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:
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

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

Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

    Indiana pacers
    Wondering about Rush
    Enigmatic 2nd-year player lacks consistency on both ends of court
    By Mike Wells
    Posted: January 18, 2010

    The question is one that everybody in the Indiana Pacers organization has been trying to answer since the 2008-09 season.
    That's why Pacers coach Jim O'Brien added some levity to it when he leaned back on the wall and opened his arms wide when asked about pushing the right button with second-year swingman Brandon Rush.

    "I . . . don't . . . know," O'Brien slowly said. "I . . . don't . . . know. We tried everything. You just hope that he's going to have a good game."
    Rush went scoreless against Toronto and Phoenix early last week. Then he scored 15 points on 5-of-5 shooting against New Jersey on Friday and went 3-of-6 from the field in Saturday's loss to New Orleans.
    Was Rush making the first shot against the Nets an indicator that he would have a good game?
    "I'd like for the first shot to go in, then we'd go from there," O'Brien said. "I don't know."
    Rush "wanders through life and you get what you get" from him, according to O'Brien.
    Rush has acknowledged confidence issues in the past.
    He often has a good game on both ends of the court if he scores early.
    The Pacers don't want that to dictate his performance.
    They want him to be able to at least defend, rebound and run the court even if he's struggling offensively.
    O'Brien prefers to bring Rush off the bench, but Luther Head's ankle injury prompted him to start Rush against the Hornets. It is unknown how long Head will be out.
    Rush, who has started 22 games, is averaging 7.6 points and shooting 38.9 percent from the field this season.
    "When he's on, we're happy, and if he's not, then we just go with somebody else or realize he might be defending at a high level and rebounding at a high level and hope there's more than one way to help the team win," O'Brien said. "It's not just shooting the basketball. He can defend and rebound and hopefully run the court. He knows that he has the green light."
    to early to tell
    the system does not fit him
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

  • #2
    Re: Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

    "When he's on, we're happy, and if he's not, then we just go with somebody else or realize he might be defending at a high level and rebounding at a high level and hope there's more than one way to help the team win,
    Yes, that view is in doubt I suppose. I mean you either shoot the ball or you are worthless out there. I mean we hope that's not true, but deep down you know it is.

    Freaking Michael Cooper, man was he worthless. 9.2 on 45% shooting. Bum

    It's not just shooting the basketball.

    Now are you sure about that???


    • #3
      Re: Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

      I think he'll be here for many more years to come. He's still finding his role by battling Dahntay for time. He just needs to become more of a consistent shooter to be a reliable SG. His defense is good in most games.


      • #4
        Re: Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

        I think that the problem with Rush is that he is not a guy who is going to create his own shot, he is more like Bowen than DJ, he is not the kind of guy who will drive to the basket everytime he gets the ball, the pacers coaching stuff needs to understand this.
        @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!


        • #5
          Re: Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

          When your own coach says you just wander thru life you have to question a players desire and dedication.

          The 1/2 reason results seem to make it appear that B.Rush has regressed and not improved. He's playing 3 minutes per game more than last season but all his shooting % are lower.

          His fg% was 42.3 last season low for a shooting guard this season its 38.9%, 3 pointers fallen from 37.3 to 36.0 and even his poor free throw shooting of last season has fallen from 69.7 to 54%.

          If he were a 45.1% shooter as Michael Cooper was it would be a marked improvement. Its beginning to look as if he'll join his 2 brothers Jaron and Kareem as very good college players who just didn't have as much success in the NBA.

          Will he have a long NBA career? Probably , but will he become more than an effective bench player ? Unlikely. Sadly you expect a little more from the 13th pick in the draft , than what we have seen so far from Rush.

          You can say all you want about he doesn't fit the system , but Rush is now the same inconsistant player he was at Kansas only now he can't even find the basket with his shot.

          He is rapidly becoming an total enigma much as Derrick McKey was , the skills are there but they aren't being used to the upmost . Even at his worst tho McKey was a far more effective player than Brandon has been thru his first season and a half.

          So far Rush's performance has been that of a 2nd round pick or a free agent not that of a borderline lottery pick. Unlike most I don't expect that to change , even under a new coach , he seems to be missing the inner drive to become more than an average NBA player at best.


          • #6
            Re: Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

            The guy clearly is a little "soft" psychologically... don't know if it's a maturity thing, or that he just has poor self confidence.

            I think he's a bust from that perspective. I personally expected more of the killer instinct from a player of his pedigree.

            However, he clearly has natural talent and has shown that he can play at a high level. Very strong defensive wing skills.

            He just needs to get out of his own way.

            Whether he steps up in the two years or not is the million dollar question.


            • #7
              Re: Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

              Not only is the game of basketball not all about shooting, OFFENSE isn't even all about shooting. Rush sees the court, understands spacing and passing lanes well and so forth. Seth has talked a lot about the other, often overlooked offensive positives Rush can bring to the game.

              That said, clearly Brandon has struggled shooting the ball. It's been bad. More than just streaky. I do think the system doesn't fit him and he's having a hard time finding his role on the team. I strongly suspect JOB's tendency to talk out of both sides of his mouth doesn't help with things. It does appear that Brandon may be too relaxed/not focused enough though and that is on him.

              I do wonder about the headline - seems to me that Rush has been our most consistent defensive presence, more so than DJones who is supposed to be our "stopper." I've seen Rush have games where his shooting is bad or non-existent but he is playing tough D and hauling in rebounds. JOB sort of acknowledges that, so maybe it's just Wells who is saying his is inconsistent on D. I can't honestly tell.
              "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

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

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


              • #8
                Re: Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

                It's Rush's free throw percentage that really bothers me.

                This is something he could work on very intensely if he had the kind of work ethic that makes for great shooters.

                This is something that is not affected by outside forces. It has nothing to do with adjusting to the NBA.

                He doesn't take his time on free throws. He doesn't focus. He communicates a laissez faire attitude on his part, telling me he will never have the killer instinct to focus in at the end of games when it really counts.

                Nice guy. Good team player. But not a gamer, in my opinion. And I don't care if you are only a role player on a team, you need to be a gamer who can make that critical basket at the end, if you are the one left open. At this point, I don't see Rush becoming that guy. (It was Chalmers that hit the big bucket in the NCAA finals).

                For all these reasons, I would be in favor of trading him. I'd love for my predictions to be proven wrong.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference


                • #9
                  Re: Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

                  It's just too early. This may be all Brandon ever will be, or maybe a different coach would get more out of him. Who knows?
                  "man, PG has been really good."


                  • #10
                    Re: Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

                    I believe a historical analysis of 13th picks (which we just happen to have) would show Brandon in the middle of the pack, or close to. Therefore, I say no bust!


                    • #11
                      Re: Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

                      Rush = No Heart

                      He will always be what he is and if you can see him as the "Next Derrick McKey" then you can live with it better

                      He will always be off and on . Great game followed by disappearing act. If you look back at his time at Kansas a lot of the local writers noticed the same thing

                      I dont think it matters to Brandon whether the team wins or loses. (obvious speculation, but that is the impression I get from him on the court)
                      Sittin on top of the world!


                      • #12
                        Re: Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

                        rush's ceiling is a good role player on a good team. if he doesn't have "it" by now, he won't get "it"


                        • #13
                          Re: Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

                          Since Rush appears, dare I say, "robotic" to a point, it seems to me the more structured the offense, the better he's going to look.


                          • #14
                            Re: Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

                            Up to this point I would consider him a bust, but we really need to see him with a new coach to know for sure...


                            • #15
                              Re: Wondering about Rush/ Mike Wells

                              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                              Since Rush appears, dare I say, "robotic" to a point, it seems to me the more structured the offense, the better he's going to look.
                              I think that is a very valid point.

                              Ironically I think he would have done much better under someone like Rick Carslyle or maybe we could trade him the Bobcats, as I think LArry Brown would love him
                              Sittin on top of the world!