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

Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 11
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 template Next
  • #1

    Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

    "Deserve's got nothing to do with it."

    A wise man I once knew used to say that a man can learn most of what he needs to know about life by remembering quotes from Clint Eastwood movies. While my friend was being glib, there is some element of truth to that funny outlook. Somebody else more savvy than I can go ahead and put the various GIF's or meme's that may apply if you wish.

    I thought of this quote this week when watching the press conference Larry Bird gave in announcing the dismissal of Frank Vogel. Various people have asked me to weigh in with my take, so this will be my attempt to clarify my various muddled thoughts, perhaps ask some difficult questions, and to give you some thoughts on potential other candidates.

    Let me be clear before I begin in earnest: I liked Frank Vogel as a man and leader of men, as a representative of our franchise, and as a coach. I liked his demeanor, his refusing to use the media to denigrate his own players, and I think he is a very strong coach. I think he put up with alot of meddling in Indiana that wasn't conducive to winning, and had many difficult players and personalities that he was asked to navigate through. For the most part, I thought he handled these issues brilliantly, and I was proud to have him as our coach. Had I somehow been in in the ownership of this franchise, I would have empowered Vogel, instead of emasculating him by letting him being called out by our front office, by forcing him to hire assistants he may not have chosen himself, and I would never have allowed him to coach without a contract while being one of the lower paid coaches in the league.

    On many levels, this situation has been botched. Not just from a basketball point of view, but from a PR perspective. While I enjoy Bird's brutal honesty most of the time, occasionally his lack of sophistication with the verbal language bothers me. Making Vogel look bad by saying he "begged" to keep the job was unnecessary even if true, and his inability to really clearly articulate why he made this move in detail has hurt our franchise in the minds of the public at large and among the rabid Indiana fanbase. To fire a man as respected and as successful as Frank Vogel, you really needed to be able to sell your reasons why, and to sell your vision going forward, and I don't think Larry did that to the satisfaction of many of us.

    However, that isn't meant to say that Vogel was a great coach, because he wasn't. He was good, even very good, and I believe that the stability that keeping him presented us with alot of advantages in a league where some teams change coaches like we do socks. Vogel helped establish that professional, inclusive, successful culture, and I commend him for it. But let's not confuse him for greatness or make his bust in the HOF yet either....Vogel had flaws also. Particularly on the offensive end, Indiana was decidedly average or below during his tenure. Not due to lack of effort on his part, but I also believe that Indiana was rather reactive on offense, copying others without really gaining a tactical advantage. We ran a TON of sets and other actions stolen from a variety of coaches (we ran alot of Rick Adelman stuff, we ran some triangle stuff when Shaw was here, we tried to copy some of the Spurs actions in transition) but we didn't seem to have a real clear identity of how we wanted to play offense. We were a hodge-podge of ideas that never really became anything resembling a coherent way to play.

    Of course, Vogel had to make do with what was given. Bird hasn't exactly excelled in giving Frank much offensive firepower to deal with either. The fact that we cobbled together enough offense to win at all with some of the limited weapons we had during these past few years goes as a credit to Frank and his staff. Many of the limited players and strange (to put it mildly) personalities Vogel got the most out of was impressive, and his ability to figure out a way to win with no real point guard during his tenure is impressive, considering this is a real point guard driven league for the most part, and Vogel never really was given a great option.

    Personnel choices by Bird, more than any strategic errors by Vogel, have hamstrung our offensive potential greatly, but that doesn't mean that Frank is some great offensive mind, because he isn't. He is a defensive coach by trade, and a great handler of men. Given better players, that would have been enough to perhaps win a title or come even closer than he did here. But let's not call him a peak offensive mind, especially in a world of basketball which is trending toward a more fluent, open, wide open offensive game.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "Tomorrow is promised to no one."

    That is another Eastwood movie quote, and it applies here also. This is professional sports, and in a zero sum game where championships are the goal (or at least should be), then what you have done in the past doesn't necessarily mean you are the right guy for the future. Even though I wouldn't have done it, and I think some of Bird's reasoning to get here is beyond my basketball logic, I do think in some ways Bird's decision to let Vogel go is brave, and one that should be commended.

    I say "brave", because I believe it was truly hard to make this call, and Bird had the guts to do something in order to try and drive this franchise forward, rather than do the easiest thing and just maintain the status quo. And I also am impressed that Bird had the courage of his conviction to act on his vision boldly, with little or no sentiment. I do think Bird wants to truly bring Indiana a world championship, and he simply doesn't believe Vogel can get us there in the current environment. Leaders must have vision, and they must act boldly to pursue that vision is a single minded quest for success. An organization, in order to succeed at the highest levels, MUST BE ON THE SAME PAGE ALL THE WAY FROM THE TOP DOWN TO THE ELEVATOR GUY AND MAINTENANCE CREW.

    It was clear that Vogel and Bird had different ideas and paths on how this program should operate. If you aren't "all in" with a common cause, then changes have to be and should be made. Clearly they were not, and I didn't see anyway they ever would be from an offensive perspective, and perhaps from an accountability and personality perspective. I don't necessarily think either party is wrong, and if I had to choose one to follow I would have chosen Vogel......but Bird is in charge, and the boss may not be always right, but he is always the boss. So really, no matter how Bird may have arrived here, I can't argue with him too much in a big picture way. Whoever the coach is, MUST have the same vision and see the game and team through the same eyes, otherwise your success has a ceiling far lower than we want it to be.

    Bold and risky this move is, and it is more likely to fail than it is to be proven right. But I do kind of like the idea that taking a risk to be great rather than settling to just be good is the path we chose. If nothing else it raises our potential ceiling as a franchise in the short to medium term, and it makes us more interesting. I can endorse Frank Vogel being let go in those terms, if it means that Larry Bird and our ownership is going to dare to be new, be innovative, be bold, and be great. Bird clearly as decided the age old axiom of "good being the enemy of great" is true, and made a move to shun the good in the pursuit of excellence and greatness.

    I can get behind that, and I think we all will, if the next guy up can embody that.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Of course, my hope for aiming for the stars and for greatness as our court leader means the onus is on Bird to deliver someone who ACTUALLY HAS THE CAPABILITY OF BEING "GREAT" AND VISIONARY, AND NOT JUST A RETREAD WHO WAS WORSE THAN WHAT WE ALREADY HAD.

    Vogel was too good just to fire him just for the lame reason Bird gave. Likely about 90% of the coaches that exist in the world will be worse or about the same as Vogel was. If we hire a guy who has already proven he can't get it done, or has already shown he isn't a big time guy, then this move will be shown to stink, and my faith in Bird's judgement will be even lower than it may already be. I don't want any talk of Randy Wittman, or Mike Fratello, or Mike Woodson, or Lawrence Frank, or Mike D'Antoni, or a million of these retread guys being speculated on. Those guys aren't visionaries, they aren't great, and that would just be a treading water type of move worthy of our scorn. They aren't terrible, but hiring guys like that would go against the narrative of only making this move in an attempt to improve us, and not to just rearrange the deck chairs.

    If you are bold enough to fire a very successful coach who deserved better treatment during his tenure and at the end of it, then then YOU MUST BE BOLD ENOUGH TO BE CREATIVE, HIRE THE VERY BEST GUY WHO FITS YOUR VISION, WHO CAN FORM A SUCCESSFUL PARTNERSHIP WITH YOU IN LOCKSTEP, AND WE MUST BE WILLING TO PAY TOP DOLLAR TO GET THAT GUY.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    That last part in the previous paragraph is important to me. Just as an aside, if it comes out later that we let Vogel go SIMPLY BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE HAD TO PAY HIM THE ACTUALLY GOING RATE FOR A TOP COACH ($7million or so per year), and that our ownership is just simply reluctant or too cheap to play the going rate for someone of Vogel's accomplishment, then Simon deserves every bit of scorn and ridicule that I or any of us can muster.

    Is it possible that this whole thing is just a charade, so we don't have to pay a big time coach what they make, and instead we simply will hire someone who will work for cheap? Disregard Bird's statement of Simon supposedly being willing to pay top dollar for someone, as he would naturally have to say that. I have questioned our owners before of course, and I'll get even louder if I have to if this ends up being proven true as a motivation for this move. Those of you reading this: Can you for sure rule this out if you are honest with yourselves? I wish I could for sure say I don't think this was a factor, but given my pre-existing doubts about Mr. Simon's priorities in regards to winning, I cannot.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "Go ahead, make my day."

    As I see it, we must aim for the very best in this search. That doesn't mean the most famous or the biggest name, but someone who is highly respected, who is an offensive mind, and who is totally in mind meld with our front office. I also think we need someone who has the cajones to stand up to Bird if need be, because Bird will respect that behind closed doors. Bird will have to respect this coach's acumen more than he did Vogel, who I don't think ever actually did gain Larry's full trust, even though that is ridiculous in reality. This new hire must be close to Bird in terms of personality, and yet be able to sell the players and fans on his abilities and vision. On top of that, he must ego free mostly, because the way Simon has this place set up to run, Bird is the face and the star of the franchise, and not whomever the coach will be.

    I wouldn't do it that way, I'd be more modern thinking if I owned a team, but I am a couple of winning lottery tickets away from doing that. I think our entire front office structure is antiquated to some degree, and I tend to think that empowering the coach as the de facto head of the organization is likely to be more successful into the future. But I digress.

    Here are the candidates I'd consider, listed below. Many of these are under the radar and not being mentioned much if at all, although my top recommended candidate just got mentioned by Jered Wade this morning.

    1. ETTORE MESSINA, assistant with San Antonio. Extensive international success as a head coach. One of the most brilliant offensive minds in the world. Now has NBA assistant experience with one of the best coaches alive. He is accomplished, brilliant, and a hall of fame level coach everywhere he has been. I don't know that he will be better than Vogel, BUT HE HAS GOOD A CHANCE TO BE. This would be a bold move that I could get behind, even if it didn't work out in the end. I also like the fact that he possibly would bring Chad Forcier back to Indiana, who is a tremendous assistant in his own right.

    2. NATE TIBBETS, assistant with Portland. One of the very best assistant in basketball, and has a great offensive background. Highly respected in the league, and a fresh face. I love his ability to important some of Terry Stotts "flow" offense to Indiana. I DON'T KNOW IF HE WILL BE A GREAT COACH OR NOT, BUT HE HAS A CHANCE TO BE. He will be a head coach someday.

    3. JAY LARRANAGA, assistant with Boston. Highly respected assistant with Brad Stevens. He would bring alot of Brad Stevens offensive system to Indiana, and has a long basketball pedigree. His father is a great college coach, and he has been around the game his entire life. I DON'T KNOW IF HE WILL BE A GREAT HEAD CHOICE, BUT HE HAS A CHANCE TO BE.

    4. KALEB CANALES, assistant with Dallas. He comes from the Portland and Dallas organizations, with ties to Bird through Carlisle and Pritchard. He is another little known assistant, but he is a strong offensive mind that will be highly recommended by Rick Carlisle I am sure. WILL HE BE GREAT? NO ONE KNOWS, BUT HE MIGHT BE.

    I swear, if we make a move for a dud retread for cheap money instead of shooting for the moon, then my tune will change quickly. Even with these guys, you'll have to question whether they hire them because they were truly the best, or if because Simon wouldn't pony up the cash for whoever else they might prefer.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "A man has to know his limitations."

    Lastly, Larry needs to empower this next coach, and not constantly harp on him in the media with inane comments thought provide material for talk radio, twitter, and message boards. Those type of comments serve no purpose other than to make himself feel better, and they take away from the head coaches ability to craft a message. Bird doesn't speak often, but he quite forcefully inserted himself into the news a few times during Vogel's tenure. Every time he did that I thought it weakened Vogel's own messages, and Frank's respect in the lockerroom. Vogel handled it with class and kept a stiff upper lip, but Bird should be smarter and better than that.

    Maybe, in his day 30 years ago, players responded to public pressure that way. Maybe in the 80's, being called out or commented on in the media was a way that people were motivated by. And maybe when Bird did that in the Boston media to his teammates or coaches back in the 80's, it worked. But this is 2016, and the world has changed. Bird needs to shut his piehole, know his limitations, and know his role.

    Can you imagine if Donnie Walsh would have said some of the things to the media jackals about Bird that Bird did about Vogel during his tenure. Or if Walsh had ripped the players to the press during a playoff series? Bird the coach would have been offended and hurt by that, but Bird the executive doesn't seem to get it.

    I doubt that Bird listened to anyone else in his front office hierarchy about this move, and I don't know if anyone besides him will have any input. Bird the coach was successful because he delegated extremely well, but I am doubting whether Bird the executive operates that way. I am not sure there are the kinds of tough questions and willingness to disagree with leadership behind closed doors going on in Banker's Life right now. If Bird or Dinwiddie or anyone else has input or expertise with our future, then Bird needs to be willing to listen.

    Bird's personality has it's pros and cons for sure. But he better know that that his comments lack of media savvy sometimes have a corrosive effect on whoever his head coach is, otherwise he will end up repeating the mistakes of the past.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    That's my take. Bold and risky, even if unfair, is ok with me if done with the right intentions and motivations. For that reason, while I would chosen a different path, I can get behind this move at least conditionally.

    But Larry better execute this plan with an effective, bold and visionary hire. And Simon better hold Bird more accountable than he seems to be doing. Otherwise we will be wasting the prime of maybe the best player we've had here, and be hopelessly stuck on the treadmill to mediocrity or irrelevance.......or worse.

    Pressure is on, Pacers leadership.

    As always, the above is just my opinion.

    Tbird
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

    Couldn't agree more, on pretty much all counts. If a retread is chosen, I am starting to step off the Bird train.

    This feels like a swing for the fences move for coaching, and one he wouldn't do unless he saw an option that's doable.

    Also big time on the Messina train.

    My single largest fear is that Bird alienated the top choices secondary to his style in the press. If we find out Messina rejected an interview, where he accepted one with the Lakers, that'll be a big red flag.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by docpaul; 05-08-2016, 05:29 PM.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

      Great post, and pretty much my feelings in a nutshell written by someone more intelligent lol.

      Losing Frank sucks because he's a good guy but he wasn't Red Auerbach. Larry better not screw up the hire though...
      "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

      • #4
        Re: Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

        Good post Tbird, but really pretty much everything in your post has already been brought up here since the press conference. So I guess quite a few people agree with you.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

          Very well said. I believe Frank being such a great guy added salt to the wound.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

            The vocal side of the forum has clearly made up their minds about Bird. So, I'm pretty sure no matter who the pick turns out to be there will be some criticism. But especially if it's an established coach. But here's the thing with that, the retread label is pretty easy to throw around but is it really fair in many cases? Carlisle was on his third team when he arrived in Dallas so was he a retread for them? I've lost track of how many teams Larry Brown has coached, but he ultimately got a title in Detroit (and was pretty much the designer of the mid-90's-2000 Indiana Pacers' foundation of winning).

            Sometimes it's the synergy of a coach, players, staff and FO that make it work and burn brightly enough to achieve greatness before flaming out.

            Somewhere someone said the team better win 50 games next season to prove the firing and new hire was the right thing. But I think that is short-sighted. What we need to see is a reversal of recent trends of a hot start and fall-off. We could be 11-20 out of the gate with everyone feeling their way and then go 31-20 and be on a 12 game win streak heading into the playoffs. And then take that momentum into the playoffs. So the record isn't better overall, but what about the results in the end and the outlook looking ahead for those playoffs and then coming season?

            But, yes, crediting this as a bold move trying to move the team forward rather than treading water is a good way to look at it. It might work, it might not... but it should be about competing for banners, not just making the playoffs. This is not the NCAA where a team can steal a game or two, get hot, and end up with a winnable game in the Final 8 with a one shot deal in the offing to put them into the championship game. In a best of 7 format, getting lucky one game isn't enough to advance.

            Of course I know this as much as anyone can when predicting something, and that is if Donnie Walsh was running the franchise none of this happens. Vogel would be here a long time as long as we kept making the playoffs, or playing down to the wire for a chance at the playoffs.

            Swinging for the fences should come with its fair share of risk too though for the batter. I fully believe if you try to make things happen you can. So if this doesn't work, there will be opportunities to right the ship. But those opportunities have to be taken and have to work. It's not an endless line of mistakes or reversals a person should be allowed. But I much prefer the attempt versus Walsh's method of waiting until panic would set in and he had to act.

            I will forever think Bird mishandled the JOB hire, and reupping him when he should've been moving on. In fact, had he moved on in the offseason rather than bringing him back for a likely midseason firing (that almost all seen coming knowing he was on borrowed time), then he's likely to have had HIS (Bird's) pick for the next phase of the Pacers in place and not second guessing what Vogel was doing when Vogel earned the right to keep the job (or force a PR nightmare scenario onto Bird for not giving him the job he earned). So that is at least 1 strike for Bird if not 2 depending on how you look at it.
            Last edited by Bball; 05-08-2016, 06:07 PM.
            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

            • #7
              Re: Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

              Good post.

              I agree that Vogel is a very good coach but not a great one. Although I'm sure he will improve on his shortcomings over time, and being such a young coach, he could still become great in the future.

              Having said that, we are not going to have an in-prime PG here forever, and I understand we must try and do everything we can to make these years count.

              Tbird, I was wondering if you could give us your thoughts on David Blatt as a potential candidate, who I think is a fantastic coach and got caught in an unfair situation in Cleveland.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

                I think Bird REALLY wants to bring a championship to Indiana. If Bird doesn't think Simon is willing to pay top dollar for a coach, then I think Bird would leave. In other words, I don't think money us the issue for not re-signing Vogel or the reason we sign whomever.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

                  Originally posted by Bball View Post
                  The vocal side of the forum has clearly made up their minds about Bird. So, I'm pretty sure no matter who the pick turns out to be there will be some criticism. But especially if it's an established coach. But here's the thing with that, the retread label is pretty easy to throw around but is it really fair in many cases? Carlisle was on his third team when he arrived in Dallas so was he a retread for them? I've lost track of how many teams Larry Brown has coached, but he ultimately got a title in Detroit (and was pretty much the designer of the mid-90's-2000 Indiana Pacers' foundation of winning).

                  Sometimes it's the synergy of a coach, players, staff and FO that make it work and burn brightly enough to achieve greatness before flaming out.

                  Somewhere someone said the team better win 50 games next season to prove the firing and new hire was the right thing. But I think that is short-sighted. What we need to see is a reversal of recent trends of a hot start and fall-off. We could be 11-20 out of the gate with everyone feeling their way and then go 31-20 and be on a 12 game win streak heading into the playoffs. And then take that momentum into the playoffs. So the record isn't better overall, but what about the results in the end and the outlook looking ahead for those playoffs and then coming season?

                  But, yes, crediting this as a bold move trying to move the team forward rather than treading water is a good way to look at it. It might work, it might not... but it should be about competing for banners, not just making the playoffs. This is not the NCAA where a team can steal a game or two, get hot, and end up with a winnable game in the Final 8 with a one shot deal in the offing to put them into the championship game. In a best of 7 format, getting lucky one game isn't enough to advance.

                  Of course I know this as much as anyone can when predicting something, and that is if Donnie Walsh was running the franchise none of this happens. Vogel would be here a long time as long as we kept making the playoffs, or playing down to the wire for a chance at the playoffs.

                  Swinging for the fences should come with its fair share of risk too though for the batter. I fully believe if you try to make things happen you can. So if this doesn't work, there will be opportunities to right the ship. But those opportunities have to be taken and have to work. It's not an endless line of mistakes or reversals a person should be allowed. But I much prefer the attempt versus Walsh's method of waiting until panic would set in and he had to act.

                  I will forever think Bird mishandled the JOB hire, and reupping him when he should've been moving on. In fact, had he moved on in the offseason rather than bringing him back for a likely midseason firing (that almost all seen coming knowing he was on borrowed time), then he's likely to have had HIS (Bird's) pick for the next phase of the Pacers in place and not second guessing what Vogel was doing when Vogel earned the right to keep the job (or force a PR nightmare scenario onto Bird for not giving him the job he earned). So that is at least 1 strike for Bird if not 2 depending on how you look at it.
                  I really agree with this. It's all about fit.

                  To take an example from another sport: just now Claudio Ranieri - a mediocre coach and perennial loser throughout his career - managed to win the League title (the first of his career) with Leicester City - a team which at the beginning of the season was supposed to be a bottom feeder and fighting against relegation.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

                    Well said Tbird. This could work out bringing in a new coach, or it could backfire. Just seems kind of silly for Pacer fans assuming the next guy coaching will be a significant downgrade from Frank. Vogel did a terrific job here, and would have done a great job coaching next season and the years to come. Nothing wrong with having higher standards, and wanting more
                    Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

                      I really worry about this next hire it has a lot of potential to go either way for us. I'm a bit of a pessimist and I still am jaded by the whole JOB hiring process after one stinkin phone call.
                      Last edited by TheDon; 05-08-2016, 06:49 PM.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search



                        If Bird is such a badass and has all the answers, let him put on the suit and tie and
                        get his butt out there and show how the team should be coached. Then if the team
                        doesn't perform up to expectations, and a few players miss a few shots, then he
                        can make himself the scapegoat and fire himself.


                        Edit: All those Clint Eastwood quotes should apply to him too, especially now!

                        Last edited by RamBo_Lamar; 05-08-2016, 07:19 PM.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

                          Thanks for the write up, but I really am getting tired of reading "I swear, Bird had better ______ (insert genius idea) OR ELSE!!!11111one." He's going to make a more informed decision than any of us are capable of, and if it's not the guy who is on your radar that doesn't mean it's time to bust out the riot gear... gotta give whoever it is an honest shot the same way we gave an honest shot to Vogel.

                          Far too often with players they're either loved or hated from the time they're signed and held to different standards accordingly. Let's not do that with the coach. The sky is not and will not be falling next season.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

                            Originally posted by DgR View Post
                            I really agree with this. It's all about fit.

                            To take an example from another sport: just now Claudio Ranieri - a mediocre coach and perennial loser throughout his career - managed to win the League title (the first of his career) with Leicester City - a team which at the beginning of the season was supposed to be a bottom feeder and fighting against relegation.
                            Other retreads: Pete Carroll and Bill Belichick.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Tbird take on Vogel firing: "Deserve's got nothing to do with it", and other quotations as we launch into a coaching search

                              You might be able to hang that #25 offensive rating partially on Bird's acquisitions. But you cannot blame Bird because Vogel lacks of influence over NBA basketball players.

                              The issues of 2013-14 have become apparent over time. Bird is to blame for dissing and dumping Danny Granger. That guy was part of the foundation. He had the respect of his team mates and after that happened the players went their own ways. If Frank had been a stabilizing factor, the team wouldn't have fell apart. Frank is well liked because he's personable and generously dishes out compliments that are usually well placed. But that doesn't lead to guys respecting his opinion. They were just thankful JOb wasn't insulting them in the media. The fact is, if Frank Vogel influenced players his stock as a coach would be much higher. BTW, Rick Carlisle was better but not perfect. He had the personality of a librarian. But players listen to him because the man is a genius.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 template Next
                              Working...
                              X