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

"Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

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

    "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/column...leintro-080515


    DALLAS -- For what was presumed to be the most anticlimactic press conference on the NBA's coaching carousel, Rick Carlisle's overdue introduction to the locals turned out to be a fairly newsy ride.

    Among Wednesday's more memorable revelations:

    • Mavericks owner Mark Cuban announced that the club is bringing back performance coach/sports psychologist Don Kalkstein, whose presence was not embraced by Avery Johnson and whose return will inevitably be seen in some circles as a sign of weakness for a franchise in flux … until you find out that the Mavs will be sharing Kalkstein with a fairly successful baseball team out of Boston called the Red Sox.

    • As part of nearly 40 minutes on the dais to detail his plans as Johnson's successor, Carlisle shared how he's already lobbied his former top gunner in Indiana to come out of retirement next season to sign in Dallas at 43. Yet it sounds as though Carlisle won't get any farther than Boston did last summer, given that TNT's Reggie Miller texted him back with this message: "Man, you're crazy."

    • Then Cuban stopped in the American Airlines Center hallway after the formal question-and-answer session to reiterate to ESPN.com that back-to-back exits in the first round and his well-chronicled interest in buying baseball's Chicago Cubs haven't dimmed his enthusiasm to own and operate the Mavs.

    "Not at all," Cuban said.

    His grand plan/fantasy is having both teams.

    "I even told the Tribune Company [which is selling the Cubs] that basketball is still my first love," Cuban continued. "But the Cubs are a special opportunity and I would be just as excited to own them. The seasons barely overlap, so it's not going to be a problem.

    "I'm not going to sell the Mavs just to get the Cubs. I've already said the reasons why I would sell the Mavs -- if someone offers me billions and I'd be an idiot not to [sell] … or something happens with the league, which I've come close to multiple times."

    I'm not going to sell the Mavs just to get the Cubs. I've already said the reasons why I would sell the Mavs -- if someone offers me billions and I'd be an idiot not to [sell] . . . or something happens with the league, which I've come close to multiple times.
    -- Mark Cuban

    Cuban resisted the urge from there to dredge up old wrangles with NBA commissioner David Stern and declined to expound on his chances of winning the bidding and actually landing the Cubs.

    He also passed (for the most part) on responding to some of Johnson's recent swipes out the door. Most of the afternoon's chatter was focused on various Mavs types -- Cuban, Dirk Nowitzki and naturally Carlisle himself -- trying to shoot down suggestions that the new coach is not a lot different from the old coach, strategically or personality-wise.

    "In terms of style of play," Carlisle said, "I know there's going to be questions."

    They won't be restricted to style of play. From the time Carlisle emerged as the only real contender for this job and the ensuing week it took for his four-year contract worth nearly $18 million to be finalized, Carlisle has heard more than a few whispers that (a) he calls way too many plays and prefers too slow a pace to be the guy who liberates Jason Kidd and (b) he hasn't been a good communicator in his stints coaching Detroit and Indiana.

    The Mavs likewise haven't been able to shake the perception that Carlisle was merely the best available compromise when president of basketball operations Donnie Nelson passed on the invitation to take over.

    So Carlisle tried to explain that he was attracted to this job in part because it's the first team he'll coach that doesn't have grind-it-out personnel, giving him a chance to show how much he knows about ball and player movement, spacing and opening up the floor. He also doesn't appear to be ruffled by the skepticism, noting that Mike D'Antoni was subjected to similarly pessimistic questioning at his introductory news conference Tuesday in New York.

    "This is not about me coming in here with my style," Carlisle said. "This is about fitting the style to the personnel."

    Having passed on that first crack at the job by convincing his boss that they needed to go outside the organization for a new voice for the first time in Cuban's eight-year run of ownership, Nelson insisted that Carlisle is "the perfect guy for this situation."

    Cuban, predictably, said it loudest, insisting that only "scenarios out of left field" -- such as Larry Brown's sudden availability in Detroit and the Pacers' brawl with the Pistons in 2004 which dealt that franchise a blow from which it still hasn't recovered -- derailed Carlisle in his first two coaching jobs.

    "It wasn't hard because he's a good coach," Cuban said of the first significant hire of his tenure who he didn't previously know well.

    "When we did our research, it wasn't like there was some red flag that just kept popping up [to explain why] the guy didn't work out here or didn't work out there.

    "If he had Rasheed [Wallace in Detroit], Rick might have won a championship, too."

    Carlisle likens these Mavs to the Indiana team Larry Bird inherited from Larry Brown for the 1997-98 season. Those Pacers, Carlisle recalled, were a "39-win team that a lot of people had written off and thought had run its course and needed to be blown up." Those Pacers, with Carlisle essentially serving as Bird's offensive coordinator, posted 58- and 56-win seasons and were ushered to the 2000 NBA Finals by an all-timer at the point who had a lot of freedom.

    A decade later, Carlisle is insisting that Kidd -- more accomplished than any other floor leader he's had as a head coach -- will have as much license as Mark Jackson had with those Indy teams. The unknown remains whether Carlisle can inspire Dallas, post-Avery, like Bird did in Indy with a group clearly afflicted with Larry Brown Fatigue.
    [+] Enlarge
    Dirk Nowitzki

    Glenn James/NBAE via Getty Images

    On Wednesday Dirk Nowitzki sat with the media to hear what his new coach had to say.

    The one conclusion you could draw Wednesday is that Carlisle, at the very least, is pretty realistic. He knows that the supporting cast around Nowitzki and Kidd has some sizable holes in a Western Conference that punishes those weaknesses more than ever. He also knows that he just signed up to work for a demanding sort who only expects him to go "82-0 and win a championship."

    But credit Carlisle, after spending the season as an ESPN analyst, for not trying to lower the bar on Day 1.

    "This is one of the crucial periods of Mark's ownership," Carlisle said.

    He went on to describe October as the "most important training camp of the Cuban era."

    It sounds as though June, July and August will be busy, too, with rumblings already in circulation about the Mavs hoping they can work their way into the sign-and-trade mix for either Miami's Shawn Marion or Atlanta's Josh Smith. They are likewise bound to be linked in trade speculation to Indiana's Jermaine O'Neal, given O'Neal's successes playing for Carlisle and amid a growing anticipation in Dallas that swingman Josh Howard (after last month's marijuana monologues) and former Carlisle go-to guy Jerry Stackhouse (who only has one year and $2 million guarantee for 2009-10 left on his contract) will be offered in various trade scenarios.

    Coach and owner spoke at length about Howard -- and favorably so -- in an attempt to dispel the idea that the Mavs' youngest core player will be moved. But Carlisle did acknowledge: "This roster is going to change between now [and camp]. I'm certain of that."

    The other declaration of note came from Nowitzki, who immediately challenged the labeling of Carlisle as an uncommunicative after sitting among us media locusts throughout Carlisle's presentation, with Kidd hovering further back.

    In the same hallway as Cuban, Nowitzki told the story of his first meeting with Carlisle. Summoned to Cuban's house for what he expected to be an hour, Nowitzki arrived on an empty stomach and left starving.

    "Next thing you know we were there for a good four, four-and-a-half hours," Nowitzki said.

    "He's been really communicative to me [already]. … I think that's what Avery was missing a little, communicating with the players individually. I think that's the way to go.

    "It's still a players' league. It's not a league of coaches."

    Marc Stein is the senior NBA writer for ESPN.com. To e-mail him, click here


    Wow, do you guys really think Rick tried to get Reggie to Dallas. My respect for Reggie as a team player and glue on and off the court just doubled.
    ANDY: I guess it comes down to a simple choice, really. Get busy winning or get busy losing.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

    When I saw the title, I thought it was about Rick's interest in Artest.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

      Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
      When I saw the title, I thought it was about Rick's interest in Artest.
      Me too.

      Rick sure seems to have some interesting ideas for the players he wants.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

        Originally posted by Kegboy View Post
        When I saw the title, I thought it was about Rick's interest in Artest.
        Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
        Me too.

        Rick sure seems to have some interesting ideas for the players he wants.
        I thought it was about Artest as well.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

          Add me to that list.
          The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

            Originally posted by ABADays View Post
            Add me to that list.
            Yep... me too!
            ...Still "flying casual"
            @roaminggnome74

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

              Yep!
              And I won't be here to see the day
              It all dries up and blows away
              I'd hang around just to see
              But they never had much use for me
              In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

                Ditto.
                This space for rent.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

                  "If he had Rasheed [Wallace in Detroit], Rick might have won a championship, too."

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

                    haha, put me on that list.


                    Some people want it to happen, some
                    wish it would happen, & others make it happen.
                    ..Michael Jordan.

                    Pressure is something you feel when
                    you don't know what the hell you're
                    doing.
                    ..Peyton Manning.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

                      Originally posted by maragin View Post
                      "If he had Rasheed [Wallace in Detroit], Rick might have won a championship, too."
                      Or if he played Tay throughout the season.
                      “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                      “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

                        Add me to that list
                        LoneGranger33 said
                        Agreed. As the members of Guns and Roses once said, "every rose has its thorn".

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

                          Originally posted by Los Angeles View Post
                          Or if he played Tay throughout the season.
                          Because that's what wins PLAYOFF games (ie, when Tay did get to play).

                          Brown LOST HOME COURT to Rick using the same teams from the season before. It was only the addition that Sheed that drastically changed things. Look what Rick got for losing Brad Miller before he even got to Indy. Now look at what Detroit had to give up to add ALL-STAR Sheed to the team.

                          Yes, clearly Rick has always had the silver spoon chances when it comes to rosters.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            Because that's what wins PLAYOFF games (ie, when Tay did get to play).

                            Brown LOST HOME COURT to Rick using the same teams from the season before. It was only the addition that Sheed that drastically changed things. Look what Rick got for losing Brad Miller before he even got to Indy. Now look at what Detroit had to give up to add ALL-STAR Sheed to the team.

                            Yes, clearly Rick has always had the silver spoon chances when it comes to rosters.

                            I gotta agree. Go back into the archives here, and you will see how Kstat (IIRC) had all but given up on the Pistons chances before the Sheed trade.

                            Rick was doing a better job here than Larry was doing in Detroit before they got Sheed. Adding a player like Sheed while giving away basically nothing sure does help out. It was certainly a smart move by Dumbars to have his chips in place.

                            The more I think about it, Rick should have been given another chance here. Does Utah dump Sloan when they have a bad year? Did SA get rid of Pop just because they had a horrendous year with Drob out (though I guess they had just fired Bo HIll).

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: "Man, you're crazy." - Reggie to Rick

                              i didn't read it, but thot it was about Artest as well
                              STARBURY

                              08 and Beyond

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X