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

What are the Pacers strengths?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #16
    Re: What are the Pacers strengths?

    Jay's post sums it up well. Very eloquent. But I have a question for a lot of the fans here.

    First, let me preface my question by saying that my knowledge of the game pales in comparison to posters like Jay, Peck, UB, etc.. So I'm curious, why didn't a lot of you more knowledgable fans see this season coming after Carlisle was hired and before it started?

    I did. And you know Carlisle did—you know he had to feel like a kid in a candy store coming here. All of the strengths Jay listed—although I would never have been able to articulate them as well as he did—were very apparent to me before anyone on this team even put on a game jersey.

    I know the spectre of last season's collapse loomed heavily here (and still does), and then we lost Brad, but I felt once Carlisle took over, everything that was unique and great about this team was going to be exploited and maximized in a way Isiah never could.

    Also, I never saw the loss of Brad as being a huge factor in the success or failure of this team. I just didn't. Going into this season, I just felt there was something special here.

    Look at the 10 points Jay listed again and ask yourself if these things weren't readily apparent to you before the start of the season. I think you'll find that they were.
    I will happily admit that my pre-season analysis and predictions were wrong. Thank goodness for the "fire" - none of you can go back and read what I said back then. But I'll own up it to it: When Carlisle was hired I raised my prediction to 40-42. I think its safe to say now that the Pacers will exceed 40 wins.

    I've got to make this brief - utilization is really important around here right now. Work > . But here's my re-cap of my off-season analysis of strengths and weaknesses, and where this team proven me wrong.

    This was a team that won 13 of its last 36 (36% winning percentage) to finish off last year. Some of these strengths were evident, and others were not. But the weaknesses and concerns were much broader.

    Some of you may remember that I was very concerned with chemistry - in particular the chemistry between JO, Ron and Al. JO's leadership and reaching out to Ron, which began over the summer out of the public eye - has been tremendously important in this turnaround. Early in the season, the frontcourt combination of Ron, Al and JO was not an effective unit and its taken some time.

    I thought the late-summer coaching change would mean that Carlisle would still be trying to design the right system even after the regular season started, so I predicted a slow start. Instead, we went 14-2 out of the gate when I thought we'd be waaayy under 0.500 through 15 games.

    We had only seen one dimension of Tinsley's game under Isiah. I've always liked Jamaal but I thought there was no way Rick would ever like him/ play him. But when Jamaal got a chance he showed his game had much more depth than I previously believed. And Rick showed more flexibility in coaching than most thought was possible.

    While Ragner and Peck were b!tc#ing about losing Brad Miller in the trade, I was saying something slightly different. I was okay with Brad walking to Denver or Utah, but I really didn't want to add Pollard to the mix. Thank goodness his stint as the starting center only lasted two games.

    I expected at least one or two trades this season once Bird got his hands around the team - with a glut of forwards and some chemistry problems, I thought some guys would be playing with one foot out-the-door. Therefore, I expected some adjustment period early in the season when more new players came in. Obviously this didn't happen.

    Point-by-point:

    (1) Jermaine O'Neal's consistent post dominance at both ends of the court.
    I knew he was great, but he's elevated himself to pretty elite status this season.

    (2) A coaching staff that has installed a system to maximize the strenghts of our roster. Our weaknesses, and we have plenty, are only occasionally exploited in ways that cause us to lose games.
    I knew the coaching would be better (how could it be worse?) But Rick had only been one place as a head coach and I don't think anybody knew just how good he was at designing a system around his players. It was popular wisdom (although obviously wrong) to believe Rick was going to install the exact same system here as he used in Detroit - because that's what other so-called "great" coaches like Brownie, Riley, Jackson and my man JVG have done. I usually think the role of a coach in the NBA is overstated - its a players game. But Rick has been nearly flawless this year.

    (3) JO and Ron continue to evolve as two of the best young clutch-time performers. Both players can create opportunities at both ends of the court.
    JO was very clutch last seaon. Remember, he was second to Chauncey Billups in game-tying or lead-changing shots in the last two minutes. Ron occasionally demonstrated this, but not consistently - especially since he couldn't be counted on to be available at the end (or even beginning) of games.

    (4) Ron Arest and Al Harrington never quit at the forward position. Both players are equally effective at offense and defense.
    Of course I knew this. The issue was whether either player could do this effectively in a "team" environment. I know some posters think the jury is still out regarding Al, but nine months ago this was a legit concern regarding Artest, too. Admittedly, a big factor in this concern was the lack-of-a-system from the previous regime, especially at the defensive end. I was curious as to how Artest would react to a defense that was more of a system than Isiah's "each man for himself" idea.

    (5) Larry Bird and Rick Carlisle bring a no-nonsense, disciplined approach to team basketball.
    Again, this was obvious. But how this team, which could only be regarded as woefully immature, would respond was an unknown. I expected this to be a rockier adjustment than it really was - and there was still plenty of b!tc#ing from the players in November and December before Tinsley returned to the lineup. On the other hand, Ron was taught his lesson in the first preseason game and he responded to this like a mature man.

    (6) Jamaal Tinsely's maturity and court vision have improved to complement his outstanding court game, instead of distract from it.
    I suppose if I watched more semi-pro games involving Iowa State, I might have known this. But I didn't.

    (7) In a pinch, Reggie can still deliver.
    He'd never really been hurt before. There were some legitimate questions as to whether he could recover enough at his age to still be a difference maker from time-to-time. And there were legit questions about how many minutes would he be able to handle this season without breaking down - especially since the backup SG position was very unclear over the summer.

    (8) Our role players (Foster, Fred, Croshere) understand what they need to do to help the team. Because of our system (see #2 above) our key players put them in situations to perform their roles instead of situations to expose thier weaknesses.
    My response here is the same as #2 above.

    (9) Our defensive intensity has helped us assemble the best road record in the league. We're as competitive on the road as we are at home.
    Ditto.

    (10) Our fans are very hungry for some playoff success after a long drought. Conseco Fieldhouse will provide a significant home court advantage once this team proves it can get past the first round.
    I don't think there's any question about this one. All NBA arenas are quiet during the regular season. I can't wait to be in there for some playoff games that matter this spring.



    So yes, some of these things were obvious, but others became more obvious to me as I learned more about our coach and learned some things about some of our younger players like Jamaal.
    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

    • #17
      Re: What are the Pacers strengths?


      While Ragner and Peck were b!tc#ing about losing Brad Miller in the trade, I was saying something slightly different. I was okay with Brad walking to Denver or Utah, but I really didn't want to add Pollard to the mix. Thank goodness his stint as the starting center only lasted two games.
      I also would have prefered to let him walk over getting Pollard. Actually of the three options open to the Pacers they chose the worst option here.

      I did not really "go nuts" over the Brad deal untill people started saying the Pollard would make us forget about Brad. (and dont try to deny that people said that) Or that he would not have been worth the 70 million he got. Brad stated that he would not have shoped at all had the Pacers simply made him an offer. He was offered less money than the 70 mill by Denver and Utah and he clearly stated then that he would take that or less to stay with the Pacers.

      The thing that p!ssed me off the most was not that we lost Brad it was the revisions in here after the fact.

      Comment

      • #18
        Re: What are the Pacers strengths?


        I'm a big Brad Miller fan, but you are ignoring some facts.

        Here are ALL his numbers during that series, and the averages (I'm going with points, rebounds, assists):

        Game 1: 12pts, 8rbs, 6ast
        Game 2: 10pts, 4rbs, 5ast
        Game 3: 7pts, 9rbs, 2ast
        Game 4: 21pts, 9rbs, 2ast
        Game 5: 0pts, 1rb, 0ast
        Game 6: 2pts, 2rb, 0ast

        Averages: 8.7pts, 5.5rbs, 2.5ast
        I was not trying to ignore any facts. I was using two games that we lost to point out that we would have won those games today with that scoring and the D we play now.

        Brad re injured his foot in game 5 and only played 11 minutes. He was efective the first 4 games of the series. In game six he only played for 14 minutes and he was very hampered by the injury.

        So for the games before re injuring his foot he played very well.

        Game 1 3 of 6 from the feild 6 of 8 from the line 8 rebounds and SIX assists with 12 points in 26 minutes

        Game 2 5 of 8 from the feild only 4 rebounds 5 assists and 2 steals in 29 minutes.

        This is the game that Isiah actually played Cro at center and he got 8 rebounds.

        Game 3 2 of 7 from the feild 3 of 4 from the line 9 rebounds in 20 minutes.

        Game 4 Played 36 minutes in this game was 8 of 13 from the feild 5 of 8 from the line with 9 rebounds and 21 points.

        How is that inefective? He was when he was injured but so was Reggie. We lost because of Isiah not because of Brad.
        Agreed. I totally forgot that he re-injured the foot in the series.

        Comment

        • #19
          Re: What are the Pacers strengths?

          I did not really "go nuts" over the Brad deal untill people started saying the Pollard would make us forget about Brad. (and dont try to deny that people said that)
          At one point in the summer or preseason, I said "Pollard is this era's G. Dreiling or S. Gray" and I got chewed up for it. "He'll be good enough in the center-deprived East." was the popular opinion ed:
          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

          • #20
            Re: What are the Pacers strengths?


            While Ragner and Peck were b!tc#ing about losing Brad Miller in the trade, I was saying something slightly different. I was okay with Brad walking to Denver or Utah, but I really didn't want to add Pollard to the mix. Thank goodness his stint as the starting center only lasted two games.
            I also would have prefered to let him walk over getting Pollard. Actually of the three options open to the Pacers they chose the worst option here.

            I did not really "go nuts" over the Brad deal untill people started saying the Pollard would make us forget about Brad. (and dont try to deny that people said that) Or that he would not have been worth the 70 million he got. Brad stated that he would not have shoped at all had the Pacers simply made him an offer. He was offered less money than the 70 mill by Denver and Utah and he clearly stated then that he would take that or less to stay with the Pacers.

            The thing that p!ssed me off the most was not that we lost Brad it was the revisions in here after the fact.


            I feel like we're in the Twilight Zone here. We keep going down different paths, but keep winding up in the same place.

            Comment

            • #21
              Re: What are the Pacers strengths?


              So I'm curious, why didn't a lot of you more knowledgable fans see this season coming after Carlisle was hired and before it started?
              A lot of us saw the Pacers being able to play this well by this point of the season. What was harder to imagine was that they would START OFF playing this well, and the Carlisle system would be effective IMMEDIATELY with NO adjustment period.

              I predicted about 50 wins, by stating that they would start off going 21-20 or so while they learned the system in the 1st half and then really crank and go 31-10 or so in the second half.

              Well, that 31-10 pace seems to be about right, but for BOTH halves.

              62-20 would be incredible, but reflects playing as well from start-to-finish as I and quite a few others EXPECTED them to play at the finish.
              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

              Comment

              • #22
                Re: What are the Pacers strengths?


                While Ragner and Peck were b!tc#ing about losing Brad Miller in the trade, I was saying something slightly different. I was okay with Brad walking to Denver or Utah, but I really didn't want to add Pollard to the mix. Thank goodness his stint as the starting center only lasted two games.
                I also would have prefered to let him walk over getting Pollard. Actually of the three options open to the Pacers they chose the worst option here.

                I did not really "go nuts" over the Brad deal untill people started saying the Pollard would make us forget about Brad. (and dont try to deny that people said that) Or that he would not have been worth the 70 million he got. Brad stated that he would not have shoped at all had the Pacers simply made him an offer. He was offered less money than the 70 mill by Denver and Utah and he clearly stated then that he would take that or less to stay with the Pacers.

                The thing that p!ssed me off the most was not that we lost Brad it was the revisions in here after the fact.


                I feel like we're in the Twilight Zone here. We keep going down different paths, but keep winding up in the same place.
                btown, what's the number here? But this is also why I tend to stay out of this particular conversation because I didn't mind subtracting Brad.

                Anyone object if we get back on topic?
                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

                • #23
                  Re: What are the Pacers strengths?

                  I will add that Brad Millerrrrrrrrrr ...no wait.... that wasn't what I was going to say. I got sidetracked

                  Seriously, what I want to add is how well Carlisle manages the games. Besides his use of TO's he is consistent with his bench. You can argue that might make a game here or there harder to win... or arguable why we lost it. OTOH, IMHO this consistency is for the long haul and long term health of the team. Every game is not a playoff game. Throwing the kitchen sink at a meaningless midseason game hoping to pull out one lone win is sacrficing the longer term goals.

                  I think it is far better the players know their roles and what is expected. If they got torched in a game it is something they and the coaching staff can learn from and adjust accordingly WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK of the long term plans.

                  Isiah IMO tried to turn every game into a chess match. Many times he outguessed himself. I'm sure he also planted seeds of doubt in players' minds. Did Isiah ever really try to make the other team adjust to what the Pacers' were doing or did he always seem to be countering their moves?

                  -Bball
                  I knew Isiah was awful and everything, but I've got two more points:

                  (1) Last summer, even though I thought he had clearly earned the title "Worst Coach in Pacers history", I didn't realize just how horrible he was, because:

                  (2) Rick has had great success by doing the exact opposite of everything Isiah did. "The Quick" vs. a structured offense. True man-to-man defense with no "help" structure vs. team defense. Stream of consciousness substitutions vs. fairly set rotations. Makes excuses for the team vs. requires discipline from the players. The "chess match" as bball called it vs. forcing opponents adjust to our gameplan. Tries to make every player a "complete" player vs. defining each player's role. Etc.

                  Its almost like every time Rick has to make a decision, he thinks to himself "What would Isiah do?" Then he picks the exact opposite and it works.
                  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

                  • #24
                    Re: What are the Pacers strengths?

                    First, let me preface my question by saying that my knowledge of the game pales in comparison to posters like Jay, Peck, UB, etc.. So I'm curious, why didn't a lot of you more knowledgable fans see this season coming after Carlisle was hired and before it started?

                    I predicted before ther season started that the Pacers would win 50 games. I figured that the Pacers might be .500 midway through January, after that very tough stretch in early January. But when they were 14-2, I upgraded my prediction to 57 wins as it was obvious that we had something special here.

                    The day Isiah was fired and it was 99.9% sure that Carlisle was going to be the next coach was the best day for the Pacers franchise since the Jalen Rose for Artest trade.

                    Comment

                    • #25
                      Re: What are the Pacers strengths?

                      strength is that the 2004 Pacers are one of the greatest teams this city has ever had, and they had alot of em.

                      1 Reggie Miller. no need to say anything
                      2. JO best big man post player in the EAST
                      3. Ron Artest. Best defender at his position in the game, and a great powerdriver, heart and soul of the Ps
                      4. Al Harrington is Zack Randolf with a great team, if he was the focal point of the offense like Zack is (portlands franchise player) he would put up the same type of #s
                      5. Jonathan Bender, makes our bench arguably the most talented bench in basketball
                      6. Jamaal Tinsley, turning into a premier PG this year. Next year he will be talked about as one of the best
                      7. Fred Jones, more amazing bench talent. very crucial to the playoffs with his off the dribble ability
                      8. Jeff Foster, Jeff is the man, hustles like Artest, can do a great job on big SFs and PFs
                      9 Croshere, our worst player in the rotation is a damn fine player, great bench
                      9 pollard, well, 6 fouls for shaq if we meet them in the finals

                      this all adds up to a legendary team, and the begining of the Pacers Dynasty. Cause these guys arent going anywhere for a while.

                      oh ya forgot the coach too Ricks done a great job with these guys gettin em focused throughout the season, I thought the las vegas trip was a good idea too. I see how Rick has given more freedom to Tinsley in making streetball plays happen when the chance arrives before going into the ol run in circles bit with reggie screens and JO post pass thing, what do they call that play?

                      So does this mean im still in the happy happy sunshine club?

                      Comment

                      • #26
                        Re: What are the Pacers strengths?

                        I will add that Brad Millerrrrrrrrrr ...no wait.... that wasn't what I was going to say. I got sidetracked

                        Seriously, what I want to add is how well Carlisle manages the games. Besides his use of TO's he is consistent with his bench. You can argue that might make a game here or there harder to win... or arguable why we lost it. OTOH, IMHO this consistency is for the long haul and long term health of the team. Every game is not a playoff game. Throwing the kitchen sink at a meaningless midseason game hoping to pull out one lone win is sacrficing the longer term goals.

                        I think it is far better the players know their roles and what is expected. If they got torched in a game it is something they and the coaching staff can learn from and adjust accordingly WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK of the long term plans.

                        Isiah IMO tried to turn every game into a chess match. Many times he outguessed himself. I'm sure he also planted seeds of doubt in players' minds. Did Isiah ever really try to make the other team adjust to what the Pacers' were doing or did he always seem to be countering their moves?

                        -Bball


                        I knew Isiah was awful and everything, but I've got two more points:

                        (1) Last summer, even though I thought he had clearly earned the title "Worst Coach in Pacers history", I didn't realize just how horrible he was, because:

                        (2) Rick has had great success by doing the exact opposite of everything Isiah did. "The Quick" vs. a structured offense. True man-to-man defense with no "help" structure vs. team defense. Stream of consciousness substitutions vs. fairly set rotations. Makes excuses for the team vs. requires discipline from the players. The "chess match" as bball called it vs. forcing opponents adjust to our gameplan. Tries to make every player a "complete" player vs. defining each player's role. Etc.

                        Its almost like every time Rick has to make a decision, he thinks to himself "What would Isiah do?" Then he picks the exact opposite and it works.



                        I don't have much to add to these two posts, except to say they are both brilliant.

                        Rick should be ashamed for making Isiah look bad because he truly has.

                        Comment

                        • #27
                          Re: What are the Pacers strengths?

                          Rick has had great success by doing the exact opposite of everything Isiah did. "The Quick" vs. a structured offense. True man-to-man defense with no "help" structure vs. team defense. Stream of consciousness substitutions vs. fairly set rotations. Makes excuses for the team vs. requires discipline from the players. The "chess match" as bball called it vs. forcing opponents adjust to our gameplan. Tries to make every player a "complete" player vs. defining each player's role.

                          Bravo. Best summation I've read to date of the differences between Rick and Isiah (this year vs. last year).

                          Comment

                          • #28
                            Re: What are the Pacers strengths?

                            BUMP.


                            Certain people today are compaining, and I'm not saying they aren't somewhat justified in doing so... about the negativity around here.

                            But this thread, which clearly is specifically for the purpose of saying nice things about the Pacers, has been completely ignored all week and with the exception of Burt, most of the posts have come from the "The Sky is Falling" camp or a few posters that I haven't figured out if they belong to either "camp."

                            C'mon, FW, Hardrive7, NY, and others: Tell us some more strengths. We've got some smart posters who are on the Sunshine Brigade. Here's your opporunity to do something about it - be positive about the Pacers instead of just complaining about the negativity. If I, the worry-wart, could probably come up with ten more then there's plenty of opportunities to expand this thread and still not turn this place into "HomersDigest".
                            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

                            • #29
                              Re: What are the Pacers strengths?

                              I'm not exactly on the sunshine brigade, but I am NOT a negative person. I think this is a very special team that we have here, and we have a chance to do something real good in the playoffs. We are 48-16 for a reason.

                              I think the biggest strength this year is that we win ALL TYPES of games. We win the blowouts, the close ones, the come from behinds. We just find ways to win. I think that says a lot about this team and how mature it is. No matter the situation. On the road, at home, against bad teams, against good teams.

                              This is why we go to the finals.
                              Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X