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

Vecsey on upcoming coaching changes

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Vecsey on upcoming coaching changes

    Nothing on the Pacers


    http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/...rd__106527.htm


    COACHING CAROUSEL: ALL ABOARD!
    By PETER VECSEY


    April 15, 2008 -- THE only mystery surrounding the final frames of the regular season is whether a coach is fired before Isiah Thomas.

    If Knicks president Donnie Walsh wants to be first on the NBA block to begin reversing his team's suffering, he'd best have his ax blade sharpened and in the wield position because inexperienced heads are about to roll.

    Barring divine intervention, Larry Krystkowiak, Marc Iavaroni and Jim Boylan are days away from dismissal by the Bucks, Grizzlies and Bulls, respectively.

    Two others on Uneasy Street, Lawrence Frank and Sam Vincent, recently received votes of confidence - from Nets president Rod Thorn and Bobcats owner Bob Johnson, respectively.

    Showing no onions or the ability to identify new head-coaching substance, the decision makers at Milwaukee, Memphis and Chicago are rounding up the same old suspects as replacements either because they're managing scared or they're appeasing owrnership.

    The names rollirng off the lips of Sen. Herb Kohl, Michael Heisley and Jerry Reinsdorf are almost Identical - Larry Brown, Scott Skiles, Rick Carlisle, Jeff Van Gundy and Mike Fratello. The above owners may not insist (newly appointed GM) John Hammond, Chris Wallace (if not supplanted by Next Town) and John Paxson hire their exact choicer, but, guaranteed, it'll turn out to be one of those five; Heisley is the lone owner of the three looking to do things relatively on the cheap.

    Hammond, who's bringing Jeff Weltman with him from Detroit (Sonics assistant GM Scott Perry will return to the Pistons where he worked for seven seasons) has a connection with Brown dating back to the Clippers when he assisted him on the sidelines. They also were together in Detroit.

    Sources say their relationship is strained, yet they have spoken within the last 72 hours.

    "Don't let that fool you," a second source underlined. "John is considering either Skiles or Carlisle, no one else."

    Carlisle also is the leading contender to replace Boylan, who moved over 36 inches on the Bulls bench when Skiles was bought out of his contract. Yes, you read it right; bought out of his contract.

    Contrary to what you were spoon-fed to believe, Skiles was not fired. He asked out early and often this season, telling superiors he felt he wasn't the right guy for the job and that he wasn't getting through to the players anymore. Their approach and the team's record reflect as much.

    Reinsdorf refused to let him walk away from his obligation unless he gave up a portion (I don't know the forfeited amount) of his remaining guarantee.

    That's all from an infallible authority and confirmed by others in the know.

    Mark Jackson is on the Bulls' short list, I'm told, which may not go more than two-deep, three if John Calipari can capitalize on his ultra success at Memphis; I'm sticking to my previous report that maintained Brown never was in the equation.

    Though flattered to be on the Bulls' radar, the ABC/Nets analyst has made it exceedingly clear to confidants he's captivated by one coaching situation and one only, the Knicks'. There is no second option unless he's outside the Garden and sees white smoke coming out of Walsh's office chimney.

    Carlisle and Skiles continue to be mentioned as Knicks applicants. I find both implausible. A year ago, Carlisle was fired by Walsh and Pacers president Larry Bird, whereas Skiles duplicated Jeff Van Gundy's hook slide on the Knicks. Additionally, I don't recall any special chemistry between Jamal Crawford and Eddy Curry and their ex-coach when they were in Chicago.

    Should Carlisle get hired by the Bulls that almost certainly would mean Skiles would wind up with Milwaukee.

    That leaves Memphis still on the prowl. As reported two weeks ago, Brown is being recruited in the dual capacity as president/coach. I can see him passing since the money is funny and the winning ain't easy. Or at least hide and watch to see what happens to Mike Woodson and Billy Knight in Atlanta, and whether Vincent is retained in Charlotte.

    Should Brown be out, that leaves second-hand Skiles. If he's committed elsewhere by then, it actually may force Heisley and Wallace to be bold and/or creative.

    Surely Lionel Hollins deserves an opportunity.

    Which team is going to be smart enough to make it worth Jeff Hornacek to get into coaching full time?

    I can't think of a better time to recruit Hall of Famer Adrian Dantley away from the Nuggets.

    I thought Terry Porter had what it takes to become another Nate McMillian when Kohl ordered him discharged (citing team defense . . . as if it's improved any since) after his second season in Milwaukee.

    Tom Thibodeau's effect on the Celtics' defensive plot is conspicuous.

    I thought the Raptors overachieved when Hornets assistant Darrell Walker was in charge.

    Give Paul Westphal a team without Vin Baker undermining it and check out what he's capable of doing.

    How long will Kurt Rambis' brief bit with the Lakers be held against him?

    Shouldn't Jim Cleamons get another chance after being submarined in Dallas by Don Nelson?

    Shouldn't Clifford Ray got his first chance? How about his first interview?

    Get me Paul Silas, Rick Pitino, Derek and Ron Harper on the phone.

    Rather than recycle the same old, same old, why not resurrect Butch Carter, Frankie Johnson and Jerry Tarkanian?
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Vecsey on upcoming coaching changes

    First of all, it's Vecsey, so I take whatever he says with a grain of salt.

    Second, I really can't understand why Frank would be retained. I know you like him Buck, but it's inexcusable that a team with so much talent finishes worse than us.

    I at least hope you don't still think he's a better coach than Byron.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Vecsey on upcoming coaching changes

      Originally posted by PETER VECSEY
      Contrary to what you were spoon-fed to believe, Skiles was not fired. He asked out early and often this season, telling superiors he felt he wasn't the right guy for the job and that he wasn't getting through to the players anymore. Their approach and the team's record reflect as much.

      Reinsdorf refused to let him walk away from his obligation unless he gave up a portion (I don't know the forfeited amount) of his remaining guarantee.

      That's all from an infallible authority and confirmed by others in the know.
      I don't care who his source is I say that's a load of BS.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Vecsey on upcoming coaching changes

        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
        Rather than recycle the same old, same old, why not resurrect Butch Carter, Frankie Johnson and Jerry Tarkanian?

        Please tell me he's kidding. If not

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Vecsey on upcoming coaching changes

          One name that sticks out to me is Darrell Walker. I was really impressed when Scott hired him along with Cleamons and Gattison, even though Cleamons eventually went back to LA with Phil.

          I'd also like to see Porter get another shot. I never understood why he was fired, and Milwaukee certainly hasn't justified the move with their play since.

          And since it's another summer, I'll go ahead and get this out of the way early. Michael Cooper and Bill Laimbeer.
          Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Vecsey on upcoming coaching changes

            Kinda surprised to see Marc Iavaroni's name there. Not because of record - that surely deserves his name there - but rather because that team is young, had injuries, & most importantly it traded away it's franchise player 1/2 was into the season for a pile of crap! They sure didn't give him long to install his style of give him the kind of players he needed.

            Notice to All: No JO'B!!! Like his player rotations or not - He's back!!!
            "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
            (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Vecsey on upcoming coaching changes

              I think Darrell Walker deserves another chance, I thought he did a good job.

              And yes Vecsey was kidding about Butch Carter, Frankie, and Tark.

              Keg, I do think Frank is a good coach - but the Nets probably need a voice there.

              Right now, if I were looking to hire a coach, I would take a very hard look at Tom Thibodeau. I think he's one of the best (if not the best assistants) but that doesn't always mean he'll be a good head coach

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Vecsey on upcoming coaching changes

                Originally posted by PacerGuy View Post
                Kinda surprised to see Marc Iavaroni's name there. Not because of record - that surely deserves his name there - but rather because that team is young, had injuries, & most importantly it traded away it's franchise player 1/2 was into the season for a pile of crap! They sure didn't give him long to install his style of give him the kind of players he needed.

                Notice to All: No JO'B!!! Like his player rotations or not - He's back!!!
                The issues aren't on the court, they're off. From the little I've read it sounds like a Rick Carlisle in Detroit situation, everybody hates the guy.
                Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Vecsey on upcoming coaching changes

                  Go figure.....it's a good crop of Coaches available. 4 of the 5 coaches listed are known for one thing....focusing on defense.

                  Wasn't it rumored that DW wanted Mark Jackson before Bird decided on JO'B? How can he not end up coaching at MSG?
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Vecsey on upcoming coaching changes

                    http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slu...yhoo&type=lgns

                    Venomous article on yahoo sports about Zeke. Funny read in a sort of way, though I one shouldn't really joy in another's misery.
                    "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Vecsey on upcoming coaching changes

                      Originally posted by Kaufman View Post
                      http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slu...yhoo&type=lgns

                      Venomous article on yahoo sports about Zeke. Funny read in a sort of way, though I one shouldn't really joy in another's misery.
                      Let's all hope Zeke returns in some form to Detroit. That would help us long term in the standings.

                      At the same time, let's also hope that Bird is not another Zeke. That is my greatest fear...

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Vecsey on upcoming coaching changes

                        :):
                        "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

                        Comment

                        Previous template Next
                        Working...
                        X