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

Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

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

  • Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

    I put the words the best in quotes, because if he isn't the best he is in the top 2 or 3.

    http://www.indystar.com/articles/8/025639-4458-116.html


    Question: Seven of the Pacers players, to the best of my knowledge, have never played for any other NBA team. Jonathan Bender, Austin Croshere, Jeff Foster, Al Harrington, Fred Jones, Reggie Miller and Jamaal Tinsley. That's over half of the Pacers' roster.

    I checked out a couple of other teams' rosters and none of them came close to matching the Pacers on this statistic. It seems the Pacers organization has a strong desire to develop their pool of talent and avoids trading off their players as much as possible.

    One would think that this probably helps create a better atmosphere amongst the players and management. Is this unusual in the NBA? (Bob from Indianapolis)


    Answer: These days it is. There's a constant drum beat for change, originating with fans as well as talk show and internet media types. Trade rumors have become a year-round thing. But stability usually wins.

    Chemistry obviously is important in basketball, and Donnie Walsh has shown the ability to ignore the cries for change and let it develop. People wanted him to trade Rik Smits early in his career. They wanted him to break up the Pacers after they lost to the Knicks in the 1999 playoffs. They wanted a lot of changes during Isiah Thomas' first two seasons as coach, but he held firm except for the trade with Chicago that brought the center they lacked. They wanted him to get rid of Ron Artest. I could go on.

    I look around the league and see teams with losing records that have as much or almost as much talent as the Pacers. But they lack a winning culture and chemistry. Most teams simply don't have the patience or strength to stand up to the pleas for change. Chicago, for example. It once had Brad Miller, Elton Brand and Ron Artest on its roster. What it didn't have was the foresight or patience to let them develop.

  • #2
    Re: Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

    Damn straight. People give up on players and teams too easily, and it's good to have someone in charge who's got the patience to let things work. And what's better, he knows when it really is time to let someone go [The Davis boys, Jax, Rose & Best]
    Official Member of the Anti-Alliteration Association

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

      Walsh is very good at what he does, but not great.

      When we win an NBA championship, I'll put Donnie at the top of the list. But not until.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

        Walsh is very good at what he does, but not great.

        When we win an NBA championship, I'll put Donnie at the top of the list. But not until.

        So by that rationale, Reggie, Karl Malone, Charles Barclay, Hank Aaron, etc. aren't/weren't great players because they never won championships.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

          Walsh is very good at what he does, but not great.

          When we win an NBA championship, I'll put Donnie at the top of the list. But not until.

          So by that rationale, Reggie, Karl Malone, Charles Barclay, Hank Aaron, etc. aren't/weren't great players because they never won championships.
          It is the job of players to play.

          It is the job of GM's to build teams.

          So, yes, if a GM doesn't have at least one championship under his belt in a long career, I hardly think he can be termed the best.

          He can still be in the Hall of Fame. But the best in the biz, he ain't.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

            So, yes, if a GM doesn't have at least one championship under his belt in a long career, I hardly think he can be termed the best.

            He can still be in the Hall of Fame. But the best in the biz, he ain't.

            You said Walsh was very good, but not great. No one said anything about being "the best."

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

              Walsh is very good at what he does, but not great.

              When we win an NBA championship, I'll put Donnie at the top of the list. But not until.

              So by that rationale, Reggie, Karl Malone, Charles Barclay, Hank Aaron, etc. aren't/weren't great players because they never won championships.
              It is the job of players to play.

              It is the job of GM's to build teams.

              So, yes, if a GM doesn't have at least one championship under his belt in a long career, I hardly think he can be termed the best.

              He can still be in the Hall of Fame. But the best in the biz, he ain't.
              Walshi is one of the top 3 GMs in the NBA, if not the best. To say otherwise is complete ignorance.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

                Walsh is very good at what he does, but not great.

                When we win an NBA championship, I'll put Donnie at the top of the list. But not until.

                So by that rationale, Reggie, Karl Malone, Charles Barclay, Hank Aaron, etc. aren't/weren't great players because they never won championships.
                It is the job of players to play.

                It is the job of GM's to build teams.

                So, yes, if a GM doesn't have at least one championship under his belt in a long career, I hardly think he can be termed the best.

                He can still be in the Hall of Fame. But the best in the biz, he ain't.
                Walshi is one of the top 3 GMs in the NBA, if not the best. To say otherwise is complete ignorance.
                Donnie's good but he's not perfect.

                No championships in the East among the GM's, so he ranks at the top with me there.

                But, if you want me to say he's better than West in the West, forget about it until the Pacers wear rings.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

                  So, yes, if a GM doesn't have at least one championship under his belt in a long career, I hardly think he can be termed the best.

                  He can still be in the Hall of Fame. But the best in the biz, he ain't.
                  You said Walsh was very good, but not great. No one said anything about being "the best."
                  Ah, but this thread is titled,

                  Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best".

                  And UB expanded this in his very first sentence...

                  I put the words the best in quotes, because if he isn't the best he is in the top 2 or 3.
                  I'll agree he's in the top two or three. But so far he's proven to be better at consistently putting the Pacers in the upper echelon of the East (and occasionally the entire league) every year but he still hasn't proven that he can assemble a Champion. Hey, as those of us that tried our best to be Pacers fans in the 80s can attest to: I'll take DW and his consistency over that debacle any day of the week. But I still wonder if he's got it in him to get us over the hump.
                  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: Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

                    Geoff Petrie and Jerry West rank ahead of DW in my book.

                    West needs no explanation.

                    But Petri in eight years has taken the Kings from the pits to the pinnacle. I like their chances of winning it all, better than anyone else's including ours. Not saying we, or someone else, can't beat them. Just saying they look to be extremely competitive.

                    Petrie traded an aging Mitch Richmond for Chris Webber. He acquired Bibby, Christie, Bobby Jackson, Vlade and Brad Miller. And drafted Peja.

                    Hard to argue with Petrie's volumn of work in the first eight years. Brad Miller's loss may not have affected the ranking of DW for Pacers fans, but the deal has sure elevated the status of Petri in the rankings for SacTown fans.

                    San Antonio's management has also been excellent. Yes, they got really lucky with no-brainer first overall picks Robinson and Duncan. Still SA has managed their finances extremely well and won a couple of titles. Plus they are poised to compete for another title every year for the forseeable future because of their current talent and cap space.

                    Kiki Vendeweghe also deserves props in his brief tenure. He completely turned around the Denver situation. Kiki appears to be a great judge of talent and an extremely able manager of the cap.

                    Who also can argue with Joe Dumars success in Detroit? He's been very successful so far, but I think maybe he tends to tinker too much, and next year he may not look as brilliant as he does right now. Joe is a gambler and Joe deserves mention in any list of productive GM's. He may yet turn out to be a failure, but he also may end up as a greater GM than player.

                    Jim Paxson of the Cavs will soon get his props. Getting LeBron was part luck, but he's proving he knows how to build a team and manage the cap.

                    Brother John in Chicago, on the other hand, is struggling a bit right now.

                    For those who like this stuff, hoopshype.com has an informative record of transactions involving each GM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

                      I agree Jerry is probably the best in the business.... but it's a bit difficult to compare him and DW....

                      one reason being he was GM for the Lakers....probably the team every superstar would play for if they had a choice...they're a large market team in the brightest of spotlights...not a tough sell when going after star players..... When he took over as GM in '82 the Lakers were already stacked with Magic, Kareem, Worthy & Co.... after their reign was over in the 80's there was a dry spell until Shaq , Kobe & Co. came along.... I'm not trying to diminish his accomplishements...but maybe shedding a little more perspective... when making comparisons.

                      What Memphis is doing is great... and he should get alot of credit for what is going on there... hiring Hubie Brown was genius...and Hubie deserves almost as much credit for getting all that talent on the same page.

                      In the last 24 yrs only 7 different teams have won the NBA championship....its a tough group to break in to.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

                        Jerry is great not just because he was in LA he is an excellent talent scout. He always drafted low but usually got pretty good players with those picks.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

                          ...
                          Chemistry obviously is important in basketball, and Donnie Walsh has shown the ability to ignore the cries for change and let it develop. People wanted him to trade Rik Smits early in his career. They wanted him to break up the Pacers after they lost to the Knicks in the 1999 playoffs. They wanted a lot of changes during Isiah Thomas' first two seasons as coach, but he held firm except for the trade with Chicago that brought the center they lacked. They wanted him to get rid of Ron Artest. I could go on.

                          ...
                          Honesty time fellas - raise your hand if he is referring to you in this quote:
                          "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
                          - Benjamin Franklin

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

                            Geoff Petrie and Jerry West rank ahead of DW in my book.

                            West needs no explanation.

                            But Petri in eight years has taken the Kings from the pits to the pinnacle. I like their chances of winning it all, better than anyone else's including ours. Not saying we, or someone else, can't beat them. Just saying they look to be extremely competitive.

                            Petrie traded an aging Mitch Richmond for Chris Webber. He acquired Bibby, Christie, Bobby Jackson, Vlade and Brad Miller. And drafted Peja.

                            Hard to argue with Petrie's volumn of work in the first eight years. Brad Miller's loss may not have affected the ranking of DW for Pacers fans, but the deal has sure elevated the status of Petri in the rankings for SacTown fans.

                            San Antonio's management has also been excellent. Yes, they got really lucky with no-brainer first overall picks Robinson and Duncan. Still SA has managed their finances extremely well and won a couple of titles. Plus they are poised to compete for another title every year for the forseeable future because of their current talent and cap space.

                            -snip-
                            I don't really agree that Petrie is better than DW. The Maloof Bros. pretty much gave him a blank check with which to work from. I'm not sure he'd do as well as DW if he was also required to be fiscally conservative.

                            Now I'll give you that he's done a better job with a blank check than Trader Bob, Nellie, S. Layden, etc. But outside of drafting Peja and trading for Bibby, everything else he's done has pretty much just involved throwing a lot of money at certain players.


                            Oh, and I make it a point to never, ever, ever, ever say anything nice about Popovich as GM. As "Chuck Person's biggest fan" and an unashamed Bo Hill fan, what he did to Bo the season the Spurs had all the injuries and they way he treated Chuck and Vinnie was absolutely unjustified. Further, to blacklist Bo just because he pointed out that his firing was unjustified because his starting frontcourt of David, Chuck and Sean plus the primary backup forward Charles Smith combined to miss 263 games that season... Just so Pops could name himself coach, draft Duncan and fool everyone into thinking he's some type of genius. Yes, that's the real number, Chuck missed all 82 after back surgery, David only played in nine games and Elliot and Smith each missed more than half the games. Its not like Bo hadn't recently taken those guys to the WCF and had 62 and 59 wins in the previous two seasons.
                            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


                            • #15
                              Re: Another reason Donnie Walsh is "the best"

                              I don't have time to expand... but I disagree with a point in the 'answer'. I contend Walsh did start to dismantle the team in 1999 after the loss to Knicks. I've read and posted interviews that seemed to confirm that.

                              I don't want to argue whether that was the right or wrong thing to do (that's not the point). I just think the answer is a bit of revisionism to make a point. The team we had in 2000 was a team with ending contracts. Contracts that Walsh had elected not to extend. The 2000 finals wasn't 'expected'... it was a surprise. That is how I read things.

                              There are plenty of things that can be argued in Walsh's favor. Arguably, it could be said Walsh's decision to begin making changes after the 99 season has the Pacers in a better position today for the long haul than they would've been had he elected to keep that team together and extend certain players. I just think it is revisionist to say Walsh stood pat against those demanding change after the loss to the 99 Knicks.

                              -Bball
                              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

                              Working...
                              X