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

Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

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

  • #46
    Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

    If your SF is scoring 25 PPG, do you need your starting SG to score more than 10 PPG if he's giving outside shooting and defense?

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

      Originally posted by rexnom View Post
      If your SF is scoring 25 PPG, do you need your starting SG to score more than 10 PPG if he's giving outside shooting and defense?
      Ask LeBron. I think he'd say "Heck yeah."

      Even if the answer is "no," I think a more ideal situation would be Danny scoring 20ppg and scoring high teens. Balance is a good thing, especially when your #1 option isn't a superstar.
      This space for rent.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

        JOB is an idiot, that's all that benching our player with the most potential for manning up the wing and shooting threes shows. Maybe this will work, but not playing Roy is getting old. Let him foul out of every game. It is good for a young big man. It's not like Roy is your push of the mill David Harrison type. He actually has potential to be a real force a couple years from now.

        Even if we had a dominant big man like I have been calling our missing piece for 6 months and one of the "pieces" for over a year, I'm not sure if he would get minutes.

        This topic is about Rush but I think the question is the same for Roy's lack of minutes as well.

        We are 7-13? and not sure if things will get better. I had high hopes because I've seen the high potential of this team. O'Brien has no faith in his players and I think Larry should be offended by this. Larry has built a team that O'Brien is utilizing. Where is Roy, where is McRoberts, Rush, and Ford late in the games? Sure who couldn't use a healthy Dunleavy right now? I can't name one team!

        A Rush/Dunleavy lineup was my dream for this year. , but it hasn't happened yet. Marquis has surprised me but isn't clutch enough and is too turn over prone. He has good defense I just wish he would be more of a team player on offense.

        Rush and Hibbert are the future. We need to start building through the draft/free agency. Trades seldom work out here in Indiana, never really have. We need a championship, badly. If we don't make a drastic turn I know this may not last forever. I'm worried about the fate of this team and I think we are building in the right direction we just don't possess the right coaching, and we are missing a couple of players. Though Rush and Hibbert seem they may very well in the future progress into the pieces we are missing. I think one more low post banger would really help. A "Dale Davis" everyone seems to say.

        People don't realize how lucky we were to have players like Dale and Antonio Davis, the Davis twins. Two of the buffest men we have ever seen. Rick Smits was a dream and I think his injury problems were why we never won a championship. I'm not making excuses for Smits but he still had a solid career. His injuries just hindered him from being great, unlike Jonathan Bender, who we all know the story of.

        Play Roy and Rush every game. Rush should be getting at least 20-25 minutes and Roy should be in there until he has 6. Danny is still going to be around. I think with TJ and Murphy in this lineup we would fare better off in the long run. Go to you bench early and often and leave the core rested. We have ran out of gas this year over and over and it’s due to the coaches inability to play McRoberts, Hibbert, Rush, Baston, and Ford. Ford needs to be in there at the end of the game, and often times he is missing.

        What is up with these coaches? Carlisle and O'Brien? They try to be good every year so they never play their young people. Less development and the team still sucks, so we will suck even more in the future if something doesn't change. The 5 players I mentioned are the players that are missing from our lineup that need to be in there more. Of course a healthy Dunleavy may have me singing a different tune.
        Last edited by Midcoasted; 12-09-2008, 06:05 PM.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

          Originally posted by DisplacedKnick View Post
          And again, I've only seen 2 Pacers games. I know Rush had knee surgery two years ago and sometimes it takes a while to get the athleticism back from something like that (see Carl Landry) so maybe if I was watching the Pacers more I'd change my opinion. I've been seeing him as a Hubert Davis type (nice shooter and role player off the bench) but better defensively.
          I think Rush could be a productive starter if surrounded by, say, Granger and a really good inside guy. I could be wrong, but he doesn't strike me as a volume scorer. Say low to maybe mid teens tops. A good 6th man option if not a starter, as you suggest.

          Defense is where I think he has the potential to really distinguish himself, but I wonder if he'll develop the temprament I'm assuming, of course, that his shooting will become more consistent as he becomes more comfortable.

          Overall, I see both the rooks as likely solid back-ups with the potential to be contributing starters if accompanied in the line up by a couple impact players. That said, I can't predict the future and, in this short time, nothing has been proven whatsoever. We'll still just dealing with potential.
          I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

          -Emiliano Zapata

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

            I'm all for benching Rush for disciplinary reasons and not disclosing that to the public. Hopefully that is what happened. I personally think that Graham is only good for taking an open shot... other than that, I don't want him on the court at all.
            Pacers!

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

              Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
              Overall, I see both the rooks as likely solid back-ups with the potential to be contributing starters if accompanied in the line up by a couple impact players. That said, I can't predict the future and, in this short time, nothing has been proven whatsoever. We'll still just dealing with potential.
              I think Hibbert will eventually be a solid starter. It'll take a while - except for monster talents big men usually take a couple of years - but I see a guy who can make a few shots, grab 7-8 boards and block a couple of shots a game.
              The poster formerly known as Rimfire

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

                I don't think it was a disciplinary reason.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

                  Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                  I don't think it was a disciplinary reason.
                  I don't know what it is, but I think it is one of these:

                  1) Prepping for a return of Dunleavy. Just getting a look at Graham in the meantime and giving Rush a minute to look over the landscape before the new year....but keeping Rush's expectation of minutes in check considering Dunleavy and Quis will get most of them. This is the one I think it is.

                  2) Discipline. Who knows? It could be an off court issue or practice issue. I doubt it.

                  3) Stats like JOb claims. This is the one I cannot believe because there simply has not been enough games to make a judgment, particularly when we have faced the best teams in the league. It's almost silly when you consider the fact Graham has been in the league 4 years and has done nothing....and still doesn't look that good. Anyway, all you need to do is watch Rush and Graham for a minute and you can tell Rush is clearly more talented in multiple facets of the game.

                  4) Head games. Rush is over-confident and needs reigned in. Maybe he's not listening. I doubt it.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

                    Rush seemed to respond tonight. He was one of the few that played well.

                    However, he's got to learn not to overpursue on a guy like Kapono. He looked a little wired a few times, and got himself out of position.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

                      Could be setting up for a Quis and Graham trade. Get a true post up PF in return?? Isn't Quis in a contract year? So he is an expiring, Pacers already know he isn't a long term option for their team, neither is Graham. If they trade those two away, for a post up big man. Then they don't have to sign Rasho next year.

                      Nobody expected Quis to play this well, so he is pure bonus for a trade.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

                        Originally posted by count55 View Post
                        Rush seemed to respond tonight. He was one of the few that played well.

                        However, he's got to learn not to overpursue on a guy like Kapono. He looked a little wired a few times, and got himself out of position.
                        Wells observed that Rush was playing aggressive with the ball, lack of which is a criticism he has received through his college career and since he was drafted.

                        What people aren't thinking about is that he was benched not so he could sit on the end of the pine and pout but so that he could watch specific aspects of other players' games - something you do not have the luxury of doing if you are prepping to play your own minutes.
                        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


                        • #57
                          Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

                          Originally posted by BillS View Post
                          Wells observed that Rush was playing aggressive with the ball, lack of which is a criticism he has received through his college career and since he was drafted.

                          What people aren't thinking about is that he was benched not so he could sit on the end of the pine and pout but so that he could watch specific aspects of other players' games - something you do not have the luxury of doing if you are prepping to play your own minutes.
                          I agree with you.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

                            It shouldn't have to be said, but when Kapono's going off (and he does when he plays the Pacers), BRush has to be on him. Whether that's 30 or 35 minutes, doesn't matter. The guy contained Stephen for Christ's sake; he has to be our best shot at Kapono!

                            JOB's player rotation-related stubborness isn't looking too good now.
                            You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

                              Originally posted by theboyjwo View Post
                              Could be setting up for a Quis and Graham trade. Get a true post up PF in return?? Isn't Quis in a contract year? So he is an expiring, Pacers already know he isn't a long term option for their team, neither is Graham. If they trade those two away, for a post up big man. Then they don't have to sign Rasho next year.

                              Nobody expected Quis to play this well, so he is pure bonus for a trade.
                              Clearly you don't setup Stephen Graham for a trade by allowing others to see him play. His own brother made him look like he was D league. Hopefully he gets a job with the Mad Ants or in Europe next year. Not a terrible player, but he's still pretty lucky to stick in the NBA for 4 years with that game.

                              Anyway, this entire "looking at the stats and having to give Graham a shot" is very odd, to put it as nice as I can. I just want the truth from the Pacers. I could be wrong, but I don't believe I'm getting that right now.

                              I think it's a charade...overplaying the P.R. game...with JOb as the mouthpiece...and it's not the first time. The last time was last year when I thought we got mixed messages about whether Tinsley was injured or not. I truly believe they don't think the public can handle the truth. Call it the Pacer PR Machine at work again. Well, don't overdo it guys...

                              JMHO.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Indiana's O'Brien Opts To Bench Rookie Rush

                                [QUOTE=BlueNGold;818635]

                                he's still pretty lucky to stick in the NBA for 4 years with that game./QUOTE]

                                I use to say the samething about Alford. Then an IU fan pointed out how he stayed long enough in the NBA to get a retirement check.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X