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: Frank and his job security

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

  • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

    Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
    Sookie this is not a good argument. Larry Bird is not a good scapegoat.
    My opinion is just as valid as anyone else's.

    We don't know the inner workings of the team. We just see what goes on in the floor.

    We do know the history of the team.

    We know that Larry has done a heck of a job putting the team together. We also know he gets stubborn..and can make..harsh decisions.

    He did wait to long to fire O'brien. Someone else would have coached the team, that's a silly argument. And ANYONE else would have been better. But he got lucky..because Frank fell into his lap.

    Lance Stephenson doesn't work out 99.9% of the time. He did this time. (We think.)

    Hill, West, Hibbert, and PG were all fantastic decisions.

    But Frank? Frank came in..told everyone we were going to make the playoffs..and the Pacers made them. And they've gotten significantly better every year that he has been here. The guy has had very little missteps for someone who is so new at coaching. People are calling him weak just because he's positive. That's just incorrect.

    Paul George? PG is significantly better than most thought he'd be. He's struggling now, sure..but the amount of crap posted here about him is ridiculous.

    I think Larry made a huge error. And I think it started this collapse, and now they don't know what to do. I don't really know if Bynum and Turner are an issue, but I doubt they did more destruction than losing Danny. And I'm sure there are more issues, but I think that's what the biggest issue is.

    Regardless, that doesn't mean the season is over..that this team can't pull itself together. This team does normally go through a slump anyway. (Not this bad, but..) The guys will just have to figure out if they'd like to pull their heads out of their collective asses or not.

    People may think it's ridiculous to blame Bird. It's more ridiculous to blame Frank.
    Last edited by Sookie; 04-07-2014, 07:27 PM.

    Comment


    • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

      It truly is sad that it has come to this. Vogel goes from being one of the leading candidates for coach of the year, to this. How are people going to feel if the Pacers turn this thing around and make it to the finals?

      Comment


      • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

        Originally posted by kent beckley View Post
        Danny granger did not play last year, but he had such a huge impact? Not buying it.
        Then no coach has ever had an impact, and they are pretty much useless exept to determine when who subs in for who.

        Comment


        • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
          Frank Vogel turned this team around after Larry stubbornly refused to fire Jim O'brien for way too long.
          Paul George had to be begged to take over games. Has marketedly improved himself and is learning to be the man when that's never been his role before.

          THESE are the two people that the board is blaming. When it's obvious that the loss of Granger put this team into a tale spin. People are discussing out of control egos when I'm simply saying that Bird made a relatively large mistake. He shouldn't lose his job for it, but Vogel and Paul don't deserve to be scapegoats either.

          I'm grateful for how Larry built this team. I'm just calling a spade a spade, and I haven't forgotten the poor decisions he's made previous to this year too.


          The ET trade was a great move. I just think Turner ultimately will need to be re-signed, camp, Summer to fully mesh with this team. But as a future playmaker, scorer, who can start in case of injury? It was a good trade. Maybe the staff can curb some of the dents in his game too (defense). But Danny was and is done. He had a knee injury, then returned to strain his calf. Then returned again with no lift, and a broke shot. Then he gets traded for a young stud who was not the 2nd coming of Carmelo Anthony as Sixer fans had wanted.

          Danny lands in L.A., has a few decent games though nothing highly explosive. And then strains his hamstring and is probably done for at least the 1st round of the playoffs for the Clippers. I say Larry made a great move. He also landed Allen in the trade. Who now being on the roster with Copeland, gives Frank NO EXCUSE to still be playing Scola. Scola's shot is broke. I think Larry saw that, and nabs Allen in the trade. IF Cope's defense is too suspect for Frank at times, fine...........roll with LaVoy. Who is a good mid-range shooter but also defends and grabs boards. Frank though, is still MAN-CRUSHING Scola.

          He's learned nothing. And ultimately, that will be his downfall. He refuses to use the talent provided to him. I guarantee if ET had landed in San Antonio with Allen, Pop would've found at least 3 different strategic uses for both players. Even simple stuff like cutting to the basket for catch and layups. Which would've had Turner averaging 10 points off the Spurs bench off of simple assists from Parker or Duncan off ball movement. Our coaching staff doesn't seem to wanna earn their take home pay.
          Last edited by Grimp; 04-07-2014, 07:53 PM.

          Comment


          • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

            Bird brought Obrien on during the 3 year plan of rebuilding this Franchise. the first two season under Obrien the roster for this team sucked. its the reason why SVG turned us down. Obrien was fired midway through his 3rd season. the second season the team made progress at the end of the year so i can understand in that aspect why Bird would have kept Obrien around.

            i just don't get why folks think Bird had so many options to coach this team other than Obrien... because we coulda brought phil Jackson in here and this team still was not going to win ****. that simple.

            lets say then bird fires Obrien after his second year,, and the team is still one season away from having cap cash and being able to improve significantly (ie DWEST signing & bringing in GHILL). those are improvements that would intrigue an experienced proven coach.

            it would have made ZERO sense.. let me say it again ... ZERO ********* sense to replace OBRIEN prior to the season where this team had cap room. why you ask... well for one who knew what we would be able to find in FA. and with that said don't you want to bring in a coach that sorta fits the teams personnel???

            so lets say bird kept Obrien "too long" then we bring in a coach for a team lacking in talent to only the following season make significant improvements and not knowing full well if that coach would be the right fit for the team with any new addiitons that would have been added.

            again.. i just don't see the logic in that. fire Obrien,, bring someone new in.. then the following season make significant upgrades...???

            instead Bird knew and stated upfront it was a 3 year plan. which also coincided with the cap space the team had to attain DWEST. why not wait and make the upgrades then find a proven coach who would be more willing to coach the roster Bird assembled after the 3 year plan when the team had more talent.

            i believe that was Birds agenda.. it just so happened Vogel won him over and Bird gave the unproven video assistant a chance. firing Obrien would not have helped matters at all when the roster was as bad as it was.

            we were better off trending upward.. making a splash in FA then attracting a proven coach then firing the coach first then acquiring more talent. if we woulda let Obrien go after season 2 no one worth a darn woulda been interested in coaching this team.. so we woulda hired some unknown only then to upgrade the following offseason with more talent,,, which at that point woulda most lilkley landed us a better coach for the long term.

            holding onto Obrien for "too long" is simply BS when the roster at that time would not have won a first round series even with Red Aurbach at the the helm. our best bet was exactly what Bird did. let Obrien coach the scrubs.. then upgrade significantly in FA and via the draft and at that time find a proven coach who would have been more willing to come here once the talent was on the roster.


            anyone still ******** about keeping Obrien for too long i just gotta shake my head at... because no matter who was here at that time pacers were not winning a playoff series. and if we had let go of Obrien early theres a good chance no coach with a proven track record woulda have come here.

            the best bet was waiting like bird did.. it just so happened Vogel exceeded expectations. i was worried about it then but felt much better when Shaw came along. now that Shaw is gone were probably getting a much clearer idea of how far Vogel still has to go before he reaches the higher echelon of the coaching ranks.

            Comment


            • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

              Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
              im frankly tired of the danny granger excuses. how about we blame all this on losing Orlando Johnson as well. all in all both players likely played about the same number of minutes over the last two seasons. Pacers advanced to the ECF without Granger. This pacers team started out 20-4 or whatever it was to begin this season without Granger.
              I have no doubt losing OJ was a blow too. He was very well liked in the locker room.

              im torn on Vogel,, love to see it work here but if he were to stay i would hope Bird would find him a traditional point guard.. i believe it would immensely help Vogels offense.
              Vogel's offense doesn't need a traditional point guard. When we were at our best, the ball was moving and it was being shared. Vogel's offense looked just fine then. The ball stops. The offense looks bad.

              how is it the bulls lose DROSE and trade Luol Deng and yet continue to get better. pacers trade a guy that hasn't had a significant impact on the court for almost two years and now everyone wants Bird gone. give me ********* break.

              like i said, im sick of hearing the BS granger excuses for why this team is losing. quite frankly,,, if yall love granger that much please go root for the damn clippers then... just like all the peyton manning fans who converted to the broncos. i appreciate granger but first and foremost is the FRANCHISE.
              For an understanding of how an injured player can still have a significant impact on a team, please watch this video. (http://www.nba.com/video/channels/or...oakim-noah.nba) Fast forward to about the 8:10 mark. As you can see, the Bulls did not lose Rose at all. He still provides leadership, despite not being on the court or being the same player. Danny, I believe, provided much of the same qualities, even though as some posters like to say, "he was a shell of himself."

              but lets not even consider that in the equation... lets just fire Bird because he traded a player that was on his way out regardless.
              There's a difference between letting a relationship end naturally where both parties understand it's time to walk away and abruptly and prematurely severing a relationship in a spur-of-the-moment decision.

              Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
              this is another fallacy im ready to hurl upon. who the hell was we going to bring in here that wanted to coach this team??? remember this was prior to DWEST HILL etc. our roster was comprised of guys like earl Watson dauntey jones Brandon rush Dunleavy... etc. the roster wasn't talented and that's why Stan Van Gundy turned this team down.

              all those b******* and there have been many about OBRIEN who were we going to go out and get prior to the year we had cap room??? im sure the best coaches in the business were lining up to coach Dunleavy Watson nestorovich and the other garbage on this roster Bird inherited from Walsh.
              Roy and PG were on that roster as well. O'Brien had PG in a suit and Roy on the bench behind Nesterovic. It's true Stan Van Gundy publicly demeaned the Pacers roster and the O'Brien firing, but it's also true Stan Van Gundy looks like an idiot now because of those comments.


              Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
              maybe it woulda helped if Vogel didn't have danny standing in the ******** corner pocket game after game to showcase he still had the abilities to make a difference.

              no its all on Bird who traded a player that Vogel had standing in the corner game after game.
              Actually, Danny standing in the corner was a huge reason why our spacing was so effective and why it isn't now. I believe Lowe did a great job of providing video/clips of this on Grantland, but he basically highlighted how Lance likes to aimlessly roam the baseline to be in position for rebounds, whereas Danny was comfortable behind the three. And Turner, we all know, is not a three point shooter. Standing in the corner was by design. For a great example, watch this clip of our win over the Heat in Game 3 a couple years ago (props to MRat). Notice the spacing and Danny's positioning, which allows for ball movement and ample opportunity for drives by the other players.

              2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

              Comment


              • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                Criticize Bird for a completely legit reason in Indiana and you get crucified. The Turner trade was terrible, his worst decision as a GM (his second worst was choosing Hansbrough over Lawson, and third worst Hansbrough over McBob, only then do you get to he who must not be named). I think it has become pretty clear who the leader in the locker room was, which shouldn't be any surprise to anyone. Half the players looked up to him as a mentor, he had been on the team longer than anyone, and was easily the best player on the team prior to the injury (and probably would have still been if it wasn't for the injury). All-in-all he probably has had about a 50/50 good to bad ratio, which is a great ratio for an FO guy in the league for 10 years.


                Grimp, a lot of Sixer fans were happy to get rid of ET, and didn't have a very high opinion of him. As well being considered the second coming of Carmelo Anthony is not exactly a good thing. To many people he is the current player who epitomizes selfish play. He might be good enough that his teams generally have winning records, but there is a reason why they tend to not do much in the playoffs.

                Comment


                • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                  Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                  Criticize Bird for a completely legit reason in Indiana and you get crucified. The Turner trade was terrible, his worst decision as a GM (his second worst was choosing Hansbrough over Lawson, and third worst Hansbrough over McBob, only then do you get to he who must not be named). I think it has become pretty clear who the leader in the locker room was, which shouldn't be any surprise to anyone. Half the players looked up to him as a mentor, he had been on the team longer than anyone, and was easily the best player on the team prior to the injury (and probably would have still been if it wasn't for the injury). All-in-all he probably has had about a 50/50 good to bad ratio, which is a great ratio for an FO guy in the league for 10 years.


                  Grimp, a lot of Sixer fans were happy to get rid of ET, and didn't have a very high opinion of him. As well being considered the second coming of Carmelo Anthony is not exactly a good thing. To many people he is the current player who epitomizes selfish play. He might be good enough that his teams generally have winning records, but there is a reason why they tend to not do much in the playoffs.



                  Selfish? I think they were unhappy with Turner because he didn't carry the team when they dumped Lou, Jrue, Iggy, etc. That was a pipe-dream.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                    Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                    the first two season under Obrien the roster for this team sucked. its the reason why SVG turned us down. Obrien was fired midway through his 3rd season.
                    I thought O'Brien was fired in his 24th year at the helm? Or maybe it just felt like that and was his 4th year that he was fired....
                    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                    ------

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

                    -John Wooden

                    Comment


                    • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                      Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                      The ET trade was a great move. I just think Turner ultimately will need to be re-signed, camp, Summer to fully mesh with this team. But as a future playmaker, scorer, who can start in case of injury? It was a good trade. Maybe the staff can curb some of the dents in his game too (defense). But Danny was and is done. He had a knee injury, then returned to strain his calf. Then returned again with no lift, and a broke shot. Then he gets traded for a young stud who was not the 2nd coming of Carmelo Anthony as Sixer fans had wanted.

                      Danny lands in L.A., has a few decent games though nothing highly explosive. And then strains his hamstring and is probably done for at least the 1st round of the playoffs for the Clippers. I say Larry made a great move. He also landed Allen in the trade. Who now being on the roster with Copeland, gives Frank NO EXCUSE to still be playing Scola. Scola's shot is broke. I think Larry saw that, and nabs Allen in the trade. IF Cope's defense is too suspect for Frank at times, fine...........roll with LaVoy. Who is a good mid-range shooter but also defends and grabs boards. Frank though, is still MAN-CRUSHING Scola.

                      He's learned nothing. And ultimately, that will be his downfall. He refuses to use the talent provided to him. I guarantee if ET had landed in San Antonio with Allen, Pop would've found at least 3 different strategic uses for both players. Even simple stuff like cutting to the basket for catch and layups. Which would've had Turner averaging 10 points off the Spurs bench off of simple assists from Parker or Duncan off ball movement. Our coaching staff doesn't seem to wanna earn their take home pay.
                      I'm so sick of reading about Lavoy and Copeland d*mn near every time you post....we all get it. You believe they're our unhearalded savior of the bench over Scola. This team is broke beyond merely changing the minute rotation.


                      Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                      Comment


                      • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                        Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
                        I have no doubt losing OJ was a blow too. He was very well liked in the locker room.



                        Vogel's offense doesn't need a traditional point guard. When we were at our best, the ball was moving and it was being shared. Vogel's offense looked just fine then. The ball stops. The offense looks bad.



                        For an understanding of how an injured player can still have a significant impact on a team, please watch this video. (http://www.nba.com/video/channels/or...oakim-noah.nba) Fast forward to about the 8:10 mark. As you can see, the Bulls did not lose Rose at all. He still provides leadership, despite not being on the court or being the same player. Danny, I believe, provided much of the same qualities, even though as some posters like to say, "he was a shell of himself."



                        There's a difference between letting a relationship end naturally where both parties understand it's time to walk away and abruptly and prematurely severing a relationship in a spur-of-the-moment decision.



                        Roy and PG were on that roster as well. O'Brien had PG in a suit and Roy on the bench behind Nesterovic. It's true Stan Van Gundy publicly demeaned the Pacers roster and the O'Brien firing, but it's also true Stan Van Gundy looks like an idiot now because of those comments.




                        Actually, Danny standing in the corner was a huge reason why our spacing was so effective and why it isn't now. I believe Lowe did a great job of providing video/clips of this on Grantland, but he basically highlighted how Lance likes to aimlessly roam the baseline to be in position for rebounds, whereas Danny was comfortable behind the three. And Turner, we all know, is not a three point shooter. Standing in the corner was by design. For a great example, watch this clip of our win over the Heat in Game 3 a couple years ago (props to MRat). Notice the spacing and Danny's positioning, which allows for ball movement and ample opportunity for drives by the other players.


                        sorry but i disagree that this offense has been good at truly any point during Vogels tenure. we were last in A/T ratio in the lg the previous season and were again ranked 27th in the lg this season. so with all due respect i do believe this team needs a traditional point guard approach.

                        as far as Obrien yall can believe what you want. i hated obriens offense as much as the next pacer fan but letting him go wasn't going to make any difference at all in the win column.


                        all in all... i firmly believe this pacers team will get it together and make a run in the postseason so im not really flipping out too much. however, if this team fails it wont have anything to do with the granger trade.

                        it will fall on PG knocking up a stripper... or Brian Shaw no longer on the sidelines. those are more valid reasons for this decline than a player who hasn't contributed anything since the 2012 east semis due to a degeniterrvie knee condition.

                        Bulls have a coach that doenst take BS from anyone.. that's why they are successful.. has nothing to do with DROSE holding up poms poms on the sidelines.


                        could yall imagine hibb being coached up by Thibbs.. hibb would prob crawl into a corner and cry its how dam soft he has become. the attitude he had yesterday disgusted me. prob even moreso than the performance he gave Friday nite vs Toronto.

                        not sure i should bother with that since at halftime of that game thread we had posters on here saying hibbs was plyaing just great vs Jonas Villicuinus.




                        ya all.. lets blame this on Bird trading danny, not PG having off the court issues, hibbert playing like a 7'2 p****y, or shaw leaving the bench. how that has anything to do with danny is beyond me.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                          Frank gets next year regardless of what happens in the playoffs for me. If things go bad next year I'd be open to a change at the All Star break but we aren't the Sixers or something, this'd be a coaching change that needs a lot of due diligence that you can only get in an offseason. But it needs to be made abundantly clear from Simon, to Bird and Vogel both, that the offense needs to get fixed. Legend's no longer infallible to me.

                          Pritchard and Coach X being our lead guys in summer 2015 isn't something I'd disagree with at this point.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                            Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                            Criticize Bird for a completely legit reason in Indiana and you get crucified. The Turner trade was terrible, his worst decision as a GM (his second worst was choosing Hansbrough over Lawson, and third worst Hansbrough over McBob, only then do you get to he who must not be named). I think it has become pretty clear who the leader in the locker room was, which shouldn't be any surprise to anyone. Half the players looked up to him as a mentor, he had been on the team longer than anyone, and was easily the best player on the team prior to the injury (and probably would have still been if it wasn't for the injury). All-in-all he probably has had about a 50/50 good to bad ratio, which is a great ratio for an FO guy in the league for 10 years.
                            Don't forget Jrue Holiday. That was my pick and I was irate at the time. I grew to love Tyler because he seems like a great guy and he was a big part of our smashmouth, "bash brothers" mentality, but that pick.... never forget.
                            2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

                            Comment


                            • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                              Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
                              I have no doubt losing OJ was a blow too. He was very well liked in the locker room.



                              Vogel's offense doesn't need a traditional point guard. When we were at our best, the ball was moving and it was being shared. Vogel's offense looked just fine then. The ball stops. The offense looks bad.



                              For an understanding of how an injured player can still have a significant impact on a team, please watch this video. (http://www.nba.com/video/channels/or...oakim-noah.nba) Fast forward to about the 8:10 mark. As you can see, the Bulls did not lose Rose at all. He still provides leadership, despite not being on the court or being the same player. Danny, I believe, provided much of the same qualities, even though as some posters like to say, "he was a shell of himself."



                              There's a difference between letting a relationship end naturally where both parties understand it's time to walk away and abruptly and prematurely severing a relationship in a spur-of-the-moment decision.



                              Roy and PG were on that roster as well. O'Brien had PG in a suit and Roy on the bench behind Nesterovic. It's true Stan Van Gundy publicly demeaned the Pacers roster and the O'Brien firing, but it's also true Stan Van Gundy looks like an idiot now because of those comments.




                              Actually, Danny standing in the corner was a huge reason why our spacing was so effective and why it isn't now. I believe Lowe did a great job of providing video/clips of this on Grantland, but he basically highlighted how Lance likes to aimlessly roam the baseline to be in position for rebounds, whereas Danny was comfortable behind the three. And Turner, we all know, is not a three point shooter. Standing in the corner was by design. For a great example, watch this clip of our win over the Heat in Game 3 a couple years ago (props to MRat). Notice the spacing and Danny's positioning, which allows for ball movement and ample opportunity for drives by the other players.




                              Danny standing in the corner was an easy fix. Turner backs up Lance and you expand to 10 man rotation. Replacing Danny with Rasual or Cope. They perch in the corner now for 3. Teams are aware of their 3 pt prowess. All Vogel needed to do was switch Turner into Lance's 2nd unit role of scorer and facilitator, and then replace Danny's usual spot up corner appearance with Copeland or Rasual. Use Cope or Rasual as the new Danny, and Turner as the new Lance. Sheesh.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                                Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
                                Criticize Bird for a completely legit reason in Indiana and you get crucified.
                                support bird and you get criticized as well for giving the guy a pass due to namesake. isn't that what all u bird critics were saying when Legend first unveiled the 3 year plan??? he got a pass cause he was Larry??? well hows that worked out for us?? lets see 27-28 sellouts this year is it????

                                this place had fire bird posts all over the place 3 years ago so don't act like everyone been on Birds bandwagon from the getgo. its highy hypocritical and delusional to do so.


                                holy ******* **** Bird doesn't walk on water... find me a GM who does.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X