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

Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

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

  • #46
    Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

    Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
    The trade wasn't Rush for Augustin, but a 5 player trade that included Bobcats Henderson & Nazr and Pacers TJ Ford.

    I'd take those table scraps as they have been referred to as over some the scraps the Pacers have on their roster at the present. Those table scraps are playing for a team in the playoff hunt. How's the Pacers doing with Rush and Ford? Oh yeah, 4th worst record in the NBA with Rush and Ford as starters.
    Laughable, just down right laughable. If you really think Henderson and Nazr would make us a better team then I need some of what you are smoking.Oh what we win 5 more games this year because we fill in a needed big man role? Oh then we ruin our draft position again.

    I bet if you put Rush and Ford on Charlotte they are probably not just in the playoff hunt, they are probably in it.

    Our problem has more to do with coaching and less to do with talent. Im sick of hearing we are the least talented team in the NBA. There couldnt be a bigger misconception out of there.

    Some people around here really need to get their head out of the sand...

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

      I'd prefer to just leave Rush and Henderson out of the trade all together.

      I like the idea of a DJ/AJ point rotation. I think they'd push each other, because both would see opportunities to be a starter. They'd be really cheap. And if JOB was here, he'd be forced to play them.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

        Originally posted by Sookie View Post
        I'd prefer to just leave Rush and Henderson out of the trade all together.

        I like the idea of a DJ/AJ point rotation. I think they'd push each other, because both would see opportunities to be a starter. They'd be really cheap. And if JOB was here, he'd be forced to play them.
        Sookie. I think you are right on. I think we probably offered Charlotte Ford for Augustin with Nazr to make salaries work. They said that they wouldn't get rid of Augustin unless they get back Rush. We said no, unless you throw in Henderson too.

        I personally don't like the deal. I think Ford is a more effective veteran than Mohammed. I don't care for Henderson as much as some. I have a high opinion of Seth's evaluation of players. There are a few that we disagree on. Henderson is one. I think he is a decent player with NBA athleticism and a game more suitable to the NBA yes, but I just don't think his game translates as well as he does. I think he is a little more polished version of DJones.

        Augustin I really like as a PG, but I kind of think the opposite with him. He has a game that translates better to the college game than the NBA game. I think he is too undersized, but he has seemingly worked on his shooting and he gets into the lane fairly well. I just think his career path rivals Ford. High upside early on, then everybody realizes he can play, but is more suited in a role as a backup.

        This trade to me is one starting SG with great defense and one savvy veteran scoring guard off the bench for a backup PG who can push in transition, a backup SG who plays good defense, and a big man on the decline who is solid defensively. I just see that as a downgrade even though we get an extra young player. I too would do Nazr and Augustin for Ford, even if we threw in our second round pick. It would work out evenly salary-wise as well once you add in the second rounder.
        "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

          I think that trade was pretty much Ford for Augustin and Nazr and then Rush for Henderson.

          I wouldn't mind visiting the first part of Ford for Augustin and Nazr, gives us a young PG, and gets rid of one that has made 8mil sitting the bench for half the season. it also gives us a veteran big behind Hibbert in case Foster's back continues to be a problem.

          Augustin and Price isn't a bad PG/duo and you can also try to get another one in the 2nd round either early or late to be the 3rd PG

          If the Pacers can land Evan Turner, and then make that trade happen.

          PG: Augustin, Price, ?
          SG: Turner, Rush
          SF: Granger, Dahntay, Dunleavy
          PF: Murphy, Hansbrough, McRoberts
          C: Hibbert, Foster, Nazr, Solo

          That 14 spots, and 2 2nd rounders still, as well and Dunleavy, Murph, Foster and Solo's expiring. Should be a interesting summer, to bad we're still a couple months away

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

            Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
            Dude you obviously need to take your offense colored glasses off. You are just showing your totally ignorance to the bigger picture. Offense looks good defense wins championship. You are consistent in calling our best one on one defender "inconsistent." You are seeing a Rush who probably feels like he doesn't need to score because you have Granger and Murphy throwing up 30 junk shots a night.


            DUDE???

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

              Oh and I would ask that we throw in Jim O'Brien for Dave Hanners (an assistant coach). Hell I would do Michael Jordan's laundry for a year to take JOB.
              "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

                Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post


                Im sick of hearing we are the least talented team in the NBA. There couldnt be a bigger misconception out of there.

                Some people around here really need to get their head out of the sand...



                Then quit listening or quit drinking the FO koolaide. The overall talent on this team is terrible. There is a reason this team has the 4th worst record in the NBA, and it all isn't Jimmy!

                Yes, SOME do need to take their head out of the sand.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

                  Uh, not agreeing with you on most points, Tyme. I do think we have enough talent to do better than we have. I do think O'Brien's coaching isn't being effective for this current team. That's not FO kool-aid, that's me observing and formulating my own opinion. We have talent on this team. Not championship-caliber talent, but certainly better than 20-win talent. I watched Rick Carlisle make the playoffs with a patchwork, 8-man line-up.

                  And Nazr Mohammed is hardly going to come in here and improve us. The proposed trade personally didn't do much for me.
                  Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 03-11-2010, 04:48 PM.
                  There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

                    Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
                    Uh, not agreeing with you on most points, Tyme. I do think we have enough talent to do better than we have. I do think O'Brien's coaching isn't being effective for this current team. That's not FO kool-aid, that's me observing and formulating my own opinion. We have talent on this team. Not championship-caliber talent, but certainly better than 20-win talent. I watched Rick Carlisle make the playoffs with a patchwork, 8-man line-up.

                    And Nazr Mohammed is hardly going to come in here and improve us. The proposed trade personally didn't do much for me.
                    Kid:

                    Just have to say this.... Nazr will help the Pacers more than Foster being out not playing. Ok, I said it.

                    2/3 of the Pacers roster is nothing more than rotational to benchwarmers at best. Could the team have a better record, sure, but how much better? I never saw it as talented enough to make the playoffs. I was generous in the thread on how many wins the Pacers would achieve this year by saying 37 or 38. What was your guess?

                    I'm going to upset some people when I say I thought McKey was a major underachiever as a player. Yes, he could play "D", but he never took advantage of his ability to be better. It just use to infuriate me to no end. I see this in Rush. IMO, if Rush is not traded this year, he had best be bringing his game together next year or a 4th year as a Pacer shouldn't be in his future.

                    I'm not sure the FO hadn't become frustrated enough with Rush's inconsistancy to the point of deciding to go another direction at SG, thus the offering him in the Charlotte trade. Maybe/hopefully, he gets the message and puts his whole game together on a consistant game to game basis. If not, then Rush can send me a card when he gets to his next home/team as far as I'm concerned.
                    Last edited by Justin Tyme; 03-11-2010, 06:04 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

                      No on Nazr, not sold on DJ or Henderson.

                      Would love Felton in a S&T.

                      Would consider moving back in the trade for Patterson or Monroe if it meant addressing our PG need.

                      Of course, I'd love Wall.

                      I heard Favors compared to Horford, who I love, so if that's true, sign me up.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

                        Originally posted by IUfan4life View Post
                        but it is a pretty dumb to give JOB zero credit,
                        I have a response for you (2 words), but it would get me banned.

                        So, I'll take the high road, refrain from childish stuff and simply ask you where you feel that JOB was instrumental in Rush going from bad to decent ??

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

                          Originally posted by cdash View Post
                          I know, but why were the players all of a sudden offering up glowing quotes on Rush to the media?
                          They weren't. For the most part, quotes only get written when a reporter actually asks for them.

                          Doesn't mean they're not true, though.
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

                            And for the record, if we got the #2 pick I'd absolutely take Turner with the idea of moving Rush to the bench.

                            I'd be absolutely THRILLED with a 3-wing rotation of Danny-Turner-Rush. No qualms about that at all.
                            This space for rent.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

                              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                              And for the record, if we got the #2 pick I'd absolutely take Turner with the idea of moving Rush to the bench.

                              I'd be absolutely THRILLED with a 3-wing rotation of Danny-Turner-Rush. No qualms about that at all.
                              If Turner lives up to his expectations that would have to be one of the best 3 wing rotations in the league a year or two down the line.
                              "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

                              "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

                              "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Teammates revel in Rush's improvement

                                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                                Kid:

                                Just have to say this.... Nazr will help the Pacers more than Foster being out not playing. Ok, I said it.

                                2/3 of the Pacers roster is nothing more than rotational to benchwarmers at best. Could the team have a better record, sure, but how much better? I never saw it as talented enough to make the playoffs. I was generous in the thread on how many wins the Pacers would achieve this year by saying 37 or 38. What was your guess?

                                I'm going to upset some people when I say I thought McKey was a major underachiever as a player. Yes, he could play "D", but he never took advantage of his ability to be better. It just use to infuriate me to no end. I see this in Rush. IMO, if Rush is not traded this year, he had best be bringing his game together next year or a 4th year as a Pacer shouldn't be in his future.

                                I'm not sure the FO hadn't become frustrated enough with Rush's inconsistancy to the point of deciding to go another direction at SG, thus the offering him in the Charlotte trade. Maybe/hopefully, he gets the message and puts his whole game together on a consistant game to game basis. If not, then Rush can send me a card when he gets to his next home/team as far as I'm concerned.
                                Tyme, let me just put it this way, and be truthful with your response, give it some honest thought:

                                Do you believe this team would have 20-21 wins right now if Rick Carlisle was here instead of JOB?

                                I can't. When I think about it, I just can't see that being the case. With Carlisle and this collection of players, we'd be vying for a playoff seed right now. Deep down, you know this. That indicates right there a coaching problem, not a personnel problem. Ya, the personnel could be improved, we are not the most talented team in the league, but a coaches job is to *maximize* the production with the players he has and do you honestly feel that this team currently has maximized production? The talent of this team has not decreased THAT much from last year. You could argue that it hasn't gone down at all. Was Jarrett Jack really worth 10-15 wins all by himself? Really? Maceo Baston and Rasho that much better than the two Jones? I'm not thinking so. There is a *clear*, visible, on-the-court difference in production and effectiveness across the board for this team from last year to this year.

                                ----------------
                                As for Rush/McKey, they're only under-achievers when over-expectations are applied to them. Both of those guys were key contributors to very strong teams, and that's what you have to realize. Not everyone is built to be showcased --- and that's fine! I completely understand and appreciate their type of play as I've watched more and more basketball over the years, and played basketball myself. Those guys might not fill up the scoreboard, but they do *everything* else that puts your team in position to win, and on occasion they might even light it up. But they're not Danny Granger, and Danny Granger is not Brandon Rush, and trust me, there are things that Rush does a lot better than Granger. You have to realize that not everyone is going to develop into Scottie Pippen or whoever. Every player has their strengths and weaknesses, some more than others.

                                Rush is almost on par to Foster in terms of overall defensive contribution and rebounding at their respective positions, and yet I can guarantee you don't hold both guys to the same offensive expectations, and that right there is not reasonable. You expect Rush to be what, a 20ppg scorer for $2mil a year and he hasn't even finished his second season? He's already at 10ppg. This last month, he's at 13ppg and 6rpg, on top of defending the opponent's top offensive wing player. He obviously has things to improve, but.... duh, lol. He's in his 2nd season. He will do that. There's a perspective thing here, hand in hand with expectations. He'll get there eventually, just gotta be realistic and patient.
                                Last edited by Kid Minneapolis; 03-11-2010, 11:48 PM.
                                There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X