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

JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

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

  • #46
    Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

    Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
    And he was only "crappy" because he didn't do the things that needed to be done to help the franchise long term. A long term he obviously wouldn't have been around for. JOB's teams won more games than they should have. That doesn't mean I like him, or think his style of basketball is at all enjoyable, but it's true.
    I think you have it exactly right. Everyone in the NBA knew JOB did a great job in Indy and everyone knew he would be right back as an assistant or a head coach. Everyone outside of Indianapolis, that is. I heard lots of claims that he would never coach again but only Pacer fans who had a "homer" view of their Pacers believed that. JOB established discipline to a team that Carlisle lost control of at the end of his tenure. That was the reason for his "my way or the highway" approach and I assure you that he had Bird's blessing in that. I am also sure that he got Bird's recommendation for a new job....... ...

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      Yes. He did a great job building Roy Hibbert's confidence and developing Granger's defense. He also helped McRoberts become a great 3 point shooter....and showed the world why Troy Murphy should get 40 mpg. I still can't understand why LA doesn't agree.

      But team chemistry is where he really helped us the most. I would not be surprised if he went down in Pacer history as the players favorite coach.....
      Hey!!! ... McBrick was a totally lost cause. It wasn't his job to build Hibbert's confidence, it was job to make him a basketball player. He did that. Granger has never played defense for anyone including a highly regarded Coach K. No one is going to be able to do that. He was a disiplinarian and those kind do not get love from the players. But those players needed that because they had walked all over Carlisle.... Give JOB this current team and a mandate to win and not rebuild and he would do fine and he would have a different approach. Bird always supported JOB and I am sure he still does.... ...

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

        Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
        No. I tried to hospitable to him, and in fact I was probably one of the last to get on the fire Jim O'Brien bandwagon, but that jerk quit on his team 6 weeks before he was fired. Watch how we started the season up until JOB decided to have Posey take over the Troy Murphy role. JOB QUIT on our team.

        Unforgivable.
        Players quit on their teams all the team. Management quits on their teams of the time (tanking). It happens. I'm not convinced JOB did it, but I don't care either way. It's the past and I don't care.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

          He sat Josh down against the Bulls in the fourth quarter when McBob had the hot hand just before the referees mercifully ended the JoB reign of tyranny 3 minutes early and cost us that game (not to mention the many other games that season he cost us, SA at home for example). He didn't think that team could make the playoffs. I said it on here a couple weeks before he was canned that he had quit on them
          "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

          "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

            I disliked JOB especially by the middle of that 3rd year, but I don't think he'd be a bad assistant coach at all. In fact, I didn't think he was a bad coach so much as I thought he was a bad coach for us. He got in a rut here (as evidenced by the strict subbing pattern) and he certainly lost his players. I wouldn't have ever been quite so livid about it, if he hadn't been given that maddening extension. But overall I think he is a sound coach that could have a positive impact at the assistant level. I think this will turn out to be a good pickup for the Mavs.

            I do feel bad for DC and DJ though. I really like those two guys, and this will really suck for them especially DC. Jones I think has the demeanor and experience to put the past behind him and move forward, but I'm afraid Collison will have a hard time with it.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

              Originally posted by OlBlu View Post
              Hey!!! ... McBrick was a totally lost cause. It wasn't his job to build Hibbert's confidence, it was job to make him a basketball player. He did that. Granger has never played defense for anyone including a highly regarded Coach K. No one is going to be able to do that. He was a disiplinarian and those kind do not get love from the players. But those players needed that because they had walked all over Carlisle.... Give JOB this current team and a mandate to win and not rebuild and he would do fine and he would have a different approach. Bird always supported JOB and I am sure he still does.... ...
              Jim was needed for a year...maybe two. But not three. Jim was indeed needed to lay down the law. But the Pacers proceeded to trade all the problem children and by year #3 we had choir boys getting beaten down by the warden. He should never have started year #3.

              ...and no, Jim wouldn't win with this team. Roy wouldn't play as well for him...and Roy is the best player on the team. Also, last year Granger actually did start playing a little defense again for the first time in years....but he wouldn't have under Jim. Under Jim, it was all about the three and Granger was fine with that. Now more is being asked of the players. They are now expected to play a complete game instead of a flawed gimmick.
              Last edited by BlueNGold; 08-19-2012, 09:41 PM.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

                You guys say OB won more games than he should, but as soon as he got canned, Vogel turned the team around. WITH THE EXACT SAME PLAYERS.

                You can counter that the team gave up on OB and that's why Vogel did so well. But Vogel did really well again the following year.

                Also, Vogel didn't just lead the same system and players with new attitudes. He changed all the stupid stuff OB was doing that all of us were complaining about. He emphasized defense and tough play. He cut out the silly bazillions of substitutions. He spoke positively of his players in public instead of negatively. He predicted wins rather than a losing season. He immediately spoke publicly about the need to take high percentage shots. He immediately benched Posey.

                You guys spin it however you want. The truth is completely obvious.
                "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

                  Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                  You guys say OB won more games than he should, but as soon as he got canned, Vogel turned the team around. WITH THE EXACT SAME PLAYERS.

                  You can counter that the team gave up on OB and that's why Vogel did so well. But Vogel did really well again the following year.

                  Also, Vogel didn't just lead the same system and players with new attitudes. He changed all the stupid stuff OB was doing that all of us were complaining about. He emphasized defense and tough play. He cut out the silly bazillions of substitutions. He spoke positively of his players in public instead of negatively. He predicted wins rather than a losing season. He immediately spoke publicly about the need to take high percentage shots. He immediately benched Posey.

                  You guys spin it however you want. The truth is completely obvious.
                  You forgot that he ended the "Jack a 3" offensive scheme, we suddenly stopped giving games away with the 4th quarter, Slick wasn't openly questioning defensive man assignments (as he was when JOB the quitter put Posey on Blake Griffin, remember what I said about Jim quitting on his team?) on air, fans stopped booing the head coach of the team, and he started actually playing Paul, not to mention dressing BOTH Tyler and Josh (remember when Bird had to order JOB to play Tyler, so he responded not by doing the logical thing and benching the washed up scrub "stretch 4" who was shooting an ridiculous 88% from behind the arc, but by giving Posey MORE minutes and not dressing Josh period? ), but I would have thanked this post 1000 times just because for "He immediately benched Posey (and cut back TJ's minutes)."

                  Let's face it, Jim the Quitter had a big role in Brandon Rush's struggles here (at least the part not self inflicted by B-Rush), he ALMOST ruined Roy's career, and god knows what would have happened to Paul had he not been canned. On the flip side, he extended James Posey's playing career a whole half season. I will give him some credit though, only he could have figured out a way to make another team want to trade for El Matador Troy.
                  Last edited by Sandman21; 08-19-2012, 10:22 PM.
                  "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                  "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

                    Originally posted by Thingfish View Post
                    There has always been this assumption that the JOB teams won more games than they should have. I think that's hogwash.
                    I don't know. They had some 26-28 win- rosters over those couple of years that I refused to watch. He got them to the 30's somehow. Not the way I would have wanted to see it, relying on crappy veterans and stunting the growth of the younger guys. But he somehow got those awful rosters into the 30's. He gets some credit. Not much, but some.
                    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                    And life itself, rushing over me
                    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

                      And it still rubs me the wrong way when players openly deride JOB in the media. I understand the complaints, trust me, I just don't like the public airing of grievances. It's just unprofessional, it's been a year and a half, move on. And don't take any posts I've made in this thread of me being pro-JOB, I danced a jig when Larry finally fired him, I just don't like the crap slinging that so many players have taken part in. Think if JOB did multiple radio interviews bashing players he coached, this board would EXPLODE.

                      But he hasn't said a peep. I literally haven't seen one single word quoted from him since he got fired. I give him credit for that.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

                        Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                        And it still rubs me the wrong way when players openly deride JOB in the media. I understand the complaints, trust me, I just don't like the public airing of grievances. It's just unprofessional, it's been a year and a half, move on. And don't take any posts I've made in this thread of me being pro-JOB, I danced a jig when Larry finally fired him, I just don't like the crap slinging that so many players have taken part in. Think if JOB did multiple radio interviews bashing players he coached, this board would EXPLODE.

                        But he hasn't said a peep. I literally haven't seen one single word quoted from him since he got fired. I give him credit for that.
                        I'll agree with you that JOB gets points for saying nothing post firing. But two things to note:

                        - He said a bunch of stuff WHILE THE COACH that somewhat neutralizes your "credit"

                        - Bird deserves most of the blame for those negative comments by players. It's like making people walk on hot coals and asking them not to say "ouch."
                        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

                          I refuse to re-"litigate" the Jim O'Brien years. But I will say that my silence on this issue doesn't mean I've seen the light and now agree with you all. Just that I said all I needed to say on the topic over the years and I still feel the same way. If for some reason I change my mind on things, I will be sure to post.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

                            JOB's gimmicky offense won a few games. Enough games to get us over the 30 game hump. I can't say that is a good thing. Or that it is a bad thing.
                            I will say that his heavily defensive rotations probably helped Hibbert in getting smarter defensively. And that is about it on that. It did not help Granger, D.Jones, or DC.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

                              Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                              JOB's gimmicky offense won a few games. Enough games to get us over the 30 game hump. I can't say that is a good thing. Or that it is a bad thing.
                              I will say that his heavily defensive rotations probably helped Hibbert in getting smarter defensively. And that is about it on that. It did not help Granger, D.Jones, or DC.
                              It helped Danny making him an All Star and the gimmick always worked at the end of the year when other teams but the Pacers didn't care about winning.
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: JOB to reappear as Mavs assistant coach?

                                Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                                It helped Danny making him an All Star and the gimmick always worked at the end of the year when other teams but the Pacers didn't care about winning.
                                I was talking about defensive rotations. And the reward I was talking about was making us a better team. And not making individual players have accolades.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X