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

Pat Riley is such a weasel

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

  • Pat Riley is such a weasel

    http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/b...,4744307.story

    MINNEAPOLIS - After committing in the offseason to coaching the Heat through 2009-2010, Pat Riley is leaning toward stepping aside after this season.

    With his team struggling and in need of a significant roster overhaul, Riley said it might be in the franchise's best interest if he focuses solely on his role as team president.

    "But that's after this season," Riley stressed, as he looked ahead to Tuesday night's game against the Timberwolves at Target Center. "That's not now."

    Riley, 62, said he was torn by the commitment he made to owner Micky Arison to hold the dual roles over the remaining two-plus seasons on his Heat contract.

    "Sometimes, just with me, I feel like now, more than ever, I might be butting heads with both jobs," he said. "And I've revisited that over and over again."

    Several NBA coaches have final say on personnel decisions, ranging from the success of San Antonio's Gregg Popovich to the failure of New York's Isiah Thomas.

    But Riley said he now sees why the majority of teams divide the responsibilities.

    "I was much better, I believe, just as a president," he said, "because I wasn't having to deal with the personalities."

    Just over a year ago, Riley left the team for six weeks to undergo knee surgery and a hip replacement, with assistant Ron Rothstein guiding the team back into playoff contention.

    Riley insisted there would be no such break this season, but backed off considerably from the statement he issued on Aug. 18, when he said, "I'm going to coach another three years, the terms of my contract. … I don't want to be a one-and-done guy every year. I have three years left on my contract and I will coach those out."

    At the time, Riley thought the Heat would return to title contention. Instead, it has sunk to the bottom of the league, in part because of front-office decisions that have stripped the team of much of its 3-point shooting, defensive grit and quality depth.

    "As a coach," he said, "there's a real personal attachment that I have had with players that is not as objective on the other side."

    Given the opportunity by Monday's deadline to clear the Heat of two non-guaranteed contracts, Riley retained forward Alexander Johnson and center Joel Anthony, leaving his roster at the league-limit of 15 and denying the team the opportunity to try out prospects on 10-day contracts.

    "I grow very close to guys, young guys that might not be performing for me, because I've always been that way," he said. "That's how I sort of related to guys as coach."

    Riley has spoken of selecting his successor from his staff, with Erik Spoelstra, 37, considered the front-runner among the current assistants. Riley also is particularly close to longtime coach Mike Fratello, the former Heat television analyst who has been out of the league since being dismissed last season by Memphis.

    Riley's anticipated enshrinement into the Basketball Hall of Fame would be in September, a ceremony that could provide closure to a coaching career that produced four championships with the Showtime Lakers in the '80s and a 2006 title for the Heat.

    "I think this has to be addressed," he said of a full-time return to the front office. "It has to be addressed by me in an honest, objective way."
    This bandwagoning BS of his sickens me.

  • #2
    Re: Pat Riley is such a weasel

    Pathetic. Seriously, did he not hear the sports talk when he returned? And now SVG is over in Orlando winning games.

    Worst of all is that he got a ring out of Wade drawing fouls out of nowhere for 4 games, and for that he was labeled genius all over again. At times he may have been, but much of his work in Miami lately seems questionable in spite of the title.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Pat Riley is such a weasel

      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
      Pathetic. Seriously, did he not hear the sports talk when he returned? And now SVG is over in Orlando winning games.

      Worst of all is that he got a ring out of Wade drawing fouls out of nowhere for 4 games, and for that he was labeled genius all over again. At times he may have been, but much of his work in Miami lately seems questionable in spite of the title.
      Riley might be a weasel, but he's done plenty well for a Miami franchise that pretty much was still considered an expansion team going nowhere when he took over them in 95'.

      He brought in Zo. He brought in Tim Hardaway. He got stopped cold by the Bulls. Then he got Wade and Odom. Then he got Shaq and went for it all. He won a title. He wouldn't have won that title by playing it conservatively.

      And with his luck, a good chance he's going to wind up with Rose or Beasley this year.

      It's not a pretty situation for them right now, but Riley is a guy who's succeeded more than he's failed, so I'm not about to doubt that in 2 years he's back to being competitive again.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Pat Riley is such a weasel

        Originally posted by d_c View Post
        Riley might be a weasel, but he's done plenty well for a Miami franchise that pretty much was still considered an expansion team going nowhere when he took over them in 95'.

        He brought in Zo. He brought in Tim Hardaway. He got stopped cold by the Bulls. Then he got Wade and Odom. Then he got Shaq and went for it all. He won a title. He wouldn't have won that title by playing it conservatively.

        And with his luck, a good chance he's going to wind up with Rose or Beasley this year.

        It's not a pretty situation for them right now, but Riley is a guy who's succeeded more than he's failed, so I'm not about to doubt that in 2 years he's back to being competitive again.
        You could make the argument that if he had stuck with Wade/Odom/Butler/Haslem core he would still be contending in the East. They likely wouldn't have won the title, but that core would be in the top 4 in the East.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Pat Riley is such a weasel

          That argument is worthless. Not because it isn't correct, but because it being correct does absolutely nothing to the stance it objects against. No one would change 4th place in the East for a Championship. Not even Seth.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Pat Riley is such a weasel

            Originally posted by skyfire View Post
            You could make the argument that if he had stuck with Wade/Odom/Butler/Haslem core he would still be contending in the East. They likely wouldn't have won the title, but that core would be in the top 4 in the East.
            Overlap in positions of those players as Butler is a SF, Haslem is a PF, and Odom is a SF/PF. No center and no PG, the two most important positions in the NBA. He did right in getting Shaq, but they should have blown it up right after.

            I imagine they still make a trade before Feb. 21.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Pat Riley is such a weasel

              Originally posted by d_c View Post
              Riley might be a weasel, but he's done plenty well for a Miami franchise that pretty much was still considered an expansion team going nowhere when he took over them in 95'.

              He brought in Zo. He brought in Tim Hardaway. He got stopped cold by the Bulls. Then he got Wade and Odom. Then he got Shaq and went for it all. He won a title. He wouldn't have won that title by playing it conservatively.

              And with his luck, a good chance he's going to wind up with Rose or Beasley this year.

              It's not a pretty situation for them right now, but Riley is a guy who's succeeded more than he's failed, so I'm not about to doubt that in 2 years he's back to being competitive again.
              Thus the "lately".

              And I mean his status as genius coach, not his GM work. LA, NY, MIA 90's, he was great. This last run was all the talent. What made it worse was the sudden surge in the playoffs that made it seem like he'd flipped a switch in them. But I actually think it was brilliant that he could go from Showtime to Mugtime and do both at nearly the same caliber of winning.

              But coming out of retirement as a token coach was cheap.
              Originally posted by Fool View Post
              That argument is worthless. Not because it isn't correct, but because it being correct does absolutely nothing to the stance it objects against. No one would change 4th place in the East for a Championship. Not even Seth.
              How big a 4th place are we talking? Penthouse suite 4th place or Motel 6 4th place? Is it a 4 game sweep championship or 4 point play bad call in game 7 kind of championship.


              (no, I don't exactly know what that means either )
              Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 01-09-2008, 12:41 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Pat Riley is such a weasel

                When the going gets tough......the tough get going.

                When the Heat starts losing games....Riley gets going.

                When the Heat starts winning games....Riley gets the urge to coach.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Pat Riley is such a weasel

                  Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                  When the going gets tough......the tough get going.

                  When the Heat starts losing games....Riley gets going.

                  When the Heat starts winning games....Riley gets the urge to coach.
                  My exact sentiments.
                  The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Pat Riley is such a weasel

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    But coming out of retirement as a token coach was cheap.
                    I guess it is easier just to rehash the ludicrous "Heat only won cause of fouls" opinion that was oh-so popular among 15-year-olds and poor sports reporters from a few years ago. Sure, that was the only factor. Had nothing to do with Wade being really good, or Shaq playing well, or Gary hitting game winners or Zo playing inspired ball.

                    And it certainly had nothing to do with Pat Riley. Right. An NBA legend with 4 rings and like 6 trips to the Finals had no effect on these guys. Sure. Stan Van Gundy would have been just as inspirational. Obviously.

                    http://www.nba.com/features/15strong_060713.html

                    Originally posted by Dwyane Wade
                    When Coach Riley took over, I didn't know what to expect, but I had faith. When one of the greatest coaches in the history of the game becomes your coach, you know you are in good hands. It was an honor. One of the first things he told us was that we were going to turn into more of a power team, which was a departure from how we had played under Coach Van Gundy. After three games, however, I knew I was going to love our new style because I was getting more opportunities and fast breaks. Coach Riley helped me improve my overall game. If I played poorly or if I played well, he always pointed out something to show me the way it was supposed to be done.

                    "If you want to be a winner," he said, "this is what you are going to have to do and what you should try to do."

                    Who am I to argue with him?
                    So, I always tried to do it.

                    It took us awhile to adjust to the new style. Things didn't really click for us until, coincidentally, a 36-point loss to the Mavericks in Dallas on national television February 9. We were embarrassed and humiliated. In the team meeting after the loss, I remember Gary Payton standing up and asking what it was going to take to get better.

                    Coach Riley answered, "It's time to follow the leader."

                    We did.
                    Any individual agendas — ranging from who shoots, who plays, what the rotation is — all took a back seat. The loss was a wake-up call, and we collectively decided to play as a unit beginning with our next game, three days later, versus the Pistons. We came from behind to win that game and immediately rolled to nine more victories. In those 10 consecutive wins, we came back eight times during the fourth quarter.

                    Even though we sort of sputtered toward the end of the regular season, losing six of our last 10 games, we knew we had the second seed in the Eastern Conference wrapped up.

                    Once the playoffs came around, there was a fair amount of people predicting that we would get knocked off, and that Chicago could be the team to do it, especially after they came back to tie the series. I think we really underestimated the Bulls, but we took their best punch. Outside of The Finals, that was probably the hardest series we played and one of the hardest that I've ever been a part of in my young career.

                    The next series against the New Jersey Nets started off poorly for us, as we lost Game 1 by 12 points. Once again, our downfall was predicted. But, we bounced back after realizing that our problems were coming from the defensive side of the ball — too many transition points and not enough rebounding. The key was to get back to playing as a team, which we did with the help of a huge performance from Antoine Walker in Game 2. From there, we rolled into Detroit, the series we had been waiting for all season long. We knew we could defeat this team if we played well. We had a lot of confidence in ourselves, and with Cleveland playing them so tough in the previous round, we saw the way they could be beaten. It took six games, but we got it done.

                    After the first two games of the NBA Finals, the doubters were out again with talk that the series wouldn't make it back to Dallas — a point that bothered us, but one that didn't surprise us since we had been underestimated all year. In fact, it lit a fire under us to go out and prove our point. Even during Game 3 when we were down 13 with 6:34 left, we still believed. We believed, becoming only the third team in NBA Finals history to win four straight against a great Dallas team.

                    In the end, it really was about "15 Strong" for us, a motto that came to represent togetherness and dedication to one another. No matter if we were high or low, through thick and thin, we always stuck together as a team. A lot of the guys on this team — Alonzo, Gary, Antoine — were doubted because they had never won a championship despite their individual success. It's just great when you can go out there and prove people wrong, and do it the right way. We all made plays to get to this point and achieve this goal, and that is what team basketball is all about … 15 Strong."
                    Read my Pacers blog:
                    8points9seconds.com

                    Follow my twitter:

                    @8pts9secs

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Pat Riley is such a weasel

                      He needs to man up and accept responsibility cause his teams suck!!!
                      R.I.P. Bernic Mac & Isaac Hayes

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Pat Riley is such a weasel

                        Come on, no one is questioning that Pat Riley is a better coach than Stan van Gundy or Ron Rothstein. It's just that Riley seems to take the easy way out a little too often.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Pat Riley is such a weasel

                          I think Pat should step aside and hire Scott Skiles. I can't wait to have Shaq give Scott a hard time so Scott can say "I fought you once. Don't think I won't do it again."

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X