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

Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

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

  • #46
    Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

    Originally posted by wintermute View Post
    Seems to me this was leaked right away to squash the Mark Jackson rumor.
    I get the vibe from Woj that Jackson himself was the one that put that out there

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

      Or a new coach I meant. Something has to change though. I'm not saying blow it up at all. Just 1 player or a new coach.

      Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
      1 - 2, Tinsley's coming for you.
      3 - 4, You're not a team no more.
      5 - 6, He's gonna plead the 5th.
      7 - 8, He's gonna stay out late.



      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

        The biggest reason I like Frank is because the moment he became the head coach we began our 180 degree turnaround. It was a miserable 5 years and then all of a sudden it was 'smashmouth'. Immediately we started growing and then we added West and Hill and soon enough a legit powerhouse.

        Plus I would love to play for Frank. Seems like a good leader.

        BUT there have been constant areas of weakness:

        -our bench has sucked for the last 2 years. Think of all the talent in our bench unit from these past 2 seasons- Watson, Augustin, Green, Turner, Scola, Plumlee, Copeland- all of them have looked better NOT playing for Frank. I think some are true fit issues like Turner, but a good coach should maximize the talent and that has not been the case with out 2nd unit.

        -Our backup PF spot can do more than just shoot 15 footers. Scola's role in the team on offense is only to brick wide-open 15 footers. He has stayed open for a reason. Why doesn't Frank change it up and utilize Scola's post game? Who bricked more- Hansbrough or Scola?

        -Cope. Let's just say he can be part of the solution for the offense. He actually has skills off the dribble and brings us desperately needed 3 point shooting and spacing.

        -Take a page from the other championship coaches (Spo, Pop) and rest the starters more. They understand it is a marathon and there is no point in having a deep bench where Cope and Allen can't even touch the floor, what's the point in having them?

        -How the hell are we such a bad entry pass team? Maybe they need to practice more fundamentals or something, but clearly the offense needs work. It is ultimately Frank's responsibility.

        These things seem clear to many of us and I am sure Bird too. He will tell Vogel to fix certain things if thinks it is necessary. Kind of like hiring Vogel on the basis of bringing Shaw staff to support him. So I am confident that Larry will make sure that changes will be made with his vision for the team and Lance too.

        In short, I am happy Vogel is back and hope to see the internal changes made to this team. I think this team has the potential and we just need some tweaking and our guys to grow up mentally. but I said the same thing with Artest too, so what do I know?

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

          I keep hearing one of our playoff weaknesses is/was athleticism at the 4/5 slots. Isn't what where LaVoy Allen could've helped? Or been tried anyway...
          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

          ------

          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

          -John Wooden

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

            Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
            I get the vibe from Woj that Jackson himself was the one that put that out there
            Of course. Either Mark himself or his "camp". Either way it seems the Pacers want nothing to do with him.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

              Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
              A team that has made back to back ECF's, losing to what will probably be the three time champions, does not need a major shake up. Changes? Yes. But why would you want to change a bunch of things? One, who are you going to bring in player and coaching wise that will be a clear upgrade? Two, does stability mean nothing to you guys?

              Frank has to improve. No one disagrees there. But this was what his 4th season at the helm? With first being half a season and the second being the lock out season. This season created a whole bunch of new challenges for Frank. A brand new bench which was wildly inconsistent. Lance being Lance and all the issues that came with. Roy Hibbert forgetting how to play basketball. PG going from super efficient to super inefficient. George Hill becoming less and less aggressive. And David West becoming more of a liability on defense. This defensive juggernaut of a team is a great defensive team because of the system, Paul George, and when he's playing well, Roy Hibbert. Hill is average on defense, struggles against the super quick guys, but is above average against just about everyone else. Lance and West are below average on defense. Lance isn't disciplined enough. West doesn't rotate correctly just about ever. I feel like that really hurt Hibbert, especially vs Miami.

              Frank will come back better. Just like PG will.

              You think Vogel won't have a new bench next year? This new bench excuse has gotten old.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                You think Vogel won't have a new bench next year? This new bench excuse has gotten old.
                If you consider Solo, Copeland and whoever we add to replace Butler/ET in the lineup....yeah, Vogel will have a different bench.
                Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

                  I expect Lavoy to be our backup PF.

                  Copeland to see more minutes too.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

                    Originally posted by The Future View Post
                    I expect Lavoy to be our backup PF.

                    Copeland to see more minutes too.
                    Ditto

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

                      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                      I agree about the defense. He has done a great job with that although he has the players to get that done.

                      His ability to design an offense is just about non-existent.

                      His motivational ability is about making people feel good about themselves. That's a simple thing to do and works with young, naive guys...particularly if they are self-centered. But eventually it leads to players not listening or taking him seriously. That's basically where he is at now. Even Hibbert who said he would run through a wall for the man is talking back to dad now.

                      Results have been good. But he's run his course. JOb was also extended when he should have been let go.

                      His play calling has not been good and I presume that means on offense.

                      His reluctance to change has lost games. Yes, Rick got stuck on the "throw it into JO game". It was like a security blanket. Frank's security blanket is sticking with the starters for heavy minutes. It's hard to know what would have happened had he tried different things, so I suppose all we can do is give him a pass.

                      The way he handles players is all about praise. Empty praise. It grows old and is no way to build a "long term" relationship with players.

                      Adjustments. Yes, Frank tries. We could talk about player X not getting minutes but it's all speculation. What isn't speculation is that other coaches have made adjustments that he didn't have an answer to. The Hawks only lost because their talent level was nothing close to ours. We didn't adjust and almost lost that series.

                      The reality is, our opponents for most of the NBA playoffs dictated the tempo and that is the coach's fault. We played their way for the most part and when facing Miami that proved to be fatal.
                      One of Vogels flaws is inexperience. Not much he can do about it, comes with time. For example, overemphasizing the 1 seed. All for naught, burnt the starters out, and development on the bench sacrificed.

                      Every coach is going to have flaws outside the truly great ones. For me this season is on the players, hence the reason Vogel deserves the benefit of the doubt.

                      At the same time he still takes blame for not busting their *** if they refuse to take care of the ball (Lance, PG), or play with effort game in game out (HIBB).

                      Vogels a good coach, wouldnt call him great at this time but he can be. Good move by Bird. Still plenty of work left to do this offseason.

                      Our FO must dominate this offseason or once again we will fall short of the Finals.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

                        Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                        Frank has to redesign the offense, this team can't get easy baskets, and the system doesn't work for anyone who isn't a starter. The Bench has no idea what to do when they come in. Its not a system like Pop's where you can just plug and play any competent shooter at pretty much any position and just rely on ball movement to get the best shot.

                        Speaking of passing: I just watched the Spurs defeat the Thunder. I was in awe of the Spurs passing game with 5-6 passes whipped around b4 a shot was taken. Diaw with 20 some points and a bunch of great passes. For a fat lazy olaf as some thought last year, he's a good player with a chance to win a ring, and I hope he does.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

                          Originally posted by Heisenberg View Post
                          Basically forever if I were him. Dallas is a market that can attract FAs, Cuban's a great owner that will spend and seems great to work for, he's plenty involved but lets the people he hired do their jobs. Short of burnout I don't see him leaving for a long time.
                          Unfortunately they haven't really landed an in-demand FA lately

                          edit: But they probably will get one soon
                          Last edited by sopgy; 06-01-2014, 12:07 AM. Reason: But they probably will get one soon

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

                            Originally posted by The Future View Post
                            I expect Lavoy to be our backup PF.

                            Copeland to see more minutes too.
                            I dont. We cant afford it. Only way would be letting Lance walk. If LaVoy will get minutes it will be at C if Cope is still here.

                            Bottom line, resources are scarce... cant wrap up 11M (Cope, Mahinmi) and Allen (QO 3.8) in our backup bigs when there are too many other holes to fill with limited available space. Makes zero sense keeping LaVoy and Cope, if no other moves are made ie Mahinmi. Its one or the other Cope or Allen not both, cant have 4M on a backup to a backup, and no backup sg, let alone potentially a void at the starting sg spot.

                            Hate to break it but Pacers are strapped this offseason if we resign Lance, or fail to move Hibbert....

                            if Vogels not gonna play Cope he needs to be upfront with Bird so he can be moved. 3M is too valuable to ride the pine all season.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

                              Originally posted by pogi View Post
                              Some people need to think about this.... Vogel hid a lot of our weaknesses. Our team is a complete contrast to NBA standards. We have a pg that sucks at passing, a shooting guard that's more a slasher than a shooter, a PF that isn't great at rebounding or defense, a center that misses bunnies and put-backs, and our best player has some of the worst handles especially at his position.

                              If he hide it, how come we all saw it? SMH

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Pacers to bring back Frank Vogel (ESPN)

                                Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                                I dont. We cant afford it. Only way would be letting Lance walk. If LaVoy will get minutes it will be at C if Cope is still here.

                                Bottom line, resources are scarce... cant wrap up 11M (Cope, Mahinmi) and Allen (QO 3.8) in our backup bigs when there are too many other holes to fill with limited available space. Makes zero sense keeping LaVoy and Cope, if no other moves are made ie Mahinmi. Its one or the other Cope or Allen not both, cant have 4M on a backup to a backup, and no backup sg, let alone potentially a void at the starting sg spot.

                                Hate to break it but Pacers are strapped this offseason if we resign Lance, or fail to move Hibbert....

                                if Vogels not gonna play Cope he needs to be upfront with Bird so he can be moved. 3M is too valuable to ride the pine all season.
                                What if we cut Scola? I read somewhere his contract is unguarantied and will cost like 1.5 mil. Could we sign Allen to another 2yr/$6 mil deal?

                                Would you rather have Allen or Scola if they end up costing about the same next year? I am leaning towards Allen, but not really sure.
                                Last edited by sopgy; 06-01-2014, 12:13 AM. Reason: typo

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X