scoring. I attribute a lot of that to Dunleavy's absence. I think Granger is the Pacers best player. But if Dun could come back at 100% he'd reclaim that title. And for the record, I am very skeptical that he will.
                    "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

                    -Lance Stephenson

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

                      Danny's "scoring" has increased as a result of him improving several facets of his game most notably his ball handling ability, and his ability to get to the line. About the only part of Dunleavy's game where he has a notable advantage over Granger is his passing/decision making. Otherwise they are about equal or Granger is superior. If you look at Quis as Dun's replacement, and Rush as Quis's replacement from last year, you see that there isn't a HUGE difference in stats. (Ignoring intangibles) As long as, Granger doesn't go into a shell a la the JO syndrome he exhibited, I think you'll see his score numbers stay between 22-24 ppg all season.


                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

                        Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
                        The only real phase of Granger's game that has been stepped up is his scoring. I attribute a lot of that to Dunleavy's absence. I think Granger is the Pacers best player. But if Dun could come back at 100% he'd reclaim that title. And for the record, I am very skeptical that he will.
                        Originally posted by Indy View Post
                        Danny's "scoring" has increased as a result of him improving several facets of his game most notably his ball handling ability, and his ability to get to the line. About the only part of Dunleavy's game where he has a notable advantage over Granger is his passing/decision making. Otherwise they are about equal or Granger is superior. If you look at Quis as Dun's replacement, and Rush as Quis's replacement from last year, you see that there isn't a HUGE difference in stats. (Ignoring intangibles) As long as, Granger doesn't go into a shell a la the JO syndrome he exhibited, I think you'll see his score numbers stay between 22-24 ppg all season.
                        While I think it's true that Dunleavy was a more complete player than Danny last year, I also agree that Danny has definitely developed more offensively than just his scoring. He has become a better passer, and he attacks the basket better (though not as consistently as he should). His ballhandling is better, but he still has a relatively weak handle.

                        I believe Danny is the better player now, but I think his advantage over Dunleavy on the defensive end, while still significant, is overblown. I consider Danny an average defender (but a good shot blocker). I tend to be a little disappointed in his defensive decision making and positioning.

                        I seriously doubt Danny has any problem with Bird's comments about Dunleavy. I'm sure that Danny considers the $64mm extension as ample proof of Bird's belief in his game.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

                          All I know is watching this team vs. last years team I can see heart every game. I honestly think that Granger misses Dunleavy out there and I know Dunleavy has never played with someone as talented as Granger. I feel that both these players compliment eachother very well. I think Bird sees a lot of himself in Dunleavy when he is out on the court. I do not mean by overall talent but how Dun sees the floor and his passion for the game. I think that is why Bird loves Dun so much. Granger overall has more talent than Dun as far as athleticism and defense, but I think they both need eachother on the court to make the "team" successful and I believe they cannot wait to be on the court together.
                          JOB is a silly man

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

                            Originally posted by jhondog28 View Post
                            All I know is watching this team vs. last years team I can see heart every game. I honestly think that Granger misses Dunleavy out there and I know Dunleavy has never played with someone as talented as Granger. I feel that both these players compliment eachother very well. I think Bird sees a lot of himself in Dunleavy when he is out on the court. I do not mean by overall talent but how Dun sees the floor and his passion for the game. I think that is why Bird loves Dun so much. Granger overall has more talent than Dun as far as athleticism and defense, but I think they both need eachother on the court to make the "team" successful and I believe they cannot wait to be on the court together.
                            I would agree. I think Danny would love to have Dunleavy back out there to share some of the load.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

                              I am excited to see how Dunleavy matches up with Rasho. The ball will be going into the basket without even a dribble.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Mike Dunleavy our best player?

                                Originally posted by count55 View Post
                                While I think it's true that Dunleavy was a more complete player than Danny last year, I also agree that Danny has definitely developed more offensively than just his scoring. He has become a better passer, and he attacks the basket better (though not as consistently as he should). His ballhandling is better, but he still has a relatively weak handle.

                                I believe Danny is the better player now, but I think his advantage over Dunleavy on the defensive end, while still significant, is overblown. I consider Danny an average defender (but a good shot blocker). I tend to be a little disappointed in his defensive decision making and positioning.

                                I seriously doubt Danny has any problem with Bird's comments about Dunleavy. I'm sure that Danny considers the $64mm extension as ample proof of Bird's belief in his game.
                                Co-sign on every word of this.

                                Dunleavy was the MVP last season. Danny has since evolved. But given the large $ extension plus the "can't lose your position when your injured" theory (being extended to your MVP position in this extrapolation), it's not outrageous for Bird to say such things.
                                Read my Pacers blog:
                                8points9seconds.com

                                Follow my twitter:

                                @8pts9secs

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X