The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

    I voted for Slick for the same reason that I'd vote for Wilt at the greatest center of all time. I'm old enough to remember the aba but never went to a game and they were seldom televised where I lived so I can't vote for him from personal memory but his record speaks for itself.
    For the NBA era I'd give it to Larry Bird. I realize that he had Carlisle but for that I just credit him to for being smart enough to surround himself with good people.
    Larry Bird qouted March 25th. 2015:

    Bird: I wanted to keep our group together because in the summer, if David and Roy opt out, we're back to zero, really. We don't have that much, so you leave your options open. If we did make a trade, I didn't want to take on a lot of contracts -- because that's what usually happens. Plus, I liked my guys. They're playing well. If we keep the core together and Paul comes back healthy, we'll be right back to where we were.


    • #17
      Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

      Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
      You've honestly become a troll with a lot of this JOB stuff.
      It was a joke.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!


      • #18
        I'm too young to remember the ABA, the Coliseum, or the telethon, and my only memories of him involve listening to the radio, but I think Slick deserves this distinction. I don't understand the total dismissal of anything that happened in the ABA - a tendency on the part of casual fans and media to immediately discredit a very real and storied history.


        • #19
          Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

          Brown by a wide margin. He was a master. Wow was he great


          • #20
            Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

            I was too young to remember Slick all that well. Larry Brown was the best coach I have ever seen in Indy. His coaching actually made a positive difference. I would put Rick behind him and Larry third. Not sure where Slick would rank, but he's sure getting a lot of votes.
            Lance is finally home. Whether he becomes our starting PG or he's 6th man, he's getting big minutes and he's here to stay. #llortontnia


            • #21
              Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

              Even though I never saw him coach I voted for Slicky Bobby... He's the only Pacers coach who earned a trip to the Hall of Fame based mainly on his time coaching the Pacers...

              Rick would be 2nd for me...

              Bird isn't even in consideration from me ever since I heard second hand from JO that Reggie felt like the vets ran that team with Larry being little more than a figure head...
              Last edited by J7F; 08-23-2012, 11:58 PM.
              Nothing in life worth having comes easy.


              • #22
                Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                I can't speak to have seen him, but for 3 ABA championships, I'll vote Slick.

                If we included work outside the Pacers I'd give it to Brown though.


                • #23
                  Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                  Larry Brown set the stage for most of a decade of great Pacer basketball. Without Larry Brown I'm not sure what the team would've looked like in the 90's or how much Brown's impact seasoned Reggie's game. Just as Jonathon Bender should thank Donnie Walsh every day for his bank account, Donnie Walsh should thank Larry Brown for his prolonged career and reputation.
                  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, thatís teamwork."

                  -John Wooden


                  • #24
                    Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                    I think Larry Brown is widely regarded as the best in-game coach ever to coach in the NBA. That is what I hear all the time from many experts. Brown has some negatives - the biggest is that he wears out his welcome by the way he drives his players - they eventually tune him out. I contend he didn't leave all of his coaching jobs because he got restless, but because he could tell the players were starting to tune him out. So he had a short self-life. Maybe his personality is a little different - people who know him well, including Donnie Walsh, always said Larry is only happy when he is miserable.

                    Another negative is he runs hot and cold on players - he wants to trade players on a whim. Walsh also mentioned this (in a nicer way) several times. So you never want him being in control of personel. Also, Brown is by nature a negative guy, he never thinks his teams are good enough, never satisfied and he wants each player to b play perfectly. He'll stop practice over and over again if a player makes a mistake.

                    Another thing about Larry is he wasn't much of a film watcher himself. Supposedly he could watch a play live and remember every single thing that happened down to every detail.

                    He coached his team to be the best it could be. He didn't coach his team to "beat the other team" In many ways he is almost exact oppsite to Carlisle.

                    Granted these are generalities:

                    1) Carlisle sees his players as they are, puts them in positions to succeed, plays to each players strengths and coaches his team to beat the other team
                    2) Larry Brown teaches his players to be what they can become, teaches them to play the game, teaches them to be better at things they aren't good at.

                    Example - Carlisle and Brown both coached Ben Wallace. Carlisle asked Ben to rebound and defend - he never worried about getting him to be part of the offense. Brown asked Ben to expand his game, get better offensively, forced him to be part of the scoring offense.

                    Which approach is correct? Carlisle approach is more typical for NBA coaches.

                    I think the different approaches is why Brown's teams generally started seasons very slow, because he spent training camp trying to get the players better. Carlisle was trying to get the team ready to beat the opponents.

                    Another thing about Brown, supposedly he put in new offensive plays all the time as the season went along - not to suggest other coaches don't, but Brown much more often.

                    Back in Brown's first season here, if you watch how the Pacers developed from the first month to the last - it was remarkable how the team didn't look anything like it did earlier. That single season was the best single season coaching job I have ever seen.
                    Last edited by Unclebuck; 08-24-2012, 09:00 AM.


                    • #25
                      Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                      I have to go with Bird because I'm too young for Slick and the Bird coaching years are my most fond as a Pacer fan.

                      Jackson, Rose, Miller, Davis, Mckey, Mullin, Smits. That was a nice team and the first time I got really familier with a Pacer team, so that team definitely sits in an important spot in my heart! It also helps that they made it to the Finals!


                      • #26
                        Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                        I'd probably go with Slick Leonard, with Larry Bird in second place (due to the fact the longevity wasn't there).


                        • #27
                          Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                          If we didn't have Larry Brown's fourth season, which is also known as The Season We Do Not Discuss, I think he'd be near-unanimous at the top of this poll.

                          For three seasons I absolutely loved him as the Pacers coach.

                          Over my half-season package that final season, I sat in MSA and watched the Pacers go 4-18 or something awful like that. Just maddening how bad those of us on that half of the ticket split had it.
                          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


                          • #28
                            Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                            Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                            If we didn't have Larry Brown's fourth season, which is also known as The Season We Do Not Discuss, I think he'd be near-unanimous at the top of this poll.
                            I dunno, he'd still be fighting uphill battle against Slick's 3 ABA championships. It would definitely be even closer in an already tight race, though.

                            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                            Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...


                            • #29
                              Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                              I cannot pick Slick because I never saw him coach - so how would I know. So I use the same principle as I do with players. Unless I watched them I cannot really comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                                I think quite a few people need to check the rafters the next time they're at the Bank.

                                To mirror my JOB/Isiah argument, Larry Brown may very well be the better coach, but Slick did a much better job coaching the Pacers.

                                As for the others in the poll, all I know is Bird and Carlisle were wildly outcoached by George Karl (with a major scouting assist from Rick Majerus) in the 1st round of the 2000 playoffs. Just embarrassing how outcoached we were. It took Reggie putting on a freaking superhero costume to even get us to game 5, let alone Travis' last shot (and yes, Dale's monster rebound assist.) It's really something to think how different the last 12 years would be if that shot hadn't gone in.

                                On that alone, it's a two man race as far as I'm concerned. And looking at the results, it's an easy choice to me.
                                Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!