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

SI Article: Phil Jackson talks Lakers, his future, Dwight Howard, more

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

  • SI Article: Phil Jackson talks Lakers, his future, Dwight Howard, more

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nba...?sct=uk_t11_a5

    Well, the article has a majority of Lakers topics in it, but it has some great topics about basketball x's and o's that maybe some of you will get interested.

    And also, I'm surprised Phil Jackson mentioned Frank Vogel in the end. Anyway, here's the complete article:

    Phil Jackson hasn't said much publicly since he was passed over for the Lakers' coaching job in favor of Mike D'Antoni. And he did not use a 60-minute conversation over breakfast last week to launch fusillades against the Lakers. But he did have some comments about the Lakers and a few other things, too.

    Some of Jackson's comments appeared in a Sports Illustrated story running this week. (Click here to subscribe to the magazine.)

    Jackson wasn't wearing any of his 11 coaching rings on this morning (he also has two as a player from the Knicks), but the subject came up because his book coming out in May is titled Eleven Rings. His favorite, incidentally, is the 1996 ring, the first one of the Bulls' second three-peat, not because of anything that happened during the season, but because it is "the least ostentatious," with a simple four trophies on it.

    Note that the interview took place while Dr. Jerry Buss was still alive and in the hospital. Certainly I would've asked Jackson something about the legacy of Dr. Buss, who hired him (twice) and is the father of his longtime companion, and now fiancée, Jeanie Buss, who runs the Lakers' business operations.

    One final thing: Jackson has seven grandchildren, from two other marriages, and gave up the fact that Jeanie now allows herself to be called "Granny."

    SI: Do you watch a lot of games? Do you have the NBA package?

    Phil Jackson: I just got it last week at Jeannie's insistence. She didn't want people thinking that her boyfriend is so poor he can't get all the NBA channels.

    SI: Do you take notes in case, you know, future jobs arise?

    Jackson: I sometimes take notes. I have some people who have come to me and ask, "Would you watch my team, see if you can pick anything up?" Four or five teams, plus the Lakers. [He wouldn't identify the other teams.] So while I'm not officially in the consulting business, it might come in handy sometime.

    SI: You've been away from the game for two years. Do things change quickly in the league?

    Jackson: Not really. It's a mimic league. It has been for a long time. Coaches see something and say, "Oh, that's hard to defend. Maybe we'll run that." Screen-roll. Three-point shooters in the corner. Bigs that can roll and pop. San Antonio has a system, a way of doing things, and maybe a couple others. But most everybody runs that screen-roll.

    SI: How does the game look to you? Similar from team to team?

    Jackson: Yes. Basketball is a simple game. Your goal is penetration, get the ball close to the basket, and there are three ways to do that. Pass, dribble and offensive rebound.

    The easiest one is -- or should be -- the pass. But the new rules allow you to throw more people at post-up players. NBA basketball is a big man's game, and in the past they protected that aspect of the game. Well, those rules went out the window and what they didn't do was consider this: If they're going to continue to allow zone defenses to work and shut down the paint, then they have to put six more seconds on the shot clock. A 30-second clock. But they're so attached to the idea of the 24-second clock that it doesn't happen.

    SI: Did you bring it up when you were coaching?

    Jackson: All the time, all the time. But general managers always dominated those competition committees. Anyway, it [allowing limited zones] has eliminated some of the post passing and made dribbling a major part of our game. As a result, I think people forgot that there are still ways you can get the ball inside rather than just standing there and throwing the ball in. You have to have a system that makes all things work. Pop [San Antonio's Gregg Popovich] has that.

    SI: How would you describe that system?

    Jackson: Popovich made significant growth 10 years ago or so after David Robinson left. It had been pretty stilted. You know, two big guys. A lot of stuff he does represents the triangle offense. They flow into it a different way. Strong-side triangle. Pinch-post action. Some of it may have come about because we were going at each other all the time in the playoffs and he had to defend against it.

    SI: When you won three consecutive titles [2000-02] with Shaq and Kobe, you ran the triangle. But didn't you also get a lot of screen-rolls out of that?

    Jackson: Yes, and it came naturally out of the offense. Or it might be a "special." We always had some of those.

    SI: When you look at the Lakers now, considering that they've had a lot of personnel changes and injuries, what do you see?

    Jackson: They just don't put the ball in the post. They'll use a screen-roll to get the guy in the post. But there's no consistent plan to do it. Yes, Kobe will go in there. But Dwight [Howard] just doesn't get any touches. They've basically eliminated his assets.

    SI: But wouldn't his assets be rolling off the screen-roll, with either [Steve] Nash or Kobe?

    Jackson: You want the ball 10 feet away from the basket. Throw it into the post, make them double-team and have everybody around to make shots. That's what Shaq could do. That's where you have the Robert Horrys, the Derek Fishers and the Rick Foxes sitting out there getting wide-open jumpers.

    SI: But Dwight is not Shaq in that aspect of the game, drawing the double team and finding people. Isn't that true?

    Jackson: I think he can be. But he is not where he needs to be physically because of the back surgery. He needs a year to recover from something like that. He's starting to come around, but he has a massive upper body to carry around. He's a terrific athlete, but he still has to get all that back. He's looking better all the time, but his problem right now is turnovers. He's got to have a little better recognition, and that will help him gain the confidence of his teammates and coach, which he does not have now.

    SI: How about when Pau Gasol comes back? There seemed to be some problems when they were out there together.

    Jackson: Well, what is the problem? We won two championships that way [with two big men]. Pau is one of the best big men in the game. I mean, Pau Gasol is going to be in the Hall of Fame.

    SI: Hmm, I love his game, but I don't know about that.

    Jackson: He has won European titles with Spain, [he won] two NBA championships. I think he will.

    SI: As far as the Lakers go, haven't they been improving?

    Jackson: Yes, I think they are finding a way to play. And that's nice to see. Steve has had to sacrifice because Kobe is dominating the ball, but Kobe is showing he can be both playmaker and scorer. Now it's about defense. And I think that's coming around. They make the playoffs, I think they've shown they're going to be in it with every team.

    SI: Do you ever feel compelled to catch a game live at Staples Center?

    Jackson: I haven't yet. I'll probably go when Shaq's number is retired. [That is scheduled for April 2.]

    SI: There's little doubt you had a good run in this town, even after not winning it in, say, 2004, which may have been your toughest season, the one when Karl Malone and Gary Payton joined on.

    Jackson: I did have a good run. There were always people who didn't like the triangle, thought it was too methodical, too unlike Showtime. But I was always astonished about how well I was treated. When I came back [in 2005] and took the job, people actually thanked me. They didn't say, "Good luck." They said "Thank you." I never forgot that.

    SI: The $12 million question -- and I'm just throwing out a number -- is: Are you going to coach in the NBA again?

    Jackson: I'm not coaching. I told Mitch [Kupchak, Lakers GM] that back in October. So when we sat down in November [to talk about taking over after Mike Brown was fired], he brought that up and I said, "Well, this isn't about moving or going somewhere else and learning new players. It's different. So I'm ready to think about coming back, but I still have to think about it."

    But I do hold out the idea that there's still influence in the game I could have. Red Auerbach, Pete Newell, Wayne Embry, guys like that have had ... a number of people have had considerable influence and haven't been coaches per se.

    SI: So ... a GM job?

    Jackson: I don't like that term. Vice president of basketball operations/director of player personnel is more like it.

    SI: Vice president ... that doesn't sound like the boss, but the guy who would report to the owner.

    Jackson: No, that guy would be the boss. He would be the president of the organization.

    SI: What else do you do with your time besides surf the NBA channels ... now that you have the package?

    Jackson: I'm a sports-watcher. I played football and baseball, coached baseball. So I watch those things. I watched rugby last weekend. I played hockey in North Dakota growing up and watch a lot of that. We watched Homeland.

    SI: You seem like you might be a Breaking Bad guy.

    Jackson: I'm not. One of my friends, John Lithgow, was on Dexter. So I watched that until it got too dark. Same with Breaking Bad and Weeds, shows like that. I can't take those shows where the premise is the good guys are breaking the law.

    SI: How is your physical condition? [Jackson has had two hip replacements and one knee replacement.]

    Jackson: Working out, rehabbing is almost like a job. Monday, Wednesday and Friday, several hours a day.

    SI: A final obvious question: What do you miss about coaching?

    Jackson: What you might expect. Being around the other coaches, being around the guys. It's what I talked about in my book [Eleven Rings]. Coaching is about, "How do I get these people to play at their peak level?" Yeah, the X's and O's mean something, but you can get people to do that. And a lot of those guys have been hired. The Lawrence Franks and the Frank Vogels. Mike Brown was one of those guys. That's not a knock. Those guys know how to coach the game.

    But coaching is much more than that. It is a spiritual quest. And if it's not that, you don't have a challenge, you don't have a mission. Forming a brotherhood and trying to move it forward, that's the part that I miss.

    Jack McCallum is the author of Dream Team and the Sports Illustrated Book of the Apocalypse.

  • #2
    Re: SI Article: Phil Jackson talks Lakers, his future, Dwight Howard, more

    I find it interesting that he seems to be talking about Frank as one of the X and Os guys rather than the "spiritual quest/brotherhood" thing. I see it more as the opposite.
    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


    • #3
      Re: SI Article: Phil Jackson talks Lakers, his future, Dwight Howard, more

      Originally posted by BillS View Post
      I find it interesting that he seems to be talking about Frank as one of the X and Os guys rather than the "spiritual quest/brotherhood" thing. I see it more as the opposite.
      That's what I also thought.

      Well probably it is his assumption because he recently just got a package of NBA channels and watched the current Frank Vogel. He may have missed seeing the Frank Vogel that have press conferences like bible studies.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: SI Article: Phil Jackson talks Lakers, his future, Dwight Howard, more

        Originally posted by 15th parallel View Post
        That's what I also thought.

        Well probably it is his assumption because he recently just got a package of NBA channels and watched the current Frank Vogel. He may have missed seeing the Frank Vogel that have press conferences like bible studies.
        Reporters, please turn to the book of Props, Chapter 3, verse 7-11

        And Lo there was before them a player whose progress was great. But unto him a setback befell, and the multitudes did cry out in their lamentations, saying, "Verily should he be traded, yeah, even unto a bag of Fritos and a Coke." And the Coach did calm the waters, and spake unto them in gentle kindness, saying, "Nay, it shall not be, for he is a Beast on the defensive end and shall not be slighted for his efforts."

        Thus endeth the reading of the Word. Go in peace.
        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


        • #5
          Re: SI Article: Phil Jackson talks Lakers, his future, Dwight Howard, more

          Originally posted by BillS View Post
          Reporters, please turn to the book of Props, Chapter 3, verse 7-11

          And Lo there was before them a player whose progress was great. But unto him a setback befell, and the multitudes did cry out in their lamentations, saying, "Verily should he be traded, yeah, even unto a bag of Fritos and a Coke." And the Coach did calm the waters, and spake unto them in gentle kindness, saying, "Nay, it shall not be, for he is a Beast on the defensive end and shall not be slighted for his efforts."

          Thus endeth the reading of the Word. Go in peace.


          Spread the good news to thy neighbors!
          Last edited by 15th parallel; 02-20-2013, 01:32 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: SI Article: Phil Jackson talks Lakers, his future, Dwight Howard, more

            Originally posted by BillS View Post
            Reporters, please turn to the book of Props, Chapter 3, verse 7-11

            And Lo there was before them a player whose progress was great. But unto him a setback befell, and the multitudes did cry out in their lamentations, saying, "Verily should he be traded, yeah, even unto a bag of Fritos and a Coke." And the Coach did calm the waters, and spake unto them in gentle kindness, saying, "Nay, it shall not be, for he is a Beast on the defensive end and shall not be slighted for his efforts."


            Thus endeth the reading of the Word. Go in peace.


            It doesn't get better than this.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: SI Article: Phil Jackson talks Lakers, his future, Dwight Howard, more

              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              Reporters, please turn to the book of Props, Chapter 3, verse 7-11

              And Lo there was before them a player whose progress was great. But unto him a setback befell, and the multitudes did cry out in their lamentations, saying, "Verily should he be traded, yeah, even unto a bag of Fritos and a Coke." And the Coach did calm the waters, and spake unto them in gentle kindness, saying, "Nay, it shall not be, for he is a Beast on the defensive end and shall not be slighted for his efforts."

              Thus endeth the reading of the Word. Go in peace.
              Seriously, with enough time and consideration put into it, you could write a "Basketball Coach Bible" in just that style without necessarily making it about any one coach. Could be amazing.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: SI Article: Phil Jackson talks Lakers, his future, Dwight Howard, more

                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                I find it interesting that he seems to be talking about Frank as one of the X and Os guys rather than the "spiritual quest/brotherhood" thing. I see it more as the opposite.
                It's funny because one person can read the exact same thing as another person and get a different opinion. I read what Phil said as saying that Frank (both Lawrence & Vogel) as well as Mike Brown were the type of coach's that motivated people. After reading your post I now see why you think the way you do about it, but honestly my first inclination was to think that you can get X & O guys but people like Fran & Brown know how to coach (meaning every aspect of the game).

                I think you are probably more right than I am on this.


                Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: SI Article: Phil Jackson talks Lakers, his future, Dwight Howard, more

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post
                  It's funny because one person can read the exact same thing as another person and get a different opinion. I read what Phil said as saying that Frank (both Lawrence & Vogel) as well as Mike Brown were the type of coach's that motivated people. After reading your post I now see why you think the way you do about it, but honestly my first inclination was to think that you can get X & O guys but people like Fran & Brown know how to coach (meaning every aspect of the game).

                  I think you are probably more right than I am on this.
                  Peck, I rather agree with you.
                  Go Pacers!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: SI Article: Phil Jackson talks Lakers, his future, Dwight Howard, more

                    I'm not even sure I care which way he meant it. Love or hate him, the guy is a successful coach and he praised our young coach. I appreciate that. We know Vogel is a motivator and the players surely do. I think we're also seeing this year that he knows the game on a strategic level as well.

                    Now what was I trying to say? Oh yeah. I love our coach.
                    "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

                    "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

                    "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: SI Article: Phil Jackson talks Lakers, his future, Dwight Howard, more

                      Originally posted by BillS View Post
                      Reporters, please turn to the book of Props, Chapter 3, verse 7-11

                      And Lo there was before them a player whose progress was great. But unto him a setback befell, and the multitudes did cry out in their lamentations, saying, "Verily should he be traded, yeah, even unto a bag of Fritos and a Coke." And the Coach did calm the waters, and spake unto them in gentle kindness, saying, "Nay, it shall not be, for he is a Beast on the defensive end and shall not be slighted for his efforts."

                      Thus endeth the reading of the Word. Go in peace.
                      And all the "real" Pacer fans said, AMEN!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: SI Article: Phil Jackson talks Lakers, his future, Dwight Howard, more

                        Originally posted by gummy View Post
                        I'm not even sure I care which way he meant it. Love or hate him, the guy is a successful coach and he praised our young coach. I appreciate that. We know Vogel is a motivator and the players surely do. I think we're also seeing this year that he knows the game on a strategic level as well.

                        Now what was I trying to say? Oh yeah. I love our coach.
                        He also emphasizes defense which not too many coaches in the NBA do these days
                        Smothered Chicken!

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X