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

Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

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

  • #16
    Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

    Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
    Its been a revolving door for players ever since the Artest trade. Granted, they held onto the problems for too long and tried to market "a new roster" (2006-07) when the only thing that changed was the scrubs. Josh Powell and Rawle Marshall.

    We could compromise that the needed to replace all the players AND all the coaches.
    Rick had definitely become part of the problem in the fourth year. His third year, it's more difficult to tell, but I'd say it's reasonable to believe the damage had already been done, so firing him may have been the right thing to do (in conjunction with overhauling the roster).

    I had always thought that Bird would've fired Carlisle that summer if not for the two-headed monster.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

      Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
      Its been a revolving door for players ever since the Artest trade. Granted, they held onto the problems for too long and tried to market "a new roster" (2006-07) when the only thing that changed was the scrubs. Josh Powell and Rawle Marshall.

      We could compromise that the needed to replace all the players AND all the coaches.
      If you need to replace your players, why would you get rid of a top 5 coach? That's my point.

      Did Rick lose the team? Yes, but he lost players who were leaving or needed to leave.
      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

        That's the difference. I don't think Rick is a top-twenty coach.

        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

          Well I'm sure his COY award along with him placing top 3, what, 2 other years says something.

          He's miles better than JOB, regardless. Change just for the sake of change isn't always good. Especially when you downgrade.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

            I'm just glad that Rick isn't here, along with the players in question.

            I thought Rick's weaknesses in dealing with his players to me was something I didn't want new guys having to deal with. Mind games and what not.
            ...Still "flying casual"
            @roaminggnome74

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

              Rick's great but his system wears down a team, its players and its fans.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

                Rick reminds me of not one but TWO of my friends. I already know what he's like both on and off the court.

                Nice, conservative, caring guy who's just not real personable. He comes off as a snob to many people. He just can't help it. He likes the finer things in life including classical music and the theatre...and may be into aerobic exercise and health food. Someone tell me if I have him pegged. I think Rick likes classical music...but don't know anything else...

                No offense to my buddies or Rick, but Rick would be a great coach if the players were robots.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

                  Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                  JO had multiple suitors
                  Jalen had multiple suitors
                  Houston and Chicago offered Croshere as much money

                  Its been popular to b!tch about those contracts, but they got market value.

                  Its the "early extensions" that we need to learn from: there was no reason to extend Bender and Artest, and later Tinsley when those were made. First of all, the team ran out of money, secondly, all of those players proved unworthy.
                  i would say that it's the fact that we got burned on the bidding wars for jalen and austin that led to donnie's eagerness to extend the young players.

                  and in fact, the extensions were pretty sound at the time. artest, harrington, and tinsley had all been playing significant minutes when extended. only bender's extension was iffy. all were regarded as trade assets at the time, if the mcgrady rumors were to be believed. and recall that we were still available to trade artest, even after the palace meltdown, in part because his contract was relatively small.

                  the early extensions weren't the problem. it's the fact that we held certain players for too long, long after they lost their lustre.

                  i would prefer we extend granger early too, to head off a bidding war. but if granger's camp were asking for an above market contract, then i think management would just wait it out since they'll end up paying the same above market rate anyway.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

                    Originally posted by ChicagoJ View Post
                    You left off ... protesting Carlisle's fourth year:

                    http://www.pacersdigest.com/apache2-...ad.php?t=20221

                    I still think I'm right about that one.
                    I don't...and neither does the W/L record or the Tinsley factor. Remember that one major aspect was that Rick was the reason Tinsley wasn't working out and once he got a coach that opened up the offense it would all be so much better.

                    Rick was blamed for Saras - dude flopped in uptempo GS

                    Rick was blamed for Al - Al never did better than he did as an Indy 6th man

                    Rick couldn't control Ron - Ron only kept it together for one season, enough to win DPOY and make the AS team and that was for Rick

                    Rick's slog ball to JO hurt the team - the team improved from 30th in Points per Possession (102.9) to 19th (106) but the defense dropped from 9th to 15th, and JO kept on being hurt/unhappy. When you consider the improvement in 3P% by Dun there isn't much else that drastically improved on the offensive end.

                    Rick couldn't control Jackson - and then Jax got TWO different double tech ejections during the GS playoff run

                    Dunleavy is the only player that jumps to mind as improving without Rick, and frankly he only improved in one statistical way - his 3pt%.

                    Fans didn't want to come see Rick's type of team - attendence was worse last year than in any of Rick's seasons and remains on track to be that low this year.

                    6 years - 5 playoffs, 4 times to the 2nd round, 2 times to the ECF...all with luck or some other crap skill.

                    Remember when the call was to get Skiles in because he was so much better than Rick. Just one of many "grass is greener" stories.

                    I think Rick likes classical music...but don't know anything else...
                    Maybe he does I suppose but his claim to fame is hanging out with Bruce Hornsby which while not rap or crap pop or metal is still rock enough to be more than "snob". Did you not listen to the Rick show at any point? He cut up quite a bit and seemed moderately ecclectic in his taste.

                    He's just conservative and toward the quiet end over all. Otherwise I never noticed a snob aspect to him, even accidental.


                    Did Rick lose the team? Yes, but he lost players who were leaving or needed to leave.
                    Players that Rick lost, that gave up on the team, that JOB won back? zilch...ask Foster about JO's interest in still being in Indy by the end of last season

                    Improvement in discipline once Rick left - ask Shawne and Tinsley
                    Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 09-25-2008, 10:27 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

                      hmm...fairly certain i've been correct on most things concerning the pacers over the past 15 or so years. my problem is i'm just 1 or 2 years ahead of the time where it becomes popular belief.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

                        Originally posted by croz24 View Post
                        hmm...fairly certain i've been correct on most things concerning the pacers over the past 15 or so years. my problem is i'm just 1 or 2 years ahead of the time where it becomes popular belief.
                        Ok, so predict the coming two years...
                        2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                        2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                        2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          I don't...and neither does the W/L record or the Tinsley factor. Remember that one major aspect was that Rick was the reason Tinsley wasn't working out and once he got a coach that opened up the offense it would all be so much better.

                          Rick was blamed for Saras - dude flopped in uptempo GS

                          Rick was blamed for Al - Al never did better than he did as an Indy 6th man

                          Rick couldn't control Ron - Ron only kept it together for one season, enough to win DPOY and make the AS team and that was for Rick

                          Rick's slog ball to JO hurt the team - the team improved from 30th in Points per Possession (102.9) to 19th (106) but the defense dropped from 9th to 15th, and JO kept on being hurt/unhappy. When you consider the improvement in 3P% by Dun there isn't much else that drastically improved on the offensive end.

                          Rick couldn't control Jackson - and then Jax got TWO different double tech ejections during the GS playoff run

                          Dunleavy is the only player that jumps to mind as improving without Rick, and frankly he only improved in one statistical way - his 3pt%.

                          Fans didn't want to come see Rick's type of team - attendence was worse last year than in any of Rick's seasons and remains on track to be that low this year.

                          6 years - 5 playoffs, 4 times to the 2nd round, 2 times to the ECF...all with luck or some other crap skill.

                          Remember when the call was to get Skiles in because he was so much better than Rick. Just one of many "grass is greener" stories.

                          Maybe he does I suppose but his claim to fame is hanging out with Bruce Hornsby which while not rap or crap pop or metal is still rock enough to be more than "snob". Did you not listen to the Rick show at any point? He cut up quite a bit and seemed moderately ecclectic in his taste.

                          He's just conservative and toward the quiet end over all. Otherwise I never noticed a snob aspect to him, even accidental.


                          Players that Rick lost, that gave up on the team, that JOB won back? zilch...ask Foster about JO's interest in still being in Indy by the end of last season

                          Improvement in discipline once Rick left - ask Shawne and Tinsley

                          Good post.

                          I will continue to hold a torch for Rick Carlisle. May this subject rest in peace.
                          “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                          “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            I don't...and neither does the W/L record or the Tinsley factor. Remember that one major aspect was that Rick was the reason Tinsley wasn't working out and once he got a coach that opened up the offense it would all be so much better.

                            Rick was blamed for Saras - dude flopped in uptempo GS

                            Rick was blamed for Al - Al never did better than he did as an Indy 6th man

                            Rick couldn't control Ron - Ron only kept it together for one season, enough to win DPOY and make the AS team and that was for Rick

                            Rick's slog ball to JO hurt the team - the team improved from 30th in Points per Possession (102.9) to 19th (106) but the defense dropped from 9th to 15th, and JO kept on being hurt/unhappy. When you consider the improvement in 3P% by Dun there isn't much else that drastically improved on the offensive end.

                            Rick couldn't control Jackson - and then Jax got TWO different double tech ejections during the GS playoff run

                            Dunleavy is the only player that jumps to mind as improving without Rick, and frankly he only improved in one statistical way - his 3pt%.

                            Fans didn't want to come see Rick's type of team - attendence was worse last year than in any of Rick's seasons and remains on track to be that low this year.

                            6 years - 5 playoffs, 4 times to the 2nd round, 2 times to the ECF...all with luck or some other crap skill.

                            Remember when the call was to get Skiles in because he was so much better than Rick. Just one of many "grass is greener" stories.

                            Maybe he does I suppose but his claim to fame is hanging out with Bruce Hornsby which while not rap or crap pop or metal is still rock enough to be more than "snob". Did you not listen to the Rick show at any point? He cut up quite a bit and seemed moderately ecclectic in his taste.

                            He's just conservative and toward the quiet end over all. Otherwise I never noticed a snob aspect to him, even accidental.


                            Players that Rick lost, that gave up on the team, that JOB won back? zilch...ask Foster about JO's interest in still being in Indy by the end of last season

                            Improvement in discipline once Rick left - ask Shawne and Tinsley
                            Great post, Seth.

                            I liked Rick a lot, but also succombed to the temptation to move to greener grass.

                            I will quibble, however, with your last sentence.

                            My hope is that the beginning of this season is a slow, tortoise like effect of JOB actually having better discipline than Rick. JOB gave Tins a real chance. Tins blew it. JOB refused to put up with it (unlike what Rick would do) and now we start the season with solid new point guards.

                            While Rick is the better coach than JOB, I hold up hopes that JOB is the better disciplinarian/manager of people. And this character factor is so important that it might outweigh Rick's superior coaching skills.

                            That's my hope, anyway.
                            "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

                              Originally posted by Mourning View Post
                              Ok, so predict the coming two years...
                              Pacers have trouble getting into playoffs.

                              Fans blame Jermaine O'Neal.

                              Peck blames Donnie Walsh.

                              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


                              • #30
                                Re: Which PD members outsmarted the GM?

                                Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
                                Great post, Seth.

                                I liked Rick a lot, but also succombed to the temptation to move to greener grass.

                                I will quibble, however, with your last sentence.

                                My hope is that the beginning of this season is a slow, tortoise like effect of JOB actually having better discipline than Rick. JOB gave Tins a real chance. Tins blew it. JOB refused to put up with it (unlike what Rick would do) and now we start the season with solid new point guards.

                                While Rick is the better coach than JOB, I hold up hopes that JOB is the better disciplinarian/manager of people. And this character factor is so important that it might outweigh Rick's superior coaching skills.

                                That's my hope, anyway.
                                To be completely honest, I believe management's attitude changed. RC tried holding Tinsley's feet to the fire from the very beginning, in starting Kenny Anderson over him. It was let known that Tins was the starting PG. He tried it again on his way out the door with AJ as well.

                                I'm still not a fan of treating players all the same way, like some would like to see on here. You need to treat Ron differently than you do Foster, or Jax. Some players respond to a coach being in their ear all the time, others shut down.

                                I will never place the blame on the coach for what Stephen Jackson does, EVER. He's an extremely emotional person that has to have that emotion to play. If he calmed down, he would be ineffective and there's no denying it. My beef with it is, he didn't fit in Indiana or with the supporting cast. He can get away with it in GS, they have players that feed off of him that pick him up and a community that doesn't blink an eye at his outbursts.

                                I really think Rick got his legs cut out from underneath him early on with Jamaal, and even so with Ron. Management setup that stupid photo shoot with SI basically backing RA to the fullest. They backed all their players with their idiotic press releases saying they were standing behind their players and so forth.

                                I say it's managements problem from the get go because the same bullcrap kept happening under JOB than it did with Rick. There was even the "we support them" mantra handed out after a few of the incidents, i.e. Shawne.

                                In order for a coach to be a disciplinarian, the whole organization has to be on the same page. You can't have one for a coach, then the GM pat them on the butt and say "it's okay."

                                JOB stepped into a different environment. Bird and Co. laid the foot down, eventually, and told everyone enough is enough. That should have happened a long time ago, from management, when Rick was here.

                                Was RC part of the problem? Yes, but it starts from the top and the top wasn't too interested in getting things straightened out, either on the court or off of it.
                                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X