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

Vescey: SVG - 4th guy on Pacers list - update 5/15 - Sam not a lock to get job

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

  • #61
    Re: Vescey: SVG - 4th guy on Pacers list - update 5/15 - Sam not a lock to get job

    Originally posted by Mal View Post
    Not wanting Sam Mitchell is terrible? Not to me.

    I will say though that I'm also sick of having two (three?) chiefs.
    See Jays post above. Not handing the Pacers over to Sam is Donny's influence.

    Bird is terrible.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Vescey: SVG - 4th guy on Pacers list - update 5/15 - Sam not a lock to get job

      If it's the opposite of what I thought, then yeah, that's dumb.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: Vescey: SVG is the 4th guy on the Pacers list - update 5/11 -quote from Mark Jack

        Originally posted by Jay View Post
        Vecsey broke the Chuck Person/ Minnesota trade exactly how it went down six months before it actually happened in 1992 (he reported it at the trading deadline, but it didn't actually happen until right before training camp.)

        I've taken him seriously ever since. And it doesn't take much research to figure out that Donnie and Vecsey have known each other since high school.
        Yeah, but he also "broke" the Bender to the Lakers trade a few years ago. You remember that deal, right?


        Honestly to me this seems like one big Isiah situation all over again.

        TOR wants Ivaoroni but must wait on PHX to finish up. Till then they "negotiate" with Sam just in case, not unlike Rick being strung along by DW while waiting on Isiahs CBA issue to be resolved so he could be hired.

        So if Indy wants Sam then they are waiting on TOR to make it's move with Ivaroni which means that they are also waiting on the PHX playoffs, and in the meantime they also must keep options in place and active just in case something falls through.

        And then from that you probably have several other coaching jobs also waiting on those positions to fall. Heck, you have to still wonder about Mike Brown should NJ save their butts in that series somehow.



        If the PV thing about DW telling Bird to get out of that locked-in mentality with Sam is true then it helps add fuel to my belief that while DW works the biz Larry's influence is to REACT to problems. He's not a visionary, he's not solving tomorrow's problems, he's fixing last year's or even 2 years ago.

        Jack is gone, Ron is gone, so NOW they need someone to kick butt? Trade Tinsley and who exactly is the discipline issue? If they are seriously facing roster movement limits and want to start over with guys like Danny, Shawne and Ike then shouldn't they be getting a developmental coach rather than a discipline guy like Sam or even a system guy like Ivaroni (meaning a guy who can teach a system that will take vets to the next level)?

        I think this is also why really young guys like Shaw worry me because I'm not sold on them as TEACHERS. Knowing is one thing, getting it across to someone else is another. That is a unique skill that must be learned, which is exactly my issue with Jax refusing to get into the ground floor of the coaching ranks.

        Knowing what to do isn't enough, this is people management more than anything else. After all isn't the common view on where Rick went wrong that he couldn't connect his knowledge and system to his players?

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Vescey: SVG is the 4th guy on the Pacers list - update 5/11 -quote from Mark Jack

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          Yeah, but he also "broke" the Bender to the Lakers trade a few years ago. You remember that deal, right?


          Honestly to me this seems like one big Isiah situation all over again.

          TOR wants Ivaoroni but must wait on PHX to finish up. Till then they "negotiate" with Sam just in case, not unlike Rick being strung along by DW while waiting on Isiahs CBA issue to be resolved so he could be hired.

          So if Indy wants Sam then they are waiting on TOR to make it's move with Ivaroni which means that they are also waiting on the PHX playoffs, and in the meantime they also must keep options in place and active just in case something falls through.

          And then from that you probably have several other coaching jobs also waiting on those positions to fall. Heck, you have to still wonder about Mike Brown should NJ save their butts in that series somehow.



          If the PV thing about DW telling Bird to get out of that locked-in mentality with Sam is true then it helps add fuel to my belief that while DW works the biz Larry's influence is to REACT to problems. He's not a visionary, he's not solving tomorrow's problems, he's fixing last year's or even 2 years ago.

          Jack is gone, Ron is gone, so NOW they need someone to kick butt? Trade Tinsley and who exactly is the discipline issue? If they are seriously facing roster movement limits and want to start over with guys like Danny, Shawne and Ike then shouldn't they be getting a developmental coach rather than a discipline guy like Sam or even a system guy like Ivaroni (meaning a guy who can teach a system that will take vets to the next level)?

          I think this is also why really young guys like Shaw worry me because I'm not sold on them as TEACHERS. Knowing is one thing, getting it across to someone else is another. That is a unique skill that must be learned, which is exactly my issue with Jax refusing to get into the ground floor of the coaching ranks.

          Knowing what to do isn't enough, this is people management more than anything else. After all isn't the common view on where Rick went wrong that he couldn't connect his knowledge and system to his players?
          Good post Seth. I wonder, who do you consider good "teaching" coaches that are available to us? I wonder too, if an unknown might carry some weight with TPTB simply because they can't demand as much salary.
          Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Vescey: SVG - 4th guy on Pacers list - update 5/15 - Sam not a lock to get job

            Just lifted this from RealGM:

            Raptors GM Denies NBA Team Permission To Talk To Mitchell
            15th May, 2007 - 5:59 am
            Canadian Press -
            Raptors' GM Bryan Colangelo has turned down one National Basketball Association team interested in speaking with his head coach Sam Mitchell.

            Mitchell's contract expires June 30 and Colangelo said yesterday talks are under way to sign the NBA coach of the year to an extension.

            One team officially sought permission to speak to Mitchell, but was denied. Another team asked informally about a timeline that needed to be followed.

            "The response was basically I'm not prepared to release Sam to speak to other teams at this stage," Colangelo remarked. "It's far too early in the process and we're not at that point yet."
            Ever notice how friendly folks are at a shootin' range??.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: Vescey: SVG is the 4th guy on the Pacers list - update 5/11 -quote from Mark Jack

              Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
              If the PV thing about DW telling Bird to get out of that locked-in mentality with Sam is true then it helps add fuel to my belief that while DW works the biz Larry's influence is to REACT to problems. He's not a visionary, he's not solving tomorrow's problems, he's fixing last year's or even 2 years ago.

              Jack is gone, Ron is gone, so NOW they need someone to kick butt? Trade Tinsley and who exactly is the discipline issue? If they are seriously facing roster movement limits and want to start over with guys like Danny, Shawne and Ike then shouldn't they be getting a developmental coach rather than a discipline guy like Sam or even a system guy like Ivaroni (meaning a guy who can teach a system that will take vets to the next level)?

              I think this is also why really young guys like Shaw worry me because I'm not sold on them as TEACHERS. Knowing is one thing, getting it across to someone else is another. That is a unique skill that must be learned, which is exactly my issue with Jax refusing to get into the ground floor of the coaching ranks.

              Knowing what to do isn't enough, this is people management more than anything else. After all isn't the common view on where Rick went wrong that he couldn't connect his knowledge and system to his players?
              Brilliant description of Bird - he's solving problems that aren't problems anymore.

              I'm not going to miss Rick at all, but management finally got him the players he's needed all along - team oriented, coachable role players that will excel (at least better than this spring) when they learn what is expected.)

              As for teachers - I've always believed the teaching should come from the assistants - Mark Aguirre, Tree Rollins, and Chuck Person have had more to do with the development of Pacers players over the past decade than Rick or Isiah. And in many cases, they've been quite good at the teaching aspect.

              Prior to those guys, it was Mel Daniels.
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Vescey: SVG - 4th guy on Pacers list - update 5/15 - Sam not a lock to get job

                Originally posted by Jay View Post
                Let's break down the Vescey-ism:



                At Donnie Walsh's request, I'm told, Larry Bird has agreed to keep an open mind

                (1) Donnie is still in charge, people; or
                (2) Donnie is still my source but I never know if he's telling the truth or playing me like a piano

                that originally had been closed to that idea.

                Sadly, Mr. Vecsey (intentionally) confuses us by using 'that' twice in the same sentence.

                The first "that" refers to Larry Bird/ his mind.

                The second "that" refers to Sam Mitchell as "nearly guarantee[d] [sic] to get the Pacers job, as believed."

                Its also a convoluted double-negative, which means that for the first several reads you may think he's saying something different.

                Back to English, he's saying that Donnie has talked Bird into having an open mind about coaching candidates other than Sam Mitchell. IOW, if it were up to Bird, we wouldn't even need to interview Sam, we'd just need to make him a job offer, and Donnie is putting the brakes on the Sam Mitchell express train.

                Whether you like or dislike Vecsey's treatment of the written English is beside the point, he does pick his words carefully.
                Thanks Jay. I thought Graham Mernatsi was gonna have to brush his cape off and swoop in to save the day.
                Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: Vescey: SVG - 4th guy on Pacers list - update 5/15 - Sam not a lock to get job

                  I wish Mario Elie and Terry Porter would be on the list I think they would be interesting coaching prospects. Ron Harper too. Maybe KStat can tells us about him and his job with the Pistons.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: Vescey: SVG is the 4th guy on the Pacers list - update 5/11 -quote from Mark Jack

                    Originally posted by indygeezer View Post
                    Good post Seth. I wonder, who do you consider good "teaching" coaches that are available to us? I wonder too, if an unknown might carry some weight with TPTB simply because they can't demand as much salary.
                    Well certainly that's a possibility. If they are truly rebuilding then how much success can a coach have. Consider the first coach for an expansion team, or even most coaches that step in at bad teams. That's often a REALLY short leash (more so at rebuilds in fact) and they are almost always expected to be gone before the team truly turns it around, that's the next guy's job usually.

                    So if that's the case then you want to keep it cheap and it makes for a good chance to give a guy his first break. Think Tim Floyd in Chicago (okay, shake off the chills, that could be the type of coach Indy gets).


                    Teacher? Hmm, not totally sure. I wonder with Ivaroni, he does have experience with a few styles of play. I think this is where Stan Van Gundy looks decent. I think he can get something out of younger guys as he showed in Miami, but was he teaching them or just utilizing them well? Not sure, not enough time to get a read on him.

                    Actually I seriously do wonder about PJ Carlesimo at this point. Spree lost it with him and he can be tough, but he's been with Pop and that defense for awhile now and I think he carries a strong demeanor. And he's worked with kids too, spending 10+ years at Seton Hall.

                    And maybe this is where Boylan comes into the picture. He's got a strong resume, lots of diverse basketball experience. The only worry I'd have is what his scheme/gameplan might be. Has he created a playing identity or would he just clone Skiles...and is that even a bad thing. See how Mike Brown took a lot of Rick's playbook and style with him to CLE.


                    Davis, Person, Shaw seem like "you won't be here long" choices. Sam feels like a solution to a problem the team might not have, and if Tinsley is still with the team I think he's going to be benched or want out more than he used to which is worse than if they just traded him...making Sam's tough guy approach rather meaningless then.


                    Is it that Jabbar is untouchable? Why do they talk to Shaw but not Kareem?

                    As for teachers - I've always believed the teaching should come from the assistants - Mark Aguirre, Tree Rollins, and Chuck Person have had more to do with the development of Pacers players over the past decade than Rick or Isiah. And in many cases, they've been quite good at the teaching aspect.

                    Prior to those guys, it was Mel Daniels.
                    Great point. One thing guys like PJ and perhaps even Boylan and his experience bring to the table are a group of asst's that they have gotten to know over the years and worked with. A young HC thrown right out there will often have trouble putting more experienced guys underneath him, so then you get a very green staff in total.

                    Bird had his status as the exception and Harter's apparent lack of desire to be a HC at that point.

                    So it might not be so much "who can teach them" but more a case of "who can bring in the staff that can teach them" while also bringing in a gameplan that fits the talent and how they will be taught.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: Vescey: SVG - 4th guy on Pacers list - update 5/15 - Sam not a lock to get job

                      BTW, on 1070 tonight Lee talked to a TOR sports guy about the situation and his strong impression (team is being very tight-lipped about it) was that it was less about other options and more about MONEY/YEARS for Sam. He thinks this is why JC has refused to let team's talk to Sam at this point.

                      He also made the point that he could've dumped Sam early in the season and instead stuck with him. His impression is that Sam is probably looking I think for a 5 year deal and a bit more money due to the COY win and that JC is thinking 4 and less cash due to his overall 3 year record (which ain't so hot).

                      So maybe Ivaroni isn't in the mix. But I just wonder if it still isn't the "keep my wife just in case my mistress dumps me" of the Isiah/Rick situation. Maybe he really wants Sam IF he can't get Ivaroni, and perhaps he's not moving on Ivaroni out of respect for his former team. Rather than disrupting the Suns he lets it play out.

                      And yet the TOR guy did make a strong case that all it boils down to is a simple contract negotiation and nothing more, and that Sam will be back in TOR more than likely.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X