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

Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

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

  • Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

    In the thread about Montieth's blog, some of you were not convinced that some players quit on Rick last season. Here in Wells latest blog, he states the same thing, - players quit on Rick - I thought it was rather obvious and I didn't need MM or Wells to tell me.



    http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsider/



    I'm back.....briefly
    Posted by Mike Wells


    It's late August, the slowest period in the NBA offseason. This is supposed to be the time everybody recharges their battery to get ready for another interesting Pacers season. But I've had an itch to get on here and post a blog.

    Maybe it’s because I spent the previous few weeks trying to avoid becoming Jaws’ next meal while hanging out on the beach along the Gulf of Mexico. Maybe it’s because my 12-year-old daughter ran me ragged while doing the amusement park thing in Orlando.

    Whatever the reason, I decided to get back in touch with the faithful followers – Steve from Area 51, 52, 53, 54 and Scrap - on the blog. I see Mapman - aka “I don’t like using a real email address” – even made a rare appearance.

    Mark Montieth has done an excellent job keeping all you blog-thirsty folks entertained (even if it required him to get a sore back from carrying the load) during the slowest time of the year in the NBA.

    Training camp is about a month away and the expectations surrounding the Pacers this season are not very high according to the emails I’ve gotten from fans. A lot of you are already talking about the Pacers positioning themselves for Eric Gordon (if he leaves IU after one season) in the draft next June because of what they didn’t do this summer.

    What many thought would be an active offseason for the blue and gold turned into one that featured a few minor moves. The Pacers put the Rick Carlisle era in the rearview mirror and they added a shooter – Kareem Rush – and a backup point guard – Travis Diener. All the talk about Jermaine O’Neal playing in Hollywood or in New Jersey – a Jason Kidd length-of-the-court pass away from the Big Apple – turned out to be just talk.

    Everybody knows about the moves New York, Charlotte and Boston made. In no particular order, I have Detroit, Chicago and Boston as the top three teams in the East.

    I’ll be the first to admit that I’m not sure if the Pacers will make the playoffs next season. At the same time, though, I’m not ready to say they’ll be at the bottom of the East. The Pacers biggest acquisition this summer wasn’t Rush’s outside shooting, but rather naming Jim O’Brien the coach.

    There’s a positive vibe going around Conseco Fieldhouse these days. O’Brien has played a huge part in that.

    I’ve only spent a short amount of time around of O’Brien, but everything I’ve heard so far has been good. O’Neal told me earlier this month that he likes O’Brien’s straight forward approach. O’Brien’s no-nonsense attitude will be huge for a team that had some players quit on Carlisle last season. You also have to factor in that Mike Dunleavy, Troy Murphy and Ike Diogu aren’t stepping into a messy situation in training camp like they did in January. O’Neal and Jamaal Tinsley should also thrive under O’Brien since he allows his players to utilize their talent.

    Some of you will probably say I’m drinking the O’Brien Kool-Aid. I’ve had a swig or two because I think O’Brien will have a significant impact this season. I’ll drink a big glass of the Kool-Aid if the Pacers look like they’re going to be able to compete with some of the top teams in the league.

    I’m headed out of the country for one last vacation next week. I’ll check back with ya’ll when I get back.

  • #2
    Re: Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

    There is some good stuff in Montieth's latest blog also.

    http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsider/


    Random thoughts while waiting on Wells
    Posted by Mark Montieth


    I see that readers have taken notice of Mike Wells’ absence. Mike is flattered to know that he was missed, but he’s had an excused absence: vacation.

    He’s back, however, and will resume his blogging tendencies soon. It’s a good thing, because my back is sore from carrying his load over the past few weeks. Meanwhile, I’ll fill the gap by responding to some of the recent comments.

    Dr. Fife suggests something resembling a wrestling mat be put underneath the basket to lower vertical jumps.

    Now that’s one I’ve never considered. How ‘bout going the other way and putting a springboard underneath the basket, so that guys like Travis Diener can jump over the backboard?

    He also expressed disappointment that the Pacers haven’t made major deals. I understand the summer has been a letdown in that regard, but the practical reality is that good trades aren’t always available. Several other teams, such as Miami, Cleveland and the Lakers, have wanted to make significant moves this summer but haven’t found anything to their liking.

    Face it, good trades aren’t easy to find, and great ones are truly rare. The rule that salaries have to match within 25 percent makes it difficult, along with the fact the industry has become more sophisticated in evaluating personnel.

    If you look back on Donnie Walsh’s 20 years as general manager/president/CEO he made several deals that improved the team, but only a few that can be classified as great.

    1. Herb Williams for Detlef Schrempf and a second-round draft pick.
    2. The two trades with Denver that sent out Mark Jackson and then brought back Jackson less than a year later, with the bottom line of acquiring Jalen Rose for a few spare parts.
    3. Dale Davis for Jermaine O’Neal.
    4. Rose, Travis Best and Norm Richardson for Brad Miller, Ron Artest, Kevin Ollie and Ron Mercer.

    That’s four great -- not good, but great -- trades in 20 years, which is more than most franchises can claim.

    The best way to make a great trade is to identify a young player who hasn’t done much yet, but will blossom with more experience and playing time. It requires some luck, but Walsh did it with Schrempf, Rose, O’Neal and, to a lesser degree, Miller and Artest.

    As difficult as it is, you have to believe a team can find favorable trades over the long run if it keeps its eyes open, an ear to the ground, its nose to the grindstone and its mouth shut at the appropriate times. (That’s all the body parts I’ll mention for now, thank you.)

    ***

    Scrap pointed out the defensive liabilities of Troy Murphy and Mike Dunleavy.

    I agree, they’ll never remind anyone of Ron Artest or Derrick McKey. Murphy should be decent if he’s guarding power forwards, though, and Dunleavy is a good help defender. He doesn’t have quick feet, but he’s long and fundamentally sound.

    Harrington wasn’t a great defender either, though, and Jackson was erratic. Jackson, however, is capable of flashes of greatness as a defender, as he showed in Golden State’s series with Dallas.

    We’ll see if Jim O’Brien and Dick Harter can have as much success as Harter had with Larry Bird’s three teams. This year’s Pacers team, no matter who starts, should have as much defensive potential as Mark Jackson, Reggie Miller, Rik Smits, Dale Davis and Chris Mullin/Jalen Rose.

    ***

    Pacerfan Kyle sent a lengthy, thoughtful response that deserves the same from me.

    He says Artest and Jackson might still be Pacers if they had been disciplined earlier, and blames Walsh and Larry Bird as much as Rick Carlisle.

    This is a grey area, but I’ve got a few thoughts on it.

    For as long as I can remember, the head coach has been responsible for disciplining players. When teams are well-behaved the coach gets credit, and when they’re not the coach has to answer for it.

    Wasn’t that always the argument on behalf of Bob Knight? That, sure, he was out of control sometimes, but his players were so disciplined? I have read a lot of reports of Indiana and Purdue players having legal issues, but nobody has ever blamed the university administrations. When Colts players have had their off-field issues, nobody pointed fingers at the front office.

    Carlisle virtually abdicated his responsibility in disciplinary issues because he wasn’t comfortable with it. So it was left to Walsh and Bird, and sometimes assistant coaches, to deal with them.

    Walsh and Bird had a lot of conversations with Jackson about his oncourt demeanor. Walsh told Jackson that if he were coaching the team and Jackson kept going into griping rants that he’d tell him to leave the arena.

    Carlisle tended to let it slide. Even when Carlisle sent Jackson to the locker room in Cleveland last season he called on Walsh the next day to impose the one-game suspension. Compare that to Golden State coach Don Nelson, who announced fines for Jackson in post-game news conferences.

    Whenever a coach refuses to involve himself in disciplinary issues the players are going to lose respect for his authority, and all sorts of problems arise.

    The Pacers front office worked with Artest continuously, before and after the brawl. He simply was beyond anyone’s control at times. But he also was showing improvements. The flagrant foul issue, for example, had virtually disappeared.

    I don’t think you can blame the front office or Carlisle for Artest's decision to go into the stands in Detroit. I’m not even sure you can blame Artest. Go Downtown tomorrow and throw a beer in the face of 10 young, athletic men and see how many of them respond aggressively. (And keep in mind that Artest didn't hit the guy he thought threw the beer, he grabbed him and asked him if he threw it. Then all hell broke loose). It wasn’t the best decision Artest could have made, but it was understandable.

    What the front office can do, of course, is trade a player. Bird looked into trading Artest after the 61-win season in 2003-04 because he had melted down a bit in the playoffs, but there were no reasonable deals available. There was talk of trading Artest for Stojakovic that summer, but the Kings weren’t willing to do it at the time. Rather than break up a championship contender, Bird decided to stick with what he had. I don’t recall anyone complaining.

    It’s easy to look back now and say they should have traded Artest and/or Jackson earlier. If the Pacers had known how things were going to turn out, they surely would have. But they had a legit title contender, and nobody breaks up contenders unless they have no choice.


    Imagine if they had dumped Artest three summers ago, before the brawl. There wouldn't have been a brawl, of course, and people would still be wondering why the Pacers broke up a contending team.

    There were other complicating factors too, primarily that Artest and Jackson are both good-hearted, charitable, down-to-earth guys who bring a lot of energy and talent to their teams, and have been coachable in most situations. A team doesn’t give away players like them when it has a chance to win a championship. If you're running a team and have a chance to put a title contender together, you'll most likely assume risks, just as the Spurs did with Jackson, the Bulls did with Rodman and the Pistons did with Rasheed Wallace.

    That’s why Golden State is happy to have Jackson now and that’s why Sacramento hasn’t tried to trade Artest.

    ***

    As for Pacerfan Kyle’s breakdown of the Pacers and Colts offcourt issues, I’ll have to disagree with a few points.

    If you want to compare them by percentages of the total roster and you’re talking about active rosters, the Colts have 45 players, not 55.

    You also say the Pacers have had four players involved in off-court altercations: Tinsley, McLeod, Daniels and Jackson.

    I don’t mean to go Bill Clinton on you here, but you have to define “involved.”

    Jackson was found guilty of a misdemeanor.

    McLeod was present when the fights at the 8 Seconds Saloon broke out, but wasn’t charged with anything. That puts him in the innocent category, just like the several Colts players who were there.

    Tinsley and Daniels have denied the charges against them, have refused to accept plea bargains and will have their day in court. So let’s do the American thing and not pass judgment until the legal system weighs in. Maybe they’re guilty, I don’t know. If not, it wouldn’t be the first time someone was found innocent in a court of law.

    ***

    As for community involvement, the Pacers are doing as much as they’ve ever done. And they are, in fact, required to do so. The league mandates eight personal or charity appearances each season. You can question the players’ motives if you want, but not their involvement.

    The appearances aren’t always publicized, however. The Pacers want more coverage of them, but they are so frequent that they almost cease to become newsworthy. The Star simply can’t run out and write a story or snap a photograph every time a player makes an appearance. There’s isn’t enough manpower or space in the paper for that.

    Jermaine O’Neal was honored by the league last season for his community involvement. There’s been so much roster turnover the last two seasons that several of the other players haven’t established themselves in the community yet. But Darrell Armstrong, who probably won’t be on the roster next season, was here recently running a camp and other players have made appearances over the summer.

    ***

    EVH points out that much of frustration with Jackson’s incident relates to the fact he and his teammates were out at 3 a.m. during training camp.

    I understand that. It doesn’t exactly give the appearance of a dedicated athlete, does it? But people forget that NBA players (and media) work different hours than most people. They don’t have to be in the office early in the morning. I’m often up until 3 a.m., even in the summer. It’s just the schedule we’re accustomed to.

    The Pacers’ practice the day after the strip club incident was scheduled for 2 p.m., I believe, so there wasn’t much incentive to get to bed early. It’s true, however, that a coach can help control situations such as that one by scheduling earlier practices. Bird did that, which got the players to bed earlier and left them with more free time during the afternoon.

    Beyond that, the concept of training camp has changed. Now that the collective bargaining agreement limits the length of training camp practices, they are more like ordinary workouts. That’s why fewer franchises are taking their players out of town.

    I don’t believe these factors excuse Jackson and the others, but they do add some perspective.

    Let’s be honest, pro athletes have occasionally gone out carousing with teammates forever. Better to do it during training camp than the regular season, actually.

    Max McGee, the Green Bay Packers receiver, was out all night before the first Super Bowl in 1967 and wound up playing a starring role in the game despite his hangover.

    Ten years before that, Mickey Mantle, Whitey Ford, Billy Martin, Hank Bauer and Johnny Kucks went to the Copacabana in New York City (during the season) to see Sammy Davis Jr. perform. Some other patrons started hurling insults at Davis, fights broke out, and it made
    headlines. Bauer got in the best lick and was sued, but got off.

    Nobody called the Yankees “thugs” however, and nobody blamed management for their actions, although the Yankees’ owner did use the occasion as an excuse for trading Martin, who he wanted off the team.

    People like to believe athletes have changed over the years, and they have. Not only in negative ways, however, and no more than public perceptions have changed.

    ***

    Patric asks how NBA field goal percentages would change if dunks were removed from the equation.

    It’s a valid point. They no doubt would drop some and it’s something to consider when comparing field goal percentages with the WNBA.

    I was talking with someone recently who said WNBA teams would average 100 points a game if they got a point for every missed layup, but I’m leaving that one alone. The WNBA game improves every year, and hopefully the league survives.

    ***

    Anyone else notice the weird coincidence of my first blog on Reggie Miller (Why Reggie won’t go green)?

    It generated 31 responses.

    You guys are good.

    Thankfully, the blog on Jermaine O’Neal drew more than seven responses.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

      Those of you who made fun of my "This team has quit!" threads can now officially bite me.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

        Maybe Carlises next stop he'll find and in between, It think the dude could be the greatest assistant, but he was too rigid in Detroit and completely removed in Indiana. Obie's no BS approach should really play well next year I think.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

          Carlisle is a great X and O coach but I don't think he relates to his players well. There seems to be a disconnect and I wouldn't be surprised to hear that he doesn't even talk to his players unless it's a game/practice situation.

          He strikes me as the type that just wants to coach the game and nothing else and unfortunately, in a league filled with egos and prima donnas you need someone who has good people skills. That would include disciplining/calling players out when necessary and not having different standards for different players. IMO, that was Rick's worse quality. He wasn't a consistent disciplinarian.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

            I'm becoming more convinced that Bird's belief that players tire of a coach after three years is basically true, outside of the really special ones like Jerry Sloan and Pat Riley.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              There were other complicating factors too, primarily that Artest and Jackson are both good-hearted, charitable, down-to-earth guys who bring a lot of energy and talent to their teams, and have been coachable in most situations. A team doesn’t give away players like them when it has a chance to win a championship. If you're running a team and have a chance to put a title contender together, you'll most likely assume risks, just as the Spurs did with Jackson, the Bulls did with Rodman and the Pistons did with Rasheed Wallace.

              That’s why Golden State is happy to have Jackson now and that’s why Sacramento hasn’t tried to trade Artest.
              Bingo.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

                I'd like to know what his definition of Sacto not trying to trade Artest is. I don't know that they've been involved in intensive deal-brokering with him but they definitely threw his name out there as available and then pulled back when they decided there wasn't enough interest around the league.
                The poster formerly known as Rimfire

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

                  Originally posted by Shade View Post
                  Those of you who made fun of my "This team has quit!" threads can now officially bite me.
                  Let's keep in mind that this isn't official from JT's mouth or something, this is Wells OPINION, just like it is for any of us.

                  Plus is Wells saying that Dun quit on Rick 2 weeks into it, or Ike did, or Murph did? McLeod had "had enough" 3 weeks in? Doubtful. You show me where ANYTHING THEY DID WAS DIFFERENT FROM THEIR GS OUTPUT. One freaking thing. Guess Dun "quit" on basketball in total last year when his 3pt fell to the sub 30 area and just kept on quitting this year in Oakland, then played hard for Rick for about a week, then quit again...yeah, that sounds reasonable.

                  JO continued to take charges, block shots and play his butt off within his health limits. Army quit? Army? Did you see him quit because I didn't, if that bouncy energy is quitting then I guess him trying is where he goes supernova and destroys an arena. He made foolish plays, but he didn't quit.

                  Shawne quit? Shawne got all his PT at the end of the year as he started to break through and his results IMPROVED. Granger never looked better or worse all year long as far as I could tell, he had spikes of good and bad games consistant with a young player having growing pains.

                  Harrison quit? Harrison continued to be the exact same hot-headed, foul prone lazy defender (all hands, no feet) that he'd been all year.

                  Quis quit? What, because he had the same injury issues he had in Dallas?

                  Greene, Baston, Rawle...they quit? TPTB realized that it wasn't a talent issue it was a motivation issue that a new coach would fix. In fact they realized this issue so much that they got rid of all 3 of them. You know, before the new coach could motivate them again and tap into that real talent that RC couldn't get out of them.



                  I will give you ONE GUY that quit - Tinsley. And we've known about his possible heart/attitude issues from day 1.


                  As I said the other day in response to this same subject, you tell me what's the difference between quitting on MANAGEMENT and the coach? How could you tell the difference between players disgusted by a poor trade and players disgusted by the coaching?

                  Have you never played for a team, maybe a softball team or a Y basketball team that swapped out a couple of guys you liked playing with for guys that just didn't mesh with what you wanted to do?


                  Plus let's also sort out how the lockerroom can be better than ever post trade but that's when the guys quit. Yeah, some great lockerroom that was, a bunch of unhappy players who all gave up trying to win. Smell the chemistry at work.

                  Last time I checked you didn't just win for the coach's benefit, you won for YOUR TEAMMATES TOO. Where's the love and respect for your teammates when you go out and half-*** it? You think Bird needed to like his coach in order to put the effort in.


                  Not buying the system, sure. Not being motived by the coach, sure. But giving up hope...that's not great chemistry and speaks about the heart of players too.

                  Considering that a full QUARTER of the team was new at the time and came with a history of losing already, I have to wonder how much of it was the team suddenly quitting on Rick and how much was quitting on the situation.



                  I am not blindly defending Rick. I've always said that Rick did blow it by taking the easy going approach with players, by not getting into them with discipline sooner. But if you think that it was as simple as desire that the coach failed to give them and had nothing to do with the roster itself then you are in for a major letdown this year.

                  That's my point, it's not as simple as just the coach. Otherwise Dun wouldn't have been traded by Nellie in the first place, Tins wouldn't have slipped in his output in his 2nd year with Isiah, Quis wouldn't have been traded by Dallas...

                  Let's not act like we put together the Dream Team of guys who never got a shot despite kicking butt and winning lots of games and then suddenly they quit on the coach. That's head-in-sand thinking.



                  I've said many times that Rick blew it with Jack by not getting on him right away, that he tried to be friendly rather than the HC. I've said before how I made the same mistake coaching kids even and that when I tried to get tough later it was too late. I've never said that wasn't a Rick mistake.


                  Mark again reinforces a moderately positive view of Ron and Jack, not one that relieves them of responsibility but one that doesn't put all the blame on them either. That's my POV as well.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

                    Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
                    Carlisle is a great X and O coach but I don't think he relates to his players well. There seems to be a disconnect and I wouldn't be surprised to hear that he doesn't even talk to his players unless it's a game/practice situation.

                    He strikes me as the type that just wants to coach the game and nothing else and unfortunately, in a league filled with egos and prima donnas you need someone who has good people skills. That would include disciplining/calling players out when necessary and not having different standards for different players. IMO, that was Rick's worse quality. He wasn't a consistent disciplinarian.
                    I agree. He wasn't too tough in Detroit, he was calm and removed, the same as here. That's not always a bad thing, I think it's where you saw Artest calm down for his ONLY AS/DPOY season for example.

                    It's not like Jackson got calmer under Nellie is it. Frankly I thought Jack's two outbursts vs Dallas in the playoffs was worse than any on-court stuff he did in Indy.

                    It also helps him to have an assistant that is a good people person, just like a player coach needs a strategy assistant to compliment him (ahem, Bird had TWO of them no less). Brown was that for Rick and I think we saw how losing him impacted the team as a whole. Phil Jax has Tex and the triangle as the strategy part.

                    Rick doesn't motivate guys, he's not a rip and roar type like Riley or a get-in-your-head type like Phil Jackson. But the NBA has room for a lot of different approaches and the fact is that Rick has not 1 but 2 different MAJOR improvements for teams using the same (or worse) roster from the year before.

                    You can't explain that away and it proves that his method also works. Sloan missed the playoffs too, Larry Brown had a full-on disaster in New York. Good coaches have bad seasons and bad results, but when most of their seasons are well into the winning side of things you know something about them is very, very right.

                    Or did I miss where Stackhouse and Atkins were a major backcourt tandem for years?
                    Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 08-31-2007, 12:37 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

                      Agree with Seth. This thread title is dubious at best when the big confirmation we get is a casual, throw-away sentence mentioned at the end of blog. You make it seem like he offers some actual evidence or something.

                      I'm not saying the guys were "All for one and one for all" at the end of the year by any means, but comments like "he lost the team" or "the team quit on him" seem possibly inaccurate for most of our key players and an easy/lazy way to validate why we'll be a lot better this year.

                      Of course the Larry Bird Corrallary of players tuning out a coach holds some water, but there's a big difference to me from guys playing somewhat nonchallantly in the final 15 games of a lost season and a team quitting on a coach, which to me signifies a lack of respect or downright animosity, neither of which I believe occurred.

                      I'll need a much better confirmation before I believe a significant number of our key guys "quit" on Rick Carlisle last year (and I'm not even a huge Carlisle fan, FWIW).
                      Read my Pacers blog:
                      8points9seconds.com

                      Follow my twitter:

                      @8pts9secs

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

                        Quitting on a coach, doesn't mean you stop playing. You can play your *** off, and not play the style/type the way the coach wants you to play, which would be quitting on the coach.

                        You could break plays off and not do the job you're supposed to do. I personally think that Al and SJax quit on him, hence the reason that they were shipped out.

                        Tinsley quit on Carlisle a loooooong time ago. His quitting was his "sinuspoutis" sydrome.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

                          Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                          Quitting on a coach, doesn't mean you stop playing. You can play your *** off, and not play the style/type the way the coach wants you to play, which would be quitting on the coach.

                          You could break plays off and not do the job you're supposed to do. I personally think that Al and SJax quit on him, hence the reason that they were shipped out.

                          Tinsley quit on Carlisle a loooooong time ago. His quitting was his "sinuspoutis" sydrome.
                          Thank you, I was going to post something similar. Some people think that when a player quits on a coach, he walks off the job and grabs a picket sign and marches on Conseco Fieldhouse.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

                            I was no big Carlisle fan at all. He's always reminded me of a
                            guy lke Norv Turner in the NFL who's a terrific lead assistant type
                            with great X & O skills, but not the intangibles needed to be a
                            head guy except under almost perfect cirumstances (veteran
                            leadership, etc.).

                            But I'll defend him a bit on the discipline thing. He couldn't have
                            gotten away with not doing it if mgmt didn't enable it. It's as
                            much a part of the job as calling a play down 1 w/ 10 secs on
                            the clock in the 4th-Q. When he went to LB or DW to pawn-off
                            the responsibility they should have refused, forced him to do so
                            and if he didn't or wouldn't follow through, sent him packing.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Wells confirms some players quit on Carlisle last season

                              And as far as management being let off the hook for discipline problems, why?

                              If a pattern arises that RC wasn't taking the right effort into disciplining his players, and you had the authority to do it, then why wouldn't you gett off your butt and do it? Bird/Walsh have just as much right and duty to make sure players that they employ are behaved.

                              Throwing your hands up in the air and saying "That's Rick's job, not mine" is hardly an excuse. They knew it was an area that Rick struggled with, so do your job and deal with players yourself. Standing back and not acting is just as bad.
                              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X