Tweet
Originally posted by BlueNGold
View Post
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.
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
-
Technically, shooting volume 3's in the 3rd quarter was the reason why they lost the lead. They were too busy looking for the dagger and wasn't hitting the broadside of the barn.
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? -
I was hoping maybe the Pacers could sign Terrence Ross this coming summer - but he has played so well and the Magic are for real, I am expecting they will do everything to re-sign him. I haven't really started looking to the off season just yet. If Vic had never gotten injured the pacers finish 3rd in the east with 53-54 wins - and I believe a chance of making it to the ECF - a chance - but a good chance of making to the second round. So that is where I feel the team is. Vic makes a huge difference. he allows our current players to play like they are capable of instead they are trying to force things.Originally posted by Peck View Post
So I don't think a rebuild is needed. If I were in charge, I would see if we could get Ross, and I would be looking for a big time point guard. We need more shooting, more creators in general at every position.
Leaf wasn't a bad pick, he is turning into a decent player and looking at the players taken after him - sure a few better player taken after him - but no game changers
problem is if we trade Myles, then we have no shot blocking. if we trade Sabonis, we have little toughness and rebounding. Both were obvious this past season when either was injured - we need both. And while I do think they can play together for 10-15 minutes a game - I don't think both being on the floor can be our best lineup.
We have tons of salary cap flexibility this summer, use it smartly, continue to build around Vic - stay the course. I'm sorry but there are magical solutions our best players are still young.
Kemba Walker? Not sure if he and Vic are a great combo - Kemba needs the ball.
Holiday is a nice player - I think he will turn into a very solid starting caliber point guard. But to read some of the comments in the forum, you would think he is Russell Westbrook if only Nate would play him.
One thing to keep in mind about KP - he is still a wheeler and dealer at heart. He said that the past two trade deadline current players came to him and asked that he not make changes - but I expect KP is more ready to make changes now. (although the injury to Vic delays everythingLast edited by Unclebuck; 04-16-2019, 08:41 AM.Comment
-
Nice article by Bob Kravitz - some very honest comments from Nate. - Also let me say if you are reading the Athletic you are missing out on some great writing - not sure how they can pay all the salaries - but there is some great content on there - highly recommend.
https://theathletic.com/925342/2019/...r-the-celtics/
Kravitz: Pacers coach Nate McMillan searches in vain for ingredients to cook up an upset over the Celtics
As the painfully inept third quarter wore on – and on and on – the Pacers completely incapable of buying a basket in their gruesome 84-74 Game 1 loss to the Celtics, coach Nate McMillan crossed his arms and wore a faraway look.
His team couldn’t score, managing just eight points in the third quarter and 29 in the second half. His team was getting scorched in the transition game, the one area the Celtics dominated during the teams’ four regular-season games and an area where they were getting torn apart now. Was he thinking of something he said before the series, when he made a strange but appropriate baking analogy?
“We can sit here and try to create magic, but how much can you adjust?’’ McMillan said before the series began. “He (Boston coach Brad Stevens) takes advantage of his personnel. If you have the ingredients to do certain things to bake a cake, and all kinds of different ingredients, you can make all kinds of different cakes.
“If you don’t, you can’t, so it’s a chocolate cake and that’s all you can do. He’s got a lot of ingredients, a lot of different things he can do. He can mix and match and do some things. He does what other coaches try to take advantage of.”
Are you missing some ingredients? The answer is clear.
“Of course we are, but you’ve got to work with what you’ve got,’’ he said. “I’m not knocking what we have but we’re missing some things. You work with what you’ve got.”
No Victor Oladipo, no hope, or very little, anyway.
How many teams, outside of the Warriors or Rockets, could lose their All-Star, their best player by a long shot, and still be competitive in the NBA postseason? Boston did it one year ago, losing Gordon Hayward at the start of the season, losing Kyrie Irving before the playoffs, and still found its way to the Eastern Conference Finals. But that’s not how the Pacers are built. They have one alpha dog, and currently, he’s in Miami, maintaining his sanity by sending out Instagram posts.
This series provides McMillan a chance to show he’s among the league’s elite head coaches, a chance to show that he’s more than a coaching lifer who’s won more than 600 NBA games for the simple reason that he’s hung around so long. It provides a chance for McMillan to outmaneuver Stevens, the prodigy, in a contest of wills and adjustments. And yet, after just one game in the best-of-seven series, it feels like it’s far from a fair fight.
That is not a reflection on McMillan, who deserves some votes for NBA Coach of the Year after leading the Pacers to a 32-15 record before Oladipo’s season-ending injury, at which point the Pacers finished the season 16-19. Put it this way: If McMillan can somehow extend this series to six games – or pull off the seismic, long-shot series upset – the national perspective of him will be altered forever. It’s just hard, really hard, to see how that might happen.
Does he go small in Game 2, use Bojan Bogdanovic as a stretch-4?
Does he find more minutes for the electric rookie point guard, Aaron Holiday?
What can he possibly do to get more good looks for Bogdanovic, the team’s leading scorer after Oladipo went down, only to see him gasp and wheeze his way to just 12 points, five of them in the final minutes, Sunday?
Or are those all just cosmetic moves that make him look like he’s doing something?
That’s the problem for McMillan as the Pacers head into Game 2 Wednesday in Boston. He can work off a new recipe, try to bake a completely different type of cake, but without the necessary ingredients, will it make a difference in the long run?
When Stevens lost Marcus Smart for several weeks with an injury, he was able to turn to Jaylen Brown, the third-overall pick in the 2016 draft. By comparison, when the Pacers lost Oladipo, they turned to Wesley Matthews, a credible player but one who isn’t likely to make a significant impact in this series.
It’s all about ingredients.
This is not unfamiliar territory for McMillan, who once again heads into the playoffs as a decided underdog despite the fact that just one victory and one seed spot separate the two teams. As a head coach, McMillan is 1-7 in postseason series, 17-29 (.370) in the win-loss category, but the victory in 2004-05 came when they were a higher seed in Seattle. In five of the other six series’ losses, McMillan’s teams have been the lower seeds, just as they are currently.
“We’ve come into the playoffs before in situations like this, whether it’s injuries or a young group,’’ he said. “We’ve been in sixth, seventh or eighth position. I take it as it comes. You try to get Game 1 and go from there. As far as advancing, I know I haven’t advanced enough. But you take the group you have and try to get to the next round.’’
He also knows that strange things can happen in the playoffs, things that fail to take into account the teams’ relative playoff seedings. For example, there was last year’s seven-game playoff loss to the Cavaliers, the one series McMillan still believes his team should have and could have won despite LeBron James’ routine heroics. If the officials don’t miss James’ goaltend of an Oladipo shot at the basket, thus setting up James’ game-winning three at the buzzer in Game 5, the Pacers might have advanced.
“You can always win in the postseason regardless of where you finish,’’ he said. “As a rookie coming into the league, Dallas had our (Seattle’s) number in the (1987) regular season, beat us badly in the first game and then we won the next three and ended up in the Western Conference Finals.
I know how it is this time of year. I’ve also been on the end of (having) the best record and losing to the eighth seed (when Denver beat Seattle in 1994-95). You get certain matchups, you get some momentum and all of a sudden, things can change quickly.’’
The question for McMillan and his staff now is, can they bake something edible without yeast and vanilla extract? Can they find some shots for Bogdanovic? Can they get the kind of performance this series that’s been lacking almost all of the regular season from Tyreke Evans? Will this be Myles Turner’s breakout series, finally?
And if and when McMillan makes adjustments, who’s to say that Stevens, one of the league’s brightest young minds, won’t effectively counter?
Thad Young was asked if players are keenly aware of coaches who are particularly adept at adjusting both between games and on the fly during a game.
“Shit yeah, we’re playing against one,’’ he said, referring to Stevens. “He does a hell of a job making adjustments and that’s not just against us, that’s against any team. He’s one of the league’s youngest coaches but he’s got a great basketball mind, how he’s able to manage all those guys and keep them all under control. They’ve got seven, eight guys who can start on any team, and you’ve got to manage that situation. That says a lot about a coach and who he is as a man.
“Other coaches do a hell of a job. It’s huge what they do during the course of a game You can tell; players know when a coach can make adjustments on the fly. Like, ‘OK, they’ve run the same play two, three times in a row, so this is how we’re going to stop it.’ The same thing with Pop (Gregg Popovich). Nate does a good job sometimes and he’ll listen to us when he’s making adjustments. Billy Donovan. Mike Malone is huge with that. The guy in Orlando (Steve Clifford). I’m sure I’ve left some names out. But those are great basketball minds who understand the game.’’
After the game, the Pacers took great pride in the fact they held Boston to just 84 points, well below their season scoring average of 112.4 points per game. And yet, it made little difference. The game started careening out of control during the ugliest third quarter of basketball we’ve seen all season, and only ended up being a 10-point game when the Pacers made a mild run during garbage time. Did we mention they scored 74 points? That’s a decent half for the Warriors.
The cake collapsed on itself, turned into an amorphous blob of yuck. And there’s no guarantee it will get any more appetizing in the days to come. No ingredients, no hope.
Comment
-
I don't think Nate should be fired. Overall he's done a good job the past 2 seasons. Doesn't mean I'm totally happy with him though.
Turner and Sabonis have not been handled properly. Turner should be getting more shots. They don't run near enough plays for him. Sabonis and Turner should play at same damn time, MUCH more. Sabonis should initiate the offense more, our point guards suck at it. Our pg's pound the ball way to much.
Holiday should play more, seems quite obvious.
Nate needs to play the younger guys more. Even at the expense of a few wins. We obviously were not a playoff threat the second Vic went down. I'm not ever in the complete tank mindset, but you got to look to the future by playing the young a little more. Nate leans way to heavily on the the vets.
Sent from my CLT-L29 using Tapatalk
"Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"Comment
-
Quoted for Truth...people can't have it both ways. People blasted Bird for "destroying" the team chemistry due to his deadline trade that looked good on paper, but people want KP to pull the trigger on a team that clearly have better chemistry (while missing their star player) than the 2013-2014 team.Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
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
-
Completely different. Bird traded Danny Granger, the longest tenured player on the team. A player everyone in the locker room respected. A player that humbly stepped down from the best player, and helped Paul George become the team's star. Pritchard, on the other hand, keeps bums like Corey Joseph and TJ Leaf on the roster. Cannot compare a former all-star in Danny Granger, to G League players like Joseph and LeafOriginally posted by ksuttonjr76 View PostBeing unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank VogelComment
-
The players I listed - Vic, Turner, Domas, Bojan - are the only ones I'd be wedded to as a core (unless the proverbial no-brainer for one of them came along). I've looked at the rest of the roster as the way we get to the 2019 off-season. There are some I'd take back for the right deals, and keeping our rookie contracts is likely not going to be a problem (I'd definitely want to keep Holiday), but overall we need to upgrade the 1 and we need some actual scorers.Originally posted by Peck View Post
I want to make sure I am understanding you here. Are you advocating making major changes to the roster in the off season? If you are
As opposed to previous years I want to push for picks to be included in trades, but not for our own use (again, unless a no-brainer comes up at those draft positions, which isn't likely) but to include in trades for teams looking for fit from the draft in exchange for a player living up to potential who doesn't fit. I'd probably want to see us use the best remaining pick ourselves just to keep the young guys coming, but I am pretty burnt out on the idea of getting an important player in any given year from the draft itself (over time? Sure, stats usually bear out that over 10 years of drafting in the top 10 you should get a gem, but I don't want to spend 10 years with our own pick being the one in the top 10) - I feel like we need to focus on the guys in year 2 or 3 of their rookie contracts and target them for trades of when they reach FA.Originally posted by Peck View Post
BillS
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...Comment
-
But doesn't this post really run counter to your first post? Here you are saying stay the course and in your first post you are saying we have the worst offensive talent of any team in the playoffs, our second best player is weak for any of the playoff teams and even our best player is not all that great for a top player.Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
If I've learned nothing about salary cap over the years I've learned this. It means nothing in free agency for Indiana. Sure we can find all of the c level talent we want and you might get lucky and find a solid contributor but we just will not get game changers to sign with our team. We don't have an ocean for them to play in or wold famous nightlife for them to enjoy. That shouldn't make a bit of difference but in the NBA for whatever reason it does.
I agree that there really is no magic fix here. In fact that is why I'm so despondent about the team. I feel like we are stuck on a treadmill to nowhere of mediocrity. Yes I know our regular season record is better than mediocre but in the end it is just leading to yet another first round exit and honestly one that so fer has proven to be embarrassing.
I think a lot less of Pritchard if he really did not make needed changes to the team because players came to him and did not want to be traded. Nate's job is to win and win with the players he is given. Kevin's job on the other hand is to look out for the long term for the franchise.
I'll probably **** a lot of people off here but I'm going to say it. Victor Oladipo is not strong enough of an A player to be surrounded by role players, even good ones, and make a serious playoff run. In fact we really only have one season of Victor playing at that high of a level anyway. We don't know yet if that was an outlier or if this was going to be his new norm. Honestly before he went down with injury I didn't feel he was having all that great of a year anyway. We have absolutely no idea how he will be when he comes back. He could be better, same or worse there is just no way to know.
I just really hated last summer, I mean hated it. Not only did I feel once again we went garbage bin shopping for players in free agency we just wasted away all of our expiring contracts. I know they are not what they used to be but believe me they still had value. There were teams looking to get out of salary that might have offered us something. But now we have zero trade assets other than like you said players that basically we either can't or won't trade. But on top of that the players we signed? Good God I could not have dreamed of a worse signing than what we did. If your asking, which I know you are, I would much rather have taken every single penny we signed those three for and signed Marcus Smart or Montrez Harrel. Both of whom were available and Smart for sure would have taken a bigger contract and left Boston. Are they great players? Not really but they are both worlds better than the players we signed.
I just know this upcoming off season is going to consist of signing Bogdanovic, Young and either Collison or Joseph and then extending Sabonis (if he takes it). That will leave you with very little money left. Yes enough so that you could sing a max player probably but again, who is going to come here? I just perused the top 20 players available and there was not a single one that I thought we had even a remote chance of getting other than # 20 (Bogdanovic).
Sigh, I'm just rambling. I was hoping you were going to give me some scenario in which you found the path to a superior team because when I look at the future I just don't see where we can jump into that top 3 seed area without someone from up above tumbling, which I admit is possible because if Leonard bolts and they bust up the team Toronto may start over and who knows about Boston or Philly so it's not impossible.
As to Holiday I think the reason why people are so high on him may or may not have anything to do with him other than he offers something different from both Collison and Joseph. He can get his own shot whenever he wants. Both can get their own shots but not in the way he does.
Also thanks for the Kravits article. I was really well written and a good piece.
That being said continuing on the cake analogy, sometimes you have all the ingredients to make a pineapple upside down cake but when all you know hot to do is make white vanilla then that's what you get.Last edited by Peck; 04-16-2019, 10:53 AM.
Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13Comment
-
Team Chemistry is team chemistry, and the Granger trade (on paper) wasn't a bad deal. This team WANTED to continue to play together. KP could have been "F you" and made changes, but at what costs when it comes to team chemistry? Now, if you say that they're "professionals" and need to suck it up, then the same thought process should be applied to the 2013-2014 team when Granger was traded.Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
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
-
They should’ve been practicing that all year... instead of reaching for a Hail MaryOriginally posted by ksuttonjr76 View PostComment
-
We disagree on McDermott, I really like him. Keeping in mind he is an 8th or 9th man. I like that pickup. Sure not a game changer - but solid.Originally posted by Peck View Post
Path to a superior team? That begs the question - do we 1) go for broke this summer - not re-sign anyone, and really go for it? Sure i am being simplistic.or 2) do we try to keep the same identity, add a few well chosen additions and improve. The first approach is a gamble if we do that, we might miss on a few big deals, and be looking at a 35 win team or even worse. The second approach would be more of a sure thing - guarantee 46 wins or so. Obviously a lot depends on Vic.
Back to Holiday - once again I like him - like his brothers. But I am pushing back on your comment that he can get his own shot anytime he wants. I mean he can jack up threes - especially when teams back off. But I don't see Holiday able to go where ever he wants with the ball - which to me is the first test of a great point guard.Comment
-
In a vacuum McDermott might be okay as a 9-11 player, maybe. But what our team desperately needed then and still needs now is some athleticism. We should have done everything in our power at the trade deadline to get Kelly Oubrie who was traded for the corpse of Trevor Ariza.Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
Your sure thing for next year looks a lot like the first step of 42 wins the next year and 38 wins the year after that. I say that because staying the course means more Thad Young who is already north of 30. More Darren Collison who is I think right at 30 and so on and so forth. While not developing a single young player (beyond Turner and Sabonis who I no longer consider young they are now veteran players). Well eventually they are going to reach a point that they can't keep up and if we have nobody in the wings waiting and then drafting year after year in the late teens early 20's how do we reload? I'm not talking about just going out and getting more bench fodder to keep up the 40 some win charade where we are all supposed to be happy to be in the playoffs but be bounced out early and often. i mean how do we make it so the second round at least is the expectation.
Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13Comment
-
Honestly...I just think Holiday and Kyle Quinn need more playing time while benching TJ Leaf and maybe reducing Cory's playing time. Holiday seems like the X-Factor we need while Quinn is another big body (and possibly enforcer) that we can use.
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
-
I can live with that idea. it's at least something. If Leaf could get his offense going it would be nice but you can't expect a guy to get into any type of rhythm from very sporadic and uneven minutes over the course of a season.Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13Comment
-
My problem with Nate is the stubborness and egg timer rotations. Every coach and every team has made changes during the season. If you take a look at a team like the Nets. I think Hollis Jefferson was a starter or if not starting he was a key bench player. Their coach made a decision to pull him out of the rotation and start Kurucs and it worked out for them. Tyreke has played himself out of the rotation and for some reason Nate still sticks with him.
Our moves this offseason will really tell me a lot about KP and this team. The only pacer free agent that I would retain is bogey. The rest can walk. If we re-sign thad, Dc, or Cojo Then as peck said we will be on a treadmill of mediocrity. We need some more scorers and creators on this team. The only top free agents that I think we have a chance to sign would be Brogdon and a very low chance of signing Jimmy Butler. The bucks will have to go into the luxury tax to sign Brogdon and I just read an article that nba execs thinks he will be looking at a 4 year 60 million dollar contract.
I love thad, DC and Cojo but nate relies on his veterans to much and because of that IMO he has stunted their growth. Both leaf and Holiday has shown promise and KP needs to get rid of the veteran cushion and force Nate to give the young guys some time next season.Comment
Comment