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

'11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

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

  • #76
    Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

    Here's a question for the stat guys...
    The Pacers do get broken down it seems on defense and allow some uncontested things at the basket (in the half court)... but what about points allowed in transition?

    That was always a big complaint I had with O'Brien's system is that it left the team vulnerable to easy transition baskets.. and several per game. I'm curious if we've put a lid on that or not. What do the statistics say?
    Last edited by Bball; 04-03-2011, 02:45 PM.
    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

    ------

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

    -John Wooden

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

      Originally posted by Peck View Post
      The only reason anyone would even bother to look at strength of schedule would be to in some way try and justify their own belief that Jim O'Brien was a good coach caught in a bad situation.
      That seems a bit over the top to me...particularly since some of the people involved in the discussion have talked about Strength of Schedule quite a lot over the years. Heck (Peck) I was looking at an article by Count55 on the subject from 2010 yesterday.

      Originally posted by Oswalt72 View Post
      He's changed the focus of the offense, yes, but he's also kept the defense relatively the same scheme-wise. And it's worsened.
      Without digging too deep into ooky, creepy statistics, let me throw this out. The Pacers' opponents Points/FGA is down ever so slightly under Vogel, compared to O'Brien....I mean .999 the same. So, by that measure, the defense is equal to JOB's time.

      Now, opponents PPG has gone up, but so has ours.

      Comparing a simple index (pts+rbs+assts+blks+steals, minus shots, TOs, PFs...all adjusted for time) from pre-Vogel to Vogel....our opponents performance has dropped, while ours has gone up. Opponents index = .979 of preVogel index. Ours = 1.018 of preVogel performance.

      None of that says worse defense to me.

      ------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Let me add a thought here on Strength of Schedule and its place in the discussion. It's obvious to me why we'd include the topic when we're comparing team performance from year to year for certain months, BUT if you factor in the Young_Team_Playing_Up_or_Down_To_Their_Opponents_L evel (in)constant, then to some extent SoS means less. In other words, I'm speculating here that even with a tougher schedule, this team would have played up to that level somewhat.
      Last edited by kester99; 04-04-2011, 03:10 AM.


      [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

        Originally posted by Peck View Post
        How dare you use common sense as a basis for your reasoning. Where is your advanced statistical analysis, where are your shot charts?

        The only reason anyone would even bother to look at strength of schedule would be to in some way try and justify their own belief that Jim O'Brien was a good coach caught in a bad situation. Anyone else would just look and see that Frank with the exact same group of players is winning and most likely taking to the playoffs that Jim said could not make it.

        One would only ignore it because it hurts their argument. We Knew this season was front loaded well before JOB got fired. With or without JOB this team didn't achieve what I was hoping for so why should we now be impressed? I am hopeful to make the playoffs but if we do we just squeaked in.

        http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?t=60166

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

          Whether or not Frank is the next John Wooden or the next Isiah Thomas, there is one thing we know.

          The team has played better when Jim O'Brien did not or could not implement his stretch-the-floor strategy with the particular team. Here are the key examples:

          1) The five game win streak at the beginning of the year last year. Troy Murphy was out and the team immediately started playing better. Night and day better. Dahntay had to bite his tongue but he still said he knew why the team was winning. Jersey knew the same thing and followed through with benching and now trading Troy.

          2) The team was winning at the beginning of this season until Jim pushed McBob out at the beginning of December to launch threes. Teams didn't respect it and played off of him...cheating toward Hibbert. A few teams outright doubled Hibbert. Hibbert's confidence plummets and the team goes in a tailspin.

          3) Vogel takes over and we have another 5 game winning streak and except for a locker room issue the team has been playing very well. Even with it, they are above .500.

          You can talk all about SOS, but the players have torn Jim O'Brien a new one. There's no way they played as well with Jim at the helm...and I doubt that feeling has been for just this season. Nah, this team is better right now even with a bunch of young players getting the minutes. Had they tried to run Jim's system it would have been a disaster. As it is, we are going to the playoffs.

          Yes, the playoffs. You can talk all about our record versus another season but the fact remains that more teams are doing worse than us this year than last. So, relative to other teams we are doing better this year.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

            Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
            One would only ignore it because it hurts their argument. We Knew this season was front loaded well before JOB got fired. With or without JOB this team didn't achieve what I was hoping for so why should we now be impressed? I am hopeful to make the playoffs but if we do we just squeaked in.

            http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthread.php?t=60166
            A win is a win is a win.

            A los is a loss is a loss.

            Every team in the NBA plays 82 games. Each team has 41 games at home & 41 games away.

            Numbers are a funny thing. They really don't lie, they can be manipulated and cherry picked to glean what we want from them though.

            You can view the record of the team prior to the liberation (my words) of our ball club and state that the schedule was tougher and might be right.

            I can view the record since the uprising (probably your words) and say that we have already won more games than we did the rest of the season in 11 less games and be right as well.

            It is then up to our prejudice to determine which fact is more accurate because at the end of the day neither is wrong from a pure number standpoint.


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

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

              My main aurgument against firing Jim mid season was the assumed "no one on staff was capable of taking over. I did not see the value of bringing in an outsider for a couple of months. While I don't really think it made much of a difference performance whys, the fans are happier now (which I believe was the main reason it happened). Vogel has proven to be capable and didn't wreck the ship, however this team still has not outperformed what was expected of them under the old coach. Vogel gets his first interview, he isn't entitled to anything more.

              What about the people who hated JOB for playing Mike Dunleavy, (are they somehow magically right now? The ones who called Foster a scrub who shouldn't be in the league? These statements went hand in hand with the coach hate that people seem to be bragging about now.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
                What about the people who hated JOB for playing Mike Dunleavy, (are they somehow magically right now? The ones who called Foster a scrub who shouldn't be in the league? These statements went hand in hand with the coach hate that people seem to be bragging about now.
                While people were not happy with the AMOUNT of playing time those guys were getting, I think most agreed that they still deserved minutes.

                The "hand in hand" statements regarding coach hate primarily (but not only) centered around Josh and Tyler's inconsistent playing time and DNP-CD's when they were replaced by the likes of Posey and S. Jones in the line-up.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                  Originally posted by spazzxb View Post
                  My main aurgument against firing Jim mid season was the assumed "no one on staff was capable of taking over. I did not see the value of bringing in an outsider for a couple of months. While I don't really think it made much of a difference performance whys, the fans are happier now (which I believe was the main reason it happened). Vogel has proven to be capable and didn't wreck the ship, however this team still has not outperformed what was expected of them under the old coach. Vogel gets his first interview, he isn't entitled to anything more.

                  What about the people who hated JOB for playing Mike Dunleavy, (are they somehow magically right now? The ones who called Foster a scrub who shouldn't be in the league? These statements went hand in hand with the coach hate that people seem to be bragging about now.

                  I couldn't disagree with that bolded statement more. Most people had this team finishing under .500 this season. With Vogel we are over .500 by a couple of games. That is certainly outperforming the expectations we had for JOB. And he is clearly exceeding what Jim actually did, not the expectations of what we had of him doing which is even more impressive.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                    Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                    There is little doubt in my mind that Vogel could coach any of the teams JOB has ever coached and ended up with a better result.
                    So you think that Vogel would have gotten that Celtics team to the NBA Finals?

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                      Originally posted by Peck View Post
                      The only reason anyone would even bother to look at strength of schedule would be to in some way try and justify their own belief that Jim O'Brien was a good coach caught in a bad situation. Anyone else would just look and see that Frank with the exact same group of players is winning and most likely taking to the playoffs that Jim said could not make it.

                      So I'm inferring from your comments that strength of schedule is a stat that is out of bounds for rational discussion. Ok, but I hope that is applied across the board

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                        Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                        So I'm inferring from your comments that strength of schedule is a stat that is out of bounds for rational discussion. Ok, but I hope that is applied across the board
                        So now your going to argue stats.? You who is Mr. I don't need to see the stats. I watch the game.

                        We both watch the games, you mean your going to tell me that you don't look at the club and see the difference between the time prior to Frank and after?


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

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                          I think the major difference between Vogel and JOB is pride. Vogel is going to Bird, and most likely calling Pitino. He is seeking advice. So the question is:

                          Is Vogel a puppet coach of Bird? I wouldn't go that far. But Vogel is young, has grown. But to say that he could endure and bring this lack luster roster that we have had the last three years, to a better overall result is a stretch.

                          To say that JOB is the same coach, or that the NBA is the same as it was when the Celtics made it to the ECFs, is a stretch.

                          JOB is not a worse coach than Vogel. But I think that JOB's stubbornness and narrow vision gets him slightly worse results with the same type of roster.

                          NEITHER CAN BRING THIS TEAM TO THE NEXT STAGE. Neither could bring this team to the second round. JVG could, SVG could, Avery Johnson might, Adelman could, and many others.

                          Unfortunately those guys are not walking in the door. The real question is: can Vogel be that guy with growth? Or is there someone out there who can?

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                            Originally posted by Peck View Post

                            We both watch the games, you mean your going to tell me that you don't look at the club and see the difference between the time prior to Frank and after?

                            Not at all, but that was not the point Hicks started the thread with. He started the thread in response to my off handed remark about Pacers playing well towards the end of the seasons that JOB coached. Hicks was talking about the record, not how well or poorly the team was playing, and he was talking about the record during a specific portion of each season. So I think it is 100% in bounds to look at the strength of schedule.

                            Are we beating the Lakers, Heat and the Celtics or the Wizards, Cavs and Kings? I think that is a very relevant question in light of Hicks original post in this thread.

                            In more general terms I never considered looking at who the pacers beat as some strange stat that only some statisticion can understand.

                            If I am out of the country or some cave and cannot follow the pacers and when i get back I learn the pacers have won 10 straight I'll say great, but my next thoguth is who did they play, who did they beat. By any measure it is a very fair question, and yet peck you are acting like it is some weird stat that is difficult to understand.

                            The bottonline: who the pacers play is not a stat - that is an important reality
                            Last edited by Unclebuck; 04-03-2011, 10:50 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                              The NBA is an odd beast. Let me make just one point why using stats in this type of case is simply a waste of time.

                              Teams often take the night off...especially down the stretch. If Team A locked into a position and is overconfident, they may give Team B a lead. That's what happened a couple years ago when we had huge leads that "strangely" evaporated in the latter stages of games. While some wondered why we "collapsed", it was obvious to many of us who have played games.

                              Don't you remember taking it easy on some teams or guys if you are playing one-on-one. Who here has allowed an opponent to get a lead purely for the challenge of snatching the victory. Imagine if you played 5 grueling games in a week and had a patsy on game 4. The temptation to toy with them or take a break is pretty strong. Sometimes the patsy ends up winning. What does that do to the stats, particularly a small sample size.

                              Where am I going with this? I am saying that this is one example of why relying on a tiny sample size of games to explain human actions...and expecting to make sense of it statistically is a fool's game. What about injuries? Locker room issues? The list of factors are simply too long, so you end up comparing apples to oranges.

                              Similarly, there are probably numerous examples of why attempting to compare how the Pacers played down the stretch in 2008 or 2009 versus this year is pure nonsense. There are too many factors, basketball and non-basketball in nature.
                              Last edited by BlueNGold; 04-03-2011, 11:06 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: '11 Frank versus '10, '09, and '08 Jim: Last game of Jan through First game of April

                                Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                                Teams often take the night off...especially down the stretch.
                                I've always made the point that the two most inpredictable months of the NBA season are November and April. A lot of teams come out of training camp/preason just not ready to play so some lesser teams can get some cheap wins in November. April is even crazier because so many teams have different agendas byt that time in the season.

                                And no I don't buy the argument that in order to play well in the playoffs a team needs to be playing well at the end of the season. I think that is hogwash.

                                I do think record after allstar break is significant, but the Lakers they were 14-1 since the break, if they were to lose 5 out of their last 8 games to end the season I think that means nothing at all. Teams like that as long as they play well at some point during the season, they know they can do it in the playoffs
                                Last edited by Unclebuck; 04-03-2011, 11:29 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X