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

Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

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

  • #76
    Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

    Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
    Honestly though Vogel is not the coach that I expect to be here when the Pacers become contenders. He is OK to take a 37 win team to a 48 win team, but the Pacers aren't good enough to be a contender.
    So...we keep him until he's able to coach the team to 48 wins, then fire him once Indiana becomes a contender? That doesn't make sense...if Indiana became a contender, wouldn't he be one of the reasons why?


    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


    • #77
      Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

      Go back to 1993, Bob Hill had coached the pacers as well as he could, he nursed our younger players through their growing pains - the team was ready to win, so it was the perfect time to hire Larry Brown.

      I think we are a few years away from being in the same position. So OK, let Vogel coach our younger players through their growing pains, and in 3 years when Paul george is in theory our best player and our younger players have grown (and a few trades and adjustments are made) and we some good playoff experience, then you hire a coach you think can lead us to a championship.

      That was my point. Coaches with very rare exceptions have a short 3 or 4 year self-life, so in essense and using hyperbole why waste a championship caliber coach on a team that isn't ready (no matter who the coach is). Hire the championship caliber coach when the team is ready to win

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

        If the front office is so unsure of the guy that they're making him hire an entirely new staff and sign a one year contract, is he really the right guy?

        Granted, if you are going to hire Vogel both those scenarios are probably the correct way to do it, but I don't feel good about it. I understand after the last hire they want to play it safe but this feels like riding a bike with training wheels. While wearing a helmet, knee pads, and elbow pads. While covered in bubble wrap.
        "I had to take her down like Chris Brown."

        -Lance Stephenson

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

          Originally posted by BRushWithDeath View Post
          If the front office is so unsure of the guy that they're making him hire an entirely new staff and sign a one year contract, is he really the right guy?

          Granted, if you are going to hire Vogel both those scenarios are probably the correct way to do it, but I don't feel good about it. I understand after the last hire they want to play it safe but this feels like riding a bike with training wheels. While wearing a helmet, knee pads, and elbow pads. While covered in bubble wrap.
          Nothing wrong with it. Other forum member had said that Larry Bird had a similar setup during his 3 years of coaching. The impression that I have been getting lately about Vogel is that he's a true student of the game, learns, and then adapts quickly. For me, Vogel only made a handful of questionable coaching decisions during the regular season, and I thought he was flat-out crazy for putting George on Rose at the start of the series, but it worked. In reality, Vogel GAVE Miami the blueprint for beating Chicago.

          Based on potential, Vogel has a good chance at becoming a good Head Coach with the proper people around him.


          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


          • #80
            Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

            Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
            Go back to 1993, Bob Hill had coached the pacers as well as he could, he nursed our younger players through their growing pains - the team was ready to win, so it was the perfect time to hire Larry Brown.

            I think we are a few years away from being in the same position. So OK, let Vogel coach our younger players through their growing pains, and in 3 years when Paul george is in theory our best player and our younger players have grown (and a few trades and adjustments are made) and we some good playoff experience, then you hire a coach you think can lead us to a championship.

            That was my point. Coaches with very rare exceptions have a short 3 or 4 year self-life, so in essense and using hyperbole why waste a championship caliber coach on a team that isn't ready (no matter who the coach is). Hire the championship caliber coach when the team is ready to win
            Well...we won't know if we need a "Championship Caliber" Coach until Vogel proves he's not, will we? The only thing that Vogel proved last season is that he's worth a look in the Head Coaching position.


            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


            • #81
              Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

              Hiring experienced assistant coaches makes sense to me. I thought the general consensus last year was that Jim had a very weak lineup of assistants. Just because Frank has exceeded expectations as the head coach, that doesn't change the fact that he was working with a previously-perceived-to-be-weak assistant coaching staff, now minus Assistant Vogel, making it even weaker.

              Strengthening up your bench is always a good thing, and does not necessarily reflect poorly on Vogel at all. It might, but it easily might not.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                Honestly though Vogel is not the coach that I expect to be here when the Pacers become contenders. He is OK to take a 37 win team to a 48 win team, but the Pacers aren't good enough to be a contender.
                Originally posted by rock747 View Post
                What is your reasoning? Experience?
                I'll answer too - at some point, someone has to have the knowledge of how to get over the edge from mid-level to top-level team. If you don't have a team of veteran players where at least one major piece (not just a bench leader) has been at the top level, you have to have a coach who knows how to do it. And, until you've been there at some level, you don't know how to do it.

                Second, often the difference in moving from one level to the next is an additional point of view, a slight change to the angle of approach that uses the existing talents/structures/habits in a new way. A new coach provides that change.
                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


                • #83
                  Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

                  Originally posted by BillS View Post
                  I'll answer too - at some point, someone has to have the knowledge of how to get over the edge from mid-level to top-level team. If you don't have a team of veteran players where at least one major piece (not just a bench leader) has been at the top level, you have to have a coach who knows how to do it. And, until you've been there at some level, you don't know how to do it.
                  This is vague. What is it that these coaches and veteran players know, specifically, that the other coaches and players don't?

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

                    Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                    This is vague. What is it that these coaches and veteran players know, specifically, that the other coaches and players don't?
                    If it were so easy to sum up veteran knowledge, we could just have Larry Bird write up a book or give weekly seminars.

                    Experience matters, and its usually things you learn by doing. Things like how to react to a certain situation, or how certain variables would change your reaction. For example, in my day job, I wouldn't say I'm the most experienced guy, but there are numerous tricks I use to make life easier. None of them are especially valuable or especially clever, but collectively they make me a lot more productive than say a raw new hire. I think that's how it would work with veteran coaches and veteran players as well.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

                      Can anyone imagine Bird goijng through this process in order to hire a head coach?

                      http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...=Google+Reader

                      Commentary

                      Anatomy of hiring an NBA coach

                      By RICHARD JUSTICE
                      Copyright 2011 Houston Chronicle

                      June 2, 2011, 11:20PM



                      Looking back on a process that included three interviews lasting more than 20 hours, Daryl Morey remembers one moment that sold him on Kevin McHale.


                      It occurred as Morey and his staff peppered McHale on approximately two dozen end-of-game situations as part of a discussion that included topics ranging from coaching influences to player development.

                      OK, Kevin, we're down five points with 50 seconds remaining and have the ball and one timeout?

                      Or …

                      We're up three with 90 seconds left and one timeout remaining.

                      McHale answered confidently and without hesitation.

                      "We analyze the heck out of those game situations," Morey said, "and Kevin hit the ball out of the park. It made me realize how smart he is and how he knows his stuff. That was the moment for me. Believe me, he's going to know what to do at the end of games."

                      Before McHale aced that part of the exam, the Rockets believed they had a handle on what kind of coach he would be. They loved his leadership, intelligence and basketball aptitude and were becoming convinced he really and truly was it in for the long haul.

                      "I'm 100 percent in," McHale told them. "You guys are going to get everything from me."
                      The Rockets were anxious enough about this part of McHale to have owner Leslie Alexander ask him the same thing. In the end, Morey and his assistants Gersson Rosas and Sam Hinkie believed they had a perfect candidate.

                      McHale was so perfect that Alexander had them double-check what they had already doubled-checked.

                      With every telephone call, the Rockets were more impressed, and a guy who barely had been on their radar screen at the beginning of the process was on his way to becoming their new coach.

                      Along the way, there would be some tough talks. Why did such-and-such player dislike him? What situations did he handle poorly? Is he committed to working the hours required to be a successful NBA coach?

                      In some ways, Morey probably knew what he was getting. For a couple of years, the Rockets and Timberwolves have co-hosted one of the NBA's largest pre-draft camps.
                      During those hours in the gym, it's NBA people talking about the game and players and everything else.


                      The great debate

                      Morey never forgot the day McHale, then general manager of the Timberwolves, and Tom Thibodeau, a Rockets assistant, now coach of the Bulls, got into a heated argument about how best to defend the low post.

                      "It was right there in front of everyone at the camp," Morey said, "and it was amazing to listen to. They went through multiple pick-and-rolls and a bunch of other things. I got a sense of him as a person in times like that."

                      Morey began the search to replace Rick Adelman by going through 10 years of files on assistant coaches. With the help of senior vice president Keith Jones and others, that list was trimmed to 20 candidates and then 10.

                      Morey met with Alexander several times for input.

                      "Mr. Alexander mainly wanted a smart guy," Morey said.

                      The Rockets ended up doing formal interviews with six candidates. All the first interviews lasted close to 10 hours. Kelvin Sampson's went 14.

                      Morey wrestled with the idea of hiring a former player versus a career coach.

                      His buddy, Celtics general manager Danny Ainge, feels strongly about having a distinguished former player as the coach and surrounding him with quality assistants to help with strategic preparation.

                      Ainge apparently believes no single coaching quality is more important than the leadership and credibility some former players bring.

                      Morey doesn't agree. He has high regard for Jeff Van Gundy and believes two other finalists, Lawrence Frank and Dwane Casey, would have been good hires.

                      But there was something about McHale. His charisma. His smarts. His desire to be a great coach and to learn.

                      "(Former Rockets personnel man) Dean Cooper worked with Kevin and believes he takes the best of his staff and the people around him," Morey said. "Kevin has a Midwestern feel about him. He's very upfront with people. He doesn't get offended.“

                      Morey had been impressed at how much McHale improved between his first and second stints as Timberwolves coach. The Wolves got better shots, had better defensive awareness, you name it.


                      Case closed

                      "There was massive improvement," Morey said.

                      Morey and the others became convinced they had their man. Alexander signed off, and McHale will be Introduced today at Toyota Center.

                      McHale's hiring is a gamble only in that he has spent so little time coaching. But there's no situation on the floor or locker room he hasn't witnessed, and in some cases, dealt with.

                      The Rockets have plenty of work to do on their roster, so the hiring of McHale is a step in the right direction with plenty more needed. But it's a significant step, and the Rockets hope, a lasting one.
                      richard.justice@chron.com



                      Last edited by Unclebuck; 06-03-2011, 11:27 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

                        Great read. Actually, I can imagine Bird doing exactly that. One thing I don't doubt about Bird is thoroughness when it comes to fits, game plans and tactics.
                        I'm not sure if he's nearly as strong as Morey when it comes to novelties like advanced stats or other modern inter-discipline stuff.
                        But the stuff in the article, I'd imagine Bird is as thorough as anyone.

                        In fact, if you didn't give me any names and asked me to say who was the GM in that article - Morey or Bird - I'd say Bird.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

                          Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                          If it were so easy to sum up veteran knowledge, we could just have Larry Bird write up a book or give weekly seminars.

                          Experience matters, and its usually things you learn by doing. Things like how to react to a certain situation, or how certain variables would change your reaction. For example, in my day job, I wouldn't say I'm the most experienced guy, but there are numerous tricks I use to make life easier. None of them are especially valuable or especially clever, but collectively they make me a lot more productive than say a raw new hire. I think that's how it would work with veteran coaches and veteran players as well.


                          I know that I have worked at many jobs, and outperformed the "veterans" simply because I wanted it more. I outperformed the "veterans", simply because of my ability to analyze a situation, and make sound decisions based on the information at hand. Hence, it wasn't uncommon for me to be the "youngest, non-degree having" Supervisor/Manager in the workplace.

                          IMHO, I was more "productive" due to my ability to adapt instead having someone hold my hand to tell me what to do when a particular situation arises. Are you saying that just because you've been there longer, that I can't come in and outperform you at your own job?


                          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


                          • #88
                            Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

                            Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                            IMHO, I was more "productive" due to my ability to adapt instead having someone hold my hand to tell me what to do when a particular situation arises. Are you saying that just because you've been there longer, that I can't come in and outperform you at your own job?
                            On Day 1 or Day 5 or Day 30, the answer is probably not for most situations. In this situation, there isn't room for that kind of learning curve. Unless starting 5 or 10 games under .500 is OK.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

                              Originally posted by Kraft View Post
                              On Day 1 or Day 5 or Day 30, the answer is probably not for most situations. In this situation, there isn't room for that kind of learning curve. Unless starting 5 or 10 games under .500 is OK.
                              So, it's okay to using a promising "rookie" when there's nothing to lose, but when the situation is critical, you want to shy away from the promising "rookie" to go with the "veteran"?

                              Hmmmm....I remember a long time ago when the Lakers were playing Utah, and a young, rookie Kobe Bryant was called upon and shot 1 airball in regulation and 2 airballs in overtime. As a result, the Lakers lost that series. I remember thinking at that those exact moments "Wow...that took a lot of guts to shoot those shots especially from a rookie.". I also remembering and thinking that game could define Kobe as a player. 15 years later...the rest is history.

                              Vogel is a promising coach with potential, and this season could define him. I'm willing to take my chances with him.


                              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


                              • #90
                                Re: Wells: Vogel must change his staff and hire 3 assistants

                                Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                                IMHO, I was more "productive" due to my ability to adapt instead having someone hold my hand to tell me what to do when a particular situation arises. Are you saying that just because you've been there longer, that I can't come in and outperform you at your own job?
                                Uh, no. Where are you getting that? If we're pulling that card, I've also outperformed people who've been at work longer. But undoubtedly experience helps, and I was more productive with experience than when I was a newbie.

                                The post I was responding to asked what sort of advantage veterans might have over non-veterans, and I responded. Obviously there are all sorts of advantages; so perhaps a young Frank Vogel could outcoach a veteran Obie for other reasons. But all other things being equal then experience would trump youth.

                                Originally posted by ksuttonjr76 View Post
                                I know that I have worked at many jobs, and outperformed the "veterans" simply because I wanted it more. I outperformed the "veterans", simply because of my ability to analyze a situation, and make sound decisions based on the information at hand. Hence, it wasn't uncommon for me to be the "youngest, non-degree having" Supervisor/Manager in the workplace.
                                Bully for you. Want a cookie?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X