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 / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

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

  • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

    Originally posted by idioteque View Post
    No kidding, I was proud of it when it was built, even more proud of how well it has been taken care of. The way it was built was really forward thinking in terms of sports arenas. At the same the Fieldhouse was built, a lot of NBA arenas looked okay on TV, but had pretty dingy luxury suites, narrow hallways, not great concessions or parking. The Fieldhouse really set the gold standard is has better amenities than some arenas that were built afterward. While Amway Arena is considered by many to be the nicest in the league, the Fieldhouse is right up there so many years later.
    I agree. Everything in it just still looks immaculate: The concourses, the exterior/interior bricks, the windows, the suites, the displays, the floors, the restrooms, the aisles, the seats....EVERYTHING!

    We've also done a couple of major things to keep it up with the Joneses so to speak. We added the LED band a few years back and then obviously added the massive scoreboard before last year. With those two additions, you could easily be fooled into thinking that the arena opened up last year if you didn't know any better.

    My one and only complaint about the Fieldhouse is the bland court that we've had since 2005. It looked sooooooo much better from 1999-2005 when we had the blue out of bounds with the gold lettering. I am just not a fan of unpainted out of bounds. I've never understood why we made that change. I'm fine with the interior paint in the free throw area being blue instead of yellow, but I've just never been a fan of the out of bounds. The center court logo and lettering looks great at least.

    Speaking of that sort of thing, we need to cash in on our popularity and unveil some bad a** new jerseys next year. They would sell like hotcakes given how popular the team is right now. We're in year nine of these uniforms and have simply had them for way too long. They've already outlived the flo-jos and pinstripes, both of which were superior uniforms. Those pinstripes looked dope when we wore them as retros last year. The current uniforms aren't bad, but they aren't that good either, IMO. They are as average and mediocre as it gets. There is nothing memorable or jaw dropping about them.

    Comment


    • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

      Originally posted by seeker80 View Post
      I have been fighting this off, but I can't help myself.

      One of the bonuses of last night's great win was not having to hear from the Lance Fanboy nation. Can you imagine the hue and cry if we had lost? Lance's new contract offer would now be in the 20 mil range and the "trade for tacos (donuts)" machine would have worked all night long without respite. Of course, GH's trade value couldn't be higher after last night so let's strike while the iron is hot.

      Last night should make it crystal clear. The is a TEAM. If your 5th option can drop 37, you should get on your knees and thank the gods and stop trying to make it about 1 guy.

      Someone made the comment that last nights game proved that Lance should have the ball in his hands all of the time and let everyone else score.

      ...must have been watching a different game.

      GH had the ball in his hands 80% of the time for the last 20 mins. Pushing the break. Driving into the paint time after time for a tear drop, a dime to DWest or drawing a fould. Just how would that work if he never had the ball in his hands?

      What GH proved is he willing do whatever it takes so the TEAM has the best chance to win. He will defer if he needs to or be assertive if he needs to because its not all about him or triple double watches.

      This issue is the biggest concern I have about keeping Lance around. Will it always be about the TEAM or will it always be about Lance? Sometimes, reading this board, I wonder.

      Great post. I see you only have 50 post to date. You should post more often.
      Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

      Comment


      • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

        This is really just coming from the past 10 games but I'm not sure what's going on with PG. If he's just worn down from playing some many minutes on both ends of the floor as our best scorer and perimeter defender then I wish Vogel would trim his pt by 5 minutes or so. If Paul needs a break and can't produce at a super high level on both ends then I wish he'd focus on D first. Paul's defense as a whole has been terrible for the past 10 games and Lance hasn't been any better. GH has been our best perimeter defender overall during that stretch. If last nights game showed us anything it's that we don't need Paul to score 20 every night. Taking 23 shots to get us 17 points isn't right. Vogel should have stepped in early to contain that. He needs to challenge Paul to be our best defender first and I want GH handling the ball most of the time going forward. I don't think it's really the best thing for this team in the long term to continue to have 2 players dominate the ball the way PG and Lance have. We need to use our size to our advantage and keep West and Hibbert more involved in the offense; we'll have an even better reason to do this when we finally get Bynum in the lineup. Will any of that happen? Not if Vogel’s recent history is any indication. I’m not really down on Vogel as much as it sounds like, he’s done a great job with this team. I just wish he’d coach a little more.
        Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

        Comment


        • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

          Originally posted by seeker80 View Post
          I have been fighting this off, but I can't help myself.

          One of the bonuses of last night's great win was not having to hear from the Lance Fanboy nation. Can you imagine the hue and cry if we had lost? Lance's new contract offer would now be in the 20 mil range and the "trade for tacos (donuts)" machine would have worked all night long without respite. Of course, GH's trade value couldn't be higher after last night so let's strike while the iron is hot.

          Last night should make it crystal clear. The is a TEAM. If your 5th option can drop 37, you should get on your knees and thank the gods and stop trying to make it about 1 guy.

          Someone made the comment that last nights game proved that Lance should have the ball in his hands all of the time and let everyone else score.

          ...must have been watching a different game.

          GH had the ball in his hands 80% of the time for the last 20 mins. Pushing the break. Driving into the paint time after time for a tear drop, a dime to DWest or drawing a fould. Just how would that work if he never had the ball in his hands?

          What GH proved is he willing do whatever it takes so the TEAM has the best chance to win. He will defer if he needs to or be assertive if he needs to because its not all about him or triple double watches.

          This issue is the biggest concern I have about keeping Lance around. Will it always be about the TEAM or will it always be about Lance? Sometimes, reading this board, I wonder.

          Yes, Lance is definitely expendable on a night where we have two players combine to go 25-35 from the field for 67 points. One of them put up 30/10 and the other had the best game of his career with a 37/9/8 line. If those two players could consistently put up those kind of numbers, then yeah, this team could probably move on fine without Lance.

          But let's not forget that it still took OT to beat this team, and I'm guessing that doesn't happen with Lance in the game. The offense scored just 45 points in the first half of the game. A big reason for that was PG's crappy game, but Lance's absence was obviously huge to. We missed his scoring, his ball movement, his passing, and the way he draws double teams and hits open men. I guess I'm a "Lance fanboy" in that I recognize that his production this year is one of the main reasons that the team has gone from being very good to elite. You take a dynamic offensive player in Lance and replace him with someone who is currently poor on offense in Granger, and it lessens your starting lineup. Not being cold, not being a fanboy, just stating some obvious truths.

          Our lack of offense early on was erased by the fact that two of our players absolutely played out of their minds. All the credit in the world to Hill and West, but this team still missed Lance.

          Comment


          • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

            Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
            Great post. I see you only have 50 post to date. You should post more often.
            I appreciate the thought, but I am a grouchy old guy and I know it. I don't trust myself with folks whose parents were probably in HS the same time I was, when I was attending my first Pacer game in the Coliseum in '73.

            I know how rare the opportunities to win it all are.

            I was behind the basket where Prince ruined what I thought was a lock to win a title. Was in attendance the game after the Brawl and knew we were about to banished to Siberia by Stern (good ****ing riddance). Was out of state but watching every game when we got to the finals too late in 2000. Metta World Artest was my favorite Pacer for awhile and I got in the habit of excusing his "lapses".

            Got burned.

            So now I am really, really sensitive to what I see are impediments to a title.

            Right now? Its Magic. Little Bron. The guy who leads us by a large margin in techs and flops. The cause of all trade talk, breaking the bank, doing whatever it takes.

            Its a distraction, a wild card, an unknown...

            Last night, after the game, DWest was being interviewed by Brooke. Lance couldn't help himself, he crashed the interview and West shot him a look like "go f'ing away". Lance beat a hasty retreat. Kid can't help it, he's gotta be the center of attention.

            Worries me. That's why I am glad we beat a club that is a real challenge for us without him. I hope he gets the message. And then we can work on PG so he learns he doesn't have to be "all Jimmy Kimmel" all the time, everyone can help.

            Comment


            • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

              Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
              Yes, Lance is definitely expendable on a night where we have two players combine to go 25-35 from the field for 67 points. One of them put up 30/10 and the other had the best game of his career with a 37/9/8 line. If those two players could consistently put up those kind of numbers, then yeah, this team could probably move on fine without Lance.

              But let's not forget that it still took OT to beat this team, and I'm guessing that doesn't happen with Lance in the game. The offense scored just 45 points in the first half of the game. A big reason for that was PG's crappy game, but Lance's absence was obviously huge to. We missed his scoring, his ball movement, his passing, and the way he draws double teams and hits open men. I guess I'm a "Lance fanboy" in that I recognize that his production this year is one of the main reasons that the team has gone from being very good to elite. You take a dynamic offensive player in Lance and replace him with someone who is currently poor on offense in Granger, and it lessens your starting lineup. Not being cold, not being a fanboy, just stating some obvious truths.

              Our lack of offense early on was erased by the fact that two of our players absolutely played out of their minds. All the credit in the world to Hill and West, but this team still missed Lance.
              I agree we would we not have gone in to OT if Lance were playing and gave us what he gave us in Portland when PG dropped 43 and single handedly kept us in the game.

              Lance gave us 2 that night, so you are technically correct, we would have won in regulation.

              Comment


              • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

                Originally posted by seeker80 View Post
                I agree we would we not have gone in to OT if Lance were playing and gave us what he gave us in Portland when PG dropped 43 and single handedly kept us in the game.

                Lance gave us 2 that night, so you are technically correct, we would have won in regulation.

                In Portland, Lance got into foul trouble early, only shot the ball 3 times, and fouled out. I'm sure the exact same thing would have happened last night and he would have duplicated his worst performance of the season. If players duplicate a prior extreme performance when playing the same team, then why didn't PG's 43 December points against Portland spill over into last night? Or why didn't George Hill shoot 1 for 8 last night? That's what he shot in Portland the first go around. Poor performances in that December game from everyone not named PG probably had a lot to do with the fact that we beat the Clipps in LA the night before.

                Comment


                • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

                  Barry whining all night took away from the game. God he's terrible
                  Impossible Is Nothing

                  Comment


                  • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

                    Originally posted by Romsey31 View Post
                    Barry whining all night took away from the game. God he's terrible

                    Still better than watching FSI for the billionth time, IMHO. ESPN's better HD makes it worth watching.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

                      Btw The way David jumped in celebration when pg hit that fourth qtr three was a joy to see
                      Impossible Is Nothing

                      Comment


                      • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

                        Originally posted by seeker80 View Post
                        I appreciate the thought, but I am a grouchy old guy and I know it. I don't trust myself with folks whose parents were probably in HS the same time I was, when I was attending my first Pacer game in the Coliseum in '73.

                        I know how rare the opportunities to win it all are.

                        I was behind the basket where Prince ruined what I thought was a lock to win a title. Was in attendance the game after the Brawl and knew we were about to banished to Siberia by Stern (good ****ing riddance). Was out of state but watching every game when we got to the finals too late in 2000. Metta World Artest was my favorite Pacer for awhile and I got in the habit of excusing his "lapses".

                        Got burned.

                        So now I am really, really sensitive to what I see are impediments to a title.

                        Right now? Its Magic. Little Bron. The guy who leads us by a large margin in techs and flops. The cause of all trade talk, breaking the bank, doing whatever it takes.

                        Its a distraction, a wild card, an unknown...

                        Last night, after the game, DWest was being interviewed by Brooke. Lance couldn't help himself, he crashed the interview and West shot him a look like "go f'ing away". Lance beat a hasty retreat. Kid can't help it, he's gotta be the center of attention.

                        Worries me. That's why I am glad we beat a club that is a real challenge for us without him. I hope he gets the message. And then we can work on PG so he learns he doesn't have to be "all Jimmy Kimmel" all the time, everyone can help.
                        I have to admit, Lance does worry me too. I am of the opinion that we should pay him big money to stick around, but I would be lying if I said he doesn't make me nervous.

                        One more tangent note: Paul George needs to cut the ******** with his constant whining to the refs. I can handle an off game from him like last night, but he has spent the past month (at least) barking at the refs on every no-call. Shut up, Paul.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

                          Just making sure everyone saw we just beat one of the best if not the best offensive team in the league.. reading this post you would think we lost by 10.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

                            Originally posted by Romsey31 View Post
                            Barry whining all night took away from the game. God he's terrible
                            Starting in the 3rd quarter or so, I actually did something new and enjoyed it: Coach Nick (from Bball Breakdown) was doing live online audio commentary of the game, and with an app on my iphone I could listen to him while still keeping up on Twitter, and I just muted the game after that. The only bad part was his live and my live were like a few seconds apart (he was ahead of me), but I still liked it. If the app would allow me to pause and resume to correct the gap, it'd be perfect.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

                              Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                              As an aside... have we had two players on the same team go off for 30 in a game yet this year? That's impressive.
                              The Pacers have not done it (before tonight, Paul George was the only Pacer to even score 30 in a game so far this year).

                              It's happened at least a few times on other teams. Marcus Thornton and Isaiah Thomas against the Pacers a couple weeks ago for example.

                              Unless I missed it, the last time the Pacers did it in the regular season, it was January 17, 2011 with Danny Granger scoring 32 and Darren Collison scoring 30.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Pacers / Blazers Post Game Thread - 2/7

                                Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                                Starting in the 3rd quarter or so, I actually did something new and enjoyed it: Coach Nick (from Bball Breakdown) was doing live online audio commentary of the game, and with an app on my iphone I could listen to him while still keeping up on Twitter, and I just muted the game after that. The only bad part was his live and my live were like a few seconds apart (he was ahead of me), but I still liked it. If the app would allow me to pause and resume to correct the gap, it'd be perfect.
                                Yea the pausing feature would be great, maybe you should suggest it to them. I use league pass seeing I'm in the islands, so I just switched the commentator to away
                                Impossible Is Nothing

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X