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

4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 34
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 34 template Next
  • #1

    4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors


    SLOW, STEADY MARCH
    TOWARD ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
    PLAYOFF EDITION


    -VS-


    Game Time Start: 3:00 PM ET
    Where: The Fieldhouse, Indianapolis, IN
    Officials: Danny Crawford, Ron Garretson, Bill Spooner (Nick Buchert)

    Media Notes: Indiana Notes, Toronto Notes
    Television: TNT / SportsNet One
    Radio: WFNI 1070 AM, 107.5 FM / CJCL 590, 1050 AM
    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
    46-39
    Home: 26-16
    2
    58-27
    Away: 25-17
    Apr 26
    Apr 29
    May 01
    May 04
    T B D
    If Needed
    If Needed
    T B D

    MAHINMI
    ALLEN
    GEORGE
    ELLIS
    HILL
    VALANCIUNAS
    SCOLA
    CARROLL
    DEROZAN
    LOWRY


    PACERS
    None reported


    RAPTORS
    None reported



    Toronto claws into Indiana in its own home, takes 2-1 series lead
    Kelly Dwyer

    It’s as if the Raptors brought the worried weather with them. After squandering home court
    advantage in a tight Game 1 loss, Toronto swiped it right back in a dominant Game 3 performance
    on Thursday night, downing the Indiana Pacers 101-85 to take a 2-1 series lead.

    The Pacers aped Toronto’s typical Game 1 showing in its first game back home in 9 days, playing
    tight and uninspired basketball from the get-go. Toronto pounced on the Pacers from the start,
    establishing DeMar DeRozan’s wiry midrange game early on, giving the All-Star space as he
    bounded his way toward 12 first quarter points. DeRozan hit for 4-6 from the free throw line in
    the first quarter, matching in 12 minutes of action what he contributed from the stripe in 67
    previous first round minutes against these Pacers.

    DeRozan would go on to hit three more from the line in the win, finishing with 21 points. His
    backcourt mate Kyle Lowry also hit for the same number, tying for a team-high, continually
    probing a Pacer defense that hardly reminded of the No. 3 ranked stoppers that the home crowd
    watched during hte regular season.

    “They outplayed us in most areas,” Indiana coach Frank Vogel admitted following the loss. His
    Pacers lost the rebounding battle (45-38), the team shot just 38 percent while missing 16 of 22
    three-pointers, and his team could hardly be bothered to match Toronto’s intensity when it came
    to corralling loose balls and potential turnovers. Toronto absolutely thrived in the unfamiliar
    setting.

    Swingman DeMarre Carroll, starting just his second game since Jan. 3 (and playing over 30
    minutes for the first time since Dec. 3), was a massive boon. Raptors coach Dwane Casey
    credited his ability to provide spacing to the Toronto offense following the win, but it was his
    defense on All-Star Paul George that made the biggest difference. George nailed all 12 of his
    free throw attempts and finished with a game-high 25 points, but he missed 13 of 19 shots in
    the loss while turning the ball over four times.

    George added 10 rebounds and six assists, but he had little help from his fellow starters. The
    Pacer backcourt of George Hill and Monta Ellis combined to miss 10 of 16 shots, while center
    Ian Mahinmi was clearly hamstrung by a lower back strain. Coach Vogel decided to start rookie
    forward Myles Turner ahead of the ineffective Lavoy Allen coming out of halftime, and he
    responded with seven points, four rebounds and two blocks in that frame, but Indiana could
    only cut Toronto’s 17-point lead to 12 during Turner’s turn.

    Raps coach Dwane Casey was clearly pleased with his team’s effort following the win:

    “I liked our activity, intensity, our tone, our approach, our effort, and our attention to detail,”
    forgetting to list his team’s ability to line up properly for free throw attempts and the cut of his
    team’s jib during timeouts. Toronto forced 10 Indiana turnovers in the first half alone, and
    though Casey fretted...CONTINUE READING AT BALL DON'T LIE

    Why would anyone want to be an NBA head coach?
    Paul Flannery and Tom Ziller

    We dive into the muted (so far) NBA coaching carousel and wonder what's so attractive about being
    an NBA head coach anyway.

    Two NBA head coach openings have been filled as the Nets landed a hot assistant and the Suns
    looked within. But there's a lot more action to come. In this week's Flanns and Zillz, we discuss the
    job market and its associated issues, plus we have a rant about Twitter, which is different than a
    Twitter rant. Enjoy.

    FLANNERY: Is it just me or does it seem like coaching season has been a little muted this year?
    I was totally prepared for the Lakers and Knicks to engage in an amusing battle royal over Luke
    Walton. Instead they may keep Kurt Rambis and Byron Scott? OK.

    And what's with the search firm in Minnesota? Is Glen Taylor that disconnected that he needs to
    pay someone to tell him to go after Tom Thibodeau?

    All we have so far was Brooklyn making a sneaky smart hire in Kenny Atkinson. It really is a
    brand new world.

    ZILLER: I wonder how much is on hold until the Warriors have a lay-off between series so
    Walton and the Spurs assistants can do proper interviews. That didn't stop Atkinson, of course!
    The Houston job is still unavailable, and that might be an attractive one for someone like
    Thibodeau, so I could see that delaying things too. But you're right: with two high-profile teams
    like the Knicks and Lakers potentially involved in searches, it's weird it's been so quiet. I can't
    believe Rambis and Scott are the best options.

    Does Scott Brooks potentially landing in D.C. move the needle for you? Wizards and Thunder
    fans are going to have a super anxious few months waiting for July if that happens.

    FLANNERY: Man, I still don't know what to make of Scott Brooks. It's not like I was super
    impressed by what he did in OKC, but I also think we gloss over the wins too much and think
    anyone can do it. Maybe anyone can do it if they have Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook,
    but would you rather have Brooks or Billy Donovan right now as an OKC fan?

    I keep coming back to Monty Williams. People railed on him so much, but hey, turns out that
    maybe he was a pretty good coach for that New Orleans team. He certainly got a lot out of
    that roster. So I think coaches need more than one opportunity before we can evaluate them
    fully, especially if they fall into a situation that's really good or really bad.

    ZILLER: Absolutely true, and it goes both ways. Byron Scott looked pretty good in New
    Jersey and New Orleans, and abjectly awful in Cleveland and Los Angeles. How much of that
    is talent downgrades exposing faults, and how much is league evolution? The latter question
    is interesting to consider in light of Jeff Van Gundy's apparent interest in working again.
    Consider how much the league's changed since he last coached. It's been nearly a decade!

    Back to Brooks vs. Donovan: it's interesting that the same pluses and minuses arrive. The
    team is great overall, but struggles to execute consistently late. Maybe it's the roster?
    Maybe Donovan is better than Brooks, but the steep learning curve is tamping down his
    potential excellence? We should note that Brooks only had one season of Westbrook
    playing at a true MVP level, and Durant missed the whole thing.

    Let's lighten the mood and talk about race. The NBA's need for a Rooney Rule has been
    mentioned. The league has historically been more diverse in power positions than other
    major American sports, but it does seem like the NBA is getting worse on this account.
    Former NBA-level players are getting hired less frequently, and historically few non-player
    coaches of color get hired. Does the NBA need to establish rules to ensure coaches of color
    are receiving a fair hearing, or should the league remain hands off?

    FLANNERY: I think it's time to establish some ground rules for hiring coaches, and
    specifically to hiring GMs. Just because the NBA has a better track record on race doesn't
    mean that it's immune to the larger sports trends, or even its own recent track record.
    There is this notion that the analytic revolution has passed black candidates by, and
    that's the most insidious form of racism. It's not the overt stuff. It's the idea that black
    candidates are less qualified because they don't have a hedge-fund internship on their
    CV. That's a bunch of ********, but there's that a line about Basketball PhD's coming back
    to mind again.

    Look, I'm sure the Sixers went through an exhaustive search to hire the senior advisor's
    son but come on, who are they fooling? Let's open this up a little and let the sun shine
    in. It will do everyone a world of good.

    ZILLER: Amen. I know Kenny Atkinson is very highly recommended, and we don't
    know who the Nets talked to beyond him, but the trend is worrisome. Especially when
    former coaches with good records (Nate McMillan) or former players who have played
    long dues in coaching (Patrick Ewing) don't even get many interviews, let alone jobs. And
    someone really needs to explain to me how Troy Weaver, the man who recruited Melo to
    Syracuse and convinced Sam Presti to pick Russell Westbrook 4th, doesn't have a GM job.

    Speaking of our frustrations with the topic of coaching, are you as sick as I am of
    Constant Coaching Critique Twitter? It's impossible to be on Twitter during a Raptors
    game at this point because of the rampant Dwane Casey slander. I say we appoint Bob
    Voulgaris as NBA Coach Critic in Chief, give him free rein and fine every other NBA
    Twitter personality who complains about a lineup, a rotation decision, a play call or a
    tactic more than three times a game. I'll allow an exception for complaining about
    intentional fouling, because oh my Basketball Gods I hate that.

    FLANNERY: Yeah, I'd say Coach Twitter has become more pronounced this season
    and it's really exploded in the postseason. You mentioned Bob and he's a really interesting
    follow. He's got a lot to say and I like to hear to him say it, but it feels like there's a
    bandwagon effect happening where people are falling over themselves to tell us how
    smart they are and how dumb the coach is. It gets old. That's not excusing questionable
    decisions or weird rotations, but I dunno, maybe there's a reason for it.

    Hey, and good for Earl Watson, who got the full-time job in Phoenix while we were having
    this conversation. I'm curious to see what the Suns are going to do this offseason, because
    I don't think they're that far away from getting back to a competitive level again.

    Interesting that...CONTINUE READING AT SBNATION


    Pacers
    Candace Buckner @CandaceDBuckner
    Jared Wade @8pts9secs
    Tim Donahue @TimDonahue8p9s
    Tom Lewis @indycornrows
    Ian Levy @HickoryHigh
    Whitney @its_whitney

    Raptors
    Doug Smith @SmithRaps
    Holly MacKenzie @stackmack
    Sam Holako @RapsFan
    Adam Francis @raptorshq
    Joseph Casciaro @JosephCasciaro
    Blake Murphy @BlakeMurphyODC
    This is the darkest timeline.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: 4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

    Do we know who is today's ref. crew?


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

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: 4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

      Originally posted by Peck View Post
      Do we know who is today's ref. crew?
      Officials: Danny Crawford, Ron Garretson, Bill Spooner (Nick Buchert)
      This is the darkest timeline.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: 4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

        Can we switch up the starting 5 please? It isn't working.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: 4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

          Originally posted by avoidingtheclowns View Post
          Officials: Danny Crawford, Ron Garretson, Bill Spooner (Nick Buchert)
          Well at least that isn't a horrible crew. Spooner can be a pill at times but generally this isn't a bad unit.

          Edit: Well crap, I looked right past it three times. Sorry ATC.


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

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: 4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

            Listen, the refs aren't going to decide this game. We come out looking anything like the last 2 games and we're finished. PG needs help, and he'd better get some if we want to advance. I'm trying hard to believe.
            Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: 4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

              Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
              Can we switch up the starting 5 please? It isn't working.

              Turner starting for Allen

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: 4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                I'm here early today and it looks bad guys. There are a ton of raptors fans already in attendance m. It won't be like Chicago is here but it's not good either.


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

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: 4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                  Obviously it's our season defining game. IF we can get ANYONE (preferably several) players not named Paul George or Myles Turner going and even this thing up, I have a good feeling about winning a best of 3 with the Raptors. Home court or not.

                  They have confidence right now, as they should. But I absolutely believe if we reinsert that sliver of doubt and stir up their playoff nerves, we can win one of two in Toronto.

                  But if Paul and Myles are the only ones to show up, then it's completely moot.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: 4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                    Glad to see Vogel is starting Turner. It's a move that should've been done two games ago.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: 4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                      Now it gets worse. They are organizing a cheering section behind the raptors bench. The Toronto super fan is going around the floor level and leasing raptors fans in chants


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

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: 4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                        This is a must win game. I expect us to come out with much more urgency, toughness, and energy. There shouldn't be a single loose ball that someone isn't jumping on, and we can't just get pushed around like in Game 3.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: 4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                          Ok I take it back, if there isn't a quick turnaround in fans coming in this might be as bad as Chicago


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

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: 4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                            Breaking out the old Reggie Swingman from high school for this one. Gotta do it.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: 4/23/2016 NBA Playoffs, First Round - Game Thread #4: Pacers Vs. Raptors

                              Originally posted by Peck View Post
                              Now it gets worse. They are organizing a cheering section behind the raptors bench. The Toronto super fan is going around the floor level and leasing raptors fans in chants
                              Ugh... Well, the guy (and our fans) need to take it personally and shut'em up.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 34 template Next
                              Working...
                              X