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:
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

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

Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

    Over 60 wins

    Golden State Warriors - 67.5

    Over 50 wins

    Boston Celtics - 56.5
    Houston Rockets - 55.5
    San Antonio Spurs - 54.5
    Cleveland Cavaliers - 53.5
    Oklahoma City Thunder - 51.5

    Over 40 wins

    Toronto Raptors - 48.5
    Minnesota Timberwolves - 48.5

    Milwaukee Bucks - 47.5

    Washington Wizards - 47.5
    Denver Nuggets - 45.5
    LA Clippers - 43.5
    Miami Heat - 43.5
    Charlotte Hornets - 42.5
    Philadelphia 76ers - 42.5
    Portland Trail Blazers- 42.5
    Utah Jazz - 40.5

    Over 30 wins

    New Orleans Pelicans - 39.5
    Detroit Pistons - 38.5
    Memphis Grizzlies - 37.5
    Dallas Mavericks - 35.5

    LA Lakers - 33.5
    Orlando Magic - 33.5
    Indiana Pacers - 31.5

    New York Knicks - 30.5

    Over 20 wins

    Phoenix Suns - 28.5
    Brooklyn Nets - 28.5
    Sacramento Kings - 28.5
    Atlanta Hawks - 25.5
    Chicago Bulls - 21.5
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 08-30-2017, 08:53 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

    Call me an optimist, but I think the Pacers will get over 31.5 wins fairly easily. I think the challenge would be at 35 wins.


    • #3
      Re: Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

      We need to get into that bottom 5 bad. As much as I'd love to see us make the playoffs the way to get better and land a franchise player for us is through the draft, and I know we've landed Reggie 30 years ago and PG outside of top 10 but I dont care. I'll take my chances with a pick inside the top 5 rather than #13-15 overall.

      I have a conspiracy theory that the NBA made us trade PG to OKC since they lost Durant last summer and promised us a top 2/3 pick if we did it. (: Lets go

      PS: Nets


      • #4
        Re: Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

        My guess is 32 wins, so I guess I take the over haha.


        • #5
          Re: Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

          Teams I can see tanking:

          Bulls - They've already came out and said they were.
          Hawks - Gutted their team by getting rid of all vets. They're real players for top pick in 2018.
          Kings - I don't see them tanking although they could end up with a top pick. They have a lot of talented youth plus signed vets like George Hill, Zach Randolph and Vince Carter.
          Nets - No reason to tank. They'll be motivated to screw that pick up for Boston/Cleveland. I dont think they want to gift wrap another team a #1 overall pick. Injuries were the main reason they won 20 games last year though...Boston was fortunate.
          Suns - I believe they need 1 more top pick and then they'll be ready to go. I see them as tankers.
          Knicks - They suck. Tanking.
          Magic - Not tanking.
          Lakers - Not tanking. Time to win. Lonzo will lead them and they keep their pick if it's #1 overall (too risky) and #6-30. They need the least amount of ping pong balls possible.
          Mavericks - Theywill not tank until they are eliminated from the playoffs, like they did last year, so I won't count them as tanking because they'll be shooting for wins for the first 6 months of season.
          Grizzlies - Sneaky tank team but can't list them yet. It seems like MEM is always injured. If Mike Conley goes down they'll be bad. Might put money on U37.5 wins now that I think about it.
          Pistons - no tank
          Pels - no tank


          A total of 4 teams that will likely be in full tank mode for the 2017-2018 season. We know the Pacers won't tank so it's highly unlikely we have a worse record than those 4 teams listed. Also, if/when we are eliminated from playoff contention I doubt we'll rest or tank. We'll just be shooting for costly wins that screw up our draft pick. We just need to hope we somehow completely suck or have an injury plagued season or get hooked up at the draft lottery. A top 5 pick + the cap space we can create next summer would be oh so nice. But don't plan on it. We need it badly though, sets us up.


          • #6
            Re: Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

            I don't think the Knicks are going to tank. They won't make the playoffs but Hornacek is fighting for his job.


            • #7
              Re: Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

              Originally posted by I Love P View Post
              Nets - No reason to tank. They'll be motivated to screw that pick up for Boston/Cleveland. I dont think they want to gift wrap another team a #1 overall pick. Injuries were the main reason they won 20 games last year though...Boston was fortunate.
              I really don't get this. I watch the Nets a dozen times with and without Lin and Lopez. I was row 3 when they came to Indy. Their roster was trash and they had every reason to want to win. I don't know why so many people think they were more unfortunate than other teams with injuries. And I don't know why so many people are trying to speak them into relevancy. Maybe because they hate Boston. Maybe they hated the trade of KG and Pierce. Maybe you are Russian.

              The main reason why the lost was they weren't good at all. And they are not that much better.


              • #8
                Re: Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                Toronto Raptors - 48.5
                I would bet the over on a team that won 51 games in a tougher conference.


                • #9
                  Re: Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

                  Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                  I would bet the over on a team that won 51 games in a tougher conference.
                  Raptors Under 48.5 wins is one of my favorite, if not favorite, play. It was Nets O20.5 wins which was the opening line a few months ago. I planned on emptying the 401k & all accounts on the over. Now it's 28.5, which is close to what it should be. I say 30.5 but still not as comfortable with 28.5 than 20.5 lol.

                  I put the Raptors OU @ 41.5. Im not big on:

                  Kyle Lowry (played 60 games last year) / Delon Wright (47 games played in 2 seasons)
                  Demar DeRozan / Norman Powell - SG position is set
                  CJ Miles (He's a bench player) / Bruno Cabloco (3 years 23 games 1.2 ppg) / OG Anuboy
                  Serge Ibaka (each year his stats get worse. Is he really 27?) / Pascal Siakm
                  Jonas Valencinous (on the trading block) / Jakob Poetll (just a sophomore)

                  I'd feel a lot better if Kyle Lowry, Serge Ibaka & CJ Miles were on contract years but all 3 of those guys just got paid this offseason. I'm willing to say at least 2 of those guys won't live up to the contract this year & will coast through the year. Kyle Lowry 3 years $100 million? What's going to drive him? Lowry will probably miss a bunch of games.

                  I like DeRozan, Powell & don't mind Jonas but they're counting on a lot of guys with no experience. I hated when CJ Miles started here & always said no team can be successful with CJ in their starting lineup. He should be an 8th man. Toronto could very well could miss the playoffs. You know there will be injuries. Last year I put money on Charlotte missing the playoffs & they did. That's what I'm doing with Toronto. They're out.


                  • #10
                    Re: Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

                    Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                    I really don't get this. I watch the Nets a dozen times with and without Lin and Lopez. I was row 3 when they came to Indy. Their roster was trash and they had every reason to want to win. I don't know why so many people think they were more unfortunate than other teams with injuries. And I don't know why so many people are trying to speak them into relevancy. Maybe because they hate Boston. Maybe they hated the trade of KG and Pierce. Maybe you are Russian.

                    The main reason why the lost was they weren't good at all. And they are not that much better.
                    I watched all their games. Lin played the first 5 games of the season before getting injured. They went 2-3 & 2 of their 3 losses were by a combined 7 pts, 5 @ Boston / 2 @ Milwaukee. The Nets last 21 games which Lin played in they went 10-11. They won 20 games last year & lost their best player yet their OU went up 8.5 games.

                    Celtics, Bucks, Cavs, Wizards, Heat are the only 5 teams in the east who are locked into the playoffs.
                    Bulls, Hawks, Knicks, Magic are 4 teams locked for the lottery.
                    That leaves 6 teams left for the final 3 East seeds #6, #7, #8: Raptors, Hornets, Pistons, Pacers, Nets, 76ers. Tough to predict which 3 will back in out of those 6


                    • #11
                      Re: Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

                      Looks like you feel strongly about those picks, empty that 401k then.


                      • #12
                        Re: Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

                        I have no clue how....but Vegas always have a good idea about how Teams will end up performing. The only way that I can see that the Pacers outperform this Win total is if something major happens ( such as a major trade where the Pacers take on some key long-term piece and/or this team IS WAYYYY better than we think ). But unless some no brainer trade comes a long....I don't see that happening. I think that KP will stick to his plan to use Cap Space to amass trading and long-term assets. At most, I can see the Pacers winning a few games more or less than this Win total.....but IMHO a really small chance that we significantly improve this win total.

                        This will likely put us somewhere within the top 10 Lottery which I have no problem with. As long as our likely long term core of Dipo/Myles/CoJo/Lance/Sabonis/Leaf and short term core of DC/Bojan/Thad gets consistent minutes while we "test the waters" with GRIII to see if we should add him to the long term core or not, then I am fine with losing 2 out of every 3 games. The key to this and next season is developing and figuring out what our long-term core is and utilizing the Salary Cap space to improve this team for the long term.
                        Last edited by CableKC; 08-30-2017, 03:04 PM.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.


                        • #13
                          Re: Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

                          Lakers under 33.5 and I feel pretty strongly about it. Ball is a rookie and I don't know how good he'll really be and Lopez is decent but he didn't do anything in Brooklyn, plus the Lakers are still in the Western Conference.

                          Oh and from above, the Lakers don't keep their pick under any circumstances, if it's 2-5 it goes to Boston, 1 or anything past 5 it goes to Philly. They just aren't very talented still and relying on a rookie point guard to lead you near the playoffs is asking a lot.

                          The Suns are about tired of young guys which is why they were trying to be in the Kyrie bidding. I think their talent being healthy gets them to 30-35 wins but they could fall lower.

                          Pistons also feels like an easy over...they were 10th last year and clearly Chicago, Atlanta and Indiana will fall off so they should be a lock in with their talent. I'd feel way more comfortable with their 38.5 against Charlotte and Philly's 42.5, I think they'll be fighting for those last couple spots.
                          "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                          ----------------- Reggie Miller


                          • #14
                            Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

                            Seems like a safe guess to me. There's so much up in the air that it's hard for me to expect more. I think I was drinking some kool aid earlier in the summer and thought it'd be around 35.

                            Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
                            Last edited by Hicks; 08-31-2017, 10:56 AM.


                            • #15
                              Re: Vegas - Westgate super bookk over/under for season

                              Who else thought this was a BornIndy post when they read the threat title?