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

Coach Knockout Finals!

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

  • Coach Knockout Finals!

    I am shocked that Brown lost in the last round. I did not see that happening at all. Now we are down to Vogel and Carlisle. I have no idea what to expect at all. Let the madness begin!

    Rick Carlisle
    Overall: 181-147
    Playoff Record: 18-17

    2003-04: 61-21 1st in East, reached Conference Finals; 10-6 in Playoffs
    2004-05: 44-38 6th (out of 15) in East, reached Conference Semi-Finals; 6-7 in Playoffs
    2005-06: 41-41 6th (out of 15) in East; 2-4 in Playoffs
    2006-07: 35-47 9th (out of 15) in East



    Frank Vogel
    Overall: 197-139
    Playoff Record: 28-26

    2010-11: 20-18 8th in East; 1-4 in Playoffs
    2011-12: 42-24 3rd in East, reached Conference Semi-Finals; 6-5 in Playoffs
    2012-13: 49-32 3rd in East, reached Conference Finals; 11-8 in Playoffs
    2013-14: 56-26 1st in East, reached Conference Finals; 10-9 in Playoffs
    2014-15: 30-39
    49
    Rick Carlisle
    65.31%
    32
    Frank Vogel
    34.69%
    17

    The poll is expired.



    "Pacers will win 50 games this season" 07-16-2015
    "Ian will average 10-10 this season" 10-21-15

  • #2
    Re: Coach Knockout Finals!

    I think Rick Carlisle is the better Coach of the 2, but I voted him out based on the record as a Pacer head Coach. Rick's teams got worse every year and he had lost them completely by the end of his career here. Most if not all of that was due to the players more than the Coach, but the numbers don't lie. Vogel for #1 or 2 after Slick!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Coach Knockout Finals!

      Originally posted by Cousy47 View Post
      I think Rick Carlisle is the better Coach of the 2, but I voted him out based on the record as a Pacer head Coach. Rick's teams got worse every year and he had lost them completely by the end of his career here. Most if not all of that was due to the players more than the Coach, but the numbers don't lie. Vogel for #1 or 2 after Slick!
      Yeah, the numbers certainly paint that picture, but it's really hard for me to fault Rick too much for the implosion of those Pacer teams he coached. The Zen Master himself couldn't have corralled that group of personalities.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Coach Knockout Finals!

        Rick obviously has a better overall coach resume, but comparing the two's time as head coach with the Pacers, I have to eliminate Carlisle.
        "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

        ----------------- Reggie Miller

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Coach Knockout Finals!

          How either of these coaches are ranked above Bird and Brown just boggles the mind.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Coach Knockout Finals!

            I'm voting JO out!
            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


            • #7
              Re: Coach Knockout Finals!

              I think Carlisle's a better coach by a fairly significant margin, but based strictly on their time here I honestly flipped a coin. Obviously this season we'll learn way more about Frank than we ever have so things could easily change.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Coach Knockout Finals!

                On a serious note, how do you knock Bird, Carlisle, Vogel, or Brown out? It's easy to think of a reason for the sake of argument, but there is always a but that can be thrown into that argument.

                Bird arguably was a figurehead. But he also had the good sense to delegate and he also dictated the sideline demeanor which always spills over into the play on the court (can someone get Crean to study this?). And whatever Bird employed as that 'figurehead' or whatever he did, it worked. He owns the team's only Finals appearance. That alone should earn him an instant 'save'....

                Meanwhile, Vogel arguably had the good fortune of taking over a fairly complete team that had been beaten down by a coach who not only taught a system where his defense was 180% counter to his offensive philosophy yet seemed to have the people skills of an alligator. And Vogel hasn't shown he could put together a consistent bench and starting combo or a solid offense with a contending team. And then there was the mid season swoon that he had no answer for. BUT he still got the team to 2 ECF's and did a solid job coaching last year under trying circumstances. And look at his record. He might not have the resume of the others overall but he's got a darned fine one of his own that is still being written. How do you argue with that? And then throw in, he's our current coach and it's the offseason. Hard to find fault in him now at all!

                Or Carlisle. His name is on the 61 win banner hanging in the Fieldhouse. Had Dumars not snookered us at the trade deadline and leap-frogged us we might be talking the Pacers' first NBA Championship under Carlisle. He did a fantastic job during the brawl year under very trying circumstances. The team still made the playoffs and Reggie went out as the best player on the floor. The "but" in this case is the following season when the wheels came off. But considering the trash he was left to deal with... with rumors of substance abuse, diva-ism, Artest's trade demand, the Dunn and Murph combo, the multiheaded monster in the front office... how do you fault Carlisle? Especially when all he did was take his walking papers and go get an NBA championship on his resume.

                And then there is Brown. Arguably, and IMO, the most important coach in the modern era. Brown established a winning attitude and turned the Pacers into a team expected to contend. The but in his case is his last year. But before that, we had real coaching. We played the right way. A culture was established that ran from team to fans. It's tentacles still reach to this day. Even after the brawl and some trash the fans still recovered. The team as a whole was not known as the sad sacks of the late 70's and 80's nor were the known as the brawl team too long. When we reset, we reset more to the Brown era attitude. Brown was always a coach that burned bright but out quickly. "Out of Town Brown" was a well-earned nickname. But he gets all my respect for what he did with this franchise. He was the right man at the right time. His hire and work probably saved Donnie Walsh's job. But I won't hold that against him...

                So no, I won't be selecting anyone.... I can't do it...

                Note: Chicago J, I know there is no 61 win banner with Carlisle's name on it in the fieldhouse. I just added that part for you!
                Last edited by Bball; 08-11-2015, 11:08 PM.
                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


                • #9
                  Re: Coach Knockout Finals!

                  Originally posted by Bball View Post
                  Note: Chicago J, I know there is no 61 win banner with Carlisle's name on it in the fieldhouse. I just added that part for you!
                  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


                  • #10
                    Re: Coach Knockout Finals!

                    So...the guy leading the final is the guy 1/2 of PD wanted fired 15 months ago. Makes sense....

                    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Coach Knockout Finals!

                      Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                      So...the guy leading the final is the guy 1/2 of PD wanted fired 15 months ago. Makes sense....
                      only because we couldn't vote for the Pistons

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Coach Knockout Finals!

                        Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                        only because we couldn't vote for the Pistons
                        Are you sure? I could have a sworn people may have voted for larry brown by accident...

                        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Coach Knockout Finals!

                          Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                          Are you sure? I could have a sworn people may have voted for larry brown by accident...
                          Carlisle does have the Piston stink on him, could bias some folks

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Coach Knockout Finals!

                            ...but larry brown doesn't?

                            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Coach Knockout Finals!

                              obviously, but he's not in the finals. plus he called the TO for Reggie's final applause and that was pretty cool.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X