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:
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

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

Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

    Just to give some type of balance to the who is the worst coach, and we've had some bad ones, I think we should state who was the best coach and we've had some great ones.

    Give us who and why.
    Bob "Slick" Leonard
    Larry Brown
    Larry Bird
    Rick Carlisle

    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  • #2
    Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

    Rick is still my fav Nba coach. If I ever get into coaching his style is a lot like I see me being. He isn't narrow minded and takes win now vs build for future better than most. Main reason I like him and POP so much. Monty Williams is my 3rd fav he gets the best out of his young guys.


    • #3
      Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

      Slick. Three championships; 'nuff said.

      But honorable mention goes to Larry Brown. Other than his wandering eye looking for the next job, he's still everything you want in a coach. And while he's the illustration of why Bird's three-year rule for coaches has validity, you get so much from him during those three years.

      Bird gets credit because of his success. Not a tactician, probably terrible with x's and o's or working with players individually, but he could lead them and motivate them.

      That's the Golden Three of Pacers coaches.
      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


      • #4
        Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

        This thread is going to produce some knife fights....I gotta go with Slick for a lot of reasons, but mainly even when you listen to him now you can just tell he gets the game, and he seems like he would be good at handling players.


        • #5
          Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

          Two best from when I started following the NBA would be Bird and Carlisle.

          Bird had the experience and the players listened. Not sure he was the best "coach" ever, but he know what he knew and more importantly he knew when to delegate. He could also still play which I think helped the players relate a lot.

          Rick was a great coach, though his interpersonal skills held him back a bit IMO. I think we saw him grow a lot from Detroit to Indiana, and his work after the brawl was nothing short of spectacular.

          Never saw Slick coach, but like another posters said above just listening to him you know he "gets it". Basically the polar opposite of Isiah Thomas. Oops, sorry, wrong thread


          • #6
            Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

            About coach Brown not a fan of his at all. I'm sure he was great with us a team that is ready to win. But what he did with the Kittes really soured me with him. When you have a young rebuilding type roster like he did with the Cats you don't play over priced vets who aren't part of the future instead of the kids and try to win 8th every year I doubt many top notch coaches would do that. You don't tank per say but you do what Monty did last year you play the kids see what you have and let the kids learn and play hard. Coaches like Larry Brown and JOB can't do that.


            • #7
              Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

              I never saw Slick coach, too young.

              Bird, this is just my opinion, but I don't think he has even close to the success he had without Carlisle sitting right next to him.

              Brown, talk about an overrated coach if I have ever seen one.

              That leaves Carlisle, from my incomplete experience, to be the best Pacer coach to date.


              • #8
                Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                Unfortunately, too young to have caught Slick, so I gotta go with Larry Legend.
                "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "


                • #9
                  Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?


                  Signed by UNCLEBUCK.
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!


                  • #10
                    Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                    Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post

                    Signed by UNCLEBUCK.
                    You've honestly become a troll with a lot of this JOB stuff.


                    • #11
                      Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                      I love Slick, but I don't really remember much about his coaching, so I can't pick him. He had to be good no doubt and I love his comments during games and how he believes basketball should be played. He bleeds Blue and Gold, how can you not love that.

                      Larry Brown was great, helped turn this franchise around. I can't over look Larry's constant unhappiness with his players no mater were he's coaching. He is a great coach, just don't let him make personnel decisions, he falls in and out of love with players to often. I still was not happy with him his last season here he gave up on the team and he has even said that himself. Some of the greatest times at MSA were with Larry Brown though, I'll never forget those times.

                      Larry Bird, I'm still not completely sure about as a coach. He obviously did a great job when he was our coach, seems to really know the game and how players think and what makes them respond (aka Jalen). He commands respect that few coaches will ever have, simply because of what he was as a player. I think he hired two great assistants and let them do their job, so does that make him a great coach, maybe, or a great leader yes, I really still don't know. Seems Bird has excelled at everything there is to do with Basketball, very impressive resume. Maybe we are still under estimating him?

                      I'll pick Rick
                      I just think Rick is a awesome coach, He was great at Detroit, still believe he is as responsible for their Championship as Larry Brown was. He set the stage, established a stye of play, they were doing worse under Larry the next season, till the Sheed give away. Billups always had nice things to say about Rick and he's the one guy from those Detroit teams I really respect.

                      Rick was even better here, he took some questionable rosters and preformed well over expectations IMO. The brawl season was about the best coaching job I've ever seen. He was not without flaws, he was supposedly distant and not very personable, but I think he worked on his weaknesses and improved, ultimately getting a much deserved Championship in Dallas.

                      I certainly would not be upset if he was ever brought back here, several years down the road.
                      "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"


                      • #12
                        Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                        I can only vote on what I saw and witnessed, so while Slick is probably the pick here, my vote goes to Larry Brown. I think he is the guy who helped change the culture, took a slightly above average team and made them a contender, while setting them up for the success Bird enjoyed. Larry Brown is a fickle, fickle man, but he can coach.


                        • #13
                          Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                          Originally posted by cdash View Post
                          I can only vote on what I saw and witnessed, so while Slick is probably the pick here, my vote goes to Larry Brown. I think he is the guy who helped change the culture, took a slightly above average team and made them a contender, while setting them up for the success Bird enjoyed. Larry Brown is a fickle, fickle man, but he can coach.
                          Close race between Brown and Carlisle for me but I'll go with that reasoning. I think Carlisle is brilliant with tactics though - on pure X&O's I think he'd be my top choice.

                          Originally posted by Hoop View Post
                          I certainly would not be upset if he was ever brought back here, several years down the road.
                          Interesting thought, and I agree. If Donnie can find his way back to the franchise, who's to say Rick won't? Though I expect he'll be in Dallas for a long, long time.


                          • #14
                            Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                            Has to be Slick. Championships. Coach & GM. On tv selling tickets during the telethon to keep the team in Indy. He was the face of the franchise. Couldn't have done any more.

                            Larry Brown is a great coach but he was never dedicated to the team (or any other team that he has been with). Larry Bird knew how to build and use his staff. But Slick did it all.


                            • #15
                              Re: Who is the best coach in Pacers history?

                              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post

                              Signed by UNCLEBUCK.
                              Come on, man. Find me a post where UB even came close to doing anything but defending JOB as an adequate coach for the Pacers who actually might have been good in certain areas. You need to stop equating defense with adoration, you really do.

                              To the topic at hand, it would be a toss-up between Slick's ABA days and Brown or Carlisle in the NBA days. Slick's NBA days are tainted by the lack of talent (and changing conditions) he was saddled with. Brown's behind-the-scenes problems grated on players but there is no question he took the team to another level, which is what you want a coach to do. Rick was skilled at the game but not so skilled with player interaction - remember that many of the locker room issues started when his player interaction assistant coaches moved on.

                              If I had to pick one, it would be Slick with Larry Brown a very close second.

                              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...