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

The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

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

  • The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

    Ok, I normally find Simmons' column somewhat entertaining, although some of his jokes are more stale than a 6 month old bag of Doritos, and the guy usually does a good job of analyzing the NBA, at least by ESPN standards.

    BUT, his small blurb about the Celts/Pacers series really has me fired up, even though most of it is complimentary towards the P's. I hope the rest of Boston and especially the Celtics are taking us this lightly.

    Celts over the Pacers in 5? :finger: I'm sorry Bill, but if you had seen any basketball this year, you would surely know Rick Carlisle by himself is worth 2 victories versus Doc Rivers. And you've seriously underestimated the impact DD has brought to this squad, not to mention AJ. And something tells me Reggie isn't going to go out laying down to the freaking Celtics in 5 games

    I admit, I was not overly fired up going into this series . . . but now I'm ready to KICK SOME CELTIC BUTT!











    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...s/050422&num=0


    By Bill Simmons
    Page 2


    Remember when I broke the 2002 playoffs down in "Survivor" fashion, voting off 15 teams until one remained? I'm dusting off that idea in honor of Stephenie's virtuoso performance this season, which is bringing back memories of Pedro in 1999, MJ in 1992 and everything else. Just when you thought she couldn't top herself, she saved her own butt by passively-aggressively convincing another member to quit during Tribal Council. We need to send her to Afghanistan -- I think she could find bin Laden in three weeks.



    In the great Stephenie's honor, let's vote off the playoff teams in descending order from No. 16 to No. 1:



    ROUND ONE
    16. Memphis (voted off by Phoenix, 4-0)
    We learned everything we needed to know about the Grizz when they needed one win for a playoff spot and lost to Dallas, Houston, Denver and San Antonio by a combined 60 points. The guy who should be kicking himself is Jerry West, who should have topped any possible offer for Vince Carter three months ago. Everyone knew Vince was dogging it and only needed a change of scenery, and everyone knew the Grizz needed a go-to guy desperately. So why wouldn't they roll the dice with Vince?


    (I know I keep asking this every year, but what is Jerry West waiting for, exactly? Does he have some secret alliance with Kobe that we don't know about? Like, "If you push Shaq out of Los Angeles and destroy the Lakers beyond repair, I'll trade for you during the summer of 2005 and we'll win some titles in Memphis together?" That's the only way the last three years make sense.)



    15. Houston (voted off by Dallas, 4-1)
    Ever since Juwan Howard went down -- and the beginning of that sentence alone is enough to raise a red flag -- the Rockets have been playing without any power forwards who could even be considered "crappy." So here's my question: Who the hell is guarding Dirk Nowitzki in this series? Clarence Weatherspoon? Ryan Bowen? Vin Baker? Dikembe Mutombo? Scott Padgett? Yao? Roger Clemens? There's a good chance that Dirk could break MJ's scoring record for a five-game series, especially since we just named a German pope who will be rooting for him. And what happens when the Mavs play Nowitzki and the Completely & Totally Rejuvenated Keith Van Horn at the same time? Who does Yao plan on guarding?



    (Note: I actually think the Mavs are going to KILL the Rockets, save for the one game when T-Mac drops in the neighborhood of 55 to 58 points on them.)



    14. Philly (voted off by Detroit, 4-1)
    Here's the funny thing: If C-Webb wasn't playing, I would have picked this series to go seven because of the Iverson Factor. Sadly, he's playing ... and there isn't a more lopsided matchup on the planet than "C-Webb on one leg versus the Wallace Brothers." Philly reader Angela McGurk summed it up best:



    "While I was watching the Sixers game last Thursday night against Miami, I noticed that Chris Webber was in the game with five fouls for an awfully long time. I turned to my husband and said, 'It's almost like "Survivor" or the "Real World/Road Rules Inferno," where other teams are trying to keep him in the game because he's such a detriment to the Sixers. He's our version of Karamo.' "



    A perfect comparison. If this was the "Inferno," the Pistons would be throwing missions to make sure C-Webb stuck around. That's how much he kills the Sixers. And yes, I supported the trade at the time. It's just that I forgot two things. First, if your coach's defense revolves around aggressive rotations and big men running out at open shooters, it's probably not a good idea to acquire a big man playing on one leg. And second, there couldn't be a worse matchup than C-Webb (the most sensitive big-money athlete in any of the four sports) and Philly fans (who can sniff this stuff out and would much rather break someone in pieces emotionally than support them). This is going to end badly. I mean, really, REALLY badly.



    13. Indiana (voted off by Boston, 4-1)
    As the old saying goes, "When Anthony Johnson is your point guard, that means Anthony Johnson is your point guard." Did Indiana have an inspiring season? Absolutely. Was the Reggie Miller Resurgence entertaining for everyone involved? No question about it. Is there anything more delighful than seeing Ron Artest dressed in a three-piece suit, cheering his teammates on and being injected with 30 CCs of Thorazine by the team doctor's every 30 minutes? You betcha.


    But they are not beating a team like the Celtics when A.) Johnson and Dale Davis play crunch-time for them, B.) Jermaine O'Neal isn't totally healthy, and C.) they're still running plays in the final minute for Reggie Miller, who gave them a season-saving four-week stretch after the All-Star Break before wearing down in April (.397 shooting). Not only do they defer to Reggie too much when it matters, he couldn't guard me at this point (much less Ricky Davis or Paul Pierce). So it ends here for Reggie. Great career.




    12. Sacramento (voted off by Seattle, 4-2)
    I never understood the media race to bury the Sonics this season -- since Rashard Lewis was their most indispensable player (not Ray Allen), why was anyone surprised when they went into the tank without him this month? Even their fans are confused and wary. When I asked ESPN.com senior editor (and diehard Seattle fan) Kevin Jackson for his pick, KJ first said, "We're gonna lose," then amended that to, "actually, Peja's hurt, we might win," to "yeah, screw it, we have a good chance to win, and coming from a Seattle fan, that's as positive a response as you will ever get." Of course, this is the same guy who corrected me two days ago when I incorrectly thought Stanford's name from "Sex and the City" was "Sanford" in my "Fever Pitch" column. So maybe he was the wrong person to ask.



    (Here's why the Sonics have reached "don't gamble on us from game to game under any circumstances" status: On any given night, they can shoot the lights out. For instance, when Minnesota had to win out for that eighth seed last weekend, the Sonics simply destroyed them: Lewis and Allen shot a combined 25-for-43 and Sprewell was making plans to take his yacht down to the Caymans midway through the third quarter. Beware of them at all times.)



    11. Chicago (voted off by Washington, 4-2)
    The Bulls were lurking as a mild sleeper before the Deng-Curry injuries ... now they have a nine-man rotation that includes Chris Duhon, Jannero Pargo, the Artist Formerly Known as Antonio Davis, Othella Harrington, Eric Piatkowski and the first-ever Amish-Brazilian basketball player (Andres Nocioni). There's even a white guy named "Reiner" who plays 5 to 10 minutes a night for them -- I think they picked him up at a frat party. Too bad. It would have been fun to watch them advance a couple of series, leading to the inevitable Jim Gray interview with a morbidly depressed Jerry Krause trying to take credit for everything that was happening.



    (On the bright side, Ben Gordon has two Andrew Toney throwback games in him this series. Those will be fun.)



    10. New Jersey (voted off by Miami, 4-3)
    You could make a solid case that Vince Carter is the most unstoppable player in the league right now, to the point that my buddy Gus asked the other day, "Has anyone ever won the Comeback Player of the Year award for their performance in the same season?" I say we give him that award, along with the "Most Sobering Reminder That We're Idiots for Caring About Professional Sports" Award. But seriously, I'm glad he's trying again. In fact, he hasn't announced it yet, but Marc Stein is reporting that Vince has decided to give his best effort through the 2005-06 season as well. So that's good news.



    Here's the thing: Along with T-Mac, Iverson, Stoudemire and Nowitzki, Vince is one of five players who could score 200-plus points in a seven-game series. Throw in Jason Kidd (who only averaged a 19-10-9 for the month of April) and Richard Jefferson (even at 75 percent, a dramatic upgrade over Rodney Buford and Travis Best at the 2-spot) and I'm not exactly sure why the Nets are 7-1 underdogs in this series. Would you want to play these guys? Kidd and Vince are like two guys on a pickup court who were waiting for their three other buddies, then said, "Screw it, they're not showing up, let's grab those three dorks over there and see if they'll run with us," and proceeded to keep winners for the next two hours.



    (This is going seven. I'm feeling it.)



    9. Denver (voted off by San Antonio, 4-3)
    A blueprint for beating San Antonio:



    A. You need to get physical with them ... and Denver is the most physical team in the league. Guys like Nene and K-Mart will absolutely knock Mr. Eva Longoria (aka Tony Parker) down the first time he comes cruising down the lane (like the Lakers did last year). Also, Duncan has always been one of the classiest players around -- what happens to him when K-Mart is throwing elbows around, or Nene starts swearing at him in Brazilian? You need to do this stuff against the Spurs; I'm not sure they like rolling up their sleeves and getting dirty, especially with Malik Rose gone. Who's sticking up for TD when Nene clotheslines him into the basket support?



    B. You need to keep throwing big guys at Duncan ... and the Nuggets have three good ones (K-Mart, Nene and the wildly underrated Marcus Camby). I see him making the Sad Duncan Face a lot, the one where he stands next to Popovich and looks like a son who just let down his dad in Little League.



    C. You need a small forward who can post up the smaller Spurs guys (Ginobili, Bowen, etc.) and take advantage of them ... and the Nuggets probably have the closest thing to a young Bernard King right now in Carmelo Anthony. On paper, anyway.



    D. You need a great coach. Not a good coach -- a GREAT coach. And George Karl is one of the best. He'll know exactly what to do here -- push the pace, knock bodies to the ground, bang the bejeezus out of Duncan (who's been banged up all season).



    So why aren't I picking the Nuggets? I don't trust Melo yet -- the right team can get him into another one of those Athens-type funks, and I don't like the way he reacts when his shot isn't falling. If you're The Guy for a good team, you need to figure out ways to help them when you're not scoring. When Melo isn't scoring, he also stops rebounding and playing defense. Not a good quality. Still, any time you get two of the best five teams playing each other in round one, that's pretty cool.



    ROUND TWO
    8. Washington (voted off by Miami, 4-1)
    Enjoyable season from the Wiz. Sadly, here's where Shaq rounds into "I'm ready to destroy any and all comers" playoff shape. Shaq, how would you like your filet of Kwame Brown served? Medium-rare? Would you like a side of Etan Thomas with that? And for dessert, we have a Brendan Haywood souffle, but it takes 45 minutes to cook ... would you like to go ahead and order that right now?


    7. Seattle (voted off by San Antonio, 4-2)
    Basically, the Sonics would have to play four lights-out games to have a chance. Probably not happening. This could be one of those series where Seattle wins game one, then takes a 12-point lead at halftime of Game 2 before a ticked-off Duncan lays the smack down from that point on. In fact, I think I'll predict that.



    6. Boston (voted off by Detroit, 4-2)
    It's the Little Things that catch up with you in a series like this. You know, like the fact that you still can't defend a high screen against a good team even after 82 games. That you can't play the one genuine low-post threat on your team (rookie Al Jefferson) for extended minutes because we're six months into the season and he still can't avoid getting ticky-tack fouls or losing his guy on defense. That you're so predictable at crunch-time (slow everything down, feed the ball to Pierce), even Isiah Thomas knows what you're doing. That you forget to box out on big defensive possessions or screw up a two-for-one sequence in the last 40 seconds and only end up getting one shot. That kind of stuff.



    And even though they match up with Detroit better than any team in the East, and even though Pierce has shown signs of becoming the 2002 Pierce over these last two months ... well, you can't beat a team like the Pistons without doing the Little Things. Too bad. I could see the C's leading every one of these games in the fourth quarter and still managing to lose four of them.



    (And yes, Doc Rivers has officially entered the "please prove to me that you can coach" phase of his career in Boston.)



    5. Dallas (voted off by Phoenix, 4-3)
    I was going to pick Phoenix in six before remembering that every round of the NBA playoffs needs to have one seven-game series. It's in the rulebook, actually -- per orders of Der Kommissar. Some lingering questions:



    A. Has there ever been a one-on-one matchup quite like "Dirk Nowitzki vs. Amare Stoudemire"? Neither guy has any chance of stopping the other, nor will they care. It's going to be like watching the best Rucker Park showdown ever.



    B. If Steve Nash was really the 2005 MVP, then why did his old team win six more games this year than they did last year? Seems a little curious, no? At the same time, if Nash ends up being the difference in this series -- which seems like a possibility, given the Mavs' point guards -- wouldn't that be the most ironic twist of the 2004-05 NBA season that didn't involve Kobe pushing Shaq out of Los Angeles and inadvertently destroying the Lakers in the process?



    C. When Keith Van Horn feels like catching a movie on the road, who does he call to join him, Shawn Bradley or Shawn Bradley?



    D. If Darko Milicic, Pavel Podkolzine, Nikoloz Tskitishvili and Carlos Delfino are all out of the NBA within three years, should they be forced to move into Chad Ford's house?



    E. When the Mavs lose Game 7 in heartbreaking fashion, will Mark Cuban leave the team alone and give them another year to gell, or will he change 75 percent of the roster like he always does? And is it too early to invite him into my West Coast roto league next season?



    SEMIFINALS
    4. Miami (voted off by Detroit, 4-2)
    I don't see any difference between the 2005 Heat and the 2004 Lakers, with three exceptions: A.) Shaq is a little more motivated; B.) everyone on the team likes each other; and C.) none of the Miami stars are flying back and forth to Colorado to defend themselves in a hearing for a potential rape trial. So why would they be more prone to beat the Pistons than the 2004 Lakers? Sure, this Pistons team doesn't have the same bench, and Rip Hamilton has been hit in the face so many times at this point, he's turning into Chuck Wepner. But other than Shaq, Wade, Damon Jones and Udonis Haslem, is there anyone on this Miami team who you would even call "mediocre"? Eddie Jones, Shandon Anderson, Keyon Dooling, Mike Doleac, Rasual Butler ... these guys wouldn't play for half the teams in the playoffs.


    In fact, I think they have the worst starter in the playoffs (Jones) and the two worst bench players (Dooling and Anderson). That's unprecedented. Why do you think they kept bringing in washed-up veterans like Mourning, Laettner and Steve Smith? Watching them piece that bench together was like watching the scene in "Project Greenlight" where the producers tell John Gulager, "Yeah, Mark Wahlberg is out as Hero ... it looks like we're going with Eric Dane." In other words, we're screwed.


    So here's where you say, "Well, Shaq and Wade can beat anyone by themselves, it will be just like Shaq and Kobe." Actually, that's not true. First, there's a difference between 2000 Shaq and 2005 Shaq -- he's not a guaranteed 35-15 in May and June anymore. Second, those Lakers teams wouldn't have beaten the 2000 Blazers, 2002 Kings and even the 2004 Spurs without significant contributions from Horry, Shaw, Fox, Fisher, Rice and Harper; we don't know anything about Jones and Haslem on that end. And third, Stan Van Gundy is no Phil Jackson -- Wade saved his butt in close games at least ten times during the course of the season. I just don't think they have the horses. Some time in the next 10 weeks, their season is going to come down to someone other than Shaq or Wade making a play ... and I don't see that play being made.



    3. San Antonio (voted off by Phoenix, 4-3)
    Just a gut feeling. This has been one of Those Seasons for Tim Duncan, where everything has gone wrong since he shaved his head and grew that Dennis Haysbert goatee in Athens. You have to wonder if anyone can beat a healthy Suns team at home -- between Phoenix's style and their fans, you basically have to shoot 55 percent and score 125 points to beat them. They're like the NBA's version of the '99 Rams (right down to the "we may never have to win a big game on the road" factor).



    Think about it: Between Stoudemire's breakout season, the league's decision to allow moving picks, the bizarre "Steve Nash for MVP" groundswell, Joe Johnson's contract run, Q and Brandy, the watershed trade of Jimmy Jackson for Casey Jacobsen's wife, Paul Shirley's historic blog and everything else, it just feels like this has been Phoenix's year from start to finish. Barring an injury, I don't see them getting bounced before the Finals.



    2. Detroit (voted off by Phoenix, 4-3)
    It would be a storybook Finals -- a fan-friendly style of basketball symbolically vanquishing the style of basketball that was threatening to destroy the league. I don't blame the Pistons for playing that way last season; heck, I even enjoyed it. But we were headed toward the same problem that killed hockey, where the defense was becoming too good for the offense. Now? The offense is becoming too good for the defense, thanks to an influx of talented players and the aforementioned (top-secret) decision to allow moving picks.



    I'm not sure that 2005 goes down as the year that saved the NBA -- after all, it's not like the league was self-combusting or something. But we're headed in a new direction, a better direction, and no champion would personify that shift better than ...



    1. The Phoenix Suns
    Your 2005 World Champs.



    (Hey, if the Red Sox can win the World Series, anything's possible.)

  • #2
    Re: The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

    He's from Boston, so you've got to expect that.

    It's obvious that he hasn't watched many Pacer games this year, or he'd know that AJ was knocking big shot after big shot stiff.

    It amazes me though how he can't get through one article without a jab at RA. Him and Kravitz would make a great couple.
    Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

      He's very good in general w/ the NBA. However, as soon as anything Boston is involved, he loses all credibility. Pretty much clouds his vision completely.

      That said... I pretty much agree with him. Despite hating him for saying it.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

        My god, that was completely ignorant. The insults to Dale and Anthony clearly show that this works for ESPN and only watches ESPN and so therefor only appreciates 3's, dunks, blocks, and Allen Iverson.
        House Name: Pacers

        House Sigil:



        House Words: "We Kneel To No King"

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

          Rick Carlisle is a GREAT regular season coach. But, at best, he's a good playoff coach.

          Yes, he's 5-3 in series wins and losses. But in the 3 lost series, he's had the homecourt advantage in every one. And his teams' record is 3-12.

          In fact, this series will be Carlisle's first in his coaching career where he hasn't had homecourt advantage.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

            C'mon guys, Bill is a comic/ writer that loves the Celtics and loves the NBA. He's not a 'professional basketball writer'. His columns are about entertainment and shouldn't be confused with a serious basketball prediction column, even though he probably watches more NBA games than the top national reporters do.
            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
            And life itself, rushing over me
            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

              Originally posted by shags
              Rick Carlisle is a GREAT regular season coach. But, at best, he's a good playoff coach.

              Yes, he's 5-3 in series wins and losses. But in the 3 lost series, he's had the homecourt advantage in every one. And his teams' record is 3-12.

              In fact, this series will be Carlisle's first in his coaching career where he hasn't had homecourt advantage.
              This was a popular theory among Pistons fans when Rick was fired and came to the Pistons, along with the theory that Rick never made adjustments and failed to play younger players (aka Prince). And it has some validity.

              However, Rick has improved as a head coach every year, and that includes the playoffs. He made plenty of adjustments during the Pistons series last year, and let's face it, the Pistons were the better team . . . regardless of homecourt advantage. With O'Neal and Tins hurt, we just didn't match up.

              And when RC was with the Pistons, he coached a very young, inexperienced team, and should not be faulted for losing a series w/ homecourt.

              Carlisle is one of the best coaches in the league now, regular season AND playoffs.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

                I disagree... I think we'll get at least to Game 6. I also think he's nuts for taking Washington over Chicago.

                Other than that, though, a pretty good article. He's an excellent writer.
                This space for rent.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

                  Originally posted by Anthem
                  I disagree... I think we'll get at least to Game 6. I also think he's nuts for taking Washington over Chicago.

                  Other than that, though, a pretty good article. He's an excellent writer.
                  Just for conversation - why the love for the Bulls?

                  Wizards won the season series 2-1, dictated pace (and that was with Curry/Deng in the lineup) and has the better guns (Arenas, Jamison). I'm having a hard time seeing a scenario where the Bulls put together 4 games where they outscore the Wiz*.


                  *Unless we see the re-implementation of the Jordan rules (they are the largest market left)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

                    Originally posted by Spicoli
                    This was a popular theory among Pistons fans when Rick was fired and came to the Pistons, along with the theory that Rick never made adjustments and failed to play younger players (aka Prince). And it has some validity.

                    However, Rick has improved as a head coach every year, and that includes the playoffs. He made plenty of adjustments during the Pistons series last year, and let's face it, the Pistons were the better team . . . regardless of homecourt advantage. With O'Neal and Tins hurt, we just didn't match up.

                    And when RC was with the Pistons, he coached a very young, inexperienced team, and should not be faulted for losing a series w/ homecourt.

                    Carlisle is one of the best coaches in the league now, regular season AND playoffs.
                    I probably should rephrase. I think Carlisle's teams (with the exception of the 2003 Pistons) overachieve in the regular season, in part because of him, and aren't as good as their record. That shows in the playoffs.

                    I've definitely noticed his growth as a coach. Pacer fans should consider themselves lucky to have him. I just don't think Carlisle himself is worth 2 victories in any playoff series, that's all.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

                      Originally posted by Anthem
                      I disagree... I think we'll get at least to Game 6. I also think he's nuts for taking Washington over Chicago.

                      Other than that, though, a pretty good article. He's an excellent writer.
                      I agree with that. In fact, I think we will take one of the first two in Boston.

                      One thing I notice is that he seems to take the high-octane offense almost every series. He seems to conveniently overlook, or perhaps he never really knew, that offenses seem to bog down in the playoffs because defenses and covering the boards become more energized.

                      I'm counting on that fact in our series with Boston. We really need JO to crank it up in the paint to draw a decent number of fouls. Also, we need Dale to continue his role as blue-collar garbage collector, and pick up even more put-backs around the glass.

                      Assuming we can slow down the fast break and contest most of Boston's perimeter shots, I think that rebounding and second chance opportunities may have a significant bearing on the outcome of the series the Celtics.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

                        Originally posted by Mushmouth
                        Just for conversation - why the love for the Bulls?
                        Honestly? Mostly because I like Ben Gordon and dislike Gilbert Arenas.
                        This space for rent.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

                          The stuff about the Heat's Jones boys is pretty stupid too.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

                            Originally posted by Mushmouth
                            Just for conversation - why the love for the Bulls?

                            Wizards won the season series 2-1, dictated pace (and that was with Curry/Deng in the lineup) and has the better guns (Arenas, Jamison). I'm having a hard time seeing a scenario where the Bulls put together 4 games where they outscore the Wiz*.


                            *Unless we see the re-implementation of the Jordan rules (they are the largest market left)
                            Here's why I like the Bulls:

                            Defense. Bulls are really good defensively, almost at a Pistons-Spurs type level.

                            Both teams are inexperienced, but the Bulls have homecourt. I think the home team wins every game in that series.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: The Sports Guy's NBA Predictions

                              I live here in Chicago, and let me tell, the Bulls are for real. They are REALLY good, trust me
                              Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X