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 Infinite MAN_force View Post
    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.
    This perspective is very logical and is most likely to sway me.

    Hmm

    Nope, not quite. I think I just remember too much the frustrations with having someone who COULD score but wouldn't (McKey) and having someone who couldn't score but was a specialist (Foster), and think a player who has flaws but is more likely to round out your lineup, is better.
    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

      Brandon, as a wingman should attempt at least 5 three pointers a game. I mean if he's ice cold by his 8th attempt then he can stop and shoot more inside.

      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.
        And I will take 100% over 50% everyday of the week, and twice on Sundays. It still doesn't change the fact that 5 for 5 is better than 5 for 10.

        Originally posted by BillS View Post
        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.
        So let me get this argument straight. Going 5 for 10 is better than going 5 for 5 depending on the shot selection. But also because if on those 5 extra possessions they don't scoer it's a bad thing?

        Hate to tell you, but on those 5 extra possessions, if they don't even score once, it evens out with the player that went 5 for 10.

        It can't be worse, because it's the exact same thing.
        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
          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.
          Well, he's not a 100% shooter, either, it was just trying to narrow down to a single element for discussion.

          However, since Brandon doesn't move, I stick to my position that he doesn't cause the defense to have to work very hard on him, leaving them to put more energy into the other 4 players.
          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 BillS View Post
            This perspective is very logical and is most likely to sway me.

            Hmm

            Nope, not quite. I think I just remember too much the frustrations with having someone who COULD score but wouldn't (McKey) and having someone who couldn't score but was a specialist (Foster), and think a player who has flaws but is more likely to round out your lineup, is better.
            So the solution is to have a player, who can't defend, take more shots but only average around 13pts a game?

            Over a player that plays better defense, who doesn't shoot as much, but with a higher percentage, who is going to average 11pts a game?




            Like I've said from the beginning. Dunleavy will not score 16+ a game. He just won't. And if he does, that means that Roy, Danny, or DC is just playing like crap.



            Your 4th option should be a good shooter, who fills OTHER needs.
            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 BillS View Post
              Well, he's not a 100% shooter, either, it was just trying to narrow down to a single element for discussion.

              However, since Brandon doesn't move, I stick to my position that he doesn't cause the defense to have to work very hard on him, leaving them to put more energy into the other 4 players.
              But if they leave him open to focus on the other four, he's a better shooter than Dunleavy and more likely to hit the shot when the ball ends up in his hands.

              For the sake of argument, I will concede that Dunleavy's a better offensive player than Rush, but there is no question that Rush is a better defensive player than Dunleavy.

              Can you agree that the difference between Dunleavy and Rush offensively is far smaller than the difference between Rush and Dunleavy defensively?

              Comment


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

                I just love this argument. Better defense or better cutting/floor spacing?


                You know it's a Jim O'Brien coached team when offense trumps all.
                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 Since86 View Post
                  So the solution is to have a player, who can't defend, take more shots but only average around 13pts a game?

                  Over a player that plays better defense, who doesn't shoot as much, but with a higher percentage, who is going to average 11pts a game?



                  Like I've said from the beginning. Dunleavy will not score 16+ a game. He just won't. And if he does, that means that Roy, Danny, or DC is just playing like crap.



                  Your 4th option should be a good shooter, who fills OTHER needs.

                  ya ur 4th and 5th options are normaly good defenders and dont need to shoot or have the ball to have an impact on a game. look at most great teams like the old bulls Dennis Rodman, Steve Kerr. Also I dont see people in utah asking to bench raja bell/ wes mathews last yr because all he does is defend and make 3s.

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                    Can you agree that the difference between Dunleavy and Rush offensively is far smaller than the difference between Rush and Dunleavy defensively?
                    In some ways yes - the shooting ability difference is far smaller than the defensive difference.

                    In other ways, no - I think Dunleavy's effect on the rest of the offense is much greater than Rush's.

                    Since I don't think Dunleavy is a useless defender, the overall combination of effects favors Dunleavy. Only to a certain level, though, such that if Brandon would move without the ball and perform in the offense like we've seen him do at the end of seasons in the past, he might trump Dunleavy. I just have little confidence he will do so.
                    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 Infinite MAN_force View Post
                      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.
                      You make a good point. I think Mike is better at offense than Rush by greater margin that Rush is better at defense than Mike. You obviously disagree.

                      Actually maybe that is what this whole thread and the entire argument we are having comes down to.

                      I think if the pacers are playing the heat for example where you need your shooting guard defending Wade, then I would expect Rush to play maybe more than Mike - but I think for almost every other NBA opponent Danny can guard the better wing and Mike is sufficent to guard the lesser wing. And for those few teams where they have two really good scorers, OK play Rush more

                      Comment


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

                        Right now I agree with the last 2 post by BillS and Unclebuck. Dunleavy plays much better in JOB's offense. Rush stands around too much. Right now, Dunleavy is the better option to start.

                        Like BillS I hope Rush comes back and plays well and moves like he should within the offense. Collison expressed interest in helping improve Rush's game maybe that and getting in trouble (hopefully not smoking anymore weed) will be what Rush needs to become the player we all want him to be.

                        Comment


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

                          Originally posted by BillS View Post
                          Well, he's not a 100% shooter, either, it was just trying to narrow down to a single element for discussion.

                          However, since Brandon doesn't move, I stick to my position that he doesn't cause the defense to have to work very hard on him, leaving them to put more energy into the other 4 players.
                          So in your mind a player like Bruce Bowen who's speciality was to stay on the corner, shoot threes to open the floor for the bigs and play defense is wortless?(this how I see it)........... Damn I wonder if Pop agrees with this.
                          Last edited by vnzla81; 11-03-2010, 01:59 PM.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


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

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            So in your mind a player like Bruce Bowen who's speciality was to stay on the corner, shoot threes to open the floor for the bigs and play defense is wortless?(this how I see it)........... Damn I wonder if Pop agrees with this.
                            ya people like Bruce Bowen are key to championship teams.

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                              I think the general point is this assertion that our offense is going to fall apart without Mike's court savvy in the starting lineup.fficeffice" />>>
                              Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                              >>
                              I just think that is completely silly. I mean, are we totally screwed next year if Mike is no longer on the team??? Is our offense hopeless without the game changer Mike Dunleavy making cuts and spacing the floor?>>

                              Wait a minute, please. I don’t believe anyone is suggesting that Dunleavy is the “where all, end all” of the offensive unit. At least that has never been my argument. But if that is what the pro-Rush sentiment believes regarding our argument, then I believe that you miss the subtlety of the point we have been trying to make… or at least that I have been trying to make.

                              Since86 is probably correct in stating that the Pacers will probably score points whether or not Mike is on the floor. I’m not certain of whether they might score slightly more or slightly less, but they would get points none the less.

                              What I am stating is that I believe Dunleavy’s offensive role is not that of a scorer, but rather that of a facilitator. There is no doubt that having a new PG and having a much improved, passing Hibbert on the floor also leads to greater facilitation of the offense. Someone a heck of a lot more knowledgeable than I can attempt to weight the contributions of each.

                              But there are a few facts, not suppositions, but facts, that can be viewed. Granger is getting more uncontested shots and Granger is making every attempt to move a lot more without the basketball than in prior seasons.

                              I would agree with anyone who wishes to state that a new PG and a double-teamed Hibbert contribute to Danny’s additional uncontested shots. I also agree with what others have stated on both sides of this argument that the greater amount of offensive motion has also led to more open shots on the part of all players in the starting unit.

                              I doubt that anyone would argue with the statement that an uncontested shot is a higher quality shot (i.e. a more makeable shot) than a contested shot taken at the same spot on the floor. And this is where I believe Dunleavy plays a part. His constant motion facilitates all players on the court getting uncontested shots. Granger, in trying to be more in motion this season, accomplishes the same thing.

                              I think this is something we saw quite a bit with Reggie. His motion would often times carry him through the lane or along the baseline, even though his intent was not always in receiving the pass. In such cases, his decoy run served two purposes: To wear down his defender by keeping him in constant motion and secondly, to distract another player’s defender for the split moment it takes the player to pop off of Reggie’s motion to get an uncontested shot.

                              I believe almost any player in motion accomplishes the same thing. Danny and Mike in motion wear down their defenders, they create space and possible uncontested shots for themselves and their teammates.

                              Does it not make sense that if one of your perimeter players is not in purposeful motion that the efforts of those that are in motion can be negated? At least, based in Bobby Knight’s substitution patterns through the years, that is what I came to believe.

                              I have not said that Rush is not capable of making a better starting SG than Dunleavy. And, I have always been a firm believer that young players make their most marked improvement going into their third years. For whatever reason, a light goes on or they learn better what to work on during that second summer or who knows what, they just seem to show better improvement in their third seasons. I am hoping the same thing for Rush… that he is a much improved player over last season.

                              If he does improve, that is only part of the equation. The Pacers, now run an offense that is much more dependent on PNR and on motion than in the last few seasons. If Rush cannot pick up on that, then his insertion into the lineup could actually be detrimental to the performance of the starting unit. After all, do you really think Danny would get as many uncontested shots if his SG is merely spending his time standing outside the arc?

                              I would even be willing to eventually insert Rush into the lineup if he can master purposeful motion and he proves that he is far more offensively aggressive than last season, regardless of whether he makes any other improvements. In my opinion, if Rush cannot be offensively aggressive, and use his athleticism to get to the rim and/or the free throw line, then he is just taking up a roster spot. That would make him no more important to the team than DJones.

                              I hold out hope, but just don’t think Rush will make the improvements that are needed. As someone said earlier, it is just not in his DNA. He was a perimeter player at Kansas and he is still a mere perimeter player now. Conseco holds over 18,000 spectators. The last place we need one is on the floor.
                              Last edited by beast23; 11-03-2010, 02:23 PM.

                              Comment


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

                                i might change my username to something brandon rush related i think i might make it BRush Force 25

                                rush > dunleavy
                                george > dunleavy
                                rush = george (both are really good young players)
                                In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X