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

5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

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

  • 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat


    WITNESS THIS!


    -VS-




    Game Time Start: 7:00 PM EST
    Where: The Fieldhouse, Indianapolis, IN
    Officials: D. Crawford, T. Brothers, J. Goble, D. Collins

    Media Notes: Indiana Notes, Miami Notes
    Television:
    Local Radio: WIBC 93.1 FM
    NBA Feeds:
    REMINDER: Per PD policy, please do not share a link to, describe how to search for, request a link to, or request a PM about streaming video of a NBA game that is not coming directly through the NBA. Not even in a "wink-wink, nudge-nudge, know-what-I-mean" round-about sort of way. Thank you



    1

    5-2
    Home: 2-1
    1

    5-2
    Away: 1-1
    May 20
    May 22
    May 24
    May 26
    vs
    at
    vs
    at

    If Necessary

    If Necessary
    C
    PF
    SF
    SG
    PG
    HIBBERT
    WEST
    GRANGER
    GEORGE
    HILL
    C
    PF
    SF
    SG
    PG
    TURIAF
    HASLEM
    JAMES
    WADE
    CHALMERS


    Pacers
    None to report



    Heat
    Chris Bosh - Lower Abdominal Strain (out indefinitely)

    Jared Wade: Taking Away the Three and Marginalizing Miamiís Role Players

    The Heatís second best player has shot like trash in this series. After shooting 8-for-22
    last night, as noted by Brian Windhorst of ESPN.com, Dwayne Wade is now 4-for-19
    (21%) on jump shots in two games against Indiana. While Frank Vogel has credited this
    to how well Paul George has been playing defense (which is mostly true), this isnít just
    a second-round issue for Wade. Including the Knicks series, he is now 12-for-49 (25%)
    on jumpers during the playoffs. That is horrible and if he continues to shoot at that rate
    outside the paint, the Miami Heat have no chance to beat the Pacers. They really donít.

    Most onlookers would expect Wade to turn it around, however. And even if he canít get
    out of his jump-shooting slump, he is such a dynamic and versatile scorer that he will
    find ways to put points on the board. He is still among the most lethal penetrators in
    league history, a Maserrati on the break and a fixture at the free-throw line. His
    individual talent to score remains the second-biggest concern for the Pacers (following,
    ya know, the talents of that other guy.)

    Conversely, it really isnít Wade that the Heat should be concerned about.

    What they need to fix is the lack of production from their one-dimensional supporting
    cast. Because the rest of the team is shooting just as poorly as Wade. In 160 combined
    minutes during Game 2, the other eight players who entered the game other than
    James and Wade scored just 23 points on 9-for-34 FGs (26.5%). In Game 1, over 140
    combined minutes, Miami players not named LeBron, Wade or Bosh scored 21 points
    on 7-for-21 (33%) shooting. And being even that useful required a 4-for-4, 9-point
    performance from Joel Antony, a career 2.7 point per game scorer.

    Part of the Plan

    For the Pacers, this is all going according to strategy. Frank Vogel was on 1070 The
    Fan radion in Indiana this morning and discussed how his team is focusing on taking
    away Miamiís role players.

    ď[We're] very focused on what those guysí strengths are,Ē said Vogel. ďAll their role
    players are capable of much greater production than they put forth last night. But
    they are sort of limited in what can do. Theyíre either drivers or shooters or dunkers
    at the basket. But theyíre not versatile, theyíre not multi-weapon type of guys. So if
    you just dial in to taking away their one strength, theyíre guys that can be limited.Ē

    The number-one way to minimize the Heatís bench is to take away their ability to
    shoot open three-point looks. There are very few ways any of them can hurt you
    other than by making triples. And it is something they do very well.

    Throughout the regular season...CONTINUE READING AT 8p9s




    3-on-3 preview: Heat-Pacers, Game 3

    In another installment of the Heat Index's 3-on-3 series, our writers give their takes on
    the storylines before the Heat visit the Pacers for Game 3 of the Eastern Conference
    semifinals.


    1. Fact or Fiction: Dwyane Wade should have been suspended.

    Tom Haberstroh: Fiction. Although, I've gone both ways on this one. Darren Collison
    decelerated slightly for the pass, so I'm not sure it was all Wade's fault for the sheer
    velocity of impact. But I can't shake the feeling that this wasn't a fully objective ruling. I
    keep asking myself the following three "What Ifs": What if Collison and Wade switched
    places? What if Chris Bosh wasn't out indefinitely? What if the Heat were up 2-0 instead of
    split in the series? We'll never know.

    Michael Wallace: Fiction. I thought a Flagrant 1 was adequate punishment to fit the
    crime. As it turned out, that extra possession Indiana got as a result of Wade's message-
    sending cheap shot ended up costing the Heat in a 3-point loss. I will say this: Had Wade
    or LeBron been hit from behind like that, my guess is the call would have been more harsh
    under the same circumstances.

    Brian Windhorst: Fiction. It was a cheap shot hit and was properly called a flagrant
    foul. It would've been interesting had it been called a flagrant-2 foul and they had to
    review it and decide whether Wade should've stayed in the game. Joey Crawford was all
    over the play, made the call and the league stood by him. It was proper.


    2. Fact or Fiction: Heat need Haslem to step up more than Miller

    Haberstroh: Fact. Haslem has played worse than just about anybody left in the
    playoffs and the Heat don't have anyone who can score underneath. If they can just get
    Haslem to provide 10 points with some mid-range jumpers and put-backs, it would open
    up so much in LeBron James and Wade's games, especially in the pick-and-roll.

    Wallace: Fact. Only because Shane Battier, Mario Chalmers or James Jones are
    capable of giving Miami the shooting Mike Miller is supposed to provide. With Chris Bosh
    out, Miami doesn't have any other bigs who as effective as Haslem could be in the pick-
    and-roll game with Wade and LeBron. Who else is going to grab 10 rebounds if needed?
    Haslem must first give Erik Spoelstra a reason to play him more than the 12 minutes he
    got in Game 2.

    Windhorst: Fact. Well, the Heat need somebody to step up, anyone. But Haslem
    would be a bigger boost because if he was able to get his jumper going he would be a
    threat in the pick-and-roll game. With Bosh gone, the Heat's favorite play has been
    gutted because the Pacers do not respect whoever is in the play unless it is Wade and
    LeBron.


    3. Fact or Fiction: You expect the foul disparity to even out in Game 2.

    Haberstroh: Fact. I would say that a breakout game of the Heat's supporting
    cast is just around the corner, but I look at Haslem and Miller limping up and down
    the floor and I can't help but wonder if there's something more that's plaguing this
    team. The Pacers are healthy, hungry and home for the next two games. This is a
    toss-up, to me.

    Wallace: Fiction. I'd go 55/45 still in favor of the Heat. Miami still has the
    league MVP in James and a top-5 player in Wade on the roster. Two more baskets
    from anyone else on the roster the other night would've put the Heat ahead 2-0
    right now. You could also look at it another way and say that if the refs didn't hold
    back Indy in Game 1, the Pacers could also be up 2-0. So in essence, that does
    mean this thing is essentially anyone's series to win.

    Windhorst: Fiction. The Heat have the two-best players and overall more
    experience. They still have the edge but it is much closer, there's a much smaller
    margin for error with Bosh out.




    Zach Harper: Nice win, Indiana. Please get in the paint.

    Iíd like to congratulate the Indiana Pacers on stealing a road playoff game against one
    of the best home teams in the NBA. It wasnít pretty by any means and it seemed like
    both teams were giving the game away throughout the final couple minutes. However,
    a win is a win in the playoffs and even the poor play by Indiana down the stretch
    doesnít change the fact that the series is now evened up at one game apiece.

    Thatís pretty huge for the Pacers to be heading back to Indiana after stealing home
    court advantage.

    Hereís the thing though: The Pacers are in some serious trouble.

    The Heat looked completely disjointed on offense while trying to adjust to life without
    Chris Bosh. Sure they scored 53 points in the second half of Game 1, but last night
    was a fantastic combination of really good, aggressive defense by the Pacers and
    utter confusion and a stalemate execution by Miami.

    I think the Pacers defense will be fine against the Miami Heat. Paul George seems to
    have figured out that his length can make up for any physical advantage Dwyane
    Wade might have over him. Until Dwyane adjusts and figures out that he needs to do
    his damage away from the ball and heading toward the basket coming off of screens,
    George should be able to bother him and hope Wade isnít just making really hard
    jumpers.

    Grangerís effort on LeBron in the second half was great because he seemed to know
    exactly how to get him to dribble toward the help and take away his driving lanes.
    Weíve seen a lot in LeBronís career recently that if he doesnít have any daylight to
    dribble into the paint, he seems to get confused on what he should do. He gets
    complacent with his offensive attack and just relies on bad pull-up jumpers. In the
    first half of Game 2, he got into the paint and used that floater heís been perfecting.
    When the Pacers took away the paint in the second half, he had to rely on a lot of
    effort plays (offensive rebounds, quick post-ups for position) to get points inside.

    The thing I worry about with the Pacers is their offense. Itís extremely basic and itís
    going away from everything theyíre good at.

    Want to know why Danny Granger has been so bad in the first two games? Aside
    from LeBron James suffocating him like an insecure and overbearing boyfriend
    that is dating out of his league, the Pacers fail to recognize whenever Granger
    might actually have an advantage.

    On this play in particular, the Pacers have a chance to post Granger on the right
    block with Mike Miller guarding him. If George makes the pass right away, Turiaf
    probably dives toward the post to help and it gives Hibbert and his unending
    length a clear area right at the basket. It looks like LeBron is anticipating a lob
    pass here but a quick fake reversal pass to David West at his sweet spot
    probably makes LeBron retreat. Instead George just seems completely lost with
    the basketball.

    When Paul George misses the entry pass right away, it allows Ronny Turiaf to
    help over from Hibbert and that takes away the pass altogether. The problem I
    have with this play is it seems like it was designed as misdirection on the post-
    up to run Granger off of a screen to get him a jumper from 20 feet.

    When Granger comes off the screen, LeBron is there in help defense to knock
    the pass away (he jumps the screen perfectly) and get the Heat a transition
    score the other way.

    Itís really impossible to see why George Hill thought it was a good idea to make
    this pass. LeBron is right there waiting to switch on the screen.

    This steal leads to many people being shocked that Norris Cole can dunk a
    basketball and me wanting to pull my hair out. They had a post up with Granger
    on a guy who canít check him and instead of making the easy post-entry pass
    or adjusting their play...CONTINUE READING AT HOOPSPEAK




    Pacers
    Mike Wells @MikeWellsNBA
    Jared Wade @8pts9secs
    Tim Donahue @TimDonahue8p9s
    Tom Lewis @indycornrows
    Ian Levy @HickoryHigh


    Heat
    Brian Windhorst @windhorstESPN
    Tom Haberstroh @tomhaberstroh
    Peninsula is Mightier @DavidDwork
    This is the darkest timeline.

  • #2
    Re: 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

    Gold Swagger. Let's do this.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

      We will win this one

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

        The Heat role player I'm a little worried about is James Jones. The others I don't see kicking their struggles on the road against a good Indy crowd.

        Harper is totally on point. We need to pound at the Heat over and over. Take Lebron out of the game with physicality. If we are this year's Mavs, Wade will continue to shoot poorly and be unreliable. Keep the good help defense rolling, not turn the ball over too much (Looking at you, George Hill.), take the rebounding advantage again, and score inside, we've got a great shot at taking the series lead.
        You Got The Tony!!!!!!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

          "George's athleticism is bananas!" - Marc J. Spears

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

            man I'm so pissed I have school tonight, finals are next week, I need to get out, I need to watch the Pacers.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

              1. Fact or Fiction: Dwyane Wade should have been suspended.

              Tom Haberstroh: Fiction. Although, I've gone both ways on this one. Darren Collison
              decelerated slightly for the pass, so I'm not sure it was all Wade's fault for the sheer
              velocity of impact. But I can't shake the feeling that this wasn't a fully objective ruling. I
              keep asking myself the following three "What Ifs": What if Collison and Wade switched
              places? What if Chris Bosh wasn't out indefinitely? What if the Heat were up 2-0 instead of
              split in the series? We'll never know.

              Michael Wallace: Fiction. I thought a Flagrant 1 was adequate punishment to fit the
              crime. As it turned out, that extra possession Indiana got as a result of Wade's message-
              sending cheap shot ended up costing the Heat in a 3-point loss. I will say this: Had Wade
              or LeBron been hit from behind like that, my guess is the call would have been more harsh
              under the same circumstances.

              Brian Windhorst: Fiction. It was a cheap shot hit and was properly called a flagrant
              foul. It would've been interesting had it been called a flagrant-2 foul and they had to
              review it and decide whether Wade should've stayed in the game. Joey Crawford was all
              over the play, made the call and the league stood by him. It was proper.
              All I can say is, BULL. ****.
              "What you do is so loud, I can't hear what you say" -Andrew Luck
              "If you turn the other cheek, I'm gonna hit you in the other cheek, too" -Charles Barkley
              "Ego is edging greatness out" -Rick Pitino
              Junior at the University of Louisville
              Greenfield-Central High School Alum '14
              Follow me on Twitter @steagles1
              1000th post - 4/16/12 2000th post - 6/24/12 3000th post - 3/8/13

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

                Won't be around the game thread. TV is in another room and I want to devote myself to the game.

                Will check in at half time and later tonight.

                All I can say is.



                I love this team!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

                  Originally posted by Steagles View Post
                  All I can say is, BULL. ****.
                  Your new avatar fills me with pure, unadulterated joy.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

                    Ya'll ready for this? Hope to see BLF bouncing like the old MSA days!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

                      Soo... they're starting Dexter Pittman.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

                        Alright, enough with the top 10 Lebron weiner gagging, let's get on to the game

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

                          Does anyone know why the audio pass will not work on NBA.com??? HELP!!
                          Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

                            Turning off PD, it makes the games even more stressful for me, I'll see you all at halftime!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 5/17/2012 NBA Playoffs, Second Round - Game Thread #3: Pacers Vs. Heat

                              Lets go !!!!
                              Counting down the days untill DJ Augustin's contract expires.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X