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

Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

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

  • Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

    Only a very small note on Vogel, most of his column is on the Knicks

    http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/knick...mW3ClIRtwkNI/1



    Kentucky coach may be on Knicks' radar

    By PETER VECSEY
    Last Updated: 9:07 AM, April 8, 2011
    Posted: 2:47 AM, April 8, 2011

    James Dolan's reluctance to pick up Knicks president Donnie Walsh's $5 million option for next season the moment the team qualified for the playoffs says it all about where this shadowy situation is headed.

    Instead of earning as little as that requisite reward from his boss (though a multi-year extension offer certainly wouldn't have been unreasonable), the person most responsible for reviving the franchise's relevance got the silent treatment and the cold shoulder, at least for public consumption.

    I'm sure (well, maybe) Dolan thanked Walsh for reversing the depressing talk of the town within three years of becoming Knicks president. But not doing something definitive cheapened the accomplishment.

    Instead of showering Walsh with love, Dolan has doused him with disrespect . . . regardless of how things turn out in the end. Should the Knicks make a second-round indentation or beyond it'd be next to impossible, even for someone as arrogant and obdurate as Dolan, not to allow Walsh to finish what he started three seasons ago.

    Yet, at this point in time, the smart money is betting parting gifts already have been picked out that will compensate Walsh suitably for having his authority usurped on a regular basis, enduring the indignity of almost being force-fed Isiah Thomas as general manager, and theoretically keeping his lips sealed for x-amount of years.

    It's time to go to your pocket or purse and start fingering your rosary beads to help Walsh pray a valuable package is looming. Because, really, if not for the millions, who needs to have Thomas lurking in every Garden cubbyhole, nook and cranny?

    Then again, when the obvious becomes obvious to one and all, it's often wise to go the other way to see if there's someone significantly obscure (or not) hiding in the suns' glare.

    Thomas might want to down a Lunesta before reading further. Knicks coach Mike D'Antoni, too.

    According to a team executive, who knows a thing or two about a thing or two regarding goings-on behind the screens, Dolan may have eyes for John Calipari . . . to run the front office and coach.

    Do I have confirmation on this? No. I unsuccessfully reached out to Calipari and left a message.

    Does it make sense? Yes, especially in view of Dolan's disinclination to do right by Walsh.

    We're talking about a marquee college coach fresh from another Final Four, who owns pro experience (some of it good with the Nets), is an outstanding recruiter (though the NBA's salary cap may limit that impact), and relates remarkably well with young black players.

    What's more, Calipari is represented by William (World Wide) Wesley, who works for Creative Artists Agency, Hollywood's most powerful entertainment agency. One of its many patrons is Chris Paul, who figures to be on the market within a matter of months. Wesley also reps Mark Warkentien, current part-time Knicks scout and former Nuggets' vice president; it's felt he'd caddy for Cal in the office.

    Last year at this time, fictitious reports surfaced that Wesley was shopping Calipari and LeBron James, another CAA client, as a package to the Bulls. Reporters assume Wesley has the juice to pull something like that off. He doesn't and he didn't.

    His agency, on the other hand, does, and the Garden, looking to load up on its concert talent and collaborate on other ventures, appears to be building a binding relationship. Whether Calipari is part of those chummy dealings is strictly conjecture . . . so far.


    *
    While on the subject of prospective goings and comings, the coaching carousel is in danger of developing some airliner type cracks from overuse over the next 16 weeks.

    Fifteen almost assuredly will be back with their current teams -- Gregg Popovich, George Karl, Nate McMillan, Tom Thibodeau, Scott Skiles, Lionel Hollins, Avery Johnson, Scott Brooks, Paul Silas, Monty Williams, Bryon Scott, Alvin Gentry, Vinny Del Negro and Ty Corbin.

    The remaining half have given notice (Phil Jackson), are on unspoken notice should their teams fail to meet expectations, or are in jeopardy to be served evictions notices.


    Virtually guaranteed to go are the Pistons' John Kuester, the Timberwolves' Kurt Rambis, the Hawks' Larry Drew (unless his team pulls a first-round upset, and even then I see it heppening), the Pacers' Frank Vogel (same-same), the Warriors' Keith Smart, the Wizards' Flip Saunders and the Raptors' Jay Triano, particularly if Bryan Colangelo doesn't get a new deal -- and maybe even if he does despite adhering to an agreed-upon plan by those in charge to play almost exclusively young.

    Paul Westphal, not that he deserves to be fired, might have saved his Kings job by winning some games the last couple of weeks. The fact is, he ought to get a raise for having to put up every day with DeMarcus Cousins' antics, said to be much worse than advertised.

    We've already mentioned D'Antoni's uncertain circumstances. Rick Adelman, in spite of a superlative showing minus Yao Ming, is giving no indication he wants back with the Rockets.

    Your guess is as good as mine regarding what happens to Erik Spoelstra (Heat), Stan Van Gundy (Magic), and Rick Carlisle (Mavericks) should their respective teams distribute playoff shares in April, early May or even later in the month.

    In that same vein, should the Celtics, showing my age, check into assisted living rather than The Finals, it's a given Doc Rivers will take next season off.

    Who are the most eligible replacements? Mark Jackson, Jeff Van Gundy, Mike Brown, Mike Dunleavy, Brian Shaw, Sam Mitchell, Darrell Walker, Mike Woodson, Dwane Casey, Adrian Dantley, Mike Budenholzer, Steve Clifford, Dan Majerle, Patrick Ewing, Chuck Person, Chris Jent, Dean Demopoulos, Alex English, Sam Cassell and Mario Elie. And, of, course, a few fired coaches will be recycled.


    peter.vecsey@nypost.com

  • #2
    Re: Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

    I think the main reason Vogel wouldn't be retained is this:

    His assistant coaches. Does he have the experience or pull to bring in key assistants if Bird doesn't think our current coaches are good enough?
    "man, PG has been really good."

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

      I agree with most of what he says....but isn't Vescey a friend of Walsh and hence a little biased in this situation?
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

        I've never been a big fan of Vescey. He's one of the more irresponsible columnists around the league even though he's one of the biggest names.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

          Rick Adelman, in spite of a superlative showing minus Yao Ming, is giving no indication he wants back with the Rockets.
          ^^^I would love it if we could jump all over this^^^
          The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

            JMV started talking about Frank yesterday & "what it would take" to insure he is back. IMO, next to nothing! By that, I meas next to nothing to "insure" he is back, but there is no question he gets an interview & is in the discussion.

            The Pacers are in a position they have never been in before nor has many before them - as they will have a world of cap space, & every coach, every exec. is up as well. Herb has a clean slate, from the top down, in which to work. It is said/assumed that Larry has an open invite, but no assurances. IMO there is little-to-no chance Frank is back if Larry is gone, and untill we know about Larry it is way too soon to think about Frank.

            As mentioned in the article, there will be a lot of openings this off season. If Phil & Doc walk, there is two (though Shaw is a near lock for LAL), ATL is an interesting roster (though the ownership is messed), Minny's young talent might have appeal (if Kahn were gone), and Hou would draw interest if Adelman does not want to continue there. Many here have focused in on M.Brown, but we will likely not have the roster with the most appeal. I could see Brown in Boston, can't you? And again, so much relies on Larry and his decision. Anyone other then Larry brings in "his guy". Untill we know that, it is all speculation.

            If we go young at coach (I think we will), I could be OK with Franky V coming back, but also am intrigued by P.Ewing - he has put in his time & I'd love to see him work w/ Roy. I'm open to C.Person (though I never considered him till P.Jackson started talking him up) or M.Jackson (though I HATE his refusal to spend a yr learning from a bench!). Brown is a nice mix of old school who can relate, so I like him OK, but if we go that way, IMO we almost need a "D.Collins/ Hubbie Brown-type, a vet who gets his teams to play hard & over acheive, though I am not seeing any, nor am I suggesting L.Brown (too negative, needs vets).

            When we hear from Larry, we can start talking, but untill then enjoy a short playoff series and a VERY LONG offseason.
            "Larry Bird: You are Officially On the Clock! (3/24/08)"
            (Watching You Like A Hawk!)

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

              Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post

              ^^^I would love it if we could jump all over this^^^


              I'll 2nd that motion!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

                I'd agree, if Larry Bird doesn't come back, Vogel doesn't have a shot. However, i think Vogel should get a lead assistant or an Associate Head Coach job pretty easily somewhere next year.

                If Bird stays, I think

                1.) It completely depends on who is courting who in the as a coaching prospect. If retreads are left and there isn't a premier coach available, I could easily see Vogel as the Plan B. I'd actually prefer it, honestly.

                2.) I wouldn't rule an out of nowhere guy, like a Bird buddy. McHale or what about Carlise if he is let go in Dallas if they get an early exit again.

                3.) Plan A has to be Mike Brown, though, the relationship is there. He's a Bird type coach in demeanor and is young, while having experience.

                If Bird leaves, I think..

                1.) This is a really attractive job for a GM, young nucleus, all future picks intact, cap room galore.

                2.) Possibly a GM/Coach, where a guy can buy the groceries and cook them. I think thats really rare and you would need a big time Morway and a big time lead assistant, but I can't help but wonder if your big time guys would go for something like this. This scenario not likely, but something you could consider. Stan Van Gundy or Jerry Sloan, just to throw some names out there

                3.) Kevin Pritchard/Nate McMillan - easy connect the dots thing, but Pritchards eye for talent seems pretty good and he's super agressive from what I understand. McMillan I think is a hard...nosed guy, so who knows. I like that kind of coach, but I don't know how it impacts young players and chemistry.

                4.) Donnie Walsh - I mean he's patient and deliberate. Not his first rodeo. He understands the league, market, and ownership. I know the debate on here about him and I understand it. Not sure who he'd want to bring in as a coach, but Mullin has been mentioned, I could also see Mark Jackson.

                Of course you can't play all of the scenarios out, but I could see any of these as possibilties.

                I'd guess they'd want someone in place for sure before the draft at the end of June. Honestly, I'm not sure you have to, unless you get a system guy who isn't flexible enough to build around his talent, which I'm rooting against.

                IMHO, I'm with keeping Bird and paying for Mike Brown, if it all worked out. I'd do that and not look back.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

                  I like Coach Vogel and what he has done so far. If it becomes obvious during this
                  playoff run that the players fight tooth & nail to win and make a good showing,
                  then would like to see Coach Vogel return to continue building upon progress
                  already made.

                  To h*** with Vecsey's opinion.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

                    Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                    ^^^I would love it if we could jump all over this^^^
                    Yeah, if Adelman decides (I don't get it, by the way) he doesn't want to be in Houston anymore, I'd certainly hope we give him a strong consideration. Always seemed like a really good coach.

                    Although I have to ask: Doesn't his offense involve high-post big men? At least that's what I saw a lot in Sacramento, but then again that was with Chris Webber, Vlade Divac, and later Brad Miller, who all would be best served there.

                    Other than that Rick, that would be interesting if Rick Carlisle was suddenly available again. I'm not 100% in love with the guy, but we could do a LOT worse. And this time, he wouldn't have to babysit the entire roster.

                    I'd still welcome Mike Brown as well.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

                      Bird or whoever is the next GM please say NO to another Dunleavy
                      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

                        Maybe the Pacers would want a combo front office coaching option of MD Sr., and as a result might be able to sign MD Jr. to a less expensive contract as a result of family loyalties, and then be able to afford to keep another young rising talent player longer and possibly even be able to afford a big man coach to come in and work with Hibbert on a consistent basis?

                        Or, maybe Carlisle would thank Larry for allowing him to not have to endure the last few years and agree to come back here with a potentially very bright future?

                        Or, maybe, just maybe, Vogel is not nearly as likely to be leaving as Vescey speculates.

                        Just making the playoffs with a team that probably would have struggled to win more than 30 games at the rate things deteriorated should give Vogel at least a fighting chance to stay on, depending on what behind the scenes dealings have been going on in whatever coaching search might already be taking place, if there have been any.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

                          Vogel has done a great job giving the younger guys a postive mindset and put this team back in the right direction.

                          I wouldn't be against removing the interim tag from Vogel, but I think we need to look at all of our other options including former coaches and other assistant coaches. Vogel is most likely going to be getting an interview.

                          The one guy I don't want us getting is Mike Dunleavy, Sr. He never got it done with the Clippers and did pretty much nothing as their head coach. He seemed more of a place holder, IMO and we're gonna need someone who's gonna disclipine this team.

                          I like some of the eligible replacements named such as Jeff Van Gundy, Mike Brown, Brian Shaw (although he's more than likely going to become the next Lakers head coach), Mike Woodson, and even Dean Demopoulos who played a huge role for the Trail Blazers when Nate McMillan hurt himself last year and he had to step in and take over for a little bit.

                          I don't know what the other coaches can do for us, but there's not too many bad choices and Vogel being one of them.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

                            Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                            Yeah, if Adelman decides (I don't get it, by the way) he doesn't want to be in Houston anymore, I'd certainly hope we give him a strong consideration. Always seemed like a really good coach.

                            Although I have to ask: Doesn't his offense involve high-post big men? At least that's what I saw a lot in Sacramento, but then again that was with Chris Webber, Vlade Divac, and later Brad Miller, who all would be best served there.

                            Other than that Rick, that would be interesting if Rick Carlisle was suddenly available again. I'm not 100% in love with the guy, but we could do a LOT worse. And this time, he wouldn't have to babysit the entire roster.

                            I'd still welcome Mike Brown as well.
                            Adelman is a very good, very experienced NBA coach. But IMO he does not emphasize defense enough and he plays his starters and stars too many minutes. I would rather have Mike Brown

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Vecsey on Walsh, Calipari, Vogel and other coaching news

                              Adelman, Carlisle, or Mike Brown would all be fine choices for me.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X