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

The Official "Fire Jim O'Brien!" Thread

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: When will jim O'brien be held accountable?

    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...plate=printart


    Can Pacers improve mental toughness in 2009?

    By Mike Wells
    mike.wells@indystar.com

    The Indiana Pacers see themselves as being several late-game miscues and key injuries from hovering around the .500 mark.

    Some on the outside see a team with its worst record at the end of December since the 1988-89 season, when they wrapped up the calendar year 5-22.

    The Pacers (10-21) take a four-game losing streak into Friday's game at the New York Knicks.

    Fingers usually start pointing as the losses mount, often in the direction of the coach, which helps explain why six already have been fired around the NBA this season.

    The Pacers say coach Jim O'Brien can't be blamed for their lack of execution and mental toughness in key moments of close games.

    "That's not fair because that's rarely the case," forward Danny Granger said. "In the NBA, you have so many coaching changes. It's easier to put it on the coach when a lot of times it's the players. That's how the situation is here. It's the players, not the coach."

    O'Brien said earlier that he is not worried about his job status because he wasn't expected to immediately lead the Pacers to 50 victories when he was hired in May 2007. Team president Larry Bird praised O'Brien's preparation and desire to improve the team last weekend.

    Support from management, however, hasn't softened what has happened so far.

    "Obviously it's tough on all of us, and I think he's done a pretty good job considering the circumstances," forward Jeff Foster said. "(Thirty-one) games where you're coming down to the wire and we're just making mistakes that the coaching staff has coached us not to make. We're having mental breakdowns.

    "He's doing as well as can be expected, trying to stay positive and reinforce the things we're messing up on."

    O'Brien doesn't easily accept losing, regardless of the opponent or circumstances. His postgame news conferences are engaging and personable when the Pacers win. His responses are usually short and bland when they lose.

    O'Brien has remained detailed in his preparation. He often puts players through lengthy film sessions before practicing after losses. He treats game-day shootarounds like regular practices, meaning players tape up and scrimmage.

    "Every loss is difficult until you have a chance to break down the video and look at what has happened and then you figure out how you can improve and what your teaching plan is going to be for the next practice," O'Brien said. "You get on with your life and you forget about what happened in the past."

    The Pacers' effort, a key element that kept many fans away from Conseco Fieldhouse the past couple of years, can't be questioned.

    They have beaten Houston, Boston and the Los Angeles Lakers. Only six of their 21 losses have been by more than 10 points. Their past four losses have been by a total of 12 points.

    It's how they lose -- a league-high nine double-digit blown leads -- and who beat them that cause concern.

    "I think this is a great opportunity to help a franchise turn things around," O'Brien said. "I think we're headed in the right direction and I believe there will be dramatic improvements throughout 2009. I think my whole focus on an hourly basis is to make sure that happens."

    Saturday's game at 6 p.m.

    The Pacers moved up their game Saturday against Sacramento to 6 p.m. so fans wouldn't miss the Indianapolis Colts' playoff game that starts at 8 p.m.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: When will jim O'brien be held accountable?

      In light of the results so far, the team is being prepared correctly for most games. We play well enough to win nearly every game. Good job by O'Brien and his staff on that front.

      What is not being done is a rotation of players with a higher level of recognition by the coaches of which players are actually playing well at a given point in the game, and not just substituting according to a set formula. This is often difficult to balance with the need for going deeper into the bench on a consistent basis.

      Also, during games there needs to be a better sense on the part of the coaching staff of when things are getting out of control and why, with better timing of timeouts and any associated substitutions. As our players get gassed, they tend to make more mental errors and play with more of a sense of desperation. The players are also becoming less confident and more tentative at times as our streak has continued, and understandably so.

      In a nutshell, we have a good coaching staff for game preparation. What we need for getting over the hump is a coaching staff that can manage substitutions and call timeouts for the purposes of controlling our players better and changing game momentum.

      We have been spoiled over the years with Larry Brown, Larry Bird / (Rick Carlisle), and Rick Carlisle himself who were good both at game preparation and game management. Control freaks? Yes. Was it the time for each to go when they did? Yes. Do we need someone like them to rebuild more effectively than we currently seem to be? I believe so. Who would that be? That would be a tough one to answer. Best candidate as a former Pacer? If he would come out of broadcasting (which I doubt), Clark Kellogg has a thorough understanding of the game, which is what leads to his effectiveness as a broadcaster. I believe that our exposure to Clark over the years has enhanced the understanding of basketball both in our state and across the nation from both his Pacers and his NCAA broadcasts. Would he want to become a coach? Unlikely at this point, and if he did he might choose THE Ohio State University, his alma mater.

      Will O'Brien last here? Likely. Will we continue our Groundhog Day performances? Hopefully not. Can we win more games than we have? Without a doubt! Go Pacers!!!!!!!!

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: When will jim O'brien be held accountable?

        I've always been of the belief if you have a 'talent deficit' speeding up the game is the last thing you want to do. I'm seeing comments like the above where people are saying that an uptempo game is their only chance to win. So which is it?

        That said, I don't care how much of the shot clock you use as long as you get a good shot AND that you play the situation (IOW sometimes I DO care how much of the shot clock you use). If you have a lead that is starting to dwindle, you don't want to allow an opposing team to totally grab the momentum by wasting a possession and taking a quick shot... It also doesn't hurt just to burn some clock in that situation. You don't want steamrolled. Value each possession and understand the game situation. I don't think we always do a good job of that.

        ...and play defense....
        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

        ------

        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

        -John Wooden

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: When will jim O'brien be held accountable?

          Originally posted by JGray View Post
          Larry Bird.
          That would make sense but is Bird capable to handle both positions right now this early in career as a GM? I say NO!

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: When will jim O'brien be held accountable?

            Originally posted by JGray View Post
            Larry Bird.

            I'd love to see Bird have to coach the team he has assembled... just like Zeke had to with the Knicks! We all know how that turned out.


            For those that have forgotten or don't know, Bird basically let Carlisle coach the offense and Dick Harter coach the defense. Bird said numerous times over the years they did the coaching. He was successful as a coach because of it.

            Bird will never coach again, and my guess is after his GM days with the Pacers are done he'll never be a GM again either.
            Last edited by Justin Tyme; 01-01-2009, 06:34 PM.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: When will jim O'brien be held accountable?

              I am considering a in depth post about why I think JOB is a good coach - and I still might get around to it. Really though I think this is all I need to say. O'Brien is the one who basically cut and got rid of Glenn Robinson while in Philly - he pretty much ended his career. I don't think anything more needs to be said.

              Really though the fact that JOB is the primary reason JT isn't playing this season - that is all the evidence I need that O'Brien is an excellent coach. Coach will always have a special place in my heart for ushering Jamaal out the door.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: When will jim O'brien be held accountable?

                UB,

                I generally agree with you on most things Pacers (no proof here yet due to my short tenure as a posting member) based on my longtime reading of your postings when I came here as a lurker for years. Respectfully, I would submit the following for consideration:

                What about the legions of season ticketholders who demanded of the Pacers that both JO and JT had to go no matter what during focus groups, complaints to ticket reps, and negotiating ticket deals for this season that went on prior to the end of last season? Do you really believe that OB is the primary reason that JT is not playing? There is a remarkable similarity (on the court) between the late game offensive play of Jarrett Jack and what we saw from Jamaal not long before he was benched. At times, it works for Jarrett, just like at times it worked for Jamaal. I believe that OB was forced to stop playing JT due to pressure from TPTB, not of his own volition, and that the player who most embodies the same offensive tendencies that Jamaal had is Jack, which is why he is used as our game finishing point guard despite his penchant for making mental mistakes, especially in pressure situations.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: When will jim O'brien be held accountable?

                  Originally posted by Brad8888 View Post
                  UB,

                  What about the legions of season ticketholders who demanded of the Pacers that both JO and JT had to go no matter what during focus groups, complaints to ticket reps, and negotiating ticket deals for this season that went on prior to the end of last season?
                  Do you really believe that OB is the primary reason that JT is not playing?

                  There is a remarkable similarity (on the court) between the late game offensive play of Jarrett Jack and what we saw from Jamaal not long before he was benched. At times, it works for Jarrett, just like at times it worked for Jamaal. I believe that OB was forced to stop playing JT due to pressure from TPTB, not of his own volition, and that the player who most embodies the same offensive tendencies that Jamaal had is Jack, which is why he is used as our game finishing point guard despite his penchant for making mental mistakes, especially in pressure situations.

                  Let me address each of your points -I think O'Brien is the primary reason but certainly not the only rason JT isn't playing. The other reasons being what you site and Bird

                  I can see where you are coming from comparing Jack and Tinsley - however, they are vastly different players. Tinsley has point guard skills, Jack does not. Jack plays defense Jamaal does not. Jack plays hard all the time Jamaal does not. Jack plays hurt, JT does not. They are vastly different players. Also Jack is a backup. - Overall I don't see any simarities between the two

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: When will jim O'brien be held accountable?

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I am considering a in depth post about why I think JOB is a good coach - and I still might get around to it. Really though I think this is all I need to say. O'Brien is the one who basically cut and got rid of Glenn Robinson while in Philly - he pretty much ended his career. I don't think anything more needs to be said.

                    Really though the fact that JOB is the primary reason JT isn't playing this season - that is all the evidence I need that O'Brien is an excellent coach. Coach will always have a special place in my heart for ushering Jamaal out the door.


                    I would truly hope the criteria of being a good coach is more than how JO'B has dealt with Robinson and Tinsley. That's like saying Zeke was a good coach b/c how he handled players by buying them out.

                    The Big Dawg probably thanks O'Brien for his leaving Philly where he went on to be able to be on a championship Spurs team and wears a championship ring.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: When will jim O'brien be held accountable?

                      JOb being the main reason why JT isn't playing? Come on, you really can't believe that.

                      After watching the single worst performance of a player during the PHO game, and then Jamaal starting and playing large mins the two games after, then getting a non-supension suspsion, only to start and play 35mins the next night tells me all I need to know about JOb and his discipline with JT.

                      With Bird cleaning house in regards to other players with discipline problems, or just needing to get out of Indy in general, how you think he didn't pull the plug confuses me.

                      For all the feel good quotes Jim had when he was hired on about earning playing time, and how he wasn't gonna deal with bad behavior on/off the court, he sure hasn't lived up to it. With him playing JT after PHO, with no recourse other than a non-suspension suspension, and finding out JO wasn't practicing, while starting and playing shows he's all talk.

                      If we set up a list for coaches and ranked them, he's definately at the lower end of spectrum.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: When will jim O'brien be held accountable?

                        Good grief.

                        I can't wait for the Pacers to hire a coach that UB doesn't agree with 100% of the time. ( )

                        Just to throw a tangent, here's my ranking of all-time Pacers coaches.

                        1. Slick
                        2. Brownie (not that I liked him, but you can't argue with his success)
                        3. Dr. Jack
                        4. McKinney
                        5. Bo Hill
                        6. Harter/Carlisle (we all know Bird didn't really coach them.)
                        7. O'Brien
                        8. Staverman
                        9. Carlisle, solo
                        10. Versace
                        11. Zeke
                        12. Irvine

                        Come on, this is the organization where Versace is not in the "bottom two". It is easy to throw O'Brien in the middle of the pack when you look at the bottom four or five coaches in team history.

                        O'Brien is neither the problem nor the solution. Which is actually true for a large number of NBA coaches. But some of those guys never get a decent roster (Wittman, Randy) and others are overrated because they've generally had good rosters (Johnson, Avery).
                        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                        And life itself, rushing over me
                        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: When will jim O'brien be held accountable?

                          Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                          Good grief.

                          I can't wait for the Pacers to hire a coach that UB doesn't agree with 100% of the time. ( )

                          Just to throw a tangent, here's my ranking of all-time Pacers coaches.

                          1. Slick
                          2. Brownie (not that I liked him, but you can't argue with his success)
                          3. Dr. Jack
                          4. McKinney
                          5. Bo Hill
                          6. Harter/Carlisle (we all know Bird didn't really coach them.)
                          7. O'Brien
                          8. Staverman
                          9. Carlisle, solo
                          10. Versace
                          11. Zeke
                          12. Irvine

                          Come on, this is the organization where Versace is not in the "bottom two". It is easy to throw O'Brien in the middle of the pack when you look at the bottom four or five coaches in team history.

                          O'Brien is neither the problem nor the solution. Which is actually true for a large number of NBA coaches. But some of those guys never get a decent roster (Wittman, Randy) and others are overrated because they've generally had good rosters (Johnson, Avery).
                          1. Brown
                          2. Slick
                          3. Bird
                          4(tie) Carlisle/Ramsay/Obie
                          7. McKinney
                          8. Bo Hill
                          9. Staverman
                          10. Versace
                          11. Irvine
                          12. Thomas

                          (Irvine never had any talent, but was horrible. Zeke actually destroyed talent.)

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            A piece of my mind

                            I had to get it off my chest. I like JOb and everything, and think he's a decent coach, but i don't know how much more i can take of him being our head coach. I really don't like the idea of firing a coach during the season, but i think that if this team keeps losing games that are so close, then a change is needed on the bench.

                            I really liked Avery Johnson in Dallas. Ever since he was fired, I wanted him to come to indiana. I think his style of play is exciting to watch, and defensive minded. I'm not freaking out here calling for obrien's head, what i'm saying is I think AJ would be a much better fit for this team. Anybody agree?
                            Passion, Pride, Playoffs, Pacers

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: A piece of my mind

                              There's no point, this team is far from being a "contender" regardless of who's coaching. Let Jim finish his job.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: A piece of my mind

                                I agree, im not happy with JOB at all, but we have to think about how long his contract is remaining and how much money he is due? Does anyone know?

                                I also like Avery, im totally for getting him. But I think it all depends on JOB's contract, the Pacers organization isnt going to through money around for coaches. Avery's style would be would be totally different from JOB's. Avery is a defensive minded coach, and JOB is just all over the place
                                "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X