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

Nate McMillan is in the final year of his contract, but it is likely only a matter of time before the Indiana Pacers offer him an extension.

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

  • Nate McMillan is in the final year of his contract, but it is likely only a matter of time before the Indiana Pacers offer him an extension.

    Part of me thinks that Nate isn't necessarily KP's guy. Not to say that he has a problem with him, but based on the players he has, KP clearly has a direction he wants to go.

    Nate indicated during summer league he could see the league going back to a low post game. While that made many here happy, that made me have an existential crisis.

    I get that you want to zig when they zag - but going back to a slow lost post game isn't zigging. That's just running backwards.

    That said - on the contrary, I DO believe that the league will emphasis size more in the future, but it will be a different way. While many long for the days of the 90s when the low post ruled, myself included, I didnt like how there were a lot of basketball players in the league who were there simply becuase they were tall. They lacked skill and ability. I love the game is trending towards all skill all the time - Doesn't matter if you're 7 feet. You better know how to play. And it makes sense - I never understood why guards and bigs learned to play diferrently. Guards learned how to rebound, pass, shoot, dribble run the floor.

    Bigs learned how to rebound and throw up hook shots. It was bizarre.

    I think when it comes to countering the NBA trend, the next trend will be a big team full of gifted bigs that are skilled, as well as a true defensive power house. The league is trending towards offense, the next big thing should be to trend towards defense and how to stop them.

    Anywho long story short, based on KP's comments about flexible lineups, and Nate's sometimes seemingly refusal to adjust, I wonder if his stint will be short here.

    Tangent 8000: I actually LOVE Nate as a coach and think he's one of Indiana's best ever. He focus' on defense. I love that. He commands respect in the locker room and gets his guys to buy in. He has this calm demeanor that is absolutely contagous. I even would argue he's one of the best in the league.

    But - his refusal to get creative on offense, to get more shots for our shooters... When you hear him yelling at Myles Turner to drive, when Myles is wide open. Myles. Shoot when you're open. Don't drive towards collapsing defenders! Whether you like Myles or not, he has tools NOW, and he can't seem to find a way to get him involved. His random benchings during the playoffs (dipo game 7).

    He's not creative, and refuses to evolve. It's his only knock. He's basically perfect in every other way. So. Long story short I don't know. It's hard to get a good coach. Mcmillan is definitely in the good coach category. But. He couldn't even figure out he needed to bench Monta.


    https://8points9seconds.com/2018/07/...rs-extentsion/

    Nate McMillan is in the final year of his contract, but it is likely only a matter of time before the Indiana Pacers offer him an extension.

    The Indiana Pacers overachieved last season as Nate McMillan guided them to a 48-34 record in his second season as the head coach. A 7-game series with the Cleveland Cavaliers proved more competitive than most expected as well.

    So, is an extension in the works?


    The Indianapolis Starís J. Michael is saying that is likely only a matter of time before that happens now that most of the other offseason business is out of the way.

    While it could be awhile before any extension is signed, or even offered, it is all but inevitable that the Pacers will keep him around. McMillan has a 90-74 record as the Pacers coach, part of his 568-526 overall record as an NBA coach.

    Despite McMillan getting more than anyone expected out of the Pacers last season, he isnít beloved by fans or the media. He never got out of the shadow of being an unexciting hire after Frank Vogel was fired, which have led to his muddled approval ratings.

    Without that initial bit of good will, McMillan struggled to earn fans love and respect in an up and down and ultimately doomed first season with Indiana, posting a 42-40 record.

    A better than expected second season certainly helped convince some nay-sayers, but McMillanís time in Indiana is in doubt until an extension if offered and he may never convince some that he is the right coach for Indiana.


    Itís good to hear that the Pacers are planning to get an extension done because weíve seen how uncertainty can breed toxicity. Chemistry played a huge role in Indianaís success last season, and McMillan deserved credit for getting the most out of the players.

    No coach is perfect, and some McMillanís tactics could use altering, but ultimately he got more out of the Pacers than anyone reasonably would have expected before the season. Indiana was projected to win 30-some games, after all.

    You can debate how much credit McMillan deserves, but he is part of the Pacersí winning equation in one way or another.

  • #2
    An extension would be the worst thing this franchise has done since firing Vogel or Carlisle. I still adamantly believe that McMillian is by far the largest reason we lost to the Cavs in the playoffs. His career playoff record is not good in any sense of the word.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
      An extension would be the worst thing this franchise has done since firing Vogel or Carlisle. I still adamantly believe that McMillian is by far the largest reason we lost to the Cavs in the playoffs. His career playoff record is not good in any sense of the word.
      There you go, I agree with this.


      No reason to give him an extension right now.
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
        An extension would be the worst thing this franchise has done since firing Vogel or Carlisle. I still adamantly believe that McMillian is by far the largest reason we lost to the Cavs in the playoffs. His career playoff record is not good in any sense of the word.
        Celtic supposedly had a better coach, and they still lost to the Cavs. It took a team of All-Stars to beat Lebron. BTW, how is Vogel doing?


        Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Eleazar View Post
          An extension would be the worst thing this franchise has done since firing Vogel or Carlisle. I still adamantly believe that McMillian is by far the largest reason we lost to the Cavs in the playoffs. His career playoff record is not good in any sense of the word.
          Agree on Carlisle, but with Vogel it was time. Back on topic though, would not be keen on an extension BUT with the exceeding expectations last year can see why he would get one.

          Comment


          • #6
            Sign me up for the lack of CoJo and Lance at the end of games as a major reason we lost to Lebron. He did play Sabonis over Myles, so he got that right.
            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." óKevin Pritchard press conference

            Comment


            • #7
              I view him like a substitute teacher. Once the smart kids come to class, you have to go upgrade or you are holding the team back. I'm thankful he's not JOb or Zeke though. Very, very thankful. Also, for this team he's fine. We need much more talent or the talent we have has to start moving into stud territory. Once that happens you might benefit from getting a top line coach.
              Vnzla81: Yep pretty much, they cut him because they were going to get "their guy" they couldn't get option 1,2,3,4,5 then they went to Lance he said "no thanks" and they had no other choice but to get Lance 2.0 for three times the cost.

              Comment


              • #8
                I think you guys are underselling McMillan. Based on talent alone we all know last season was an overachievement. Thatís a testament to coaching.

                Vogel was a great motivator and oh so refreshing after Obrien but I find Nate to be a much sharper and more heady coach. Those platoon substitutions followed him to Orlando from what Iíve heard. I like Nateís tendency to mix lineups and ride the hot hand. The team was night and day better out of time outs under Nate as well.

                Nate took a lot of undue blame for 16/17 and I believed that at the time. As more details have come out itís pretty obvious he wasnít the issue. Iím not exactly 100% sold but if he can duplicate last seasons success again I think heíll have proved wrong many of his doubters.
                "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                - ilive4sports

                Comment


                • #9
                  Okay, let's ask the next question. If not Nate, then what Coaching options are there that would be as good or better?
                  Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                    I think you guys are underselling McMillan. Based on talent alone we all know last season was an overachievement. Thatís a testament to coaching.

                    Vogel was a great motivator and oh so refreshing after Obrien but I find Nate to be a much sharper and more heady coach. Those platoon substitutions followed him to Orlando from what Iíve heard. I like Nateís tendency to mix lineups and ride the hot hand. The team was night and day better out of time outs under Nate as well.

                    Nate took a lot of undue blame for 16/17 and I believed that at the time. As more details have come out itís pretty obvious he wasnít the issue. Iím not exactly 100% sold but if he can duplicate last seasons success again I think heíll have proved wrong many of his doubters.
                    He is without question a really good coach. I hate criticizing him. Because he's just miles ahead of Vogel. I mean he's a really good coach. But his lack of offensive creativity is alarming is all. TBH, if they could just hire an offensive guru, I think it would be the perfect coaching staff.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                      Okay, let's ask the next question. If not Nate, then what Coaching options are there that would be as good or better?
                      Well he still has one year left, so who is available right now doesn't really matter. It is who is available next year that is important. It is too early to know who will be available next year. That is why I'm against an extension. He isn't a special coach. He is about as average of a coach as you can get at the NBA level. You do not know what options you will have in a year. So wait it out, see if you have any better options. If he really is the best option available then re-sign him for a couple seasons, and re-evaluate at the end of the next contract.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                        Okay, let's ask the next question. If not Nate, then what Coaching options are there that would be as good or better?
                        Not a fan of firing for the sake of firing.
                        Not a fan of firing Nate at all actually - I think he could arguably be the best coach of the Pacers NBA era. I mean. He's damn near perfect. Except offence. Whatever Turner's ceiling is, and it doesn't matter, he has offensive talent that is not being utilized. Myles takes 3 or 4 shots a game 2 feet inside the arch. For no reason. Further, while I am in general not in a fan of an isolation post up, that stifles ball movement, there are times it can be useful, when the offense is already bogged down, and if you have someone with talented post skills you can use it from time to time. Esp. Myles. I hear talk about how Myles doesnt' have a post game. Except. He does. He has an absolutely beautiful post game. 3 or 4 touches a game, which isn't much might be just enough to give him a little confidence. Get him in a rythm. In the same way Reggie used to get a couple free throws to get himself going. A couple post ups for Myles early on might get him going.

                        The Warriors run a double screen that gets Klay WIDE open 3 or 4 times a game. I'm not suggesting Bogie is Klay, but he can shoot, and those are the type of plays that can get your shooters good looks for three.

                        Also while his substitutions are MILES ahead of Vogel. when it comes to foul trouble he's a robot. This bit us in the Dipo foul game and the Myles 7-9 game. Myles was hot in the 3rd. He pulled him on the 4th foul Which, that's understandable, except when you consider he generally closes those games out with Sabonis anyways, so why is there a fear of Myles foul trouble? Especailly when he was HOT from the field? It ended up hurting is in two ways. Sabonis came in early.

                        Sabonis was on fire in the third and lead the comeback by himself. But he was gassed out late in the 4th. He could have closed the game if he didn't have to come in so early. In turn, Myles came in with a LONG sit cold and didn't play well.

                        Simple moves, and in the end talent is more important anyways, and it seems stupid to criticize a coach who does SO MUCH right, over ultimately pretty small issues.

                        It just worries me. I remember Mark Jackson not reallzing he should tell Steph to just shoot it from anywhere anytime he wanted. Kerr didn't do a single thing well. Except one simple adjustement: He told the greatest shooter ever to unleash. It changes everything.

                        I'm not suggesting Myles can even be an allstar - but how much is he held back because the coach doesn't see that he can be a useful tool on offense? (On the other hand Nate put Dipo in a position to succeed, allowing him the freedom to relentlessly attack. That's good!)
                        Last edited by mattie; 07-11-2018, 03:06 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Nate is an average coach. That's what his body of work tells us. He is not bad but he's not good either. He did very well last season. He overachieved, especially on the defensive end, along with the team. It's possible that this nets him an extension. Should it? No, I don't think so but I cannot rule it out.
                          People who try to win arguments are the worst. The point of an argument isn't to find a winner, it is to find the truth.

                          Originally posted by IrishPacer
                          Empty vessels make the most noise.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                            ÖÖÖ... He overachieved ...Ö..
                            I simply don't like the way this term is constantly thrown around. Overachieved based on what ?? Someone's expectations ?? Maybe those expectations were wrong to start with.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by PacerDude View Post

                              I simply don't like the way this term is constantly thrown around. Overachieved based on what ?? Someone's expectations ?? Maybe those expectations were wrong to start with.
                              Well, yeah. This team was definitely underestimated a lot at the start of last season. They proved that the expectations were wrong with their play. Personally, I don't consider overachieving to be a negative. I consider it a positive. It means that you're getting a lot more out of your team than the average person would and thus you are raising their ceiling.
                              People who try to win arguments are the worst. The point of an argument isn't to find a winner, it is to find the truth.

                              Originally posted by IrishPacer
                              Empty vessels make the most noise.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X