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

2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

    I want to do a position by position breakdown of where I think we stand at all of our spots on the floor.

    Normally I would start this off with either the Center spot or the point guard spot on the floor but because, IMO, this is going to be decided here in the very near future (one way or the other) I want to start off this year by going a differant route.

    The coach.

    First things first we must throw out our extreme views of Rick Carlisle to really look at where we stand with our coach. So in other words throw out the Jermainiac view that he can do no right & throw out the Uncle Buck view that he can do no wrong.

    The truth is in the middle & together we will try & find it.

    Let's just do a quick review of Rick's tenure with the team. He took a team that had no real structure & in his first season here put that team as the top winning team for the NBA for the regular season. They also took the eventual champs to 6 games before the season was cut off.

    The following season he once again had the team starting off with a very good record and in fact looked to be on thier way to at least matching the season before for regular season wins.

    Then the brawl occured, then injurys occured.

    Rick was faced with a task that no other coach in the history of the NBA has been asked to do & that is win with 3 starters being suspended for longer than any other time. On top of that a slew of injurys & illnesses made it so that on certain nights of the week Rick had no idea who was going to play until game time.

    Rick was able to take that team, with the help of a retiring Reggie Miller & a reaquired Dale Davis, & make the playoffs. Not only did they make the playoffs but they won thier first round series in 7 games & then went on to take the runner up to the champs to 6 games.

    This past season on paper looked once again to be a team that should have a high regular season winning %. The early season started off fairly well but there were very few dominating wins. But the season started to turn in one game & in one crucial quarter IMO. We went to Milwaukee on 11/12 & blew a fourth quarter lead & lost the game on a last second shot at the buzzer. This in & of itself was not that big of a deal, teams lose leads all of the time & we've been beat before by a last second shot. What was differant in this loss was that several of our players missed crucial free throws down the stretch & it got to the point where the Bucks were fouling us & hoping we would miss. Which we did. Instead of inserting a top 5 free throw guy into the game (Saras) & at that time the # 1 free throw shooter in the NBA (Croshere) Carlisle never made the substitutions. Although Cro had missed two free throws already early in the game.

    The reason any of this matters is because it was the first time that Rick had been questioned by both the media & his own players about why he didn't make changes in the game.

    The Pacers then went on to be blown out the very next night by the Bobcats. After that they went on a little run but in all honesty it was never the same. Eventually Ron Artest demanded a trade & eventually got one but not before missing almost 6 weeks of on floor play & again the injury & illness bug hit our team.

    Through it all Rick still managed to keep the team at .500% for the season & we still made the playoffs although we were eleminated in the first round 4-2.

    That's just a brief synopsis of what has happened, if you want to go further with it feel free to add your thoughts to this.

    Now let's look at Rick's coaching style & trust me I'm going to try & be as objective about this as I can be.

    On the defensive end.

    Rick prefers a straight up man to man defense. In his three years here I think we have employed a zone defense about 10 times (two of which came in the post season this year). From as best as I can tell we do not run a lot of traps on defense & while we do double the ball quite often I don't know that we really apply much pressure.

    Rick's defense, IMO, is not designed to create turnovers. It is designed to limit shot selection.

    Rick does place a strong emphasis on defense & I believe from day one of training camp he begins teaching this.

    Rick does adapt, contrary to popular belief, his style to suite the players he has on the floor. When Ron was here Ron was able to free lance the passing lanes much more than what Rick allows Danny or Fred. If Foster is in the game we front the post whenever we have a real center in the game we generally play strong side post defense.

    Ricks offense.

    This is where the complaints generally arise about Rick from both his players & the fans.

    Whenever Rick as a strong post player he tends to want to focus on running a 1-4 weak side isolation play. Also we have seen Rick slow down the pace of a game, even when it is to the Pacers advantage to go faster, so that we can have better clock & shot management.

    This has cause players to frequently break plays or as in Artest case break his brain.

    The good to this style is simple. It works, often times because we have a dominate post player (O'Neal) he is able to get off shots he wants & whenever we have a cutter he often times will find them going to the hoop. However this is also easy to defend if we do not have outside weapons as teams just double down on him & dare one of our other players to hit a shot.

    Now here is where some (well Uncle Buck) will pull their hair out. Even though it works, many fans just can't stand it because at the end of the day while effective it's just down right boring to watch. It takes away from the team game that so many of us love to watch. However the argument that U.B. (& others I guess) will use with justification IMO is that what is more exciting that wins? It is a winning style during the regular season & in theory is should work in the post season as well.

    Now before we skip past the offense I want to point out one other thing. Just like his defense Rick does adjust his style to the players on the floor. When Ron & J.O. were out & we had a smaller quicker lineup you saw a lot of ball movement & player movement on the floor & very few isolation plays ran.

    Never forget one thing, Rick was the offensive co-ordinator during Larry Birds tenure as head coach & those were some of the more fluid offensive teams you will ever see play. That team did not just rely on 1-4 isolation plays however they did play a lot of post up offense with one small differance. Instead of using a big man like O'Neal in the post that team used Mark Jackson & Jalen Rose in the post to initiate our offensive movement. It worked like a charm & very few teams could stop that.

    Now one last part of our offense & this part is also a sore spot for many people.

    In many ways Rick's offense as we've seen it since his return to Indiana has been nothing more than the beginning point for his next defensive stand. Offensive rebounds are sacrificed so as no easy transition baskets can be scored. Time clock management is eployed often times to burn down the game clock to give the other team less time with the ball.

    Also Rick by limiting ball movement does cut down on turn over potential.

    Intangibles.

    For whatever reason a lot of players do not like playing for Rick Carlisle. Some of it is the style of offense he runs, some of it is simply the don't like him. This is not new either as he was not given the head coaching job after Bird left because the players did not want him as the coach. Detroit players have also made statements about Rick as well. Ron Artest listed it as the prime reason for not wanting to be here & had made several statements about this for the three years they were together.

    Rick has one style to his coaching. Cool methodical & calculating. These are great traits btw & are probably the only reason why the team got threw the brawl year as well as it did.

    However there are times your team needs a motivator & yes for lack of a better term a cheerleader or even an @ss kicker. From every report we've ever read, heard or seen Rick is just not that type of person. In fact I think that is one of the reason why this last season was more of a struggle than it should have been. Rick really was not able to do a rally around the flag type moment & thus stem the losing that occured in the latter months of the season.

    Also there has been the issue of equal treatment from the coaching staff. Now to be honest with you this really might be more of a management issue than Rick's problem because I don't know how much support he would have gotten from Bird if he wanted to suspend Jackson for some games whenever Jax would yell at him when he was taken out of a game.

    But either way, it mattered.

    What does the future hold, what should the future hold?

    Bird has already given him the seal of approval or the kiss of death. Depending on which way you believe. However one thing that TPTB F'd up big time on when issuing the "support the coach" speal was thier timing. If this is what Bird believed & if he thought that the players were trying to get the coach fired (which once again goes back to how well do the players like him) then why didn't he step up about a month before that & support his coach. Now the honest answer to that would be that maybe he did & we don't know it because we are not in the locker room. But then that begs the quesiton of if he did that why did he then go to the press with it leading me to beleive he did not do it any sooner than he appeared to have.

    I could see Carlisle walk away from the team citing family issues or even just coming out & saying to much has happened for him to stay & who could blame him.

    I could even see Bird still letting him go & not even feeling bad about saying they were going to keep him because they can always say that after they said that they saw things that they didn't think would work out or whatever.

    Now having gone through all of that what do I think should happen?

    I like Rick as a coach. He doesn't emphasize rebounding nearly enough for my taste & I certainly could live without the isolation plays. However his defense is a fine structually sound defense & if done properly does not allow any easy baskets.

    However I think his time has come & gone. I just don't believe for one min. that the Pacers can trade away all of our players or even the majority of our players & I just think he has lost his voice with them.

    I do believe that as the season went on he lost the team & that players were turning deaf ears towards him.

    Scott H. touched on this the other day & I think it does ring true. If the fans see Rick on the sidelines next season it is going to seem like same old same old to them.

    We went away from isolation basketball until Jermaine started to get ready to return & then slowly but surley we added more & more clear outs each game until by the playoffs that was our # 1 offense once again.

    Also there is the matter of Center usage with Rick. I understand Harrison to a point (I disagree with him on it but I understand) but what I do not understand & probably will never understand is his lack of use for Pollard.

    However it is safe to say that not many, if any, coach's could have done as well as he has for as long as he did under the circumstances here in Indiana.

    For both Ricks sake & even the teams sake I think it's time for a new voice.

    However, I suspect he will return.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: 2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

    Originally posted by Peck
    Now here is where some (well Uncle Buck) will pull their hair out. Even though it works, many fans just can't stand it because at the end of the day while effective it's just down right boring to watch. It takes away from the team game that so many of us love to watch. However the argument that U.B. (& others I guess) will use with justification IMO is that what is more exciting that wins? It is a winning style during the regular season & in theory is should work in the post season as well.
    :2cents:
    It might work if we didn't have to pretend JO is something he's not... But IMHO a big part of the problem, and why Rick lost the team, is it doesn't work. JO isn't up to the task. ...Certainly not as we're currently constructed anyway. ...But yet we kept going back to it even tho we had success playing in other ways.

    You might sprinkle in a little of the 'playing favorites' complaint into that as well.

    If we were clearly superior with it then maybe players get into line and buy into the system and go with the flow. But we weren't clearly better and then things got even worse as the players lost faith in the system/coach (and probably lost faith in JO as well).

    I need to get to bed right now but I'd like to read this again and comment further a little later.

    -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

    • #3
      Re: 2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

      I think Rick is done as coach. He'll move into an office position this year or next, eventually taking Bird's position.

      As stated by Peck I could see family reasons used for the change at coach.
      You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: 2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

        This is an excellent analysis as always.

        I just want to point out one thing.

        Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

        I believe our outside shooting was worse this year than any time in the past 5 years.

        If our outside shots were falling at a greater rate than they fell through most of this season, do you think that the in-out capability of the style Rick runs would have looked and felt more exciting?

        If our outside shooters were more consistent do you think more plays would have focused on them?

        Even in the games we won when JO was not present, we lived or died by the jump shot. Because there was no inside post solution, we never knew if the games we lost due to horrible shooting would have been won had we gone to the inside post more often.

        So, is it this style because Rick can't handle anything else, or is it this style because Rick could not trust the players on the perimeter to get the job done?

        How would people have felt if we had lost more games, maybe not made the playoffs, but had an outside offense that had more opportunities to clank shots for long (usually defensive) rebounds?
        BillS

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

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: 2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

          Good analysis Peck. I don't agree with all of it, but I agree with enough of it to just let it go.

          As all of you know I came out a few days ago and predicted that Rick would not coach this team next season for whatever reason, and I also said that he should not coach this team next season. It is just time for a change and yes I agree with the 3 year or 4 year rule. That is shelf-life of 95% of the NBA coaches. Just think how often NBA players have to hear their coach talk.

          There are 18 timeouts per game counting the four .20 second timeouts, 18 x 82 +8 (preseason) plus the Pacers have played an average of 12 playoff games the past three seasons. That averages out to 2160 timeouts per season or 6480 over the past three seasons. So most of these players have sat through 6480 huddles with this coach. You hear you're coach more than you do anyone else in your life. So yes the 3 or 4 year rule is a factor in all this. This isn't football where unless you are the quarterback you don't really have much comminucation with the head coach.

          One thing I would like to say though, Rick is 10 times better than Isiah Thomas. It is not even worthy of debate IMO. Let's just see how many more years Rick coaches vs whether Isiah ever coaches again.

          Two last things:

          1) If anyone remembers I came out 3 years ago and strongly predicted that Isiah would be fired. (too bad the posts from then are gone) But there was silence from DW for about 4 weeks until he came out the Friday before Memorial day weekend and at least publically supported Isiah (that is when PFFL lost it and is still lost) But Donnie usually comes out in the media and holds a press conference of some sort within 10 days or so after the last game. But he didn't in 2003, he said it was due to family reasons and those were legitmate, but I also think he was aware that Bird was looking to come back, so he privately put the Isiah thing on holds - he let Bird handle it.

          2) So what is going on right now. Are they in high level discussions with Rick on a buyout or are they discussing a contract extension. No Rick is probably in some island somewhere and I suspect will meet with DW and LB next week sometime. One thing I'm 100% convinced of is either Rick will get a contract extension or he'll won't be the coach next season.

          Keep something else in mind, when Bird was hired, he spoke with the players and decided that the players could no longer play for Isiah, well I think Bird has met with the players a this week and I believe he knows these players can't play for Rick any longer. Bird has seen it and now he's heard it. So unless he believes he can change most of the players on the current team, Bird knows what has to be done, so the next two weeks should be interesting.

          I think unless Bird believes he can change 9-10 players, I think Rick is gone.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: 2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

            Originally posted by Peck
            On the defensive end.

            Rick prefers a straight up man to man defense. In his three years here I think we have employed a zone defense about 10 times (two of which came in the post season this year). From as best as I can tell we do not run a lot of traps on defense & while we do double the ball quite often I don't know that we really apply much pressure.

            Rick's defense, IMO, is not designed to create turnovers. It is designed to limit shot selection.

            Rick does place a strong emphasis on defense & I believe from day one of training camp he begins teaching this.

            Rick does adapt, contrary to popular belief, his style to suite the players he has on the floor. When Ron was here Ron was able to free lance the passing lanes much more than what Rick allows Danny or Fred. If Foster is in the game we front the post whenever we have a real center in the game we generally play strong side post defense.
            I've pretty much thought the opposite. I think Rick's D is designed to create turnovers. I think he teachs the players to be great one on one defenders and hopes to get them to exploit an offensive player's wekaness.

            A defense like the Spurs or Nets employ limits shot selection, imo. They sag into a zone at any hint of penetration and try to make you a jump shooting team. I've actually been pretty impressed with that type of D. Pistons were using it quite a bit till they got a new coach.

            Ricks offense.

            This is where the complaints generally arise about Rick from both his players & the fans.

            Whenever Rick as a strong post player he tends to want to focus on running a 1-4 weak side isolation play. Also we have seen Rick slow down the pace of a game, even when it is to the Pacers advantage to go faster, so that we can have better clock & shot management.

            This has cause players to frequently break plays or as in Artest case break his brain.

            The good to this style is simple. It works, often times because we have a dominate post player (O'Neal) he is able to get off shots he wants & whenever we have a cutter he often times will find them going to the hoop. However this is also easy to defend if we do not have outside weapons as teams just double down on him & dare one of our other players to hit a shot.
            I highlighted my biggest complaint about it, BUT....

            I will say, done effectively, I think it can be a joy to watch. I'll continue in a minute..

            Now here is where some (well Uncle Buck) will pull their hair out. Even though it works, many fans just can't stand it because at the end of the day while effective it's just down right boring to watch. It takes away from the team game that so many of us love to watch. However the argument that U.B. (& others I guess) will use with justification IMO is that what is more exciting that wins? It is a winning style during the regular season & in theory is should work in the post season as well.
            I think it does and can, but, to me, it takes a dominant big man, not a very good one. To make ana analogy that everyone can relate to, it's the same thing Houston used to win a title with Hakeem. They used Mario Elie, Casell and Maxwell to punish from the outside. I thought it was pretty fun to watch, but it was predicated on an unstoppable big man...which we do not have. I think Rick is trying to fit a square peg in a round hole when he forces this type of offense.

            (More recently, I think Minnesota did a team on the same model when they went to the western conference finals, with Garnett in the role of Hakeem and Cassel resuming his former role, aided by Sczerbiak and Hoiberg.)

            Now before we skip past the offense I want to point out one other thing. Just like his defense Rick does adjust his style to the players on the floor. When Ron & J.O. were out & we had a smaller quicker lineup you saw a lot of ball movement & player movement on the floor & very few isolation plays ran.
            I won't quote the rest of what you said becasue I agree %100. I think he's good at adapting his roster. It's adapting midgame that seems to throw him off and is my problem with him.


            R
            ick has one style to his coaching. Cool methodical & calculating. These are great traits btw & are probably the only reason why the team got threw the brawl year as well as it did.

            However there are times your team needs a motivator & yes for lack of a better term a cheerleader or even an @ss kicker. From every report we've ever read, heard or seen Rick is just not that type of person. In fact I think that is one of the reason why this last season was more of a struggle than it should have been. Rick really was not able to do a rally around the flag type moment & thus stem the losing that occured in the latter months of the season.
            This is another issue I have with Rick. I don't think he knows how to deal with young players. Kind of the Larry Brown syndrome. Look how he jacked Saras around. Look at his usage of Harrison. Remember his love of Curry in Detroit and rumbling of wanting to bring him here? I think Rick is much, much better suited for a team like SA, or Miami. I think Rick is an Xs and Os guy and needs vets to execute his plans.

            I think one reason that Granger has worked out, so far, is that Danny appears to be preturnaturally mature. Once agin, another reason that I think Rick doesn't need to be here. I think he is a GREAT coach. I just don't like the fit here.

            At this moment.

            As I've said, if management totally commits to him and brings in players that he truly covets, some his his matures that he likes so well, may be a different story. So how much do Walsh/Bird committ to Rick's "vision."

            Scott H. touched on this the other day & I think it does ring true. If the fans see Rick on the sidelines next season it is going to seem like same old same old to them.

            We went away from isolation basketball until Jermaine started to get ready to return & then slowly but surley we added more & more clear outs each game until by the playoffs that was our # 1 offense once again.
            Not to pat myself on the back, but I just knew it was coming. It will be the same old, same old if he's back next year. Rick knows what got him where he is today and he's going to ride that, no matter what, don't you think?


            For both Ricks sake & even the teams sake I think it's time for a new voice.

            However, I suspect he will return.
            He'll be back. I think our only hope is a total commitment to Ricks' vision of what he wants to do. I don't think he's comfortable with young guys. Bring him in some vets, if that's what he thinks will work best. Bird obvious wanted Saras here ( I do, too!), but if you aren't going to use him properly and as he's built his career playing, style-wise, then trade him. Same for Harrison. Trade him to some promising young team and get your PJ Brown, or Clifford Robinson, or whomever that better fits into the system you want to use, wjom you can rely on to execute the Xs and Os. Rick doesn't strike me as a teaching coach or personality assessor. A bit like Popovich. whichever way management goes, they have to commit to turing this team over totally to Rick and bring in exacly whom he wants, or gracefully let him leave, then work on bringing in players from a character/personality standpoint.

            Ow. My brain hurts. Didn't anticipate babblling that long. Sorry for being so long winded, folks.
            Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: 2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

              You do have to wonder if Rick still has the passion to coach or suffers the same burn-out as the rest of the team? He was aleged to be ready for a break after the Detroit firing and looking at taking an analyst/broadcasting job before Larry called.

              I wonder if the big picture is still not in play here, but a little side tracked. Donnie was suppose to retire after next season with Bird stepping in. Somebody's got to take LB's place and it still seems too convenient to me that Rick's coaching contract was expiring at the same time. Things have obviously changed, but I suspect it's only a minor bump in their minds.

              Rick may have set out a year to appease the fans, but then will come back in the management role later.
              You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: 2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

                Originally posted by Unclebuck

                I think unless Bird believes he can change 9-10 players, I think Rick is gone.
                The problem with that is that might be Birds intentions, but teams always hold out until the last second on trades hoping for a better one. Thus, if the trades don't go though like Bird expects we could still have Rick as coach and most of the same players.

                Personally I think Rick will be back and will install a new offense. He has to know what the complaints about him are, and I think he will try to address them.

                I think if Bird was going to fire Rick he would have already done so. That way among other reasons he would have the input of a new coach before making a lot of trades.

                Also some people have said we can't have a lame duck coach. However, I don't think Carlisle being in his last year means a thing to Bird. Bird coached his last year and the team went to the NBA finals. Of course management was on record of wanting Bird back.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: 2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

                  A couple of points. The fact that RC doesn't already have a contract extension means they aren't sure they want to give him one. So they really are going to kick this around and pinpoint the problems, then act.

                  I hardly think all the players have tuned RC out. If you deal the instigators, then there will be followers who will fall into line. Pacer trade history being what it is, there will be the fewest possible trades made which have the highest probability of effecting change.
                  Don't thank me, I'll kill ya.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: 2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

                    You're right Will, I don't think the Lame Duck theory holds with DW/LB/RC. All they have to do is walk into a team meeting and announce that RC is the coach for the entire year and that is that. Nobody's job is in writing, their paycheck yes, but their job no.

                    MAssive changes? No, that is nearly impossible to pull off. Getting rid of the "I hate Rick Carlisle" malcontents is entirely possible, and is what I expect to happen. I'm convinced TPTB will stick with Rick and try to find players willing to play the game RC's way. Can somebody gimme a list of players who would enjoy playing that way? Especially a PG worth his salt.

                    Personally, I'd like to see RC and the malcontents move on...but I don't see a coach out there to replace RC (perhaps Stan VG???? but then again?????????)

                    In any case, IMO RC has absolutely GOT to turn loose of the PG reins and let them play.

                    I've been curious why we haven't heard of the post-season wrap-up sessions, it has been awfully quiet over there.
                    Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: 2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

                      Scott - a question. "PRETURNATURALLY"?

                      Where in the world did that come from? I know you didn't pull it from your wazoo, because there ain't enough room in anybody's wazoo to accommodate that word. I began to count the syllables, but kept losing count, so I just gave up.

                      -----

                      I agree with the general sentiment that Rick needs to be replaced. And for the same reasons mentioned by many of you: he's tuned out, stubbornness with his offensive schemes, favoritism, micromanaging, etc.

                      However, one thing that I do worry about is I fear that Bird will not go deep enough with his roster changes if Rick is replaced.

                      Will Bird be tempted to do only minor tinkering with the roster in a belief that a new coach may be able to bring it together?

                      If Rick is retained, I really believe that Jackson, Tinsley, Saras, Freddie and maybe even Harrison have to go. Also, I doubt Pollard or Gill would be re-signed, or would be willing to be re-signed for that matter. Also, there is a chance that Peja would less willing to re-sign since maybe he sees Rick as one of the major problems with the team. So somewhere between 4 and 8 players would be gone.

                      But, if we have a new coach, maybe Bird will be tempted to simply think that he will trade out Jackson and Tinsley and see how the rest of the players work out. If so, I don't think those changes are deep enough.

                      But one way or another, Rick's staying or leaving will influence the magnitude of the changes that will be made with the roster.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: 2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

                        Originally posted by Skaut_Ech
                        Not to pat myself on the back, but I just knew it was coming. It will be the same old, same old if he's back next year. Rick knows what got him where he is today and he's going to ride that, no matter what, don't you think?
                        The question is, who said it first?

                        Originally posted by bulletproof May 5th, 2006
                        If I'm Donnie or Larry I also have to take into consideration that if fans see Rick on the sidelines next season that there will be the perception that it will be more of the same.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: 2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

                          Originally posted by bulletproof
                          The question is, who said it first?




                          Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: 2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

                            Originally posted by Unclebuck

                            Keep something else in mind, when Bird was hired, he spoke with the players and decided that the players could no longer play for Isiah, well I think Bird has met with the players a this week and I believe he knows these players can't play for Rick any longer. Bird has seen it and now he's heard it. So unless he believes he can change most of the players on the current team, Bird knows what has to be done, so the next two weeks should be interesting.

                            I think unless Bird believes he can change 9-10 players, I think Rick is gone.
                            I think even if the players supported Isiah (as JO did), Bird was going to fire him. The difference between then and now is that Bird hated Isiah and Carlisle is Bird's chum. Many people, including myself, were absolutely positive that Bird's arrival meant Zeke's departure, and the likely eventual hiring of his buddy RC.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: 2006 off-season evaluations part 1....

                              Originally posted by bulletproof
                              The question is, who said it first?

                              Well I ALLUDED to it early in the year. I predicted that when JO came back he would do just as he did last year and DUMP the up-tempo game, etc.

                              SEE....I TOLD YA SO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
                              Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X