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

Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

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

  • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

    Originally posted by BillS View Post
    No, it absolutely is not. Again, it isn't NBA2K where every single combination of 1,2, or even 3 big men with 2,3, or 4 wings has practiced together and fits together. You can't just ride PG until he looks a little tired and then stick Stuckey in while leaving everyone else on the floor, then pull Monta and put PG back in, then pull GHill and put Monta back in, etc. And it gets even more complicated when you do it 2 players at a time.

    And, once again, we keep counting Ian as a bench guy for purposes of saying Vogel is doing the same thing he did in the last playoffs by having 5 bench guys in at the same time.
    I never said it was 2K. If those players haven't practiced together, whose fault is that? A coach should be able to make in-game adjustments instead of worrying about the players who apparently he never had practice together for such a situation. I don't think that is the situation, but if it is indeed the case, I'd be even more on board with letting Frank go than I am now.

    I don't know the stats, but I can't think of another team that runs with 5 bench guys on the floor at the same time in the playoffs. If Mahinmi was on the floor, are you expecting him to carry the load offensively for us?

    EDIT: Also, if we are going to talk about players not fitting together as the reason for his rotations, there is absolutely no explanation as to why George Hill and Monta Ellis shared the floor so often together.

    Comment


    • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

      Originally posted by freddielewis14 (who is quoting sbnation ) View Post
      But know this: Vogel is not Larry Bird's guy.

      Bird was hesitant to fire Jim O'Brien [in 2011] in the first place, and even after Vogel turned the team around and got them to play competitively in the playoffs against the Chicago Bulls, it took a couple of months before Bird was willing to give Vogel the full-time job. If you remember, Bird wanted Vogel to hire a big-time, experienced assistant, specifically Brian Shaw, before giving him the job.
      If this is true.....you have to really question the decision making skills of Bird.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

        Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
        This argument is so hokey.

        The goal back then was to be fun to watch to sell tickets, while we wait out our terrible contracts due to the Brawl, and execute Bird's famous and now brilliant 3 year plan.

        I hated JOB, and as someone who was buying those tickets hated the plan. But we weren't going anywhere w/ or w/o JOB.
        The exact same team that JOB was coaching to another losing record was IMMEDIATELY better under Vogel, especially on the defensive end.

        Comment


        • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

          Chuck Pagano: failed to meet expectations, given 4-year extension
          Frank Vogel: exceeded expectations, on the verge of being shown the door

          Comment


          • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

            “Yeah, it’s tough, but I can’t do anything but be supportive and a great teammate. Especially when I feel like I did pretty good this season,” Hill said of averaging 8.8 points (the team's best post scorer) and 6.2 rebounds. “Just to be out of the rotation like that is definitely frustrating, especially when you don’t know what happened or what you did. If you did anything wrong; if you don’t think you did anything wrong, nobody told you you did anything wrong. So now I’m like: ‘Question mark! Question mark! Question mark!’ What happened?’ ”

            “No. I heard about wanting the second unit (to have) speed. I thought I had speed, but it’s not enough, I guess. I really don’t know,” Hill said. “Hopefully my regular-season play, even if I’m not playing in the postseason, my regular-season play still shows what I can do.”

            “I look at (not having the option year picked up) as it’s probably reasonable if you look at it from a stat sheet type of thing. You can look at the stats and summer league or whatever and (see) this is what he’s done recently,” said Hill, who did not play well last summer in Orlando. “I kinda felt like my 82 (games) last year was kinda thrown out and they just (said): ‘This is what he’s done.’ ”

            “I think that actually made me a better player at the end of the season,” Hill said about the option not being picked up and early DNPs. “It paid off for me. … So I can’t really let my feelings make the decision for me. I have to talk to my family, talk to my circle and get back to it."
            http://www.indystar.com/story/sports...ions/83883784/

            Comment


            • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

              You know, could be Bird is going to get some big upgrades in here for the offense and doesn't know if trusts Vogel with the keys because of how bad the offense has been under Vogel.

              I say do whatever will help getting free agents here and keeps PG happy.

              Comment


              • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

                Originally posted by presto123 View Post
                Sorry if it's already been brought up, but are other teams allowed to contact Vogel before the playoffs end? If that is the case then Larry better get on this thing fast.
                I don't see why not. The Lakers contacted the Warriors about Walton between Playoff Series. If I'm the Kings or Knicks, I'm calling Vogel ASAP.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

                  He should be used to being taken out of the rotation. It's happened pretty much everywhere he's been lol

                  Comment


                  • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

                    http://www.cbssports.com/nba/writer/...-not-the-point

                    KEN BERGER
                    NBA Insider

                    Frank Vogel doesn't deserve to lose Pacers job, but that's not the point

                    When it comes to Frank Vogel's future with the Indiana Pacers, don't be fooled.

                    Don't be deceived into believing that it has anything to do with Vogel's record as the Pacers coach, or whether he deserves to stay or go.

                    Haven't we learned yet in the NBA coaching business that sometimes -- oftentimes -- it isn't about that?

                    In his first full season as Pacers coach in 2011-12, Vogel led them to the second round of the playoffs -- this, after four non-playoff seasons sandwiched between two first-round exits.

                    The next two seasons brought trips to the Eastern Conference Finals, where the Pacers lost both times to LeBron James and the Miami Heat. No shame in that.

                    Then Paul George gruesomely broke his leg, Roy Hibbert disappeared from the face of the Earth and David West -- the heart and soul of this Indiana era of success -- left millions on the table to go chase a title in San Antonio.

                    Despite all that, Vogel's Pacers won 45 games this season and pushed the second-seeded Raptors to seven games in the first round.

                    It isn't a good coaching résumé; it's a great coaching résumé.

                    And yet here we are, with team president Larry Bird telling my friend Gregg Doyel of the Indianapolis Star the following:

                    “It's no secret; I want us to score more points.”

                    And with Vogel's contract up, Bird said this on his coach's future:

                    “I don't know what's going to happen."

                    And this:

                    “What I don't want to do is leave Frank hanging; there's other jobs out there he could get.”

                    That last statement is at once a commentary on Bird being a stand-up executive with class, and proof enough that Bird's mind is already made up.

                    If you don't know that you want your coach of five-plus seasons back for another one, that tells you everything you need to know.

                    Why, you ask?

                    I'll answer those questions with other questions.

                    Why did the Cavaliers fire David Blatt only months after an NBA Finals appearance, at a time when Cleveland was leading the Eastern Conference?

                    Why did the Rockets fire Kevin McHale 11 games into the season coming off an appearance in the Western Conference Finals?

                    Why did New Orleans fire Monty Williams after he'd improved the team's record for four straight seasons and made the playoffs for the first time since Chris Paul was traded?

                    Why did the Bulls fire Tom Thibodeau after five straight postseason appearances and a winning percentage of .647?

                    What about Scott Brooks, who coached Oklahoma City to the Western Conference Finals three out of four seasons -- making the NBA Finals once, and missing the playoffs only when Kevin Durant missed 55 games with foot injuries?

                    How is it that Terry Stotts still doesn't have a contract for next season, despite coaching the Trail Blazers to the No. 5 seed and a first-round playoff victory and finishing second to Steve Kerr in the coach of the year voting?

                    I could go on, but you get the point.

                    Teams firing or otherwise dismissing coaches isn't always strictly about wins, losses and how far they've gone in the playoffs. Is that fair? No, but it's how the world works.

                    Sometimes -- oftentimes -- it's about the coach's relationship with the front office and ownership. Or how well they communicate. Or how much support he has from the team's stars.

                    Or philosophical differences.

                    With Hibbert and West gone, Bird wanted the Pacers to play faster this season. It was Bird's idea for George to play more power forward, something that George initially wasn't happy to hear.

                    Bird has been harping on this for a while; this most recent interview wasn't the first time. In January, in an interview with the team's website and a local radio station, Bird said: "I'd like to play faster. I thought we might be able to do it. My vision was Paul would play more of the four -- not all of the time, but play it more. Paul's a good rebounder. If he played the four, he'd be a better rebounder. But I understand. ... I understand what Frank's saying. I understand what he feels comfortable with.”

                    And there it is. When it comes to coaching changes, you can't just look at the résumé and the accomplishments and the mitigating circumstances (like your best player breaking his leg and missing all but six games).

                    “I thought we were going to win that game last night,” Bird said of the Pacers' 89-84 loss to Toronto in Game 7 on Sunday. “If you'd told me we'd score 84 points … You can't go very far in the playoffs if you don't score."

                    Maybe Vogel stays in Indiana, with a contract extension and a fresh start and marching orders from Bird about how to do things differently.

                    If he doesn't, though, don't act surprised. Don't be fooled into thinking this decision is about something that it's not.
                    http://www.cbssports.com/nba/writer/...-not-the-point
                    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                    ------

                    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                    -John Wooden

                    Comment


                    • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

                      Originally posted by freddielewis14 View Post
                      You know, could be Bird is going to get some big upgrades in here for the offense and doesn't know if trusts Vogel with the keys because of how bad the offense has been under Vogel.

                      I say do whatever will help getting free agents here and keeps PG happy.
                      Bird's not getting any big upgrades for this team.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

                        Never making a good bench in the playoffs IS a fault of Frank though...that would be one of the things I'd lay blame on him for. There's been different players with pretty much all bad results...a guy like Barbosa was a disaster and is a vital bench piece to the Warriors now. The bench pieces have never worked out and individually you can blame Bird per player but it's still Frank's job to make it work and it just hasn't worked.

                        I'd rather bring in an offensive guy with Frank to make things work, but I don't know if that would matter. I think Larry would rather have like a Brian Shaw head coach with assistants, than a Frank Vogel with Brian Shaw as an assistant because he knows when things go wrong, Frank is going to be the final decision maker and he doesn't do what Larry wants offensively.
                        "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                        ----------------- Reggie Miller

                        Comment


                        • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

                          Full SBNation article at link:
                          http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2016/5/3...ure-larry-bird
                          Vogel has never really been Bird's preferred choice

                          Bob Kravitz, formerly of The Indianapolis Star, noted this late in the 2014 season when the Pacers were in an ugly tailspin and rumors swirled around Vogel's future:

                          But know this: Vogel is not Larry Bird's guy.

                          Bird was hesitant to fire Jim O'Brien [in 2011] in the first place, and even after Vogel turned the team around and got them to play competitively in the playoffs against the Chicago Bulls, it took a couple of months before Bird was willing to give Vogel the full-time job. If you remember, Bird wanted Vogel to hire a big-time, experienced assistant, specifically Brian Shaw, before giving him the job.

                          Vogel received a contract extension a year prior in January 2013, but that was when Bird took a year-long leave of absence from the team to deal with health issues. Bird returned for the 2013-14 campaign, and while the team got off to a 40-11 start, a second-half slide led to frustration throughout the organization.

                          Bird candidly expressed his disappointment to Kravitz in early March 2014:

                          "A lot of times, we don't take the fight to them (the opponent),'' Bird said Tuesday, before the Pacers snapped a four-game losing streak by beating the Boston Celtics 94-83 at Bankers Life Fieldhouse. "A lot of times we sit back and wait and see how it goes. And that was the case even when we were winning a lot of games early in the season. We've got to be mentally prepared to really go after the teams we're playing again. We can't have the mindset it's just another game; it's a very important game. All of them are.''

                          And while Bird publicly showed some support for Vogel, he also explicitly noted areas of his coaching that needed improvement:

                          "I'm sort of going to Frank's side because he's had so much success by staying positive,'' Bird said. "We do have to stay the course. But I also think he's got to start going after guys when they're not doing what they're supposed to do. And stay on them, whether you've got to take them out of the game when they're not doing what they're supposed to do or limit their minutes. I will say, he hasn't done that enough.

                          "...Do I think they'll come out of it? Yeah, but I don't think it'll happen overnight.''

                          Both ESPN's Marc Stein and Wojnarowski suggested Vogel was coaching for his job in the postseason. He saved it as the Pacers reached the Eastern Conference Finals for the second consecutive year, although they limped there by squeaking by a 38-win Atlanta Hawks team and then defeating a flawed Washington Wizards squad in the second round.

                          The result was another contract extension for Vogel, but these seeds of frustration were planted several years back.

                          The offense really did stink

                          Bird expressed his displeasure with the team's offensive output to Doyel on Monday: "It's no secret -€” I want us to score more points."

                          Bird put some of the onus on the players for not getting the job done this time around, but poor offense has been a consistent theme of Vogel's tenure. In the last four seasons, the Pacers haven't finished higher than 19th in offensive efficiency, and they were 23rd this season. Indiana's offense was slightly more efficient in the playoffs, but that's a small sample size against a shaky Raptors defense and there were wild swings in effectiveness from game to game.

                          The Pacers' offensive struggles were often evident in crunch time this season. Indiana made just 1-of-25 shots with 10 seconds or fewer left in a one-possession game, which is partially bad luck, but also a troubling trend of poor execution and a failure to create good looks. Too often, the offense was disorganized and/or predictable, which allowed opposing defenses to easily clamp down and force inefficient opportunities.

                          Not only did these woes hurt the Pacers over and over again in the regular season, but it cost them Game 5 in Toronto and ultimately the series. Indiana held a comfortable 13-point lead going into the fourth quarter, but then proceeded to score two points over the first nine-plus minutes of the frame and nine points total.

                          Vogel's questionable decisions with his player rotations helped play a factor in the collapse. He opened the quarter without any of Paul George, George Hill or Monta Ellis on the floor, something that happened too often all season. Vogel caught heat throughout the series for not staggering his best offensive players' minutes more effectively.

                          Don't forget those philosophical differences

                          After missing the playoffs last year, Bird expressed his desire for the team to transition to a small-ball approach that emphasized pace-and-space offense. Veteran frontcourt stalwarts Roy Hibbert and David West left the picture, and the plan was for George to play more power forward.

                          However, George never fully embraced the role and Bird's vision didn't materialize as hoped. Indiana did play faster this season and Vogel used smaller lineups a little more often, but by the new year, he switched George back to the wing and reverted to starting two big men again. The roster Bird built may not have been ideal for going small, but it's fair to question whether Vogel can effectively coach that type of style.

                          That's the dilemma Bird is pondering when deciding whether he needs to make a move. Vogel may be a good coach, but as the team continues its transition, Bird may feel he needs a different voice to help implement his vision.

                          A change wouldn't guarantee a significant improvement -- no change does in the NBA and Vogel has a track record of success. That said, there'd at least be some logic behind a decision to let Vogel go. This may be a case of coach and team simply needing to move on from each other.
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

                            Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                            He should be used to being taken out of the rotation. It's happened pretty much everywhere he's been lol
                            I don't think Lawson, CJ or Stuckey played any better. JHill was probably our most consitent bench player. Let me be clear IDC if he was in the rotation or not, but you would think the coach would say something.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

                              Originally posted by 3rdStrike View Post
                              No neutral option in the poll is disappointing. I'm fine if he returns, fine if we upgrade.
                              Are you fine with downgrading? Because that's extremely possible.
                              Originally posted by IrishPacer
                              Empty vessels make the most noise.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Should Frank Vogel be offered either a second contract or some form of extension or would you prefer the Pacers go a different direction?

                                Originally posted by Dr. Awesome View Post
                                Bird's not getting any big upgrades for this team.
                                Oh, okay. That sucks.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X