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

Vogel Signed to Contract Extension

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

  • Re: Vogel Signed to Contract Extension

    Originally posted by Sookie View Post
    I think you have to also ask what options did Vogel have too?

    Was he really going to bench Lance and PG? Maybe he could have reduced Lance's time and played CJ and Hill more. But PG? I don't even think PG was doing what he did for his numbers, but rather because he's trying to grow into the role of go to guy, and mistakes are going to be made.
    Certainly you have to wonder what options he had that were visible to fans. Lots of things could go on behind the scenes that fans would never know about, making it seem like nothing was being done - but, again, if that was the case and nothing changed on the floor, it would sort of support the "we don't care what Coach says" side of the argument.

    Anyway, my point is not that I agree that Vogel lost them, it is that it isn't so far-fetched to argue that he did.
    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


    • Re: Vogel Signed to Contract Extension

      The only coaches who last are those the players come to respect and continue to respect. Being likable and friendly and patting you on the back only last so long. That approach to management of any organization works for awhile and perhaps adequately for a longer while. But to be a great coach or manager you have to have genuine humility that cannot be seen through as an attempt to gain favor with the underlings. But you also have to have some balance of a backbone and know when to use the stick. This cannot be faked over the long haul. It has to be who you are. That's what makes Popovich one of the better coaches in NBA history.

      Comment


      • Re: Vogel Signed to Contract Extension

        Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
        That's what makes Popovich one of the better coaches in NBA history.
        I think you can go with "one of the best" here. When you look at what he does with the entire talent spectrum of his team, unlike coaches who are very good yet often focus solely on their star players, it puts him well into the top 5 if not the top.
        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


        • Re: Vogel Signed to Contract Extension

          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
          Not only that, but enough studies have been done to suggest that it's not authoritative bosses that produce the best work, but rather cooperative and communicative bosses that produce better results.
          This x10000. The impression that a coach needs to be an authoritative ******* in order for his players to listen to him is a huge urban legend.
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • Re: Vogel Signed to Contract Extension

            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
            That's what makes Popovich one of the better coaches in NBA history.
            Popovich is far from an authoritative *******.
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • Re: Vogel Signed to Contract Extension

              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              I think you can go with "one of the best" here. When you look at what he does with the entire talent spectrum of his team, unlike coaches who are very good yet often focus solely on their star players, it puts him well into the top 5 if not the top.
              What has impressed me the most is his abilities to use guys from outside of the United States with different backgrounds and make them one cohesive unit. Probably the best all around team of the past 10 years. Although I worry when they lose Duncan, Ginobli, and Parker what will happen. I'm no Spurs fan, but there is no reason to hate the team. They are successful and humble, not successful and cocky like the Heat the last few years.
              Indiana State University Alum. Hardcore Pacers fan. Racecar Driver in need of sponsorship.

              www.jjhughesracing.com

              Comment


              • Re: Vogel Signed to Contract Extension

                Can we stop pretending that "picking up a one year option when Bird was setting up a completely clean slate the year after" and "contract extension after consecutive ECF appearances" are the same thing?
                "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

                Comment


                • Re: Vogel Signed to Contract Extension

                  Originally posted by Guardshock View Post
                  What has impressed me the most is his abilities to use guys from outside of the United States with different backgrounds and make them one cohesive unit. Probably the best all around team of the past 10 years. Although I worry when they lose Duncan, Ginobli, and Parker what will happen. I'm no Spurs fan, but there is no reason to hate the team. They are successful and humble, not successful and cocky like the Heat the last few years.
                  This isn't 100% Popovich. This is 50% Popovich and 50% San Antonio's scouting staff. I cannot emphasize enough what a good job San Antonio's scouting staff has done in Europe.

                  Allow me to list the European players that the Spurs have picked from 1999 until today:

                  1999:

                  Manu Ginobili: Picked at #57. We all know how amazing that pick turned out to be.

                  2001:

                  Tony Parker: Picked at #28. Just like Manu.

                  Robertas Javtokas: Picked at #55. He was considered one of the best young bigs in Europe until he got into a serious motorcycle crash in May 1, 2002 (less than a year from the time he was drafted) that resulted in a broken shoulder, crushed thighbone and injured knees and kidneys. He lost over a year and he was never able to get back to the same level of athleticism that he had before the accident. He still had a great career in Europe even after the accident. He won 6 Lithuanian Championships, 1 Greek Championship, 1 Euroleague title and 1 EuroCup title (he was also the MVP of that EuroCup Final and he was also recently voted as one of EuroCup's Top 10 of all time).

                  Javtokas is a very good athlete (especially before the accident) that can defend, rebound and run the break. He wouldn't be an All-Star in the NBA but he definitely belonged if it wasn't for that accident. Here's a video of him dunking on a 12 foot rim:



                  2002:

                  Luis Scola: Picked at #55. Regardless of whether he's playing well for us at the moment, we can all agree that this was another amazing pick.

                  2003:

                  Leandro Barbosa: Picked at #28. Immensely important to the SSOL Suns, 6th man of the year in 06-07, 11 years in the NBA and counting.

                  2004:

                  Beno Udrih: Picked at #28. Not an All-Star but he has carved out a 10 year NBA career and he has appeared in 669 NBA games (started 255 of them).

                  Sergei Karaulov: Picked at #57. Passed up on Hamed Haddadi and Damien Wilkins to take a chance at a 7'1 Center from Uzbekistan. Didn't pan out. Shoot them

                  2005:

                  Ian Mahinmi: Picked at #28 (how many #28 picks have the Spurs had over the past decade?). Regardless of whether people like Ian's current contract or not I think that we can all agree that he's a serviceable back-up big. That's not bad at #28. That said, they passed on some pretty good players to grab him (David Lee was at #30, CJ Miles was at #34, Ersan Ilyasova was at #36, Monta Ellis was at #40, Louis Williams was at #45, Andray Blatche was at #49, Amir Johnson was at #56 and Marcin Gortat was at #57 [damn, that turned out to be a pretty deep draft]) so they could probably do a bit better.

                  2006:

                  Damir Markota: Picked at #59. He only played 30 NBA games but he has carved out a nice European career over the years. He won a double with BC Žalgiris in '08 (Baltic League title and Lithuanian Championship), a Slovenian Cup in '11 and he has been a part of several Euroleague clubs over his career. The only notable UDFAs of the draft were JJ Barea, CJ Watson, Chris Quinn and Louis Amundson (Copeland also belonged in that class but he went to Europe and returned much latter so I'm not counting him).

                  2007:

                  Tiago Splitter: Picked at #28 (surprise, surprise). Good pick at that range. That said, they did pass up on Marc Gasol (who was drafted at #48). To be fair, though, Marc really didn't have the reputation of a skilled player while in Europe. He was mainly a defensive player over here while Splitter was much more polished. Marc deserves a lot of kudos for working his *** off and becoming the player that he is today.

                  Giorgos Printezis: Picked at #58. Printezis never came over to the NBA and thanks god for Olympiacos. He made the game-winning shot in the 11-12 Euroleague Final and he helped us (Olympiacos is the team I support in Greece) repeat the next year. Apart from 2 Euroleague titles, he also helped us win the Greek Championship in '12 and the FIBA Intercontinental in '13. He also helped Greece win the Bronze Medal in the '09 EuroBasket. In other words, he has had a very good European career. The only UDFAs of importance that they passed up were Joel Anthony, Mirza Teletović, Gustavo Ayón, Ivan Johnson, Cartier Martin, Gary Neal and Anthony Tolliver.

                  2008:

                  Goran Dragić: Picked at #45. We all know who he is.

                  2009:

                  Nando De Colo: Picked at #53. Not great but not awful either. He has always been a good player in Europe (there's a reason why he's a member of the French NT since 2009) but he didn't really pan out in the NBA. The only UDFA that would be an upgrade in this draft was Wesley Matthews.

                  2010:

                  Ryan Richards: Picked at #49. An amazing 7 foot athlete from England that hasn't panned out yet (but he's only 23 years old). Jeremy Lin, Alexey Shved and Donald Sloan are the only UDFAs of importance that were passed up.

                  2011:

                  Ádám Hanga: Picked at #59. A 6'7 SG from Hungary that has been playing in the ACB for the past 5 years. I like him a lot as a player and I believe that he has the future to be a good player at the European level but I don't think that he's going to come over to the NBA. The downside of this pick is that they passed on Isaiah Thomas to get him.

                  2013:

                  Livio Jean-Charles: Picked at #28 (I swear...). He has not come over to the NBA yet but he will certainly will.

                  That's the list. Personally, I count 2 HOFers (Parker, Manu), 6 successful NBAers (Scola, Barbosa, Udrih, Ian, Splitter, Dragić), 4 players with accomplished careers in Europe (Javtokas, Markota, Printezis, De Colo), 3 young players that we cannot really judge yet as they are under 25 (Richards, Hanga and Jean-Charles) and 1 bust (Karaulov).

                  Not all of these players played for the Spurs under Pop. Dragić and Barbosa played for Phoenix, Scola played for Houston and players like Javtokas and Printezis never came to the NBA but still became very good players. That's absolutely the job of a very good scout.

                  Obviously, Pop plays a huge role on the players that do come and play for the Spurs. That's undeniable. He has a great system and knows how to motivate his players. He is definitely one of the best coaches in NBA history. But he also has some amazing scouts and an FO that will actively seek out players that fit his system.

                  In general, the Spurs organization is great. It's just like you said. There's no reason to hate that team. They absolutely deserve their success.
                  Last edited by Nuntius; 10-20-2014, 07:40 AM. Reason: forgot to write "to hate" in the last paragraph
                  Originally posted by IrishPacer
                  Empty vessels make the most noise.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X