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

  • #76
    Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

    Originally posted by Bball View Post
    IMHO... Yesterday sealed Frank's fate. Even by some miracle if we have a deep playoff run I think it would have to include the NBA Finals to change that. And the way they are playing all bets are off on even getting past the first round, let alone the NBA Finals. Even a deep playoff run can't cover what occurred to end this season.

    So, from that POV, yes.... making a coaching change now should be on the table. Simply because the way the winds are blowing it's really about the only realistic option to come close to changing that.

    BUT... It's also the ultimate Hail Mary. A last ditch effort if there ever was one. And it's not without some risk since there's still a chance that the playoffs would reignite a spark and get the team back on a single page. But who are we kidding? This is a colossal failure with little hope of anything turning it around now.

    We're all really left with wondering what happened that caused Frank to lose the team in a season that began like this on the heels of a ECF season.
    If you thought the Granger trade was a bad move... well jettisoning Vogel would make the Granger trade pale in comparison..

    I really wish someone could get through to these players that if they enjoy having Frank Vogel as their coach, then they BETTER shape the hell up... because if he is axed, it will because of THEM ... They need to realize this and man the eff up...
    "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

      Originally posted by Since86 View Post

      Slick was asked what he thought needed to be done in order to right the ship, and he said he didn't know. Kind of hard to throw stones at Frank for not knowing.

      Slick isn't in the locker room though, which is where most of the problems likely are. The root issues are behind the scenes, and we see it spill over on the court with the putrid play. So I wouldn't expect Slick to know what to do since he likely hasn't even seen what the problem is. But Frank is there and should be expected to fix it if it's fixable. This has to be fixable unless these guys really did morph into some of the biggest d-bags ever, in which case I truly sympathize with Vogel.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

        What about Bird's job security?
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

          Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
          I would argue against the pacers being one of the 3 or 4 most talented teams in the NBA. Defensively? Probably in top 3 or 4 - but also very well coached defensively and great committment defensively by the players.

          Offensively we aren't top 10 talent wise. We have no point guard on the roster. We have a center who is easily defended. A young inexperienced largely irratic shooting guard who is not a very good shooter. A power forward who is very solid, when surrounded by other good offensive players. And we have PG who is working his way to be one of the best players in the NBA, but is having some problems the past two months.

          Our offensive talent isn't too good.

          Our team was good overall because they played well together, played extrmely hard, very well coached. They weren't good because of talent.

          Put it together and we are overall maybe 9th or 10th most talented team in the NBA. So I'm not suggesting we are the current Boston Celtics.

          Assuming all teams are healthy, these teams are more talented
          Heat
          Clippers
          Thunder
          Spurs
          Rockets
          Nets
          Bulls - when Rose is healthy
          Blazers

          I might say teams like the Knicks, Raptors, Mavs, Wizards, Warriors are all at least as talented.

          Pacers never won because of talent and that is why our current dropoff is so severe. Once our chemistry dropped, our team fell apart. Our success was based on good chemistry
          Exactly.

          And let's just focus on two out of that list, the Heat and the Thunder. Frank's winning percentage is less than 4% behind Spo's and Brooks' on the career list. He's been able to get almost equal results win/loss wise with rosters that don't have players like Durant/Westbrook or LeBron/Wade.

          But yeah, Frank needs to go.....
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

            If Bynum was 100% healthy and had a good attitude for him - he would be a huge upgrade to our team and talent level. But then he has the talent to be the best center in the nBA.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post

              Maybe in 3 years assuming they are still here and can play together the combination of Lance and PG in their primes could boost our talent level into the range you think we are right now. But neither are ready now. Maybe we are using the word talent differently. I use talent to mean potential and performance and combination of both.

              To me, talent from the team perspective is "how good are you when you're executing as close to 100 percent as possible?" When the Pacers are playing at their absolute best, I still firmly believe that we are at worst a top 4 team in the league. A lot of that is certainly because of the intangibles and chemistry, but whatever you want to call it, I think that are indeed that great when all of the pistons are firing. The mental game is a crucial part of "talent", IMO. Would we be top 4 if you gave all of our players rankings like in 2k? Maybe not, but we were top 4 judging by how the mix played together. That team that won on the road against the Clipps and Spurs, that team that drilled the Rockets at home in December.......that was a freaking elite team.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                Slick isn't in the locker room though, which is where most of the problems likely are. The root issues are behind the scenes, and we see it spill over on the court with the putrid play. So I wouldn't expect Slick to know what to do since he likely hasn't even seen what the problem is. But Frank is there and should be expected to fix it if it's fixable. This has to be fixable unless these guys really did morph into some of the biggest d-bags ever, in which case I truly sympathize with Vogel.
                Slick knows what's going on. He might not be inside the circle as much, because he no longer travels, but he knows.

                And the bolded is exactly right, what do we expect Frank to do? Make the passes for his team? Tell them to stop dribbling in the middle of games? I know Grimp wants LaVoy Allen and his 2 made career 3pters out there to stretch the defense but do we honestly think scrapping everything you've been working on for the past 2 1/2 yrs in order to run a new system you only have two weeks with hardly any practice time is going to suddenly get guys to play like a team? No. It's re-arranging the chairs on the Titantic.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                  If Bynum was 50% healthy and had a remotely decent attitude for him - he would be a huge upgrade to our team and talent level.
                  Fixed.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                    Originally posted by Kemo View Post
                    I really wish someone could get through to these players that if they enjoy having Frank Vogel as their coach, then they BETTER shape the hell up... because if he is axed, it will because of THEM ... They need to realize this and man the eff up...
                    Easy. Bring O'Brien in for an interview.
                    BillS

                    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                      Slick knows what's going on. He might not be inside the circle as much, because he no longer travels, but he knows.

                      And the bolded is exactly right, what do we expect Frank to do? Make the passes for his team? Tell them to stop dribbling in the middle of games? I know Grimp wants LaVoy Allen and his 2 made career 3pters out there to stretch the defense but do we honestly think scrapping everything you've been working on for the past 2 1/2 yrs in order to run a new system you only have two weeks with hardly any practice time is going to suddenly get guys to play like a team? No. It's re-arranging the chairs on the Titantic.
                      The only basketball thing I can suggest doing is making the change of putting the ball back in Hill's hands more often.

                      Part of the problem is that our talent are our young guys. They were playing out of their minds earlier in the season, so they were handed the ropes to the offense. Now they aren't and Hill is the "stand in a corner" guy. He's not as talented, but he's more reliable. That might take some pressure off of PG too..because I don't buy the guy that everyone had to tell to shoot more is now a selfish *******. I think his team is struggling and he's trying his best, but isn't playing well.

                      Other than that..Frank can make them go over some fundamental stuff..screening, defense.. Shooting will come back in time, they just need to worry about the rest of their game.

                      BTW: I believe that's the difference between before Granger and after Granger. Before the Granger trade..they were still playing like a team..but they weren't winning AS much because their shooting had dropped off. Still, if they had continued playing at that level..they'd still be a 1 seed. After Danny..epic collapse.

                      I still think they can right this ship though. Maybe..maybe..last night was the low point. Maybe they'll decide they don't want to end the season in such a poor manner because of the mistakes Bird made. But we'll see.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                        Originally posted by Grimp View Post
                        Nonsense. But if you watch our offense, it's not smooth or a clinic ever. The only time it ever looked that way was when we smoked Houston last year. Also Frank needs to learn, when a players shot is broke, you bench them until it's fixed.
                        I can't picture George Hill running ANYONE"S offense and making it look good.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                          Part of the problem is that our talent are our young guys. They were playing out of their minds earlier in the season, so they were handed the ropes to the offense. Now they aren't and Hill is the "stand in a corner" guy. He's not as talented, but he's more reliable. That might take some pressure off of PG too..because I don't buy the guy that everyone had to tell to shoot more is now a selfish *******. I think his team is struggling and he's trying his best, but isn't playing well.
                          PG's story is an interesting one.

                          Most of the guys at the NBA have been "the man" practically every level they've played. They've carried their high school teams, most of them have carried their college teams, and then they need to adjust to becoming just another teammate in a supporting role. PG is the reverse.

                          He didn't play AAU, and the me-first style of being able to get your own, he didn't lead his HS team until his SR with his coach begging him to do so. He lead his college team in scoring, but he wasn't controlling the ball and taking control of the team. Now he's in the NBA learning how to be the guy for a squad.

                          That's a big learning curve. Not saying he doesn't get any blame, but it's still a road destined to be bumpy.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                            Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                            Maybe they'll decide they don't want to end the season in such a poor manner because of the mistakes Bird made. But we'll see.

                            So it's the fault of Bird's "mistakes"? Little accountability for the multi-millionaire players who were one game away from the Finals last year without the player whose loss you're blaming the slide on?

                            Bird's moves have been just fine. He added one of the best backup points in the league in CJ Watson. Scola has indeed been poor for a few months, but for the first two months of the year he was one of the better bench players in the league. The night we got him was one of the most giddy in the history of the forum, and you certainly can't call something a "mistake" when virtually 100% of the world thought it was a dramatic win. Yeah Turner has been crap, but Granger isn't even playing right now. If Granger was so powerful that he was the guy holding this all together, then he should be getting MVP votes this year. That's just ignoring some rather obvious issues that have nothing to do with Granger.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                              Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                              Firing Frank would be a bigger mistake than trading Danny.

                              I'm confident that Frank hasn't lost the majority of the locker room, if any of them. And I think firing him would bring about a harsher reaction from the players than trading Granger did.
                              At most, I think that it is a combination of both the Players and the Coaches that needs some change.

                              How much blame goes to Players and how much goes to Coach is debatable. But I really hope that Bird had some concrete idea about what the problem is.....cuz there is PLENTY of opportunity for there to be a roster change given that there are 8 Players that have guaranteed Contracts next year. Assuming that part of the problem is some combination of the Free Agents-to-be ( namely Turner and Lance ).....the solution is simple....just let them go to Free Agency and rebuild the roster around a smaller core. If the problem is GH, West, Hibbert or PG24....then move whoever the problem is.

                              Before any of you start the whole "Are you crazy? Get rid of Player X not Player Y" debate....my whole point is that I think whatever is causing the problem is coming from some combination of Coaching ( or lack thereof ) and the Players. IMHO....getting rid of Vogel and not making adjustments to the roster....won't make a difference if there is still some underlying Player/Locker-room problem.
                              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Kravitz: Frank and his job security

                                When the players complained about JOB and the way he run his team, we got on JOB for doing a poor coaching job, which he did. 3 years later, the same thing is happening to Frank, who we all thought did a better job. That's 2 coaches in a row. At what point do we say it's the players fault? It seems more to me that the players are just immature, self-entitled, and aren't able to handle the fame that's coming with this success that they are having this season.

                                Frank does not get absolved, but I feel the players are a bigger problem.
                                Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X