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

Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

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

  • #31
    Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    Sheed only shot 6 of 16 tonight. I'll take that
    Wow...so even though Murphy apparently played the worst defense of all time tonight, Sheed still didn't do that great. And he got a lot of calls.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

      Originally posted by rexnom View Post
      Wow...so even though Murphy apparently played the worst defense of all time tonight, Sheed still didn't do that great. And he got a lot of calls.
      Easily explained.

      After burying 6 straight on Murphy he thought he was Kobe Bryant. ...then we started to guard him and he threw up bricks thinking he would get hot again.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

        He was actually 6-13 with 18 points while he and Murphy shared court time. JO blocked two of those misses and fouled him on the 3 point play. Some of those makes and misses came with Foster and JO guarding him on those possessions. I do know the Pistons targeted him defensively with Wallace, Webber and McDyess.
        I'm in these bands
        The Humans
        Dr. Goldfoot
        The Bar Brawlers
        ME

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

          we can talk about Murphy/sheed mismatch and such back and forth.. and a lot of other rick problems but the bottom line.. with all that we were tied with 6 minutes left in the game when JO picked up his 5th foul becuase of being a little over worked going against a almost regular tripple team and having to play hard defense. we take out JO for a few minutes which makes sense.. need him for the final 3 to 4 minutes game is still cloes...

          now down 2... Granger.. yes the granger we want to take shots misses a easy shot for him in the lane and we also miss the tip... come down.. give a easy shot to Hamilton .... granger again misses a shot and again we miss a easy tip.. come down webb scores on a easy shot...

          now down six and we are no longer in touch....

          this to me isn't really ricks fault much.. can't blame him we weren't able to convert two easy put backs and granger who has been hot for a number of games misses two shots in a row....

          then Duns misses a three and becuase like all night Murphy, foster and such have tired legs can' t jump as high they get a back tip on the rebound second posession and score and its mostly game over.... most of the offensive boards and such they got by out jumping us from behind or grabbing a ball we couldn't quite grab when in proper block out... i.e. williams flying in tipping the ball away from murphy right to a blocked out Mcdyess like in the first qtr...

          we also didn't help our selves much with the ft shooting and I agree it is strange that we took it to the basket as much as they did all game long and still didn't shoot as many ft's as they made....

          My main thing I take from this game is Detroit better not be over confident about this win.. they really didn't empress me as being that much better even though they won the game... mainly becuase they managed to score a lot more 2nd chance points then us though they only ended up getting 5 more offensive boards...
          You didn't think it was gonna be that easy, did you? ..... You know, for a second there, yeah, I kinda did.....
          Silly rabbit..... Trix are for kids.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

            THE SUN!! IT WILL NEVER RISE AGAIN!!! OH NOO!!!!!

            It's pretty funny to read the reactions on here sometimes. I'm sure some of you would find fault in the coach if it was Jesus himself.

            Sheed shot 6-16, and hit two before RC made the adjustment and moved JO to him at the start of the second half.
            Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

              A bad coach? "Bad" is relative, and I'm not convinced he's a bad coach compared to other coaches. I thought that he did a fine job keeping us in this tough, back to back, road game.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

                When Wallace paired with Webber or McDyess....who was guarding Webber or McDyess?

                Was it JONeal or Murphy?

                I was thinking that Murphy should always guard the lesser Big Man offensive threat and JONeal/Foster should always guard the bigger Big Man offensive threat. Although, McDyess and Webber were doing fairly well on the offensive end....I will always prefer to have JONeal guard Wallace over Murphy and take my chances with Murphy covering McDyess or Webber.

                Besides...I don't know if that was a major factor in the loss.....it was ONE of the factors...but it wasn't the sole reason we lost. I think that Dunleavy and Murphy shooting a combind 6-13 FGA from the field and not being as much of an offensive factor in the game didn't help our cause.

                Tinsley seemed to do okay...although Billups scored 18 points...he only took 7 FGA but went 10-10 from the FT line. If billups was lighting us up...then I would have a major concern....but since Billups wasn't as much of an offensive option ( where Rip, Webber and Sheed were )...I can't really complain about Tinsley. He took 13 FGA and made 7 of them.

                Surprisingly...we did outrebound them....46 to 41. To tell you the truth...I think there were several factors in our loss ( Murphy covering Rasheed.....some coaching mistakes by Carlisle...Dunleavy and Murphy not being as much of an offensive option on the floor ) ...but I don't think any of the ones mentioned in this thread was main cause for the loss.

                Despite pulling close twice throughout the game.....I just think that we lost simply because the Pistons ( like always ) was able to execute and complete plays at critical times of the game when they had to.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

                  Isn't it Jay that always says (or is it BBall?) that Carlisle always does the right thing, but it always takes him two or three games to figure it out?

                  My guess is you saw in this situation Rick giving Murphy every chance to prove his rep wrong--that he could find a way to at least neutralize Sheed.

                  He didn't. Rick will take note of it and come playoffs or before, you won't see that mistake again.

                  To be fair to Rick, now is the time to test all your pieces before chucking certain options.
                  "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

                    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                    I always read in this forum about how Rick is a terrible coach because he tries to matchup with the opponent - and then tonight Rick for the most part doesn't do that and he still gets criticized. So which is it. Should Rick match up with the other team or the other way around.
                    I cant believe you cant tell the difference between not falling for the go small trap (which Rick regularly does) and playing a better big when needed. Jeff is the better rebounder and we have been getting killed on the boards at the ends of games because he has not been playing Jeff then. We get close with Jeff in the game and he puts Murphy in and we lose the battle.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

                      You mean killed on the boards like Murph having 10 rebs in 27mins compared to Foster's 9rebs in 23 mins?

                      For those keeping track at home, Foster is .02reb/min better.

                      I'm sure those .02 rebounds would have been a 7pt difference.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        I always read in this forum about how Rick is a terrible coach because he tries to matchup with the opponent - and then tonight Rick for the most part doesn't do that and he still gets criticized. So which is it. Should Rick match up with the other team or the other way around.
                        I totally agree with you UB. It amazes me how many people on here think they know how to coach a professional basketball team and how easy all the decisions are after the game is over.

                        If those of you who criticize Rick are so damn smart why aren't you coaching an NBA team yourself (I am sure it pays more than 99% of what people on this board make). People think that just because they watch a game 4-5 times a week it makes them an expert. I have been watching the discovery channel (surgeries). By some peoples reasoning I should be your doctor!

                        I do not mean for this post to belittle anyone. I believe that this is this best message board for ANY pro sports teams. The discussion on here is generally very well thought out but come on.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

                          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                          Isn't it Jay that always says (or is it BBall?) that Carlisle always does the right thing, but it always takes him two or three games to figure it out?

                          My guess is you saw in this situation Rick giving Murphy every chance to prove his rep wrong--that he could find a way to at least neutralize Sheed.

                          He didn't. Rick will take note of it and come playoffs or before, you won't see that mistake again.

                          To be fair to Rick, now is the time to test all your pieces before chucking certain options.


                          -Bball

                          (Technically, I don't know that it takes 2 or 3 games for him to 'figure it out' but it seems it takes that for him to act)
                          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


                          • #43
                            Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

                            Originally posted by colonialspacers View Post
                            Another reason why Carly is a bad couch is because he has no desire to play younger players even in situations where they seem to be having a good night and would benefit even more from increased play.

                            Well, that might be a factor (although he did start a 24-year-old and had an entire starting lineup comfortably under the age of thirty, but whatever).

                            But I would argue that the biggest reason why Carly is a bad couch is that he is a human being and therefore is uncomfortable to sit on.
                            The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                            http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                            RSS Feed
                            Subscribe via iTunes

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

                              How quickly people jump off the bandwagon..anxious to say "I told you so" after one loss....Sad....worthy of Kraptiz..
                              Go Pacers!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Few Reasons Why Rick Carlisle is a Bad Coach

                                Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
                                But I would argue that the biggest reason why Carly is a bad couch is that he is a human being and therefore is uncomfortable to sit on.
                                dude... have you tried?

                                granted, a carlisle couch isn't as nice as the leather riley couch in miami...
                                This is the darkest timeline.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X