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

How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

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

  • How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

    Yes, we've had a talent upgrade in West and Hill. But West has struggled a lot at times, and the overall second unit hasn't played too well.

    And yes, the younger guys (DC, Roy and PG specifically) have gotten better over the summer, but they still are similar players.


    He hasn't had time to practice with his team and he's never had a full training camp.

    We're talking about a coach that has taken a team, with largely the same players, from "unlikely to make the playoffs" to "tied for the third fewest losses in the league" in a year.

    I think it's really unbelievable what this guy has been able to do. He's clearly a great motivator. He makes good adjustments and he learns quickly. The only obvious flaw I've seen is that sometimes he puts poor player combinations on the floor.

    I just think it's amazing what the Pacers seem to have lucked into.

  • #2
    Re: How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

    Barring a collapse, he's also the next COTY.

    The last time our head coach won this award, we went to the ECF.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
      Barring a collapse, he's also the next COTY.
      I really hope so.

      He's just so darn loveable too.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

        Sure we upgraded in talent and our young guys improved. But what I love about Vogel is that he has our guys playing to their strengths! Its just so refreshing to see. I do have some concerns, like our offense being down right putrid at times, our defense always over helping and some questionable substitution patterns, but we are 13-6 and have only played 6 games at home. Who am I to question this? Vogel is clearly doing something right and I am enjoying it.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

          It's too early to say, but there are some definite positives.

          It's amazing how significant a simple change can be. Right now his changes are simple. Outside to inside, fast paced to slow paced, take the first open shot to take a good shot; these are all things that better fit the talent of the team.

          The first time I was really impressed with Vogel was in the playoffs. Out of nowhere we played team defense that I didn't think we were capable of. And now we're starting to see some more obvious strategies seep into the gameplans. Tonight was the perfect example in how we pressured their ballhandlers. Against Chicago last week it was switching the defense on Rose late to our most favorable matchup.

          We've seen Danny Granger and Dahntay Jones slowly transform their shot-selection. That is a huge undertaking for both players in such a short period of time. Both players and coaches deserve the credit on that. By the way, this is how Dahntay played in Denver and this is why I was thrilled to get him. What encourages me the most is that George Karl might be the best offensive coach currently in the NBA, so Dahntay *should* have looked better in Karl's system.

          We've seen Darren Collison slowly transform into a decent defender, using his speed to break up plays in transition and pressure the ballhandler. This is the defense Darren played at UCLA and partly at New Orleans. He has a ways to go but there is a visible change.

          We've seen Roy's ability to seal off his defender and actively pursue rebounds improve dramatically. I'm not sure how much of this is the coach but it didn't happen in his previous seasons, even when he was bigger.

          There are definitely some holes/flaws. My main concern is whether or not he can create an offense that works efficiently and involves more passing. I still think Hill and Stephenson are being misused and it needs to be Tyler in the pick and pops, not Lou. Some players need some major teaching/instruction on their decision-making. But given the shortage of time, I've been very impressed with Frank's (and the other coaches) job so far. Let's hope this growth continues.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

            I think Vogel has realy done so well as a coach. The early record speaks for itself. The team stats, especially on defense, show the vast improvement of the team. The team buying into his system tells you how much the players believe in him.

            The poor rotation sometimes is probably part of having a tight schedule plus lack of time for practice, but he adjusts his lineups well in general. I believe as the season goes on, the rotations and familiarity on-court, especially among the bench guys will improve.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
              Barring a collapse, he's also the next COTY.

              The last time our head coach won this award, we went to the ECF.
              I hope so, but what about Doug Collins if Philly keeps it up? Not that Vogel shouldn't, if Philly and the Pacers end up with identical records, who will get the votes?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

                Originally posted by PacersFan1991 View Post
                I hope so, but what about Doug Collins if Philly keeps it up? Not that Vogel shouldn't, if Philly and the Pacers end up with identical records, who will get the votes?
                Philly had the better record last year, i'd imagine Frank would get it on the basis that the Pacers improved more than the Sixers.
                Goodbye Captain, My Captain. I wish you had the chance to sink or swim with your ship on its quest for the "ship".

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

                  I'll just phrase it like stephen colbert would

                  Frank Vogel...great coach....or the greatest coach?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

                    The best part is that it seems like all these guys will die for Vogel in battle. Astounding turnaround. Excellent coaching by both him and Collins this year.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

                      He's absolutely-no-doubt-about-it got the hearts and minds of every player in the palm of his hand. I'm far from some x's and o's savant, but I do worry a bit he's got Roy specifically playing above his head, but whatever. The emotional/leadership/confidence/whatever ya wanna call it aspect is what I think's most important for a pro coach, and Frank unquestionably has that. I'm very happy Dan Burke's still on the staff, but I'm even happier to eat my "why the hell'd they give this Vogel dude the gig over Burke" words.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

                        I think he does a great job considering he has had no time as you have said. He has been adjusting on the fly as a first year full-time coach. Though obviously his prior ties with the organization probably help to facilitate the transition more.

                        He is great with the Xs and Os. He has a great basketball mind. He is great at analyzing video and drawing up scouting reports.He has a great sense of optimism, and believes in his players and they will play their hearts out for him some nights. We haven't got to the every night level, but no team every does. Hell we are only one loss out of the top spot in the East.

                        Everything that seemed impossible under JOB, now seems possible under Vogel. It's like the whole team has done a 180. The West signing was huge because it allows Tyler to grow and learn how to deal with the counter maneuvers teams have thrown at him. Before Vogel the tape wasn't out on Tyler yet I feel. JOB kept him on a tight leash. He is still starting quality IMO, but this allows him to work out the bugs and stay fresh. By the end of the year Tyler may be deadly, and Vogel is a big reason for that. Vogel has always believed in Tyler and Tyler will always go harder than anyone on the court for him. I think this is rubbing off on West because I just don't remember him being this physical. Tyler may have really changed the culture of our front court, and Vogel enabled him. Foster gets a lot of credit for this as well. Let's face it, the only players that I even considered smash mouth last year were Tyler and Foster until Vogel took over, and maybe Dahntay gets an honorable mention. Now Granger and George both seem to have embraced it, and we added a great amount of more smash mouth style with Hill, West, Pendergraph, and Amundson.

                        Vogel takes heat for his anemic rotations at time, but these teams are always great defensively I think. Sure sometimes the second unit has a little trouble scoring but the other team isn't necessarily lighting them up. I've seen the second unit get us back in games from their defense and hustle. Amundson really is very Foster like. He is better than anyone gives him credit for defensively and rebounding wise. He is also pretty decent at attacking the basket. His leaping ability reminds me of McRoberts.

                        So I think Vogel has done great. He also has a very strong coaching staff around him so I think he does a great job processing what they are telling him and adjusting accordingly. I don't know what it is there is just something about him that since the day we hired him as the interim coach, that very first interview I just knew we found our coach of the future. I guess it was just intuition, but I believe Vogel is going to have a long coaching career.

                        He is like the anti-Jim Caldwell. He makes a bad team good with just a slightly different line-up. Obviously Peyton is the GOAT and this may not be the best example but you get my drift. He coached us to the playoffs and regardless of what the 4-1 looks like, we actually competed with the team with the best record and literally almost had them and let them off the hook. He had no off season and we are sitting at 13-6 and I honestly feel we are underachieving because everyone is still learning on the fly, especially Hill and West. Underachieving and we are 1 loss behind the Bulls? Yea Vogel definitely is a good coach.
                        Last edited by Midcoasted; 01-30-2012, 06:24 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

                          The best comparison I can think of for Frank Vogel, is Brad Stevens.

                          That's a very, very good thing.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

                            here is what I posted in another thread, but it applies here. new coach, new players and improved young players - all 3 are the reasons why the team is much better.

                            The transformation of the Pacers has been quite remarkable. No I am not talking about from a bad team into a good team - we won't know until the playoffs because that is almost all that matters in the NBA, but what is quite remarkable is the transformation from a pretty soft team into a smashmouth very tough team.

                            It does remind me a lot of 1993 transforming to 1994. If you look back we changed coaches, added A. Davis, Byron Scott, Woody and traded for McKey. What that did was changed us from a soft team into a very physically tough team. Flash ahead to now and we changed coaches, added Hill and West and Roy has become a different player a vastly different player.

                            Niether time did we change the core of the team, but both times some young players came of age and both times a few veterans were added and both times a new coach came in.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: How Good of a coach is Frank Vogel

                              I don't think I've seen this mentioned yet.

                              What is really striking to me is the strength of our play coming out of halftime.

                              Last year, it always seemed that the 3rd quarter was the worst for our team: lackadaisical, bored, inept etc. Other teams were adjusting to us and taking us out of our game. We would lose games in the 3rd quarter.

                              Now it seems as if the 3rd quarter is one of our strongest. I look at last night's game against Orlando as a perfect example. Frank is making the adjustments at the half. We are winning games by our 3rd quarter play alone. (Plus, we seem to be able to close games out now, but that's worthy of a separate post...)

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X