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

All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

    Originally posted by wintermute View Post

    "I like our group of people," Ainge told USA Today last year. "I love talking to them. I'm trying to teach them about basketball, and they're trying to teach me about analytics. And I think it's important, so I think it's all good."
    Great quote. I think I'll make it my sig.
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

      Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
      I think Paul is the better player and definitely has more upside. But Ron was a beast in his day and LeBron James had nothing on him physically. I would take a young Artest on LeBron James one-on-one...maybe. Get a team around LeBron to pass to though...you can forget about it.
      Artest in his heyday would have defended Bron about as well as any human, but the other end of the court wouldn't be terribly fun for Ron. He wasn't a great offensive player (to his credit, he improved) and Bron is a world class defender when he wants to be.

      Comment


      • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

        Last night Lance was barely noticeable as a a member of the 2nd unit in a win over Chicago. Nevertheless, he dominated the Hornets post game thread.

        I don't know what it is about the guy ...

        http://www.atthehive.com/2015/2/26/8...ake-down-bulls
        "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

        Comment


        • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

          Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
          Last night Lance was barely noticeable as a a member of the 2nd unit in a win over Chicago. Nevertheless, he dominated the Hornets post game thread.

          I don't know what it is about the guy ...

          http://www.atthehive.com/2015/2/26/8...ake-down-bulls
          It's really simple in both cases:

          1.) For the Pacers, Lance was a guy who was hyped by both Bird and Boyle and eventually broke through to being an important piece on a very good team. He had wild antics that were highly polarizing and his career started with a legal trouble that involved being accused of assaulting his girlfriend right as the Pacers were trying to shed the "thug" labeling by the general public with generally good guys like Danny or Roy. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why so many Pacers fans were always split on Lance and the way his time here finished only lead to even more of a fissure between people who were deeply entrenched on both sides.

          2.) For the Hornets, Lance was supposed to be the guy who put them another level. He was supposed to help take them from 7/8 seed team to 3/4 seed and provide playmaking, fearlessness and playoff experience the team felt they needed. He hasn't and even though a lot of people are to blame, Lance's play has been particularly putrid thus drawing him into the middle of the discussion by virtue of being the new guy and being awful coupled with the expectations.


          Lance's 3rd stop (unless it's back with the Pacers) will probably be far less polarizing as his next contract will likely be well below what he has currently in Charlotte as will the expectations associated with his arrival.


          Comment


          • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

            Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
            It's really simple in both cases:

            1.) For the Pacers, Lance was a guy who was hyped by both Bird and Boyle and eventually broke through to being an important piece on a very good team. He had wild antics that were highly polarizing and his career started with a legal trouble that involved being accused of assaulting his girlfriend right as the Pacers were trying to shed the "thug" labeling by the general public with generally good guys like Danny or Roy. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why so many Pacers fans were always split on Lance and the way his time here finished only lead to even more of a fissure between people who were deeply entrenched on both sides.
            I disagree, in my opinion the most polarizing thing about Lance was figuring out and defining how good of a basketball player he is and could be. His potential often clouds perception of what he actually has done, making it very difficult to come to any agreement on what Lance the basketball player brings. As someone who loved Lance but grew tired of him last season around ASG, I never once thought about any "thug" labeling and I don't think most fans did either. He was easily one of the most cheered fans I can remember since Reggie.

            Comment


            • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

              Whoa, whoa, not labeling Lance a "thug" at all, just saying his career was peppered with all sorts of events that just continued to build on one another. Lance's time with Indy was a series of high and lows is my general point. It's not surprising he was such a polarizing figure.

              High: Bird and Boyle rave about his talent even as he's just a 2nd round pick who hasn't played
              Low: Accused of assaulting his girlfriend
              High: Shows some promise in limited minutes
              Low: Makes a choking sign from the bench to Lebron for no real reason
              High: Gets inserted to the starting lineup and forms the perfect starting 5 for what the team needed as Danny was out. Blossoms all the way up to his dominating performance in game 6 against the Knicks
              Low: The team fades out at the end of the year and Lance is more interested in blowing in Lebron's ear than listening his boss. He turns down the Pacers offer for less money to go play for a worse team.

              Lance was a roller coaster with the Pacers.
              Last edited by Trader Joe; 02-26-2015, 01:44 PM.


              Comment


              • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                Whoa, whoa, not labeling Lance a "thug" at all, just saying his career was peppered with all sorts of events that just continued to build on one another. Lance's time with Indy was a series of high and lows is my general point. It's not surprising he was such a polarizing figure.
                I didn't think that's what you were saying, basically what I meant was I don't believe Lance's past and antics have very much do with it. I just think most people that followed the team thought losing Lance was a huge blow. And you had another smaller group that thought he needed to go. Even with Lance playing like garbage, without a healthy Pacer team, neither point can be 100% proven. That's what has caused all these posts. Had the Pacers still been a top East team, with Lance's play, there would be no discussion. But I could be wrong.

                Comment


                • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                  Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
                  Whoa, whoa, not labeling Lance a "thug" at all, just saying his career was peppered with all sorts of events that just continued to build on one another. Lance's time with Indy was a series of high and lows is my general point. It's not surprising he was such a polarizing figure.

                  High: Bird and Boyle rave about his talent even as he's just a 2nd round pick who hasn't played
                  Low: Accused of assaulting his girlfriend
                  High: Shows some promise in limited minutes
                  Low: Makes a choking sign from the bench to Lebron for no real reason
                  High: Gets inserted to the starting lineup and forms the perfect starting 5 for what the team needed as Danny was out. Blossoms all the way up to his dominating performance in game 6 against the Knicks
                  Low: The team fades out at the end of the year and Lance is more interested in blowing in Lebron's ear than listening his boss. He turns down the Pacers offer for less money to go play for a worse team.

                  Lance was a roller coaster with the Pacers.
                  Bird hasn't been a roller coaster with Lance. Also, the Knicks performance was a prelude to an entire year where Lance played very well. That was hardly a roller coaster year for him...smh.

                  Yes, the team faltered but it was largely because of this:

                  1) Roy Hibbert fell apart
                  2) Paul George and his baby mama drama and selfies distracted the whole team
                  3) Disrupting team chemistry by dumping Granger and bringing in Bynum

                  Quite frankly, Lance did great under those circumstances. The Pacers recognized that which is why they wined and dined him and offered that contract.

                  Comment


                  • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                    Hornets coach Steve Clifford: Hype associated with Lance Stephenson signing wasn't good for anyone

                    Charlotte Hornets coach Steve Clifford is, by nature, candid. But Friday evening before the Boston Celtics game was the most direct I’ve heard him on the subject of Lance Stephenson.

                    Circled by media from Boston and some national outlets, Clifford said the first problem was totally unrealistic expectations from fans and media when Stephenson signed with the Hornets.

                    “A lot of this is totally off-base among basketball people,” Clifford said of the hype that Stephenson was on the verge of stardom. “He’s 23 years old. He’d played for one coach in one offense.”

                    As Clifford noted, Stephenson averaged 8.8 points two seasons ago and 13.8 points last season. So it was a much more realistic expectation he’d play in the vicinity of this season’s numbers (8.9 per game) than that he’d suddenly emerge as a 20 ppg., guy with a new team.

                    As Clifford described, Stephenson was the third or fourth option for the Indiana Pacers and it was much easier for him to get high-quality shots playing off the likes of Paul George and David West than it’s been with the offensively-challenged Hornets.

                    “The biggest problem for him is having to make more pull-ups this year than layups last year,” Clifford said, describing how Stephenson could get the ball to West, cut to the rim and get two or three cheap baskets a game.

                    Instead, Stephenson is shooting 37 percent from the field this season and 15 percent from 3-point range.

                    Clifford contrasted point guard Mo Williams’ quick transition to the Hornets with Stephenson’s more rocky experience. He said that’s not Stephenson’s fault; rather it illustrates the difference in their experiences.

                    Williams has played for seven other NBA franchises. He has seen everything the league can throw at him.

                    “Mo Williams in two days knew everything,” Clifford said.

                    Stephenson had no similar experiences on which he could rely when he signed with the Hornets in July.

                    “This is Lance’s first time playing with new guys,” Clifford said, adding it’s a fallacy Stephenson isn’t doing his part to make this work,

                    “His attitude has been fine,” Clifford said. “He hasn’t been kicked out of practice, or any of that.”
                    http://blogs.charlotte.com/inside_th...or-anyone.html

                    So basically, coming from a coach that is supporting Lance, Stephenson was over hyped as the second coming and he is more likely closer to an average player that benefitted from playing with actual All Stars. Hm, where have we heard that before...

                    Comment


                    • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                      West on why the Pacers are having some success after injuries caused a rough start...

                      Why didn't it come apart completely?

                      West has a theory.

                      "I mean, we've got grown men in this locker room," said West, who was instrumental in closing out the Cavaliers on Friday, saving an errant Hill runner from touching out of bounds and then hitting a 15-footer for a late six-point lead.

                      "We don't have any kids. We don't have guys that are knuckleheads or anything like that. We've got guys who are professional. We've got young guys who are trying to learn how to be professionals. We've got a good mix. When you have those components, that can get you through some tough times. We all like each other. And we've got a grown-man group, so that definitely helps."

                      You can read between the lines as a reference to Stephenson if you want. The reality is, even if George returns, the Pacers will miss Stephenson's talent if they make the playoffs, his ability to make a dynamic play when it appeared that none was possible. But it's reasonable to wonder, considering the way Stephenson has struggled in Charlotte, how he would have handled even more responsibility in George's absence in Indiana, and whether the Pacers would be in as stable a spot as they presently are.
                      http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...y-in-east-race

                      Hopefully we have a healthy team in the playoffs and we get a chance to see if our wing/guard rotation actually is improved this year.
                      Last edited by freddielewis14; 02-28-2015, 02:03 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                        The author talks about Lance, but West's reference to kids being in the locker room could have applied even more to Paul George and all his drama about a year ago. Paul certainly created at least as much drama as Lance last year and he called his own number far more than Lance who dished out assist and grabbed more possessions off the glass. These are just the facts and I know it doesn't fit the narrative here.

                        At one time, George Hill himself even referred to this team as Paul and Lance's team...the two hot-shot young players. Old school is just talking about that. The team will win meaningless regular season games when LeBron isn't even on the court of course. But old school will have his hands full when NBA teams actually start playing in the playoffs. Even Reggie called it (i.e. the playoffs) an entirely different level of play which relies more heavily on talent than effort. Effort certainly is a noble thing but it isn't getting any team a ring.

                        Comment


                        • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                          Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                          The author talks about Lance, but West's reference to kids being in the locker room could have applied even more to Paul George and all his drama about a year ago. Paul certainly created at least as much drama as Lance last year and he called his own number far more than Lance who dished out assist and grabbed more possessions off the glass. These are just the facts and I know it doesn't fit the narrative here.

                          At one time, George Hill himself even referred to this team as Paul and Lance's team...the two hot-shot young players. Old school is just talking about that. The team will win meaningless regular season games when LeBron isn't even on the court of course. But old school will have his hands full when NBA teams actually start playing in the playoffs. Even Reggie called it (i.e. the playoffs) an entirely different level of play which relies more heavily on talent than effort. Effort certainly is a noble thing but it isn't getting any team a ring.
                          Are you forgetting that 12-game winning streak the Cavs strolled into Banker's Life with less than a month ago?

                          http://www.basketball-reference.com/...502060IND.html

                          Also, why do you assume nobody's trying but the Pacers? When "NBA teams actually start playing in the playoffs," won't the Pacers, an NBA team, also actually start playing?
                          Time for a new sig.

                          Comment


                          • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                            Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
                            The author talks about Lance, but West's reference to kids being in the locker room could have applied even more to Paul George and all his drama about a year ago. Paul certainly created at least as much drama as Lance last year and he called his own number far more than Lance who dished out assist and grabbed more possessions off the glass. These are just the facts and I know it doesn't fit the narrative here.

                            At one time, George Hill himself even referred to this team as Paul and Lance's team...the two hot-shot young players. Old school is just talking about that. The team will win meaningless regular season games when LeBron isn't even on the court of course. But old school will have his hands full when NBA teams actually start playing in the playoffs. Even Reggie called it (i.e. the playoffs) an entirely different level of play which relies more heavily on talent than effort. Effort certainly is a noble thing but it isn't getting any team a ring.
                            Bottom line, CJ, Stuckey and Hill are producing on a playoff team. Lance isn't producing at all.

                            Comment


                            • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                              I like lance .when we drafted him i thought he would be good. But he is gone now ,so get over it.the fact is he did not want to be here so let him say ln nc and see how he will miss us more than we miss him.

                              Comment


                              • Re: All things Lance Stephenson thread for the next year or so

                                Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
                                Are you forgetting that 12-game winning streak the Cavs strolled into Banker's Life with less than a month ago?

                                http://www.basketball-reference.com/...502060IND.html

                                Also, why do you assume nobody's trying but the Pacers? When "NBA teams actually start playing in the playoffs," won't the Pacers, an NBA team, also actually start playing?
                                Don't you believe that teams "get up" for certain teams and take other teams lightly? It's really human nature. The NBA season is long and what you have with Cleveland is an important victory for them against GS and now it's time for LeBron to take the night off. No, not for a second do I put much stock in the regular season. The season is actually boring because I no longer believe these games are all truly competitive. Not until the playoffs do you see that focus.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X