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

Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

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

  • #46
    Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

    I'm a big fan of plucking out a long term assistant for one of the top coaches in the league. One name to keep in mind is Elston Turner, he is Adelman's right hand man. Adelman is a top 5 coach in this league.

    Turner's key role is player development and scouting opposition. He's a former player, and I've heard he has a great relationship with Houston's young talent. They've taken late picks and turned them into very good players (Brooks, Landry, Scola, etc).

    I'm a firm believer in Avery Johnson as well.

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

      Originally posted by purdue101 View Post
      I'm a big fan of plucking out a long term assistant for one of the top coaches in the league. One name to keep in mind is Elston Turner, he is Adelman's right hand man. Adelman is a top 5 coach in this league.

      Turner's key role is player development and scouting opposition. He's a former player, and I've heard he has a great relationship with Houston's young talent. They've taken late picks and turned them into very good players (Brooks, Landry, Scola, etc).

      I'm a firm believer in Avery Johnson as well.
      Turner is a guy who might deserve a shot, but remember what happened with Marc Iavaroni. Remember that Iavaroni was Mike D'Antoni's right hand man for the majority of the time during their year's of great success. Iavaroni was credited with having a lot to do with it.

      He bacme a very hot item following D'Antoni's first two seasons of success there, going so far as to TURN DOWN a couple of head coaching offers because he didn't like their roster situations.

      Then he finally decided to coach Memphis. And he totally bombed out. He didn't get along with players. The team lost a lot and he was gone not 1.5 years after being hired. I think Turner wouldn't be a bad choice, but keep in mind a lot of guys might be great "right hand" man's, but terrible head coaches. Iavaroni is a good example of that.

      And FWIW, if you don't like the way JOB treated McBobbies in that post game interview, you're definitely not going to like the way Avery Johnson calls people out and throws them under the bus during his press conferences.

      Edit: And although Kurt Rambis deserves more time in Minnesota, it doesn't appear as if spending the better part of 8 years as the lead assistant to the most successful NBA coach of all time has made much of a difference for them.
      Last edited by d_c; 03-06-2010, 10:43 AM.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

        [QUOTE=Thesterovic;970045]

        Larry would never ever, ever, ever even comtemplate the idea of thinking about it. He hates Bill. /QUOTE]


        If they don't have a Celtic connection, they are NOT going to be high on Bird's list.

        IIRC, Bird wanted Dennis Johnson to coach the Pacers b4 he died.

        Tom T., being at Boston, might be an assist coach Bird would consider if he's inclined that JO'B's replacement doesn't have to have had HC experience.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

          Some assistants I like are Brian Shaw (LAL), Mike Budenholzer (SA), Lester Conner (IND), Alex English (TOR) Tom Thibodeau (BOS).

          Not all of these guys are young, but they're good, player type head coaches who work to develop individual players and also can run an all around, fair, balanced system I'm sure.

          I'd hope JOB would be hired as an assistant coach in the league elsewhere. He can help out with a team's offense.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

            I'm dying to see Mark Jackson try his chops at coaching. Would love for that to be in Indiana.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

              Two names that come to mind for me would be John Stockton or Mark Iavaroni. Watching Stockton his entire career and seeing what a floor general he was. . . he would be a great choice. the hard thing with Stockton is getting him to take the job. He is pretty happy in retirement right now.

              Iavaroni was somebody who I thought got a raw deal in Memphis. . . . He would bring a great offensive system and would probably be cheaper to bring on now than he was before.
              PACER FAN ON STRIKE!!!-The moment the Pacers fire Larry Bird I will cheer for them again.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

                Originally posted by d_c View Post
                Lenny Wilkens was a HOFer as a player and currently has the most wins of any coach.
                Tommy Heinsohn is another HoFer as a player and has a 427/263 record + 2 NBA titles as a coach.

                Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                I really like the idea of at least interviewing international candidates.
                Nah, too early and the only guy worth considering is out of the picture.

                Maybe David Blatt - American, former PG for Pete Carril at Princeton who constructed his coaching career in Europe - as an assistant coach.

                Originally posted by Roaming Gnome View Post
                I personally voted for the young assistant because you can get someone that is willing to take their lumps with the young guys early on, but grow with the team that he's coaching.
                I'd consider going that way once I actually had a new roster filled with young players.

                Originally posted by Trophy View Post
                Some assistants I like are Brian Shaw (LAL), Mike Budenholzer (SA), Lester Conner (IND), Alex English (TOR) Tom Thibodeau (BOS).

                Not all of these guys are young, but they're good, player type head coaches who work to develop individual players and also can run an all around, fair, balanced system I'm sure.

                I'd hope JOB would be hired as an assistant coach in the league elsewhere. He can help out with a team's offense.
                Shaw has never showed interest in leaving LA probably because he's Jackson annointed heir. Thibodeau, I'm not sure if he'd be a good head-coach. He's been trying to get a gig for years and nobody has ever given him the opportunity.

                My favourite guy of that group is Mike Budenholzer. The Spurs offence runs like a Swizz clock and he's a big part of it + he's said to be really good relationship-wise (unlike PJ Carlesimo) + the Spurs Summer League squads are always very organized.

                ------

                I'd keep O'Brien barring major roster changes, but if I had to replace him, my top choices would be:

                Veterans
                1. Paul Silas
                2. Jeff Van Gundy (probably not interested)
                3. Sam Mitchell

                Non-veterans
                1. Mike Budenholzer
                2. Monty Williams
                3. Dave Joerger

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

                  I wouldn't be shocked to see Sam Mitchell be our next coach. He's been off the radar for a little while, and I think I even remember him being mentioned as a potential guy for us 3 years ago.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

                    I really don't like the idea of Lawrence Frank coaching the P's at all being as Nets fans ended up hating him and campaigning for his firing. Seems like a redundant move to drop O'Brien for Frank.

                    I don't want Scott either.

                    Anyone but O'Bie and the other 2 IMO.
                    Pacers,baby!

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

                      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                      I wouldn't be shocked to see Sam Mitchell be our next coach. He's been off the radar for a little while, and I think I even remember him being mentioned as a potential guy for us 3 years ago.
                      I have been thinking the same thing and that's why I had him on the poll, although he is not getting much love in the voting dept. He actually had a nice record with the Raptors but I think he wore on the team (I remember him being described as a disciplnarian-type) and they let him go very early in the 08-09 season even though the Raptors were 8-9 and the Raptors got steadily worse after that.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

                        I want to start out by saying that I don't claim to be as much of an "expert" about the Pacers and the NBA as you folks are. I'm a life-long Pacers fan, but I just don't know the in's and out's as much as many of you guys. I speak as a loyal fan just expressing his view, but I gladly read everyone else's opinions and actually am very interested in everyone's opinions.

                        With that said, I think knowing X's and O's as a head coach is overrated in the league. It's a combination of the talent you have and, IMHO, the assistants you have. Larry never really did much coaching when he was here. Carlisle and Harter seemed to be the brains behind everything.

                        This is why I am one of those people PacerDude hates...........I vote Mark Jackson. He is young enough to relate with many of the players, even being a former teammate of Foster. I think he would do a very good job in motivating the players and getting them to compete at a very high level, as well as helping AJ Price (or John Wall, maybe?) develop as complete point guards (and hopefully somehow teach them how to do all those bad-*** behind the back, no look passes).

                        I think you let the assistants be the "Coordinators", if you will. The question is, who are the assistants that would have the right combination of X's and O's that best fits the Pacers roster?
                        Last edited by Day-V; 03-08-2010, 02:05 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

                          Originally posted by Day-V View Post
                          This is why I am one of those people PacerDude hates...........I vote Mark Jackson. He is young enough to relate with many of the players, even being a former teammate of Foster. I think he would do a very good job in motivating the players and getting them to compete at a very high level, as well as helping AJ Price (or John Wall, maybe?) develop as complete point guards (and hopefully somehow teach them how to do all those bad-*** behind the back, no look passes).
                          Nobody has any kind of idea what kind of motivator Mark Jackson would be as a coach. Right now he's just a guy who looks and sounds cool on TV. That's it. That's all.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

                            Originally posted by d_c View Post
                            Nobody has any kind of idea what kind of motivator Mark Jackson would be as a coach. Right now he's just a guy who looks and sounds cool on TV. That's it. That's all.
                            I thought he was very vocal in his tenure as player here and the leadership he showed was like having a coach on the floor. He always knew how to push the right buttons with everyone. Feeding things into Reggie's ear through all those games in New York, working with young guys like Jalen at the time, and in his own little way, antagonizing the opposing team and just feeding that competitive energy to his teammates. It was contagious.

                            While someone said earlier (and it was probably you) that Bird at least had Front Office experience before he became a coach, I just really don't see how that helps in terms of actually coaching. I mean hell, Sam Perkins works in the front office, but I don't see what he does in anyway help out his coaching abilities, if he even has any to begin with.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

                              Originally posted by Day-V View Post
                              I thought he was very vocal in his tenure as player here and the leadership he showed was like having a coach on the floor. He always knew how to push the right buttons with everyone. Feeding things into Reggie's ear through all those games in New York, working with young guys like Jalen at the time, and in his own little way, antagonizing the opposing team and just feeding that competitive energy to his teammates. It was contagious.

                              While someone said earlier (and it was probably you) that Bird at least had Front Office experience before he became a coach, I just really don't see how that helps in terms of actually coaching. I mean hell, Sam Perkins works in the front office, but I don't see what he does in anyway help out his coaching abilities, if he even has any to begin with.
                              My fear is going into next year with an inexperienced coach, an inexperienced G.M., and inexperienced President of Basketball Operations with some expecting 'Rainbows and Butterflies'. No matter how much talent and potential the leaders have, we're going to make this year's Nets look like the 1995–96 Bulls.
                              Originally posted by Natston;n3510291
                              I want the people to know that they still have 2 out of the 3 T.J.s working for them, and that ain't bad...

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Who would you like to see as the Pacers coach in 2010-2011?

                                If I were to ignore the $$$ aspect of this...specifically that TPTB won't spend $$$ on 2 Coaches on the payroll ( which is one of the reasons why I'm guessing that Lester Connor would be Coaching this Team at some point with the "interim" tag )......I can see TPTB pursuing Byron Scott as a Coach....mainly for 3 reasons.

                                ( 1 ) he's Coach that Players can relate and listen to since he was one himself
                                ( 2 ) he's shown that he can win and lead a Team to the Playoffs
                                ( 3 ) he's a former well-known Pacer that long-time fans are familiar.

                                The last 2 reasons are the main reasons why I can see TPTB being interested in Byron Scott.....mainly to help draw back fans. As a Coach that has won many games with a young Hornets Team....he brings a winning mentality and Coaching Experience to the Team ( hence no learning curve that a young Coach would have to overcome ) while bringing back a familiar face for PR/Marketing reasons to the Organization.....both of which are important to try to attract fans back to the Fieldhouse.

                                Although one can ask why I'd consider bringing on a Coach for PR reasons....I'd agree if it were any other Coach. But Byron Scott does bring Experience and some Coaching respectability that fans can respect.

                                Just a guess and my hope that the Pacers would consider hiring him on.
                                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X