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

Eddie Johnson on Larry Brown

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

  • Eddie Johnson on Larry Brown

    http://www.hoopshype.com/columns/marbury_johnson.htm


    Brown, Marbury put on a show

    by Eddie Johnson / March 21, 2006

    THE AUTHOR:
    EDDIE JOHNSON

    Played 17 years in the NBA for the Kings, Suns, SuperSonics, Hornets, Pacers, Nuggets and Rockets. Won the 1988-89 NBA Sixth Man Award averaging 21.5 ppg.
    NBA all-time leading scorer among players with no All-Star appearances.
    He is in his sixth year as the color analyst for the Phoenix Suns broadcasts.
    You can visit his website at www.jumpshotclub.com
    Last week, Stephon Marbury and Larry Brown spread their dislike for one another to full view of the media. I hope most of you especially my loyal readers were not surprised by this outburst. I went on the record months ago and said this marriage would not work.

    The sad thing is that they are both equally at fault for the terrible season Knick fans have had to endure.

    I have never in all my years playing basketball seen a coach and player try to ruin the reputation of the other to the extent Marbury and Brown did last week.

    Where is the agenda? We usually tend to get caught up in the attitudes and work ethic of the player, but rarely do we focus in on the coach in this manner.

    I had two years with Larry Brown and he definitely is unlike any coach I've ever met. How many coaches do we know in any sport that would go toe-to-toe with the highest-paid player and the perceived star? Yes, I know $10 million a year can give you that security. But if you look at his track record with superstar players, the money or security does not matter much to him.

    The only team that he has coached recently where he had little or no issues (at least, until last season) was Detroit. Why? The Pistons had no superstar players that commanded and took attention away from him.
    Let’s quickly look back:

    - Danny Manning, who won a national title with Brown at Kansas, was not enamored with the idea of being coached again by Brown when he played for the Clippers.

    - Reggie Miller and Brown did not always see eye to eye either, but Reggie Miller was a pro's pro. The two years I spent in Indiana, I was amazed to see the stuff Reggie took verbally from Brown without fighting back. I once asked Reggie why he took all of that abuse when other guys were not half as committed as he was. He said: “I was taught to obey my coaches and not talk back to them”. When he said that, I laughed. That’s exactly how I was taught.

    Reggie was the most committed unselfish superstar I have ever played with. He was always the first person at practice, on the plane, at meetings, etcetera... And no one outworked him in practice or games. And Brown still found ways to ride him about something.

    - Allen Iverson was new school. You diss me, I will diss you back. Iverson’s new school mentality would not allow Brown to ride him verbally. Nevertheless, Brown’s ego and stubbornness would not allow him to give in. Allen is the toughest player I have ever seen. He played hurt for Brown and won the MVP, but Brown didn't like the fact that he took a ton of shots and had a negative attitude towards practice.

    I understand why Brown would be bothered by that attitude. What confused me was that Reggie Miller was the the poster boy of what Larry wanted and he had something to complain about with him anyway.

    So the question is... Why does Brown have problems with stars?

    I think it's quite obvious. Brown sees himself as the star attraction and not the player. He loves attention, although he will make you think he doesn’t.
    He craves being the reason why teams and players are much better off than when he inherited them when he leaves and takes another job. He made that clear last week when criticizing Marbury.

    He lives to change the way you play the game and if you are unwilling to change, he will bury you. Just look at the many lineup changes with players going in and out of his doghouse from game to game in New York this season.

    I have no idea what Channing Frye did, but he was in the running for Rookie of the Year until his minutes went down. No coach in the league other than Brown would dare even try to do what he has done with his rotations this year.

    That brings us to Stephon Marbury. Brown knew from the very beginning that he and Starbury would never get along, but the allure of 10 million per year was enough to give it a try. And if it didn’t work, he would turn the attention to the star of the team because he knew the masses would side with him instead of Marbury.

    Larry Brown is not only a great coach. He is a master motivator as well, but he knew from Day One that he would never be able to coach Marbury.
    Stephon’s history and Brown's ability to tap into the many coaches that he has placed around the league told him so.

    Marbury is everything he hates. He loves movement of the ball. Marbury loves to dominate it. He wants his point guard to pass first. Marbury loves to shoot first. He loves a leader at point guard. Marbury has never shown an ability to lead a team. He loves a point guard who does everything he says. Marbury will give a little, but not a lot.

    The one thing Larry can never say about him is that he loafs. Marbury plays hard every minute he is on the floor, but he refuses to be a star that leads his team the right way. It’s really sad because he might be the best point guard in the league on talent alone.

    The problem with Marbury is that he just does not get it. He has no idea how to equate success with him having to take a step backwards in his aggression. You would think that the fact that every team he's been on has had success once he's gone would affect him. But it doesn’t and that’s sad.

    The one rule most players have been taught since grammar school is to respect the coach and try and appease him. For some reason, Marbury has fought the idea of taking instructions and criticism from anyone. He showed us that last week by publicly saying he will respond back to any criticism he receives from Brown through the media.

    So what do we have now? A stubborn coach who hates individualistic players and a player that refuses to understand that his way of playing the NBA game has never added up to team success. So now that Larry has finally met his match, what happens next?

    That sad scenario falls in the lap of Isiah Thomas. I would bet anything Zeke wishes to take that coaching job. At least, he would be controlling his own destiny. Right now, he has two individuals destroying the successful scenario he envisioned when he traded for Marbury and hired Brown.

    I know Isiah and this has to be driving him crazy. It gets worse because he will be stuck with these two. Brown is a committed coach to the extent of having success wherever he has coached and Marbury is virtually untradeable because of his contract and past history.

    Brown boasted last week that he never leaves a team worst than when he got it. OK, we will see if Brown can conquer his toughest challenge as a head coach yet.

    It could take Brown a few years to get the Knicks out of this hole. And the shovel he will need to help dig himself and the team out will probably be named Starbury.

    Wow!

    Eddie Johnson is a regular contributor to HoopsHype.com
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

  • #2
    Re: Eddie Johnson on Larry Brown

    Brown boasted last week that he never leaves a team worst than when he got it.
    Really?

    Wow.

    That's certainly not how I remember it.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Eddie Johnson on Larry Brown

      I knew you'd have fun with this. I should have just made the thread title "For Jay..."
      Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Eddie Johnson on Larry Brown

        Just to make sure UncleBuck rolls over in his grave:

        Eddie Johnson was "my" kind of player.

        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


        • #5
          Re: Eddie Johnson on Larry Brown

          It bothers me that he shat on Reggie. Even not all the time.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Eddie Johnson on Larry Brown

            Its simple isn't it?

            Brown is a career winner, and Starbury is a career loser. Can any sane person really side with Marbury?

            Okay so Brown yells alot, but thats because I'm sure he is in the camp that everyone has something to improve on. I'm sure he'd try to teach MJ a thing or two.

            On another note.....

            God I miss Reggie Miller.
            House Name: Pacers

            House Sigil:



            House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Eddie Johnson on Larry Brown

              Originally posted by Hicks
              It bothers me that he shat on Reggie. Even not all the time.
              Did you ever read "I Love Being the Enemy,"? Reggie talks about the whole situation many times.

              He talked about being cursed at many times by Brown, and constantly being driven. However he consistently says that he learned a ton from Brown, and how he gives him a ton of credit for turning the Pacers into the franchise they are today.
              House Name: Pacers

              House Sigil:



              House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Eddie Johnson on Larry Brown

                I have seen that book on many occasions, is it worth reading?
                I was ready for Josh Smith to go to Indiana, but he went to the NBA. I am ready for him to come to Indiana once again.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Eddie Johnson on Larry Brown

                  Originally posted by Diamond Dave
                  Did you ever read "I Love Being the Enemy,"? Reggie talks about the whole situation many times.

                  He talked about being cursed at many times by Brown, and constantly being driven. However he consistently says that he learned a ton from Brown, and how he gives him a ton of credit for turning the Pacers into the franchise they are today.
                  It's been a while, but yes I have read that book. In fact, it's sitting on a table in the room down the hall from me.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Eddie Johnson on Larry Brown

                    Originally posted by Jay@Section204
                    Just to make sure UncleBuck rolls over in his grave:
                    Unclebuck died and I didn't notice?
                    This space for rent.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Eddie Johnson on Larry Brown

                      Originally posted by tinsley#11
                      I have seen that book on many occasions, is it worth reading?
                      Sorry I just now saw this...

                      Yes, if you can remember the early 90's team, it is very much worth reading.

                      Very easy to read I might add. Its basically a diary of the 95 season from Reggie's point of view.

                      Of course now it is extremely dated, but if you're memory is still good then I highly recommend it.
                      House Name: Pacers

                      House Sigil:



                      House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Eddie Johnson on Larry Brown

                        It was one of my favorite books as a kid. Reggie has some great commentary in there.

                        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

                        Working...
                        X