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

Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

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

    Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

    Saw this on RealGm boards and it seems pretty legit. Apparently, a poster from a T-Wolves board had gone to a breakfast recently where Kahn spoke about his plans for the Wolves and reflected a little bit on his time in Indy and a few of the deals & draft picks that were made. I found it pretty interesting: http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtop...?f=22&t=914495


    One of the guys asked him why we should have faith in his ability to build a winning team.

    - He started by noting that he basically tutored under Donnie Walsh (he was the GM for the Pacers from 1995 to 2004), calling Donnie one of the most brilliant basketball minds in the league (true).

    - Noting his tenure dates, I asked him how much involvement he had in the trades for Jermaine O'Neal, Ron Artest and Brad Miller. Here's where it got interesting....

    - The story behind the O'Neal trade was actually very telling. The Pacers had tried to trade for O'Neal two years before it actually happened, a year before O'Neal's rookie deal expired. Jermaine was buried in the rotation, and wasn't happy about it, but resigned with Portland under the promise that he'd play more. That didn't happen, and O'Neal and his agent got very upset. But that year, the Blazers lost that heartbreaker series to the Lakers in the WCF. Because of that, they had a knee jerk reaction and decided they needed every player from 1 to 12 to be able to contribute; thus the lopsided trade that sent O'Neal to Indiana for Dale Davis. Kahn noted that as an example of how a team always has to be prepared to take advantage of opportunities when they come up...had the Blazers won that series like it looked like they were going to, the Pacers probably wouldn't have been able to get O'Neal.

    - In terms of the Ron Artest trade, Kahn said that the main goal was to clear Jalen Rose's contract, but that while they knew the talent level of Artest, they obviously weren't aware of all the demons in his head (to be fair, at the time, no one knew how troubled Ron was). He said it was an object lesson he's learned from to pay attention to the fine details and not just the numbers.

    - He also noted a lesson learned when they drafted Tinsley. Another player with a lot of talent but a bad attitude, but interestingly enough, he said that that wasn't the problem with that pick. The problem was that the Pacers had fully vetted Tinsley but didn't even have Tony Parker on the board that year, which really emphasized for him the importance of scouting.

    - Kahn then mentioned that he felt team did themselves a diservice by not scouting pro players on other teams. He wants to get a full, in house database of every player in the league so that when a trade or free agency opportunity comes up, the team has an easily accessible full history on that player.


    A couple of things stood out for me:

    -- I think Bird picked up some tricks from Walsh. I would consider the Portland deal last year a knee jerk reaction by the Blazers. Althought a tentative deal was worked out prior to the draft, Portland saw Bayless and his stock fall right at the draft and were able to grab him, but it also cost them our two starters in the backcourt for the next few years in Jack and Rush and what looks to be a solid reserve in McRoberts.

    -- I think Bird and his staff are also looking at the finer details since he has been at the helm. While Bird may get chastised for trading for and drafting "milk drinkers", he has learned from the mistakes of Tinsley and Ron Ron. I think looking at the finer details and seeing what a player is able to bring both on and off the court has become the norm in Indy. I would argue that was the case with Roy & Brandon as well as guys like Troy, Dunleavy, Ford, Jack, etc.

    -- Lastly, I think that Bird has put a greater emphasis on scouting and finding quality players. The last few years, he has struck out on Harrison and Williams, but hit a grand slam in Granger and seems to have scored on both Rush and Hibbert.
    Last edited by Smoothdave1; 06-19-2009, 01:56 AM.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

    Thanks for posting this. Interesting read. If we had traded O'Neal for Davis in 98 (don't know if that's who we would've given up then, but have a hard time believing we would've traded Dale that early), then I think Peck really would have been sent to an early grave.

    Originally posted by Smoothdave1 View Post



    - In terms of the Ron Artest trade, Kahn said that the main goal was to clear Jalen Rose's contract, but that while they knew the talent level of Artest, they obviously weren't aware of all the demons in his head (to be fair, at the time, no one knew how troubled Ron was). He said it was an object lesson he's learned from to pay attention to the fine details and not just the numbers.

    I can already hear the typing of a Chicago-based poster that paid attention to the Bulls in the Artest years and knew that Artest had big problems.

    Last edited by Sollozzo; 06-19-2009, 01:32 AM.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

      Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
      Thanks for posting this. Interesting read. If we had traded O'Neal for Davis in 98 (don't know if that's who we would've given up then, but have a hard time believing we would've traded Dale that early), then I think Peck really would have been sent to an early grave.




      I can already hear the typing of a Chicago-based poster that paid attention to the Bulls in the Artest years and knew that Artest had big problems.

      You may have the wrong Davis. I bet it would have been Antonio for Jermaine in 98... that would have been very interesting. Get Jermaine instead of Bender and keep Dale.
      "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

      - ilive4sports

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

        Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
        You may have the wrong Davis. I bet it would have been Antonio for Jermaine in 98... that would have been very interesting. Get Jermaine instead of Bender and keep Dale.
        That would have been a dream come true. JO always needed a guy like Dale to play next to... it would free him to be Smits' replacement instead of Dale's replacement, which would have changed his whole career arc.
        This space for rent.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

          Originally posted by Adam1987 View Post
          I can already hear the typing of a Chicago-based poster that paid attention to the Bulls in the Artest years and knew that Artest had big problems.

          Yeah, I'm calling B.S. on that one. They knew they were making a high stakes gamble with their franchise and it didn't pay off. The other part is more interesting though...

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

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

            Wasn't it when Ronny was with the Bulls that he tried getting a job at Best Buy for the discount?

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

              Originally posted by Hitman02 View Post
              Wasn't it when Ronny was with the Bulls that he tried getting a job at Best Buy for the discount?
              Yes, but it was Circuit City.
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

                Originally posted by Hitman02 View Post
                Wasn't it when Ronny was with the Bulls that he tried getting a job at Best Buy for the discount?
                Haha, yeah, I think it was actually a Circuit City, but that was definitely Artest.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

                  Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                  how the do you make trades when you are "not scouting pro players on other teams"?

                  That part puzzled me a little bit. If they weren't "scouting pro players on other teams", then why were they so enamored with JO?

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

                    Yeah, I was also confused by that. You'd think every team has everyone scouted heavily. You'd think.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

                      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                      Yeah, I was also confused by that. You'd think every team has everyone scouted heavily. You'd think.
                      Well I would think you could get away with most. There's no need to scout Kobe or LeBron. Neither of those guys are getting traded, and you see all you need to see of them all the time anyway. I think most starters would be scouted. It's the benchwarmers that would get you.

                      The part I was honked off most about is how in the hell do you not even have Tony Parker on your draft board. You mean to tell me they thought there were 60 players better than him?

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

                        No wonder they "couldn't afford to pay two coaches". They must have been a real fly-by-night operation back then.
                        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                        And life itself, rushing over me
                        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

                          Perhaps I haven't paid close enough attention - what is Kevin McHale's job responsibility now?
                          Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                          Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                          Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                          Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                          And life itself, rushing over me
                          Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                          Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

                            Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                            Perhaps I haven't paid close enough attention - what is Kevin McHale's job responsibility now?
                            None. Kahn will GM and Mark Jackson might coach.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Former Pacers GM David Kahn discusses his time w/Pacers

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

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X