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

I wish Vogel had some balls

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

  • #16
    Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

    I've met Frank Vogel, cool guy to just talk about basketball with. I didn't take a full test, but I'm pretty sure Frank has some balls.
    "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

    ----------------- Reggie Miller

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

      When I think "offensive creativity," I think New York basketball coaches. Just look at Larry brown...

      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

        Coach no balls?

        Did he throw them all at the officials like Slick Leonard did once?

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

          Originally posted by ReginaldWayne View Post
          Will you please give it a rest with your fantasy of a second unit consisting of Lavoy Allen and Copeland?
          This made me
          LOL out loud.
          Did someone really say this?

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

            Defensively, I've loved what Vogel has done. Now offensively? It's a major work in progress. The offense didn't really show any real life until B. Shaw implemented some of the triangle offense into our scheming, allowing West to operate in the high and Hibbert in the low post respectively. To me, it appears the offense has almost taken a step back from where it was at the end of last season.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

              Originally posted by Sookie View Post
              I can't...

              This **** is like groundhogs day. The Pacers...as does every other team ever..go through stretches of poor play. And every year the crazy starts. Frank Vogel is probably a top 3 coach in the league, and I can guarantee you not one of the players has tuned him out. If Frank's time is shortened here, it'll be the dumbest move the Pacers ever made.

              And the same goes to Paul George. We have a budding young superstar. Arguably the best player in the league after Kevin Durant and Lebron James. Can we please let him go through some growing pains without throwing around "overrated" or "selfish."

              This team is made up of human beings. They are aware that they are able to turn it on and off, and they are probably only playing good enough to make sure they get the #1 seed in the East.

              We've got a damn good team. Enjoy them. Accept the bad with the good, because there is a heck of a lot more good. The Pacers are good enough to win a title. This team isn't Jim O'brien and Troy Murphy's Pacers.
              Agree and disagree. Something is wrong and it may very well be with Vogel's offensive schemes or what he's willing to try with SOME rotations (he does dabble), but good lord would it be an epic failure to bail on him. If you aren't bringing in Pop, Phil, Carlisle or MAYBE Tibs then what is the point? And Pop and Phil would be very limited careers due to age.

              Vogel is a great combo of youth and quality with plenty of room to grow.


              I've often tried to make the point about PATIENCE with the Bad Boys Pistons, I've posted the numbers many times that show the struggles of Chuck Daly and Isiah, Laimbeer, Vinnie, etc early on. They kept those 3 together and kept grinding.

              83-84 Lost 1st round - Isiah, Laimbeer, Microwave (Long, Tripucka)
              84-85 Lost 2nd round - same
              85-86 Lost 1st round - add Dumars and Mahorn

              So that might be the point where Indy add Hill and West except for Detroit they took a step backward, plus West and Hill were vets

              86-87 Lost ECF - add Rodman, Salley, Dantley
              87-88 Lost Finals
              88-89 Won Finals - trade Dantley for Aguirre
              89-90 Repeat title

              The key was sticking with Chuck Daly and the core as it built. They didn't punt on Isiah, Bill or Vinnie when they took a step back to a round 1 loss in year 3 of the run. It took Dumars and Mahorn 3 seasons of coming up short of a title before the win in year 4.

              This could be how it goes with Vogel. You could lose in round 2 or the ECF this year as a setback and then adjust slightly and push on into a Finals loss before finally winning a title 2 years from now. That would be a huge success even if it wouldn't feel like it right now.


              Let Vogel grow like Daly got to grow.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

                Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                Arguably the best player in the league after Kevin Durant and Lebron James.
                I want to meet the person arguing this...

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

                  Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
                  I want to meet the person arguing this...
                  Yeah, Chris Paul and Anthony Davis would beg to differ.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

                    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                    Agree and disagree. Something is wrong and it may very well be with Vogel's offensive schemes or what he's willing to try with SOME rotations (he does dabble), but good lord would it be an epic failure to bail on him. If you aren't bringing in Pop, Phil, Carlisle or MAYBE Tibs then what is the point? And Pop and Phil would be very limited careers due to age.


                    .
                    But something looks "very wrong" every year.

                    Yes, this has never been a good offensive team. But our players aren't really the type of players to put in a Spurs type of motion offense. They aren't the best passers (Lance is talented, but still too concerned about being fancy) or ball handlers really. They don't screen very well..etc. So it's always going to be ugly. I think that maybe giving Hill a few more touches, letting him make more decisions, would help..but perhaps giving PG and Lance the reigns now, helps significantly in the future.

                    Vogel's first year coaching, we hit a rough patch. Lance got sent permanently to the bench. There were reports about people not listening in practice, and Wells said that there was no way The Pacers would hire Frank. But then the Chicago Bulls series happened, and the Pacers fought tooth and nail with them. Frank had the guys playing at their best and together.

                    And every season since then, we've had a similar stretch of games. Chemistry looks "off." The offense looks even uglier than what it normally does, we lose games we shouldn't. And every year people in PD get stressed. And every year, the Pacers get themselves together and exceed expectations in the playoffs.

                    So here we are..Pacers are going through their rough stretch. The team whipping boy has been named (PG..and to some extent Lance). But interestingly..they just beat the Heat...a must win.

                    I don't like watching them play poorly. And I don't like watching these rough stretches any more than anyone else does. But ALL teams go through them. People dismiss it when The Heat do it, because "they've already proven themselves." The important thing is that the coach has the team peaking at the right time, and every year since he's coached here, Frank has had the team peaking during the playoffs.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

                      Originally posted by Dr. Hibbert View Post
                      I want to meet the person arguing this...
                      There's a lot of people on other forums that feel this way.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

                        Originally posted by immortality View Post
                        In the playoffs Mike Miller had not played until Game 6 in Miami/Pacers, he came in and made 3 threes. Shooters don't necessarily need a rhythm, even Rasul Butler who plays sporadically has a higher percentage chance to hit a 3 so far.

                        But Mike Miller was not making Copeland's salary I don't think. Also Copeland was one of our marquee free agent signings. Mike Miller was so broken down the last few season's he could barely walk. Copeland is not even close to that.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

                          Originally posted by BenR1990 View Post
                          I think had we gone through this stretch of games in late December or even January, Vogel would try some different lineup options. With only a couple weeks left in the season, there only time we would see any major changes to our rotations would be due to an injury. It's just too late in the season for a guy like Vogel to make a chance like Lavoy Allen rotational minutes.

                          I don't think lacking balls is the term I would use to describe Vogel. His unwillingness to change things up has to do with being set in a particular coaching philosophy.


                          I think these changes are necessary to win games. And keep the #1 seed though.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

                            Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                            But Mike Miller was not making Copeland's salary I don't think. Also Copeland was one of our marquee free agent signings. Mike Miller was so broken down the last few season's he could barely walk. Copeland is not even close to that.
                            That just means Copeland is worse if he can't outdo a broken down Mike Miller.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

                              Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                              I think these changes are necessary to win games. And keep the #1 seed though.
                              Then take it up with Frank? I guess my point is don't get your hopes up. The rotations we're using now is we're going to use the remainder of the year unless someone gets hurt.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: I wish Vogel had some balls

                                No one can argue about Vogel's ability to design a great defense, and get the most out of his players defensively, trust me if Lance goes somewhere else after this season he is going to look like an average at best defender. Paul wasn't considered a defensive stud out of college, and Hibbert wasn't anything special defensively prior to Vogel. In fact he was a better offensive player than defensive player.

                                Vogel offensively leaves a lot to be desired. Just about everyone performs worse for him than they do for anyone else. We have the talent to have a top 5 offense, but we have a bottom 10 offense the past two seasons. The biggest part of that is Vogel has yet to show any real ability to design an effective offense. The other part is Paul is in over his head as a number one option. While he is smoother and more athletic than Granger has ever been, Paul isn't even on Granger's level of offensive ability prior to the injury. No one on this team is. That doesn't mean he isn't a number one option, just that you shouldn't treat him like Lebron, Durant, or Melo. At the same time every one of our starters is capable of averaging at least 16ppg. This means we really should be running a more offense by committee approach. This requires a well designed offense, and a willingness of the players to go to the hot hand instead of trying to get theirs. We have never had number one, but we used to have number two so we were able to overcome not having number one to an extent, especially with our used to be all-time great defense. Now we have neither.

                                This is something that Vogel really needs to correct in the summer. Doing so will make everyone more efficient, and will really put this team over the top. If Vogel doesn't show improvement on this aspect next year, I do think you have to consider moving on next summer.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X