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

Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

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

  • #76
    Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

    Originally posted by xIndyFan View Post
    to this. and lance, tyler, jeff and roy. time to grow up and play like men.
    green? at least on roy's name

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
      This is an opinion board. He expressed his quite well. You should respect that, even if you strongly disagree with him.


      I feel the same way about your post. Get a life.
      You must have read really fast if you didn't see that the comment your ranting on was directed at the "We weren't bad enough" train of thought. It wasn't directed at the poster. The only negative I directed at the OP was in reference to the title of this thread. I made a somewhat abrasive comment because if someone doesn't want the team to be good we wouldn't even having the same conversation. If we don't share the same goal then there is no valuable dialog to be had. Your the one making things personal.

      p.s I changed a word in my post to make it more clear.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

        Originally posted by adamscb View Post
        green? at least on roy's name
        no, not really. roy's a max player. time to play like one. he needs to be the guy he wants to become.
        Last edited by xIndyFan; 08-16-2012, 04:14 PM.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

          Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
          Do you really believe that though? I think we are all here to hopefully watch the Pacers win a title...or we're just a bunch of masochists
          We are a bunch of masochists.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

            The arguing over big market versus small market seems odd when two of the three teams that mattie describes as Finals-set are not big market.
            You Got The Tony!!!!!!

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

              Originally posted by Rogco View Post
              Interesting post, and in many ways I agree with you. The big problem is that there are a lot of teams in the league, and very few have the chance to get good enough to compete for the title. Defense may be the way to go, but I think the Pacers need to ensure they have flexibility to be able to morph parts of the team. Two things happened this off-season I didn't like because they seem to cement us to mediocrity: drafting Plumlee (who could end up being a good value pick and contributor, but the pick also doesn't have the chance to seriously improve the team. We picked a guy we think will be our third string center for the next FOUR years.) and signing Hill (have no problem signing him, don't even really mind overpaying him, but wish the contract was not five years. that's to much money tied up for too long.)
              Who had star upside after the Plumlee? Moultrie maybe? PJ3? I don't see any franchise altering players we should have taken instead of Plumlee. There may be better players than him, but none that catapult us out of mediocrity. I like the George Hill signing, and doubt it anchors the team in a bad place.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                How did we win more games than them and make it farther in the playoffs then? Maybe Vogel is just that good.

                That being said Gay vs. Granger is a lot closer than most people would say. Randolph vs. West this year was pretty much a wash. I'll take Roy over Marc Gasol....Maybe there's not a huge difference, but I would take our rosters over Memphis. To act like the rest of their starting 5 is clearly superior to ours other than shooting guard is just not true IMO
                Gay is better than Danny, Zbo is way better than West, he is also a better rebounder(great rebounder to be be out of shape), Gasol is better than Roy, he is bigger and stronger, doesn't get push around like Roy, his offensive arsenal is also pretty damn good, Roy is better at blocking shots, Conley is a better point guard than Hill, I'm not a big fan of him and I love Hill but I give the point guard edge to Conley because he knows how to control an offense and makes better passes, I guess the only position the Pacers are better than Memphis is shooting guard, they are also younger compared to the Pacers.
                @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                  We've only been to the finals once and that was more than a decade ago...and we had the JO era with excellent talent....and it never made it. So, sure, I would be surprised if this team made it to the finals in the next 5 years. However, I seriously doubt that Kevin Pritchard is going to sit with this lineup for 5 years. That's less likely than the Pacers winning the championship.

                  With that said, the east is weak and Miami is the only obstacle I think stops the Pacers cold at the moment. The Pacers are capable of beating most other teams in the conference and Boston will soon be a non-factor. Other teams will rise up though, so it's going to be tough. IMO, unless Paul George blows up in a good way, we aren't sniffing the finals for a long, long time. We need a great player who can get to Reggie Miller level under pressure...or better...and we need a really solid group to get there...because there will always be really good teams with superstars that will beat us. So, no, we are not there yet but I wouldn't rule out this group. At least one guy is going to have to really step up his game and I think the only guy even capable is Paul.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                    Thank God for this thread. If I had one complaint about PD it would be the rampant optimism.
                    Last edited by PacersHomer; 08-17-2012, 01:57 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                      Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                      How did we win more games than them and make it farther in the playoffs then? Maybe Vogel is just that good.

                      That being said Gay vs. Granger is a lot closer than most people would say. Randolph vs. West this year was pretty much a wash. I'll take Roy over Marc Gasol....Maybe there's not a huge difference, but I would take our rosters over Memphis. To act like the rest of their starting 5 is clearly superior to ours other than shooting guard is just not true IMO
                      Memphis dealt with a title ending injury to their best player. That's why they lost. Their title hopes went up in smoke before Randolph was injured. Before that, everyone in league considered them title contenders.

                      You gotta a remember Memphis almost beat OKC and that was without Gay. Now with Gay back on the roster for 2011-12 season, they really had good reasons for believing they could. They also offered this: They could beat any team on the boards. And they did. LA's front line at the time was no match for Memphis despite having Gasol and Bynum.

                      Gay was additional scorer to Zach and Marc. Memphis has much more low post scoring compared to us. Their back court I'd argue is a wash compared to ours. I mean as good LAL is, I would not be surprised if it the coming post season Z-Bo and Marc beat Howard and Pau like rented mules. It's conceivable. It really is.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                        Originally posted by beast23 View Post
                        Mattie -

                        You're absolutely killing me. You are sucking the air right out of my room. You see, I'm 60 years old and I have very few remaining on my bucket list. One of the most important for me, one that I have absolutely no control over, is seeing the Pacers win an NBA championship before my days are done.

                        First off, you've given us an extremely well written position. I've understood your position for some time, but this serves very well to summarize your viewpoint. However, I don't agree with the lack of faith that you have in TPTB.

                        The reason I say this is that I can understand and can certainly accept their rationale for making the moves that they have made this summer. I could easily join in with those that feel we may have overpaid for some of the deals that were made, but I really don't take exception with the personnel retained or acquired, or the reasoning behind it.

                        I break a game into about 3 components. Game initiation/start, mid-game (perhaps further broken into Q2 and Q3/early Q4) and end-game situations.

                        Quite frankly, once the move was change was made to start Hill (with Collison's injury) and to stick with him (even after Collison returned), I don't believe that anyone can reasonably argue the point that our starting lineup was not capable of playing with anyone in the league in game start (Q1) situations. I think the scoreboard has proven that point.

                        Our early leads were often lost in late Q1/early Q2 when there were usually 3-4 bench players on the floor along with one starter. It was then not uncommon to see the starting unit either rebuild a lead or play back to even by halftime once they were re-inserted into the game in Q2. Starting the second half, our starters sometimes built leads or held their own.

                        The only time that I can sometimes take exception to the performance of our starters would be in end-game situations (last 5 minutes) against the best of the best. The better teams have more talented star players that focus better in end-game situations. And, I cannot disagree when the top players of the best teams are playing more focused, they more often than not can get the better of even our starting players.

                        So, I see the challenges for the Pacers being the strength of their bench and what they provide as a unit when the starters are out of the game in late Q1 and late Q3 situations, and the performance of even our best players in late game situations.

                        I honestly believe that that TPTB believes that they have addressed both needs. Is it unreasonable to believe that the overall performance of this team would be improved by improving the talent and capabilities of the bench players that come onto the floor in late Q1/late Q3? Is it really unreasonable to believe that Hibbert and George will continue to improve or that West will perform better as he further heals, thereby perhaps providing even more cushion to help the subs maintain leads that our starters have built? I believe this is where the TPTB took a position as one solution and that I really can't argue against the position that they took. It is reasonable and was probably the easiest solution to execute.

                        I believe that by retaining our starters, we have a unit that will perform no worse than they performed late last year. And, if George, Hibbert and West do improve, the starting unit building comfortable Q1 leads will be the norm. A better bench that can maintain those leads will eventually lead to opponents starters having to play more minutes in an attempt to overcome those leads.

                        That takes us to late-game situations. Hopefully the extra minutes players by the opponents starters will help our starters in their attempt to perform better in the final minutes of games against the leagues best players. If not, then I believe that definite needs will reveal themselves to TPTB. You could be very correct in that the Pacers will need to replace West with a player that is better suited to defend the paint in late game situations. If that is the case, then I hope by then that someone else becomes much better at providing scoring in end game situations, because right now I believe that West is the most consistent scorer we have in those situations.

                        As for our starting unit being as is for 5 years, I just don't see it. Even with a top-performing team like we had in the late 90s, that has never been the case. I don't see it now. First off, West will be a free agent and I don't see the Pacers paying him the type of money that it might take to retain him, which is probably about what he is making now. The only way would be if West will give us a break due to an enjoyment he has in playing with this team or due to some new-found loyalty he might have. But playing him his present dollars would only set us up for team salary difficulties when have to renegotiate with Granger and George.

                        I believe that this season is put up or shut up time for Paul George. If he does not elevate his game quite a bit this year, the Pacers might even go a different direction at SG. Who knows.... maybe by acquiring a new PG and moving Hill to SG. But at any rate, if tinkering with the roster through rebuilding the bench is not the answer, I don't believe TPTB will hesitate for a moment to look at attempting to bring in a new starter or two.
                        Thanks, great read. I always enjoy your boarding as you know.


                        Anywho, I completely agree with this being a make or break year for Paul George. He really needs to prove that he's going to be a major part of this teams future, or they'll have to start considering other directions. I think he'll prove that quite easily.

                        Getting back to my complaints of the starters, I wanted to address why I thought they didn't play the best in the playoffs despite building leads against Miami.

                        Miami was clearly not at full strength without Chris Bosh in the series which clearly changed the tone of the series. It is one big reason why we got an early 2-1 lead. While in general all season our starters were building leads and the bench was losing them. I believe Miami at full strength would have been able to do a better job against our starters.

                        While Indiana has definitely gotten better this offseason, so has Miami. So instead of simply hoping Indiana's young talent in Roy, Paul and Hill make up the difference because of their growth, I'd rather see TPTB make a concerted effort to improve possible weaknesses the team has. More to the point, even if the Pacers young talent could be predicted to make this team that much better, it still doesn't change the fact that Pacers do have particular weaknesses that could be addressed immediately. If all three young players made vast improvements AND we addressed our weakness at the 4 for instance, how great would Indiana be then?

                        I'll concede however, that we are going to see a very good Indiana team and their is a possibility they can take us to the next level. I have my doubts, but that is why we play the season.

                        P.S. Here's a silver lining to my somewhat bleak forecast of the future: (take heart! haha) Many people in the Pacers organization will read this thread, and it'll give them an idea on why at least a group of Pacers fans don't entirely buy into Donnie's plan. (not suggesting I personally have any influence, I'm suggesting the Pacers are very in tune to what fans in general are thinking)

                        So at the very least if what I say is momentarily true, maybe it motivates the TPTB to prove us wrong? Or re-evaluate their thinking? I'm grasping here!
                        Last edited by mattie; 08-16-2012, 07:43 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                          Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
                          Thank God for this thread. If I had one complaint about PD it would be the rampant optimism.
                          Amen. And when you comment on it with a rational well thought out post, you get called a troll.... It does get old....

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                            Way to go out on a limb there sport. What's next, proclaiming that the Cubs won't win a World Series in the next five years?

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                              I am more than content to continue my minority position as resident "I honestly feel we can beat the Heat, Lakers, whoever you throw at us" guy.

                              Last season we had early success against Miami, and when they came back swinging we had no answer. We shirked the challenge instead of rising to it.

                              I think we learned from that and will be hungry to avenge our loss.

                              Yes, the Heat are a very, VERY good BOUGHT team. The Pacers are a very, VERY good TEAM of players who fit and complement each other.

                              I still like our chances. Remember the super human games LeWade had to put up to eliminate us. Anytime you force opposing players to play at THAT high a level to simply beat you by a few points, you are in a much better position than you think. It does not take 3-4 "Bad" games from LeWade to make the Heat vulnerable. It simply takes a few games where they aren't absolutely superhuman, scoring 80+ points by themselves.

                              Could they do that to us again? Sure. It could happen. But at some point we are going to slow them down JUST enough to let our superior depth win the series.

                              Just my 2c.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Why the Pacers will NOT compete for a championship in the next 5 years

                                Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
                                I am more than content to continue my minority position as resident "I honestly feel we can beat the Heat, Lakers, whoever you throw at us" guy.

                                Last season we had early success against Miami, and when they came back swinging we had no answer. We shirked the challenge instead of rising to it.

                                I think we learned from that and will be hungry to avenge our loss.

                                Yes, the Heat are a very, VERY good BOUGHT team. The Pacers are a very, VERY good TEAM of players who fit and complement each other.

                                I still like our chances. Remember the super human games LeWade had to put up to eliminate us. Anytime you force opposing players to play at THAT high a level to simply beat you by a few points, you are in a much better position than you think. It does not take 3-4 "Bad" games from LeWade to make the Heat vulnerable. It simply takes a few games where they aren't absolutely superhuman, scoring 80+ points by themselves.

                                Could they do that to us again? Sure. It could happen. But at some point we are going to slow them down JUST enough to let our superior depth win the series.

                                Just my 2c.
                                I'll keep ridin' with ya!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X