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.
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
-
-
Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal
I mean, I don't disagree that a .625 win rate would be better, but I don't really see value in saying WHAT IF THIS THING THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN, HAPPENED? Like alright, what if we never lose at home again. That'd be awesome. I agree. Your example didn't happen, and my example won't happen. They have no value other than pleasant daydreams. The reality is the win % of hometeams in the NBA over the last decade or so has been ~60%, so yea, homecourt advantage helps - 60% is definitely better than 50%, but it's certainly not so powerful that we should be saying road losses would have definitely been home wins. What seems a lot more meaningful is that we're beating bad teams at an 85% clip, while beating good teams at an 18% clip.
Cubs did up a really nice breakdown of our schedule so far and to come. We've played 11 games against good teams (2-9), with 34 games against good teams to come (current win % projects to 6-28). Over 3 times as many games against quality competition coming. Meanwhile we've played 13 games against bad competition (11-2), including 10 games against the absolute worst competition with only 24 left against bad teams (projects 20-4). If we maintain our current trend of winning nearly every easy game and losing every challenging game we will end up out of the playoffs with a record of 39-43. Or, if homecourt is as overwhelmingly powerful as you seem to believe it is, refresh my memory on how many series an 8 seed get homecourt advantage for.Comment
-
Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal
Apparently you did not read the last sentence of my post. Otherwise you would not have wasted your time saying the same thing I did in long form. I put that in there to try and get people to not take my what if so literally, but apparently that can't be avoided.Originally posted by Dece View PostComment
-
Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal
Latest Pacers trade info from Aldridge:
http://www.nba.com/2012/news/feature...thm/index.html
Notice that Hibbert, Granger, or West aren't mentioned here.Pacers, Wizards, Sixers interested in deals
Indiana has played better lately, but the Pacers are still willing to talk about making an adjustment here or there, though they aren't willing to talk about either George Hill or Paul George, according to sources.
It also is validation, again, that the front office is 100% committed to GHill over the long run. Probably explains why they didn't let him test the market. They see him as a cornerstone to the franchise.
My guess is that West would be listed here if he was younger.
My guess is that Hibbert would be listed here if he was consistent on the offensive end.
My guess is that Granger would be listed here if it wasn't for his injuries.
May we live in interesting times.Last edited by docpaul; 12-17-2012, 03:05 PM.Comment
-
Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal
I hope is true that anybody but Hill and Paul George are on the table.@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!
Comment
-
Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal
Total home records of teams the Pacers played on the road
95-68, .582 win PCT
Multiply by 14 games = expected 6-8 record vs those teams
Total road records of teams the Pacers played at home
37-92, .286 win PCT
Multiply by 10 games = expected 7-3 record vs those teams
Expected total record = 13-11
Actual home record
7-3
Actual road record
6-8
Actual total record
13-11
So how exactly have the Pacers been "getting over"? They've done what you'd expect a team to do in the games it played. The rest of the way they will play 4 more home games than road games, and even though the quality of teams will go up in general they will be at home more than the road.
Of the top 8 West teams the Pacers have already played OKC, SAS, GSW, and MIN on the road (4 of the top 6 West teams), as well as the LAL who might get better later. Yes they still have road games vs LAC, MEM, DEN and UTH but that's only 4 losses. They've also already played 4 of the top 7 East teams (minus Pacers) on the road.
The Pacers only have 12 more road games against teams currently in the playoffs (8 West, 7 East). They've played 8 of the 20 against those teams.
This means that in the first 30% of the season they've already played 40% of their playoff team road games. So they actually haven't had it easy at all.
Yes the home schedule has been a little softer, but not dramatically so, and in total it's been normal to slightly challenging due to road games.
The issue is people for some reason are ignoring NYK, ATL and CHI as top 4 teams even though they are, and they are ignoring GSW and Minny as top 8 teams, even though they are as well (GSW is the 2nd best road team in the NBA right now).
Using the Road Wins - Home Losses ranking the Pacers rank 2nd in the East and 8th overall.
So much for getting fat against a slew of easy games. There is no reason to expect a dramatic fall off in the coming months, especially FEB when they are at home nearly every game and will be getting Granger back.
Comment
-
Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal
1 - .582 = .418
.418 - .286 = .132 -> 13.2% difference in win rate isn't dramatically softer opposition in your mind? The difference between a .500 team and a .632 is HUGE. That's an 41 win team to a 52 win team.
Listen, I hope you're right and I'd love for us to be a 55 win team. As it stands I'll be shocked to get more than 45, and the numbers you think helped your argument did not. I'd rather play the 41 win team to the 52 win team by a mile. Keep in mind the league average for homecourt is usually 60-62% ish. Teams that win less than 40% on the road or less than 60% at home are worse than the league average.Comment
-
Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal
Unfortunately, all you are doing is comparing road records. What your manipulation of projected numbers actually indicates is exactly what Seth said: compared to the competition we've face both on the road and at home, we are doing what we are supposed to.Originally posted by Dece View Post
If we keep winning .418 on the road and win an average .6 at home, we will end up with a 41 win team, which may be what you were trying to get at. You were very unclear though, and I had to work through your stuff on my own to get an idea of what you were thinking.
That doesn't account for the fact that we are starting to play better now than at the start of the season or that Granger may rejoin our team.Time for a new sig.Comment
-
Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal
The numbers I'm showing here are the expected win rate of the average road opponent for our road games, .418 against the average team we've hosted's win rate, .286.... basically I've shown that we've played a roughly average road schedule, but a very favorable home schedule, because we should expect the league average, if consistent with decades past, to be in that 38-40% range, which .418 is pretty close to.Comment
-
Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal
We are 13-11 without out best player and after a slow start (4-7). That means we've gone 9-4 since then. 9-4 without our best player and with Hibbert still being inept on offense.
we aren't a flashy team. Neither were the pistons. I honestly don't see one reason why we can't do what they did. We have enough talent. Our defense is phenomenal. Damn good coach. Our guys go out every night and play hard. And they have more experience now than ever. I think when we get Granger back, we are going to make a very strong run to close out the season and into the playoffs.
Comment
-
Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal
Also I'm not sure why people are so excited about being average... we have performed exactly at the average according to Seth's calculations, even ignoring how our schedule is going to get much more difficult at home and stay roughly equal on the road, but is average really the goal? Unless you somehow believe that the addition of Danny Granger fresh off a knee injury catapults an average team to a championship contender (it doesn't) I don't see that as a particularly good thing.Comment
-
Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal
I think the part you are missing is that we've been fairly average despite playing at a very low standard for our team talent level. And as we are 13-11 and have the 13th best record in the league, we are slightly above average. Missing who until this year has been our best player. Many, including myself, believe that he will resume being our best player when he returns to the team.Originally posted by Dece View Post
So while you may not agree that we are a good team, there's plenty of reasons to believe that we are. Including what we did last year.Time for a new sig.Comment
-
Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal
People keep throwing out, "while missing our best player!" Guys, we aren't missing Lebron, CP3, or Rose here. Yea sure, maybe he's our best player, but he's still Danny Granger. We are missing Danny Granger. A one time all star and gold medal team bench warmer. We're missing a guy, that even if he comes back 100% will take an average ~40 win team to maybe a ~50 win team. Sure, 50 wins isn't BAD, but it's worse than our pace last year and it's no contender. I mean, if you're happy with that, god bless your little heart, but we just had a really solid season, and had tons of capspace and a draft pick to improve with, and a 50 win product isn't a step up, it is, in fact, a step back. That should **** you off, to have a good team set up for a monster off season, to end up, at best, a step back from where you started. That's nothing to be excited about because all those assets we had to improve with are now gone.Comment
-
Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal
Why are you a fan of the Pacers? You don't like Hibbert, you're not enamored with either Granger or George. Those guys along with Hill are the only core players on our team locked up to deals past this year. You don't think any of the players we have are good enough for the role they fill unless you have a high opinion of West. But then, he is also the oldest player on our team.Originally posted by Dece View Post
What would you have proposed we did this offseason? There isn't much we could have done better than what they did based on the information we had at the time. Maybe you wanted one of the "hot" free agents coming off of waivers or you wanted us to go all out for Deron Williams or OJ Mayo. But to me it looks like they built the team up to be successful for a while. If you can't bring in 2 or 3 stars, that's how you do it. You build a team that will be competing for the top 4 in your conference for 5-6 years and you hope that you have a really good year. I love the Pacers, and see no reason to be ****** off about anything the FO has done when it hasn't been proven to not work yet.Time for a new sig.Comment
-
Re: Thunder/Pacers discussed Harden deal
Nothing we could have done better? You truly believe we had the most optimal off season possible? That's too ridiculous to even take serious, but here's a short handful of things we could have done better:
1) Signed Asik on a great deal... Houston got him for 3 years 25, I would have given 3 years 30 and let Hibbert walk
2) Gotten Scola for pennies on his value. Missing out on amnesty players was a huge fail
3) Brand was another nice amnesty option
4) Let George Hill go find an offer sheet. Other teams could only offer him 4 years, so I would have gotten him for likely less money without blowing my only 5 year contract.
5) Traded for James Harden... since I saved my 5 year contract I can now use it on an actual star player.
6) Not given Collison away for nothing... so now instead of an undrafted player or DJAugustine who's playing his way out of the league I have a decent backup
7) Not given out a journeyman big man a 4 year contract... Brand and Scola are better and cheaper anyway.
So let's see, I've saved money on center without downgrading significantly, I've acquired at least 1, if not 2 quality backup big men for cheap, I've retained George Hill, I've possibly traded for a true star player and given him my 5 year contract, and I still have a backup point guard. My team crushes this team.
Why am I a fan if I think our roster is full of poor contracts and players who can't win it all? 5 years from now we'll have a new GM, a new coach, possibly a new owner, and maybe 2 players leftover from this roster. The Pacers are bigger than any of these things, and these things will always change over time.Comment
Tweet
Comment