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

Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 15
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 15 template Next
  • #1

    Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

    Projected East standings (Per ESPN)


    1. Cleveland Cavaliers
    Proj. record: 57-25
    Last season: 57-25

    The Cavaliers cruised to 57 wins last season and will face an even lighter challenge in the East this season, according to our forecast. While free agent LeBron James is expected to return, J.R. Smith could still sign elsewhere this summer. Smith led the Cavaliers with 204 3-pointers last season, 46 more than anyone else on the roster.


    T-2. Boston Celtics
    Proj. record: 51-31
    Last season: 48-34

    Our panel sees the Celtics improving their record for the third straight season and breaking the 50-win barrier. Does it shortchange Boston to suggest Al Horford and No. 3 pick Jaylen Brown are worth only three wins? Perhaps. But though accomplished, Horford has been a part of only two 50-win teams in his nine-year NBA career.


    T-2. Toronto Raptors
    Proj. record: 51-31
    Last season: 56-26

    The Raptors' frontcourt lost depth this offseason, as both Bismack Biyombo (82 games played last season) and Luis Scola (76 games) signed elsewhere, to be replaced by Jared Sullinger and rookie Jakob Poeltl. If the Raptors do win their projected 51 games next season, it would still be the second-most wins in a season in franchise history.


    T-4. Detroit Pistons
    Proj. record: 45-37
    Last season: 44-38

    The Pistons are bringing back virtually the same roster they fielded last postseason, which would explain an increase of only one win by our panel. Last season, the Pistons didn't have many peaks or valleys: They never finished a month more than three games above or below .500.


    T-4. Indiana Pacers
    Proj. record: 45-37
    Last season: 45-37

    Upon first glance, the 3-team trade that brought in Jeff Teague and shipped out George Hill might appear to be a win for the Pacers. Teague is two years younger and is coming off a 2015-16 season in which he averaged more points and assists per game than Hill. But ESPN's Real Plus-Minus (RPM) paints a different picture. In 2015-16, Hill ranked 17th among point guards while Teague ranked 29th. Hill had ranked ahead of Teague in RPM each of the past three seasons.


    6. Atlanta Hawks
    Proj. record: 44-38
    Last season: 48-34

    On the surface, Dwight Howard brings more rebounds, blocked shots and a better ability to finish at the hoop. However, according to RPM, which estimates on-court team performance, former Hawk Horford ranked 27th with a 2.97 rating last season, while Howard had a -0.04 rating. Atlanta still projects as a playoff team, but our forecast thinks it'll take a hit with Dwight.


    7. Charlotte Hornets
    Proj. record: 43-39
    Last season: 48-34

    Kemba Walker took a step forward last season, averaging a career-best 20.9 points per game. His potential has the Hornets still above .500 according to our projections, but the losses of Al Jefferson, Jeremy Lin and Courtney Lee will make it hard for the Hornets to get back to such heights.


    8. Washington Wizards
    Proj. record: 41-41
    Last season: 41-41

    Having spent seven seasons with Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook, new Wizards coach Scott Brooks has experience winning with a pair of young stars. And while John Wall is a proven All-Star, there are still questions about Bradley Beal, who inked a max contract this summer. For Brooks to get the most out of them, Beal needs to be healthy. In four seasons, the now 23-year-old shooting guard has played in 65 or more games just once (179 players have appeared in more games than Beal in the past four seasons).


    T-9. New York Knicks
    Proj. record: 40-42
    Last season: 32-50

    The Knicks were the most improved team last season in terms of win-loss record, and now they've added former MVP Derrick Rose and Joakim Noah to the fold. If healthy, our projections could short the Knicks. However, our panel knows that Rose has missed 244 games the past five seasons and Noah has missed 68 games the past two seasons.


    T-9. Chicago Bulls
    Proj. record: 40-42
    Last season: 42-40

    The Bulls made some of the biggest splashes of the offseason, trading Rose while bringing in assist machine Rajon Rondo and three-time NBA champion Dwyane Wade. But is this Bulls team built for the modern NBA? The Bulls' starting perimeter -- Rondo, Wade and Jimmy Butler -- combined to make 133 3-pointers last season on 31.7 percent shooting.


    11. Milwaukee Bucks
    Proj. record: 39-43
    Last season: 33-49

    The Bucks' size continues to intrigue and leads our panel to believe the team can improve despite Matthew Dellavedova and Mirza Teletovic being the big offseason additions. But a starting lineup of five players all 6-foot-6 or taller, and the potential of more Giannis Antetokounmpo at the point, should get the Bucks closer to .500.


    12. Miami Heat
    Proj. record: 36-46
    Last season: 48-34


    The franchise leader in scoring and the guy who helped bring three titles to Miami is gone, as are Luol Deng and Joe Johnson. But our panel isn't totally crushing the Heat, because a youth movement built on Hassan Whiteside, Justise Winslow and Josh Richardson could keep Miami in the hunt.


    13. Orlando Magic
    Proj. record: 35-47
    Last season: 35-47

    Are the Magic any better or worse off for trading Victor Oladipo for Serge Ibaka? Both play great defense but struggle to get involved offensively. You could say the same for other Magic additions in Bismack Biyombo and Jeff Green.


    T-14. Philadelphia 76ers
    Proj. record: 20-62
    Last season: 10-72

    Our projections have the 76ers doubling their win total from last season thanks in part to No. 1 overall pick Ben Simmons. While it's a projection of "only" 20 wins, for Philadelphia that would be the franchise's most since 2012-13 when the Sixers won 34 games.


    T-14. Brooklyn Nets
    Proj. record: 20-62
    Last season: 21-61

    Despite mainstay Brook Lopez and Linsanity hitting Brooklyn, the Nets are projected to drop a win, according to our panel. The Nets had the second-worst defensive efficiency last season, and offensive-minded additions like Lin, Luis Scola and Greivis Vasquez aren't going to help matter

    Interesting, but speculative of course

    Initial thoughts...Miami, Orlando, Bulls, too low, Boston and Detroit too high

    http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/17...east-standings
    Sittin on top of the world!
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

    10 wins between 10 teams (4th through 13th).

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

      I agree that Detroit is too high

      Id go

      Cleveland
      Toronto
      Boston
      Indiana
      Pistons
      Hornets
      Magic
      Knicks


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
      Why you Grimpin?

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

        My projection:

        Cavs
        Pacers
        Celtics
        Raptors
        Pistons
        Hornets
        Knicks
        Bulls

        Note- I really have Boston/Indiana as interchangeable right now.
        Last edited by BlueCollarColts; 07-25-2016, 08:20 PM.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

          Cleveland
          Boston
          Toronto
          Indiana
          Detroit
          Charlotte
          Chicago
          Washington

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

            Originally posted by 90'sNBARocked View Post
            The Pistons are bringing back virtually the same roster they fielded last postseason, which would explain an increase of only one win by our panel. Last season, the Pistons didn't have many peaks or valleys: They never finished a month more than three games above or below .500.
            This isn't really true. The Pistons did not have Tobias Harris for 2/3 of last season and they played much better after they integrated him.

            Also, when your entire roster is under the age of 30, you're going to get better internally.

            It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

            Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
            Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
            NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

              Didn't we have 45 wins last year? I think our team as a improved a lot compared to last season. We should be projected to surpass the 45 win mark.
              "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

                45 wins for the 4th seed? Quite a dropoff in the east records from last year. I agree with the overall rankings mostly but the win totals seem off.
                Lifelong pacers fan

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

                  Originally posted by pacers_heath View Post
                  45 wins for the 4th seed? Quite a dropoff in the east records from last year. I agree with the overall rankings mostly but the win totals seem off.
                  I think that's part and parcel with how competitive that part of the East is and averaging everybody's individual forecasts together. Every panelist may have the 4th seed higher than 45 wins, but if every one has a different team there it is easily possible for no team to get above 45 on average.

                  Overall, it looks like they are projecting the East for 607 wins combined this year compared to 608 last year.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

                    Honestly I don't get Toronto being ahead of Indiana. I would argue we were a Rodney Stuckey not being incredibly awful game away from winning that series. And even if Stuckey was still that bad, no way Toronto beats us without Biyombo. He murdered us on the boards for that entire series. Not to mention I think we have improved from last season while Toronto went backward.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

                      I'm not understanding this hype around Boston. Paul George is knocking on the door of becoming an elite talent, but we're still fourth with what I believe is a much better roster?

                      IMHO, Indiana should be the second best team in the East unless Nate can't get the team to gel.


                      Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

                        It's July. Every team in the NBA is winning 70 games next season.

                        It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                        Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                        Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                        NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

                          Can't really get much more conservative than that.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

                            Colin Cowherd would shake his head at this, as would I

                            Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Forecast: 2016-17 East standings

                              I mean, I get the concerns that a lot of people have about the Pacers.

                              For one, in most everyone's eyes, we got worse at the coaching position.

                              Now, the Pacers added a lot more talent, most everyone agrees with that, however, the fit of that talent is a huge question mark. Most people here recognize that a Teague/Ellis backcourt would be a disaster. Past that though, we still have a lot of questions both with defense and rebounding the ball.

                              Then, you've got to consider how long its going to take for our new players to mesh. Even the super teams seem to get off to slow starts as the players learn to gel. We've added some players that are going to be receiving a lot of minutes here, and it will likely take some time for them all to learn how to play together.

                              I'm not saying I think the Pacers are going to be worse or better than that prediction, just that I understand the concerns of the critics.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 15 template Next
                              Working...
                              X