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

Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

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

  • #91
    Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

    Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
    Good coach. Innovative, inspirational, young. Cannot draw up final offensive possessions to save his life. That's his main flaw in my book, and easily cured by good assistants.
    I think the plays he drew up were good but I think Collison failed to execute them properly. The Bulls trapped him on the Pick-and-Roll and he didn't make the correct decisions when that happened.

    When the game was tied at 84, Danny came open off of a screen but Darren didn't get him the ball. Instead he forced a contested shot between 2 defenders. The last play actually wasn't a bad play. Deng did a great job defending and Danny still got a great look at the game winning shot. Deng bothered the shot and forced the miss.

    I don't see how you can blame Vogel when Hansbrough and Hibbert missed as many shots as they did in Game 3. Hibbert got the ball deep in the paint several times and he either missed or committed the offensive foul. Hansbrough's jumper has gone M.I.A. since game 1. Neither of those 2 things are Frank Vogel's fault.

    Vogel made the great decision to play Dhantay Jones in Game 3. He also has the Pacers playing the best defense they've played all year. The Bulls have Derrick Rose and the Pacers don't. That's the difference in the entire series.

    I don't understand how anyone can fault Vogel for not getting his young 37 win team to upset the league leader in wins and defensive. It's just silly.

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

      Wait. Why does everyone point at tyler and say " see Obrien wouldn't play him and now Vogel does and look at him now". Yet, obrien didn't play Ford either and its not assumed that he might benefit from thee Vogel system too? You can't have it both ways. And for the record, ive thought tj has been pretty solid all year.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

        this series has made me think much better of Vogel, not worse

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

          Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
          Who is gonna play instead of Price? Ford? Do you guys remember how TJ Ford plays? Dribble into the lane and turn it over. Has Price been good? Hell no. He is looking for his shot way too much. But TJ isn't the answer and DC can't play the whole game. Blame Price for Price's play, not Vogel.

          Ford has played in 1 game, and he wasn't at all as you described. He played within the system trying to get other players involved. OTOH, Price shot "9" times as a b/u PG in 13 PT. Making only TWO of them. That's a whopping 22%! Price in 3 playoff games is averaging 17 minutes per game and has achieved the incredible 1 Ast per game and shot 34%. That's ridiculous! 1 Ast for 17 minutes from a PG is beyond horrible. It just plain out right stinks. There is NO defending that type of poor play. I'd much rather have Ford, who has playoff experience, backing up Collison than Price.

          AND yes, the Pacers need to look for a better b/u PG than Price for next season.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

            Originally posted by flox View Post
            I don't suppose that you are advocating for a change in big men? That would make us most unlikely allies....
            I believe strongly, that Price and Collison will be a fine PG duo. It's something we don't have to worry about, and them developing is our problem right now. Do they have flashes of terrible play. Yes, but they also show flashes of what they are capable of doing. And we just need to develop it. So it's not a problem. Both have a huge work ethic, do what the coaches tell them to do, and are pretty talented guys. They've gotten a lot of hate around here, but I have a feeling they'll both make people look silly by this time next season. (If given the opportunity)

            But they are consistently the most "hated" on. We've gotten "Price hasn't played well all series." Not true. Not true at all. He played well the first game. Was Jekyll and Hyde the second. (Really just panicked and then settled down.) And did not play well last game. That's better then what Hansbrough, Josh, Hibbert, Dun, and Rush have done.

            DC..we've got people whining about DC. But he had been excellent in this series until last game. Of course, he was playing on a sprained ankle. Not like that could have had anything to do with it, at all.

            This series has shown, we need a defender and rebounder in the post. With that, we're up 3-0. That's something that Hibbert, Hansbrough, and McRoberts are never going to be. (Hello Jeff Foster ten years ago) I like all three of them a lot. And the skills that each bring to the game are unique. But none of them have the "tough defensive guy who is a rebounder" skill. That's the guy that needs to play next to Roy.

            My dream, would be to have Hans be the backup PF, McRoberts be the backup C, and get a starting PF that is capable of doing those things. Problem is, Josh is going to have to get stronger to do that. (But those two play well together anyway)

            I know you'd like to switch out Hibbert. I'd give Roy another year to see where he's at, as to me, he's got the most potential of the three. He works hard. His problem is mental, and core strength. (Which hopefully he'll address in the off season)

            We also need a SG that can score. But just like the PG position, I feel that's only a matter of time and development with Paul George. So understandable if we don't make a change there.

            This is just a mater of patience. These young guys are good. But the only thing we need, that we don't have, is a big guy that can rebound and defend. Heck, if the Pacers front office wanted to stick with this entire team for another season to see where they are at, then I'd be fine with it. I just believe that the conclusion we are going to come to is that we need a post defender and a rebounder.
            Last edited by Sookie; 04-22-2011, 11:10 AM.

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

              Vogel has outcoached thibs (COY) and has our guys playing with passion and intensity. How this series can make vogel look like anything other than a very good coach baffles me. The last play was a good one btw. It obviously wasn't drawn up for a DC contested floater, evidenced by dannies reaction. DC executes properly and danny has an open jumper.
              Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

              Comment


              • #97
                Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                I didn't get to see last night's game but based on what I saw previously from AJ I think Ford's experience could pay dividends. He has quickness necessary for the defensive end and he clearly wasn't rattled at all to be playing in game 2 even though he probably didn't expect to be.
                OTOH... I guess we're still playing for the future so playing AJ now, even if he has a rough patch, might payoff next season or the next time in the playoffs. Otherwise, being in win or go home mode, I'd expect TJ to get some minutes...
                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                ------

                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                -John Wooden

                Comment


                • #98
                  Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                  Yup......

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                    I think Frank has alot of potential as coach, and i realize its a learning process for him and the team together. I do have to question why paul george has not returned in the 2nd qtr after being such a disruptive force in the 1st. As well as he was playing today id give him as many minutes as he could handle.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                      Nope...

                      Comment


                      • Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                        Nobody makes the right decision all the time - and sometimes of course the right decision is much more obvious in hindsight. I don't think Vogel has made the right move all the time but I am totally puzzled by how anyone can look at where we were when he took over and at what we've done in this series against the #1 seed in the East and think "Yeah, that Vogel - not a good coach." Even Vogel fans did not envision this series being as competitive as it is but there is no doubt that Vogel's style of play matches up much better with the Bulls than JOB's. We can go all the way back to the regular season and take a look at the games against them headed by those coaches to see that.

                        Our guys are playing hard and Coach Vogel is putting them in a good position to succeed every game in this series. What more can you ask for from a coach?
                        "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

                        "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

                        "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

                        Comment


                        • Re: Frank Vogel-Great story, not a good coach.

                          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                          I believe strongly, that Price and Collison will be a fine PG duo. It's something we don't have to worry about, and them developing is our problem right now. Do they have flashes of terrible play. Yes, but they also show flashes of what they are capable of doing. And we just need to develop it. So it's not a problem. Both have a huge work ethic, do what the coaches tell them to do, and are pretty talented guys. They've gotten a lot of hate around here, but I have a feeling they'll both make people look silly by this time next season. (If given the opportunity)
                          Given that Price will probably not be in question until next season because of his contract (although his status as backup PG may be in question), I think that Price will get his shot in camp. I think we both have decently established positions on the Price issue, so we'll just see what camp brings on that. Lets see if he can do it.
                          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                          But they are consistently the most "hated" on. We've gotten "Price hasn't played well all series." Not true. Not true at all. He played well the first game. Was Jekyll and Hyde the second. (Really just panicked and then settled down.) And did not play well last game. That's better then what Hansbrough, Josh, Hibbert, Dun, and Rush have done.

                          DC..we've got people whining about DC. But he had been excellent in this series until last game. Of course, he was playing on a sprained ankle. Not like that could have had anything to do with it, at all.
                          I feel like when you have the point guards as the primary handlers, they will always get the most criticism. You need them to make the right decisions, and since we don't have an elite player to just dump the ball off to right now, they will get a lot of heat because they need to do more. But they do make really really bad plays at bad times that cause this, and as of right now if we want to win we just simply can't let that happen. I'm not saying it's fair, but at this point they have to carry a lot given the state of the rest of the team.
                          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                          This series has shown, we need a defender and rebounder in the post. With that, we're up 3-0. That's something that Hibbert, Hansbrough, and McRoberts are never going to be. (Hello Jeff Foster ten years ago) I like all three of them a lot. And the skills that each bring to the game are unique. But none of them have the "tough defensive guy who is a rebounder" skill. That's the guy that needs to play next to Roy.

                          My dream, would be to have Hans be the backup PF, McRoberts be the backup C, and get a starting PF that is capable of doing those things. Problem is, Josh is going to have to get stronger to do that. (But those two play well together anyway)
                          Besides the strength position for Josh at C, I feel like he's better off at the PF and is more natural there. I'm not sure if I want him here long term, I feel both strength and at times, height will be an issue. I think that we can most likely live with Hans as a starting PF if we get a better center. At the very least, his effort will ensure big minutes each night.
                          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                          I know you'd like to switch out Hibbert. I'd give Roy another year to see where he's at, as to me, he's got the most potential of the three. He works hard. His problem is mental, and core strength. (Which hopefully he'll address in the off season)
                          Agreed on the potential. Don't think he'll ever get there. Also worried that whatever PF we pair with Roy will be an offensive liability as many of those defensive rebounding PFs are. I think we're more likely to find that in a Center where we've seen Diop and Dalembert types.
                          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                          We also need a SG that can score. But just like the PG position, I feel that's only a matter of time and development with Paul George. So understandable if we don't make a change there.

                          This is just a mater of patience. These young guys are good. But the only thing we need, that we don't have, is a big guy that can rebound and defend. Heck, if the Pacers front office wanted to stick with this entire team for another season to see where they are at, then I'd be fine with it. I just believe that the conclusion we are going to come to is that we need a post defender and a rebounder.
                          Yes, I'd be ok with standing par and improving the bench for a season. We would ideally find bench players who can push for starters and hopefully get our young guns better.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X