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

Kravitz: RC a Champion

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    Kravitz: RC a Champion

    Kravitz: Rick Carlisle once a Pacers' castoff, now a champion

    http://www.indystar.com/article/2011...IndyStar.com|p

    At one point or another in most of our lives, we get hosed by management. We get a raw deal, maybe from new managers who want to reinvent the wheel, or by long-time bosses who seek to cover their own mistakes, and their derriere, by scapegoating someone.
    Which brings me to Rick Carlisle, NBA championship coach, who apparently wasn't quite good enough to make a go of it with the Indiana Pacers.


    Carlisle unfairly took the fall for team president Larry Bird and a roster of misbehaving players after the 2006-07 season, and on Sunday night, there he was, standing on the podium with the NBA champion Dallas Mavericks, reveling in a moment he helped make happen.
    Good for him. Good for everybody who has ever gotten the short end of the deal from management.


    I am always disinclined to say "I told you so" -- it's self-aggrandizing and petty -- but in this case, I'm going to say it: I told you so.
    In late April 2007, I wrote a series of columns saying Carlisle was a fall guy and a scapegoat, and this:


    "Think about this: Has any head coach in any professional sport been forced to deal with more non-basketball-related nonsense these past three years?


    "Soon enough, the ax will fall on Carlisle, leaving him with the option to take another coaching job, join the front office or take a sabbatical. After three years of coaching this eclectic group of humans, he deserves a year off. But my sense is he will end up coaching somewhere else and winning somewhere else."


    Yep.


    He did OK.


    Isn't it amazing how much better a coach Carlisle became when he got away from Ron Artest, Stephen Jackson, Jermaine O'Neal, David Harrison, Jamaal Tinsley and the cast of loonies?
    Isn't it amazing how much better a coach Carlisle became when his front office brought in free agents like Tyson Chandler instead of Sarunas Jasikevicius?


    Carlisle didn't deserve a pink slip for his four years here; he deserved a Purple Heart.


    Again, consider the madness that surrounded his tenure.
    He had that great first season in 2003-04, leading the Pacers to a 61-21 record and an Eastern Conference finals appearance against Detroit.
    That, though, wasn't his greatest coaching job. The next season brought The Brawl, and somehow -- with a decimated team, with guys coming in off the streets (remember Britton Johnsen?) and players like Fred Jones leading the way -- Carlisle not only got the Pacers to the playoffs, but won a first-round series against Doc Rivers and the Boston Celtics.


    The next season, The Brawl continued to resonate in ways that made Carlisle's job next to impossible. The players who stepped up and performed well the previous year were relegated back to the bench, and most failed to accept their diminished roles. And, of course, there was Artest's wigged-out trade request, which forced the Pacers to drop and eventually trade him away. Still, that team made the playoffs with a 41-41 record.


    Carlisle's fourth season was doomed before it even started. Training camp opened with the Club Rio affair, followed shortly thereafter by the 8 Seconds Saloon incident and a host of injuries. Now, there were people inside the organization who felt that Carlisle lost control of that team, that he kowtowed to O'Neal and lost the attention of his team as it limped to a 35-47 finish. And there were complaints about his personality, the way he could come across (unintentionally, it seemed to me) as cold, detached and arrogant.


    The players didn't like what they viewed as a paint-by-numbers offense that finished last in the league in scoring that final year. They believed they were being shackled, which seems really funny in retrospect when you see how beautifully Dallas' offense runs with a professional point guard and big guys who can rebound.


    Whatever Carlisle's culpability might have been, it paled in comparison with the mistakes the front office had made.


    And yet, he was fired.


    Foolishly.


    What Carlisle did this season with the Mavericks ranks as one of the most impressive coaching jobs we've ever seen. He lost his No. 2 scorer, Caron Butler, in January, and later his backup big man, Brendan Haywood, who was in and out of the Finals lineup with a hip pointer.


    During the series against Miami, Carlisle hit all the right buttons. He threw zones at the Heat, who couldn't have been more confused if the playbook was written in Mandarin Chinese. He put J.J. Barea in the starting lineup late in the series, where he changed the tempo of the game, and had DeShawn Stevenson come off the bench. And he managed the minutes of his veteran team, leaving his players fresh to knock off Oklahoma City, the L.A. Lakers and Miami.


    "This is a special team," Carlisle told reporters Sunday night. "This is the most special team that I've ever been around, because it's not about what you can't do, it's about what you can do. It's not about what your potential shortcomings are, it's what we could accomplish as a group together. And it was just phenomenal to be around them."


    It was phenomenal to watch.


    Carlisle, it turns out, is a championship-caliber coach.


    Just not in Indiana.


    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

    -Emiliano Zapata
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Kravitz: RC a Champion

    Carlisle wasn't ever going to win a championship in Indy, because no coach can win a championship with the cast of players we have had the past 4 years. Rick should be happy he was fired from this team (and I'm sure he is now).

    "I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Kravitz: RC a Champion

      Who's to say Carlisle didn't want out of this place that had become a looney bin those years? It was probably a mutual decision.

      Good Lord Kravitz, don't break your arm patting yourself on the back. This isn't something you knew that everyone couldn't see, and you're some sort of genius for it. Silly.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Kravitz: RC a Champion

        Okay so does Bob just ignore the fact that we were last in scoring his final year? I mean he mentions it but he basically just ignores it. I like RC, but it was clear this group of players back then did not match the coach. That's a failure of management for sure, and Management took the appropriate step to try and correct that by bringing in a new coach. To which they failed again by hiring JOB.

        I'm sure the year off gave RC a good chance to reflect on his mistakes here in Indiana. Although, Honestly I'm not convinced that RC has much to do with Dallas's beautiful offense. I mean he has the purest PG in the league. It would be stupid for RC to try and micro-manage Kidd.
        You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Kravitz: RC a Champion

          Kravitz isn't saying anything that any knowledgeable fan of the NBA probably didn't think. Carlisle had been successful as a head coach everywhere else he had been, so it was very likely that he'd have success again. He inherited a veteran team full of guys who know how to win, but had just never won it. I doubt he would've had anywhere near the success had he stuck around for our rebuilding years.

          I'd like to have him back now, but having him here the past few years, probably doesn't change a whole lot. Maybe we sneak into the playoffs one more time in those few years (and have some less headaches, JOB), but we'd also risk losing our draft position and some of our young assets like Hibbert, George, or Hansbrough. So the "I Told You So", doesn't really do it for me.
          Last edited by PR07; 06-14-2011, 09:26 AM.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Kravitz: RC a Champion

            I was so glad to see Rick get a championship.

            I agreed with Kravitz at the time that Carlisle was jumping on the grenade for the FO. I do not care who you are you are not going to win crap if most of your starters are crazy. Tinsley, Jackson, and Artest were just a bunch of screw ups and how our FO could think any coach could win with that trio is beyond me.

            Sadly in the NBA it is easier to part ways with a coach then a player. Someone had to fall on the grenade and it was easier to let Carlisle go then to move Tinsley or Jackson.

            What a surprise you can get something done when you have smart team players and do not have a FO who brings in freaking Jasikevicius.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Kravitz: RC a Champion

              This article reminded me of something Clark Kellogg commented on in the breakfast I attended last week. He brought up the Mavs and how he thought they would win the Championship and how happy he was for Rick that he was finding success. He said that since going to Dallas, Rick had done a 180 in how he coached and managed his players citing the fact that when he was here he was VERY meticulous and detailed on how he coached during games, almost to a fault. Remember his play card that he would pull out of his coat during most half court sets? Clark said he made a concerted effort to get rid of it when he went to Dallas and to coach more to the flow of the game, which the players appreciated.

              I thought it was funny that Denari chimed in that when Rick was here he always wore the same colored shirt/suit combo and now he mixes it up with his style/colors.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Kravitz: RC a Champion

                J Tinsley or a veteran savy Jason Kidd as your PG. Kidd deserved free reign, Tinsley did not. Tinsley was a quality PG in this league but he relied on 1 on 1 basketball too much.

                I don't understand why Kravitz has to take a shot @ Rooney. Several teams were interested in him & he didn't pan out. He did make the the Rookie/Soph Challenge game!!! He got injured and fell out of the rotation.

                Nobody blames the Simons. Compare Mark Cuban to them.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Kravitz: RC a Champion

                  What's interesting about Carlisle is that it wasn't just the Pacers that gave him a raw deal. I thought he was treated much worse in Detroit when he was fired so that they could sign Larry Brown as coach (which in retrospect worked out okay for 3 seasons).

                  I didn't think firing Carlisle was the right thing to do at the time. I still think that it would've been better to rebuild the team starting with trading Tinsley while he still had some value and keep Rick as the coach. However, maybe Rick (like Reggie), wanted out of the Pacers locker room petty drama. If so, I don't blame him at all.

                  At any rate, I'm glad his coaching status has been validated because what he had to go through during the Brawl season was ridiculous and he coached his bahookie off to get that team to 46 wins and a 2-1 lead in the second round against the defending Champ Pistons team.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Kravitz: RC a Champion

                    I would agree that this was just a bad situation all around and Rick was better off elsewhere.

                    In retrospect, I think Rick did himself a disservice taking this job immediately after Detroit. He used to talk about how great his year doing TV in Seattle was for his development, and I think the time away after here helped him immensely as well. He was able to lighten up and not hold the reigns so tightly.

                    Of course, having JKidd running the point certainly helps in that regard.
                    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Kravitz: RC a Champion

                      Originally posted by xBulletproof View Post
                      Good Lord Kravitz, don't break your arm patting yourself on the back. This isn't something you knew that everyone couldn't see, and you're some sort of genius for it. Silly.
                      Everyone? As a season ticket holder from 1987 through the 2008 season, I can tell you emphatically that the general consensus in Conseco was Carlisle needed to be fired. To suggest otherwise isn't just revisionist history, it's stating the exact opposite of the truth.
                      "Reggie Miller is the hardest player to guard." --Kobe Bryant

                      "Playing Reggie Miller drives me nuts. It's like chicken-fighting with a woman." --Michael Jordan

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Kravitz: RC a Champion

                        Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                        Okay so does Bob just ignore the fact that we were last in scoring his final year? I mean he mentions it but he basically just ignores it. I like RC, but it was clear this group of players back then did not match the coach. That's a failure of management for sure, and Management took the appropriate step to try and correct that by bringing in a new coach. To which they failed again by hiring JOB.

                        I'm sure the year off gave RC a good chance to reflect on his mistakes here in Indiana. Although, Honestly I'm not convinced that RC has much to do with Dallas's beautiful offense. I mean he has the purest PG in the league. It would be stupid for RC to try and micro-manage Kidd.

                        You missed the entire point. The point is that you don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

                        Which players didn't he match? JO? Tinsley? Ron? Al? etc. The exact same players they shipped out, and got new players with.

                        Look at the roster overhaul after Rick was let go. The whole roster, outside of Danny and Jeff, changed. Did Rick not fit Danny or Jeff?

                        Bob misses a huge point IMHO. I think Rick wanted the hell out of here, and Larry made that happen for his good friend. TPTB actually promoted Rick, giving him more control over the team (and more money), and then let him go the very next year.

                        I think it was a mutual decision for both sides to part ways.
                        “Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Kravitz: RC a Champion

                          Originally posted by Reginald View Post
                          Everyone? As a season ticket holder from 1987 through the 2008 season, I can tell you emphatically that the general consensus in Conseco was Carlisle needed to be fired. To suggest otherwise isn't just revisionist history, it's stating the exact opposite of the truth.
                          There were several of us that didn't want to see Rick go but I agree that it seemed that the majority thought it was a good idea to part ways.

                          I guess now it's just one of many things that didn't go exactly the Pacers way since 2005.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Kravitz: RC a Champion

                            I think that is one of Bob's worst columns to date

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Kravitz: RC a Champion

                              Given the choice to have Rick as our coach for this team I'd be all over it.
                              Our situation when Rick was fired was different. We seemingly had too much talent to give up on at the time and a change needed to be made. Hindsight is 20/20 so sure I'd rather have dumped the team and stuck it out with Rick, but we would've still sucked for the past 4 years. It's not that hard to be happy for Rick and support the Pacers.
                              Kravitz can't pass up an opportunity to blast the front office and the team.
                              Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X