Tweet
Re: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
This thread is irrelevant
This thread is irrelevant
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.
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
-
Larry Bird and Ryan Grigson- wasting the talents of Paul George and Andrew Luck
-
Re: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
LG33 - it was the whole "tragedy" angle, which is pretty dramatic verbage if you ask me.
How about "Lance might play, clearly the End Times are here" as a thread topic next.
I also call BS on this premise...
Ever? The only possible way Indy can compete is if Paul becomes an all-star? So if Roy becomes Smits, Collison becomes Workman+, Josh and Tyler become some variation of Davis and Davis in terms of game impact, and if Rush continues to be SG McKey they are still screwed?If Indiana is every going to compete they are depending on Paul George turning into an all star.
Hardly. This winning cat can be skinned a lot of ways. Freaking Paul had some outright horrible plays tonight, Roy struggled against Monroe, Danny was hit and miss (esp on defense) and Price couldn't make a bucket and they still won the game.
Rush didn't just hit the game winning shot anyway, he helped make other plays including that shot block to end the half. Plus Rush is shooting 42.3% from 3, George is 29.5% from 3, so from a true SG viewpoint Rush does give you more of the outside threat. Rush is also still blocking more shots per game despite George having the length advantage.
Paul is very promising, but this team has several other very solid young talents and I think their winning will continue to be based on mass contributions that vary from game to game.
Comment
-
Re: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
.Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View PostLG33 - it was the whole "tragedy" angle, which is pretty dramatic verbage if you ask me.
How about "Lance might play, clearly the End Times are here" as a thread topic next.
I also call BS on this premise...
Ever? The only possible way Indy can compete is if Paul becomes an all-star? So if Roy becomes Smits, Collison becomes Workman+, Josh and Tyler become some variation of Davis and Davis in terms of game impact, and if Rush continues to be SG McKey they are still screwed?
Hardly. This winning cat can be skinned a lot of ways. Freaking Paul had some outright horrible plays tonight, Roy struggled against Monroe, Danny was hit and miss (esp on defense) and Price couldn't make a bucket and they still won the game. We were playing the Pistons
Rush didn't just hit the game winning shot anyway, he helped make other plays including that shot block to end the half. Plus Rush is shooting 42.3% from 3, George is 29.5% from 3, so from a true SG viewpoint Rush does give you more of the outside threat. Rush is also still blocking more shots per game despite George having the length advantage.
Paul is very promising, but this team has several other very solid young talents and I think their winning will continue to be based on mass contributions that vary from game to game.Comment
-
Re: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
I've admitted I was being a bit irrational. I do fear that in the long run it may take them a while to give PG big minutes... We'll have to wait and see.Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
As far as needing PG to be an all star to compete? Yes this has to happen. This is not dramatic. It's not like it's a do or die situation. If PG doesn't turn out to be that great for instance, I won't be worried, I'll enjoy his contributions regardless. With that said, yes, PG has to turn into a legit all star for this team to compete. As has been said many times, this team has lots of good players, but they need someone who can take over the scoring load and allow Granger to play second fiddle. I don't think this thought process needs to be rehashed. To win 55 games for instance? That would have to happen. To play for maybe the second seed in the playoffs for instance? That would have to happen.
Sure- to be devils advocate you could argue, "but hey what if Roy turned into a big time all star, or what about DC?" I think we all know, that as good as both Roy and DC are, neither will turn into all stars. (Roy certainly may have a couple all star seasons, but not to the affect he could personally lead the team) PG on the other hand does have that potential. I think the best bet Indiana has right now to turn into a top contender is if he becomes that guy. That would turn this team into a very deep and strong team lacking at the most, a power forward.Last edited by mattie; 02-23-2011, 10:43 PM.Comment
-
Re: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
Here's the perspective I have and something I almost started a thread on if my credibility would allow it.
Suppose PG starts with Dun on the bench.
Your current top 3 options in the starting lineup are some order of Granger, Collison, and Hibbert - Hibbert because he is in the post, Collison because a scoring option is why you want the ball in his hands rather than having him pass off immediately, and Granger because he is the current scoring player on the team.
If you add Paul to that lineup, either he is the 4th option (meaning his stats go to hell and people start complaining about how he is used) or he displaces one of the other top 3.
In the Goons, PG is at worst the 2nd option and arguably the 1st option.
So - if you move PG to the starting 5, which starter are you going to move to 4th option? Notice I am not AT ALL mentioning Dun or Rush, so any use of them in a reply will be flushed and ignored.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: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
Kobe Bryant
96-97 Games Played 71 Games Started 6
97-98 Games Played 79 Games Started 1
I'm not saying Paul George is Kobe Bryant, and obviously Mamba came out of high school instead of 2 years of college. But, if you want to argue that All Stars are made by starting games in their rookie season, you're simply not right.
Guys have talent that develops at different rates. That's why Blake Griffin can come in and light up the highlights while Paul George (a more well-rounded player) has to take time to develop.
Rush isn't as talented as George, and I can't wait for the day that George takes the starting spot. But, if he's not ready, he's just not ready. No use throwing a young guy to the wolves while we're trying to secure our playoff spot.It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.Comment
-
Re: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
and Kobe made the Allstar game in 98 off the benchOriginally posted by pizza guy View PostComment
-
Re: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
Instead of describing exactly how the offense should be run, I think you could make the case that with PG in the starting line up, it would have a somewhat similar make up or could at least attempt be similar to Rondo, Pierce, Allen and KG.Originally posted by BillS View Post
I think this is a situation where with PG starting and getting over 30 minutes, and getting much more options on offense it would allow the four to develop together. Since they are the future, that needs to happen. I'd like to see them have growing pains now instead of next season which is likely to happen.Last edited by mattie; 02-23-2011, 10:57 PM.Comment
-
Re: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
Eddie Jones was a real good player and better than Kobe at the time, thats why Kobe didn't start. - That and just out of HS are rarely ready to play while those who have played some college no matter how much are sometimes ready to play off the bat.Originally posted by pizza guy View Post
Again, I realize it will be ok if PG doesn't start right now and gain those extra minutes... This is ok. The point has been made. I'll will be ok with it, and I'm actually a fan of Rush, I just don't think he should start..
I still respectfully disagree with the decision though. I think you play the best players on the court, especially when you're talking about the prior 4 I mentioned who I believe are the future of the club and need as much playing time together as possible.Comment
-
Re: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
Paul George has been averaging a little over 24 minutes per game (including 1 game in Detroit when he only played 12 minutes) his last 6 games. Not too bad considering he's a rookie. Could he be playing more? Obviously, but we have and/or had Rush, Dunleavy, Jones, and Granger all competing for time with him. I'd like to think half the game is pretty good minutes for a rookie. Also, we're 4-2 in the last six games. His time will come. As long as we're winning, don't talk **** about anybody's minutes.
Conference FinalsComment
-
Re: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
Yeah, I kind of agree with your original sentiment, but you are rushing it just a little. I think next year as long as Paul shows steady progress through the end of the season, then we should take your suggested approach.Originally posted by mattie View Post
But let him get his feet wet a little first. Rush is still capable of being a big upgrade over Dunleavy and needs to start more. Lets not forget he needs the time as well. So just let Paul be the focal point of the second unit offensively. That will give him a similar opportunity."Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"Comment
-
Re: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
Good call, Rush haters. Did you find Rush's last play to be tragic?
I don't get the Rush vs. George nonsense. Rush compliments the starters quite well with his outside shooting and perimeter defense. George could get plenty of playing time between the 2 and 3 positions. I don't view either as being a threat to the other. I really like both players, especially their defense. They both played pretty well. And every team is going to dread dealing with our second unit Goon Squad with George and Hansbrough coming in. Starting is massively overrated, and Rush doesn't have to be benched in order for George to gain more playing time.Last edited by IndyPacer; 02-24-2011, 12:03 AM.Comment
-
Re: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
Not reading the thread = failOriginally posted by IndyPacer View PostGood call, Rush haters. Did you find Rush's last play to be tragic?
I don't get the Rush vs. George nonsense. Rush compliments the starters quite well with his outside shooting and perimeter defense. George could get plenty of playing time between the 2 and 3 positions. I don't view either as being a threat to the other. I really like both players, especially their defense. They both played pretty well. And every team is going to dread dealing with our second unit Goon Squad with George and Hansbrough coming in. Starting is massively overrated, and Rush doesn't have to be benched in order for George to gain more playing time.
or
(just in case you did read it)
reading comprehension > youComment
-
Re: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
Did you miss that I was specifically addressing the sentiment that had been raised at Rush (that's goes for within a thread and just in general)? That's what others in the thread also were addressing. The first sentence in my post indicating this was a clue. It's the one that is specifically directing my comments to Rush's detractors. Thanks for the "lesson," clownshoes.Originally posted by mattie View Post
BTW, your position that it's vital for a rookie to be pushed into center stage immediately is ridiculous. George is very young and is still filling out physically. We don't need him playing 40 minutes a game as a rookie. Gradually working up to 25 to low 30s would be plenty for now. He's being brought along at a much more sensible pace than whatever you are proposing.Last edited by IndyPacer; 02-24-2011, 12:35 AM.Comment
-
Re: Why Brandon Rush starting is a tragedy affecting the success of this team
Disappointed in the lack of appreciation for Rush here. He is constantly being bashed and undervalued here without any reason. He is a great role player for this team and if he starts he can continue helping us win more games. He is a very good defender, very good outside shooter, and when he wants to can drive to the basket with the best of them. With him though its just a matter of will and want and I think coach Vogel is his guy and just what he needs. Let's give him a chance and see how it all plays out before throwing him under the bus.Comment
Comment