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

Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

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

  • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
    Who were our most important players in last year's playoffs? Think about it and your question will be answered.
    I do clearly recall Lance being our best player in Game 6 vs NY. Without his clutch performance, we likely lose game 7 @ NY.
    Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

      Originally posted by PacersHomer View Post
      Same reason why my boss can call me out for my work and I think, "Damn he's an *** but I need to get better" while if a co-worker calls me out I think, "**** that *******" even if he is more correct than my boss.
      OK, let's run with this analogy.

      Let's say your business is at the top, if not the best, at what it does in all of the East Coast and arguably the entire nation. You hear rumblings that your boss isn't satisfied with the results despite your historic achievements and you suggest to him that your coworkers are doing just fine, that you work well together, that you'll figure it out and improve what he sees as weaknesses. Your boss doesn't listen to your suggestions. He relieves the longest tenured coworker at your business, someone who is well liked, a mentor and confidant for many fellow employees. He replaces him with a worker from one of the worst businesses in the entire nation, a laughing stock of an organization that openly embraces poor results. This worker wasn't even well thought of in that organization, nor was he their best worker. Yet, here is your boss proclaiming that he can do what your former coworker did much better, and even some things he couldn't do. Oh by the way, you have a huge project due in a couple months. Now you have to incorporate this new worker seamlessly into your project. How do you feel that your boss didn't listen to your considerations?

      Now take how you feel and multiply it because your boss just publicly criticized your work habits to the press. It doesn't matter how well you were doing or how well you worked together with your coworkers. Your boss doesn't think its good enough. It doesn't matter that your boss didn't listen to your suggestions not to make changes in the workforce, even though these changes didn't help correct the weaknesses he highlighted and, in many cases, even hampered your business' product. Time is ticking and your big project is due soon. And by the way, he also suggests that another one of your coworkers could leave at the end of the year because this new worker -- you know, the one from the embarrassingly bad organization? -- yeah, he could potentially replace one of your most versatile and dynamic coworkers; a guy who really gets the office energized and tackles many tasks.

      How do you feel about your boss now? Do you smile and say, "yes, sir!" like a robot? Or do you put your head down, realizing your achievements went under-appreciated and focus on your own work so you don't get singled out for slacking off?

      Now imagine getting singled out. That's where Roy is right now.
      2015, 2016, 2019 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champions - DC Dreamers

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

        Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
        OK, let's run with this analogy.

        Let's say your business is at the top, if not the best, at what it does in all of the East Coast and arguably the entire nation. You hear rumblings that your boss isn't satisfied with the results despite your historic achievements and you suggest to him that your coworkers are doing just fine, that you work well together, that you'll figure it out and improve what he sees as weaknesses. Your boss doesn't listen to your suggestions. He relieves the longest tenured coworker at your business, someone who is well liked, a mentor and confidant for many fellow employees. He replaces him with a worker from one of the worst businesses in the entire nation, a laughing stock of an organization that openly embraces poor results. This worker wasn't even well thought of in that organization, nor was he their best worker. Yet, here is your boss proclaiming that he can do what your former coworker did much better, and even some things he couldn't do. Oh by the way, you have a huge project due in a couple months. Now you have to incorporate this new worker seamlessly into your project. How do you feel that your boss didn't listen to your considerations?

        Now take how you feel and multiply it because your boss just publicly criticized your work habits to the press. It doesn't matter how well you were doing or how well you worked together with your coworkers. Your boss doesn't think its good enough. It doesn't matter that your boss didn't listen to your suggestions not to make changes in the workforce, even though these changes didn't help correct the weaknesses he highlighted and, in many cases, even hampered your business' product. Time is ticking and your big project is due soon. And by the way, he also suggests that another one of your coworkers could leave at the end of the year because this new worker -- you know, the one from the embarrassingly bad organization? -- yeah, he could potentially replace one of your most versatile and dynamic coworkers; a guy who really gets the office energized and tackles many tasks.

        How do you feel about your boss now? Do you smile and say, "yes, sir!" like a robot? Or do you put your head down, realizing your achievements went under-appreciated and focus on your own work so you don't get singled out for slacking off?

        Now imagine getting singled out. That's where Roy is right now.
        This is a really solid post, but I don't think comparing basketball to a typical workplace is a fair comparison. They just vary on so many levels.
        There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

          Originally posted by Pacergeek View Post
          I do clearly recall Lance being our best player in Game 6 vs NY. Without his clutch performance, we likely lose game 7 @ NY.
          Lance was certainly our best player in Game 6 vs NY but PG and Hibbert were both better than him overall in both the NY and Miami series.

          That said, I don't want to diminish Lance's importance at all. He was extremely important for us but Roy and PG were a tad more important. That's all I'm saying.
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

            Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
            This is a really solid post, but I don't think comparing basketball to a typical workplace is a fair comparison. They just vary on so many levels.
            How does it vary exactly?? Is it because they are paid millions of dollars and they are simply happy because their only motivating factor is money?? Or is it because they are simply entertainers, and their profession has no room for soft and gooey emotional and human factors??

            I think that it is a valid comparison to make... Peoples work performance can easily be affected by management this way regardless of the profession... I can speak from personal experience...
            Abba Zaba, your my only friend.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

              Originally posted by Kuq_e_Zi91 View Post
              No, Candace said that's a promo they play on the jumbotron with Solo and G Hill. It's not the show and it happened during a timeout after halftime. Not during halftime. And Candace's tweet doesn't suggest it did... terrible reporting by that "Hoops Talk Radio."


              I do think the initial tweet on King of the Hill was worded confusingly. Just based on the r/nba thread, many thought Roy was watching the acclaimed animated sitcom instead of the game. I know Candace has got to make that retweet paper, but she worded it in the most inflammatory, obfuscated way possible from the reactions I've seen.
              You Got The Tony!!!!!!

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

                Originally posted by Aw Heck View Post
                Paul George and Dan Burke are the only people on that bench that I'm confident about returning next year. It would take a massive turnaround for me to consider adding anyone else to that list.
                good luck getting rid of the awful contracts we have.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

                  Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
                  I really think Vogel is not respected by this team. They like him but they don't respect him, in other words his soft approach has lost the team. I'm glad to see him show some spine but it's game 78 now. Were were the benchings 15 games ago? Where were the benchings when Paul and Lance both decided not to play defense on Jan. 1st.? If this team started out slow and Vogel brought them together he'd be set for next year but now the odds of getting this team back to where they were in Nov. with 4 games to go are slim. I'll still be watching and hoping but if this team doesn't respond in the playoffs we need a coaching change.
                  Yeah, I think that Vogel's inexperience has finally bitten us a bit. Everything was sooooooooo smooth over the last few years. The team was so happy when O'Brien left that they bought right into Vogel's "rah rah" fire em up attitude, and obviously he showed that he could coach and turn things around. Once we added Hill and West, things just went incredibly well. There were no ego issues and Vogel's "be their buddy" style worked very well. But sooner or later, any coach is going to have a situation where they have to be the "a-hole". That's obviously what's happened here, and I just don't think that Vogel knew how to be the "bad guy" to get things back on track. It's nice that he showed some spine with Hibbert, but as you say, it's game 78 now. PG and Lance's increased sense of self on the basketball court should have been nipped much earlier.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

                    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                    Lance was certainly our best player in Game 6 vs NY but PG and Hibbert were both better than him overall in both the NY and Miami series.

                    That said, I don't want to diminish Lance's importance at all. He was extremely important for us but Roy and PG were a tad more important. That's all I'm saying.
                    Can't have it both ways. In one post you're pushing win as a team, lose as a team and in another you're criticizing the acceptance of hierarchy within team/coaching/staff management. If this is how you feel then why put some players more on a pedestal for a great playoff run last season? Our starting five was incredible and all were necessary. Why do any need to be singled out as more important? If they read that on here, are you contributing to driving a wedge and reinforcing hierarchy and fueling the construction of their personal egos instead of the team ethos?
                    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                    -Emiliano Zapata

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

                      They best teams are still hierarchies. That's what gives them good chemistry: The leaders, secondary stars and supporting cast all understand and accept their roles. The Heat and Spurs are the best at establishing this.

                      There's nothing wrong with having egos, either. There's only a problem if a role player has an ego above his pay-grade. That's when cracks start to form.
                      Last edited by Kstat; 04-07-2014, 06:34 AM.

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

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

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

                        Each new rock-bottom gets more rock-bottomed than the one before it. We have to be about there, right? Can it get more rock-bottom-er, unless we hired coach Crean as a consultant?
                        The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

                          Originally posted by Slick Pinkham View Post
                          Each new rock-bottom gets more rock-bottomed than the one before it. We have to be about there, right? Can it get more rock-bottom-er, unless we hired coach Crean as a consultant?
                          Rock bottom for this team would be losing in the first round. That's the lowest possible point.

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

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

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

                            Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                            I was listening to some of the postgame show with Mark Boyle and Eddie White. Boyle said that in his 25+ years of being around the team, he's seen a lot of peaks and valleys, but he's never seen anything as shocking as this collapse. Now I know that some people might immediately scream "02-03!", but that was different. For starters, that team had never even won a playoff series together, while this current team was one game away from the NBA Finals last year. Secondly, there were plenty of outward chemistry problems back then with the Artest flagrant foul issue which led to a suspension(s?) and his destroying that camera in NY. Also, didn't a couple of guys (JO and Tinsley?) lose family members or something? Anyway, plenty of fans never really trusted those JO/Artest teams. This team OTOH earned virtually everyone's trust with their impressive play over the last couple of years, which peaked with last year's playoff run that spilled over into the domination that we saw in the first half of this regular season. Perhaps more importantly, all you ever heard was how much these guys loved playing with one another. There was the Sports Center interview with the 5 starters, and you had multiple media people who cover the team say that they had never seen such a close locker room. So it's absolutely shocking that it's crumbled like this.

                            I was one of the people who scoffed at the notion that something was wrong when other posters started mentioning it several weeks back. I thought that Seth's comparison to the 02-03 team was an overreaction, but it's looking pretty spot on right now. After the Miami game, I was for sure that we'd get back on track. I thought that winning that game would be one of those games that caused everything to click again because it should have been a nice reminder of why they play the game and put all of that effort in. So it's just downright shocking that we've lost 5 of 6 since then.

                            Those of us who are incredibly hard on the team right now are simply holding them up to the standards that they set for themselves. They were the ones who started pounding their chests about the one seed as soon as the Heat series ended last year. They were the ones who backed it up with their incredibly dominant play in the first half of the season. And they are the ones who unfortunately have choked it away down the stretch when Miami served it up on a silver platter for us. The Heat have been on complete cruise control all year long and looked like crap down the stretch, so it's just a downright shame that we've blown this. If we get it all together again and go on another deep playoff run, then I just have a bad feeling that it will all end in South Beach again. We'll play them tough and have a 2-2 series, but Miami will have the edge with 2 of the final 3 games in South Beach. But it doesn't matter what I think because I'm just some chump fan. What matters is do they think they can beat the Heat without HCA? I don't think they do, which is why they've talked so much about it. Regardless, the Heat should probably be the last thing on our minds right now. This team is obviously in serious jeopardy of being eliminated before then.

                            Those of us who've followed the team for a while appreciate just how special of an opportunity this season was. These sort of circumstances don't come around too often with a team as talented as this. It's just downright sickening to see it all collapse.
                            100% agree. I was so confident in the team that I started making plans to take time off and drive to Indiana from Iowa to see some NBA finals game.


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

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

                              Originally posted by bballpacen View Post
                              To be fair, LB has not won anything as a coach/GM... So he has done as much as said player in his current capacity...
                              "he is the only person in NBA history to be named Most Valuable Player, Coach of the Year, and Executive of the Year."

                              Larry Bird, Wikipedia.
                              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers/Hawks Postgame Thread

                                Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                                Rock bottom for this team would be losing in the first round. That's the lowest possible point.
                                yeah but i prefer it to going to ECF. i seriously rather see us losing in the first or second round rather than getting raped by heat in ECF. i just can't take it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X