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

I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

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

  • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

    Originally posted by BillS View Post
    This is devolving to a series of "yeah, but..." "yeah, but..." "yeah, but..." so it may just need to wind down as people get tired rather than somehow ending with a point.

    My personal feeling is that if Rush could be aggressive enough to be as involved in the offense every game then his increase in efficiency and increase in defense makes sense. If he isn't taking shots, then efficiency doesn't matter - 100% of 5 shots is no different than 50% of 10 when taken in a vacuum, but if the player taking 5 shots doesn't draw defense because opponents figure he won't shoot then the 10 shot player contributes more to other team members getting easier shots.
    I think people underrate Rush offensively.

    His problem in the past is that if you NEED Rush to score, you are in trouble. Last season we were counting on him to be a major offensive option, and its just not in his DNA.

    However, he is a more savvy player than he has gotten credit for. He understands basketball, he knows how to play within an offensive system, the offensive downgrade from Dunleavy to Rush is not so pronounced, especially considering you will be putting Rush in his 4th option offensive role that most suits him anyway.

    I saw him play the give and go game with Hibbert in his rookie year, he is in fact capable of doing a bit more than just camping at the arc. He understands spacing and cuts. Or at least I think he has the capability too.

    I think as a 4th option, with the ability to play OFF of better offensive options, with the benefit of playing next to a superior point guard, with the ability to collect open perimeter shots produced from an effective inside out offense run through Hibbert... You might see Brandon Rush put in a slightly better position to succeed than you did last season. Just a thought.
    Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 11-03-2010, 12:57 PM.
    "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

    - ilive4sports

    Comment


    • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

      Originally posted by Diamond Dave View Post
      What you call discipline I call being timid, or worse lazy. How about instead of shooting the open three, or passing it away if its not there, putting it on the floor going towards the basket. Or even driving, drawing a defender and dishing. Or seeing an opening and cutting too it.

      Dunleavy does these things. He sees openings in the defense and acts. Rush just stands there. Being passive is a fault a lot of the time.
      Then Stephen Jackson is the smartest player in the NBA then. And yes, we're talking extremes.

      Rush isn't smart because he isn't aggressive, so the reverse also has to be true. Aggressiveness equals intelligence.

      Well then I change my entire argument. I don't want either Mike or Brandon. I was SJax back.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

        Originally posted by Sookie View Post
        What Does Mike Dunleavy do that the rest of the starting lineup doesn't do?

        Great passing? Roy, Josh, and Darren have the covered.
        Awareness? Roy and Josh (at least) have that covered
        Scoring? Danny, Roy, and Darren have that covered.
        Basketball IQ? Roy, Darren, and Josh have that covered.

        You know you could do that some type of argument with Wade and Lebron james. What does Wade do that Lebron doesn't? Nothing, so why do the Heat need Wade - he does the same thing that Lebron does.

        Obviously my analogy is absurd - except to point out you can never have enough of a good thing, you can never have enough good players, or smart players....

        (disclaimer: please no one suggest well Lebron and Wade are superstars and Mike is a borderline starter - that wasn't my point I was just showing how the argument I quoted I think isn't a good reason not to play Mike)

        Is it harmful to have 5 great passers on the court at the same time. ,

        Comment


        • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

          And if you aren't good at driving to the basket, and you are good at shooting..isn't it smarter to shoot? Particularly when you have a coach that encourages you to shoot threes.

          Comment


          • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

            Originally posted by Sookie View Post
            Well, the thing is, Danny is simply used as a scorer. He doesn't really have to have the rest of that stuff, so I'm not saying he does or doesn't have it covered in terms of "what he can do" but simply, he doesn't have to do it in the offense.
            I agree and also I think we're able to stop scorers from scoring too much when we have a defender next to Danny like Brandon.

            Mike brings a similar type of game as Danny except Danny's defense is probably a little better.

            Danny's scoring is the best thing he has to offer and his defense is average, but Brandon who can be a decent shooter at times and go on a hot streak is typically a really good defender all the time which might be needed if Danny is struggling defensively.

            Comment


            • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

              Originally posted by Sookie View Post
              And if you aren't good at driving to the basket, and you are good at shooting..isn't it smarter to shoot? Particularly when you have a coach that encourages you to shoot threes.
              To me it looks like Rush could be a good driver from wat i saw from the preseason and the end of last season.

              Comment


              • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                You know you could do that some type of argument with Wade and Lebron james. What does Wade do that Lebron doesn't? Nothing, so why do the Heat need Wade - he does the same thing that Lebron does.

                Obviously my analogy is absurd - except to point out you can never have enough of a good thing, you can never have enough good players, or smart players....

                (disclaimer: please no one suggest well Lebron and Wade are superstars and Mike is a borderline starter - that wasn't my point I was just showing how the argument I quoted I think isn't a good reason not to play Mike)

                Is it harmful to have 5 great passers on the court at the same time. ,
                You can't have too much of a good thing, certainly. But if you have a lot of guys who are giving you the same thing, than doesn't it make sense to perhaps subtract one of those elements and replace it with one that addresses a weakness? Wing defense in this case.
                "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                - ilive4sports

                Comment


                • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                  Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                  Come on. I already responded to this. That was not at all what I was arguing.

                  I strongly believe that in order for Mike Dunleavy to make up for his defensive problems, he needs to be able to shoot the ball well from the perimeter. I was just making my point that even though it shows that he was 6-13 (a respectable enough percentage) he had a bad shooting night.
                  I was responding to Sookie, not you. However, given this response, IF your criterion for a wing is that they HAVE to always shoot well from the outside, then the argument is internally consistent and I can't refute it. However, I don't agree with the initial premise, especially with issues regarding getting to the FT line (which happens on drives and layups, not so much on outside shooting).
                  BillS

                  A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                  Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                  Comment


                  • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                    I don't know which is digging up more passion. Mike/Brandon, or who wants to come out on top.


                    Like I've said from the beginning, the starting 2guard is about #10 on the list of important things in order for the Pacers to have a successful season.
                    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                    Comment


                    • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                      Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                      You know you could do that some type of argument with Wade and Lebron james. What does Wade do that Lebron doesn't? Nothing, so why do the Heat need Wade - he does the same thing that Lebron does.

                      Obviously my analogy is absurd - except to point out you can never have enough of a good thing, you can never have enough good players, or smart players....

                      (disclaimer: please no one suggest well Lebron and Wade are superstars and Mike is a borderline starter - that wasn't my point I was just showing how the argument I quoted I think isn't a good reason not to play Mike)

                      Is it harmful to have 5 great passers on the court at the same time. ,
                      Oh I agree.

                      But I think Lebron and Wade do everything well on the basketball court, there really isn't a need for a different type of player. (Except shooting, but that's what the other players are for.)

                      In this case. At best, Josh is a good defender. And Roy is an average defender. Danny seems to hustle and try a lot more, as does Darren, but neither are good. Dun tries too..but he's simply bad. (actually, Darren's bad.)

                      Rush is a very good, possibly great defender. And that adds something that is extremely important, and extremely needed in the starting lineup.

                      If Darren and Danny were fantastic defenders, I'd probably say "yea, keep Dun in the starting lineup" but they aren't. And the team needs one in the lineup. So essentially, what Brandon brings to the starting lineup is more valuable than what Dun brings..which was my point. (As well as, what Dun would bring to the bench unit, is needed. Because none of them have the above..except Tyler and TJ with scoring..but they score in different ways than Dun does)
                      Last edited by Sookie; 11-03-2010, 01:06 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                        Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                        To me it looks like Rush could be a good driver from wat i saw from the preseason and the end of last season.
                        Also with Darren feeding him passes and guiding the offense, I think Brandon will improve his offense all around.

                        EDIT: Brandon needs to be way more aggressive and move without the ball and drive to get fouled. He looked better in preseason like you said. Hopefully it continues.
                        Last edited by Trophy; 11-03-2010, 01:07 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                          Originally posted by pacer4ever View Post
                          To me it looks like Rush could be a good driver from wat i saw from the preseason and the end of last season.
                          he went to the basket more in this preseason than he did last season. And everyonce in a while he makes a good move. But to me, he always seems skiddish..and quite often doesn't finish the basket. I'd rather have him shoot a three than drive, personally.

                          Comment


                          • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                            WHAT!?

                            You're telling me that it doesn't matter to you how many shots it takes a player to get to 5 made fgs then?

                            Are you serious?

                            Going 5 for 5 does a lot more than going 5 for 10. Should I start the list or just say that it frees up 5 possessions? A missed shot and a defensive rebound is just as good as a turnover. They are empty possessions.


                            Now which "team" is falling off the deep end?
                            Bear in mind we aren't talking extremes like 25 shots to make 10, we're talking a reasonable number of shots with a reasonable shooting percentage.

                            The 5-for-5 guy can be a problem if, on those extra possessions, the rest of the team is unable to score for whatever reason - they are having a bad shooting night, the defense sags off Mr. 5-for-5 because he only shoots when he has to, his other 5 possessions end in turning over the ball, whatever. The thing is that it isn't just a game of individual statistics, the individual statistics have to fit in to what the rest of the team is doing.

                            Defenses study players. They'll know if you have a guy who only puts up a few shots and, even if he's guaranteed to make them, will let him go ahead because they know he'll be more likely to send it to someone else and they'll concentrate on that.
                            BillS

                            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                            Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                            Comment


                            • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                              Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                              he went to the basket more in this preseason than he did last season. And everyonce in a while he makes a good move. But to me, he always seems skiddish..and quite often doesn't finish the basket. I'd rather have him shoot a three than drive, personally.
                              me 2 but u have to keep the defense at bay every once in awhile u have to drive.

                              Comment


                              • Re: I still want Mike Dunleavy to start once Rush returns

                                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                                Bear in mind we aren't talking extremes like 25 shots to make 10, we're talking a reasonable number of shots with a reasonable shooting percentage.

                                The 5-for-5 guy can be a problem if, on those extra possessions, the rest of the team is unable to score for whatever reason - they are having a bad shooting night, the defense sags off Mr. 5-for-5 because he only shoots when he has to, his other 5 possessions end in turning over the ball, whatever. The thing is that it isn't just a game of individual statistics, the individual statistics have to fit in to what the rest of the team is doing.

                                Defenses study players. They'll know if you have a guy who only puts up a few shots and, even if he's guaranteed to make them, will let him go ahead because they know he'll be more likely to send it to someone else and they'll concentrate on that.
                                But that's not an accurate description of Brandon.

                                Brandon will shoot if he's open. He just doesn't move, so he's not open very often.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X