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

The Official Golden State/Stephen Jackson Thread

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

  • Re: Golden State winning because of Jackon?

    I think that SJax is one of the reasons why they are winning....but the main reasons IMHO is because BDiddy and JRich are back and that the entire 8-man rotation is healthy.

    IMHO....the Warriors are doing good now cuz everything that has to go right for them ( everyone is healthy, good team chemistry, overall confidence, etc. ) is happening at the right time.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • Re: Golden State winning because of Jackon?

      GS is doing well because of Davis, Jack, Al, Ellis, and J-Rich right now. All of them are playing inspired ball. I think everyone is essential to their success. Not to mention guys like Matt Barnes. I think that offensive rebound Barnes snagged from Dirk said it all. The Mavs were just lulled to sleep in the regular season. I think they got a wake up call. I'll be shocked if the Warriors win more than 2 games but for an 8 seed playing a 67-game winner, that is a big deal.

      Comment


      • Re: Golden State winning because of Jackon?

        You may recall that Bill Wennington carried the Bulls to many NBA championships.

        Well, that's what you would recall if you happen to be a Bill Wennington fanboy.

        Jax improved to a 44.6% percent shooter as a Warrior, easily a career high after stinking it up at 41% while sandbagging as a Pacer. Not exactly all-world performance, even if you only care about on-court behavior.
        The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

        Comment


        • Re: Golden State winning because of Jackon?

          Of course they're winning because of Jack. He's a team leader, their best defender, one of their most versatile and reliable scorers, and the 2nd best playmaker and distributor.

          Warriors.com changed their official game notes to reflect only the playoffs, but they had statistics that showed the W-L for each player in the games they played. Jack had the highest.

          Comment


          • Re: Golden State winning because of Jackon?

            Yes, Jackson was the savior of the GS franchise Next comes the entire West Coast then the Middle East.
            The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

            Comment


            • Re: Golden State winning because of Jackon?

              Originally posted by pwee31 View Post
              You can't hide the fact that Al and SJax have helped the Warriors make a push. Of course B Diddy and JRich are key parts to their success, but Al and SJax have had big games, and hit big shots as well, so it's definitely nice for GSW to have all those options
              I don't think the trade helped them more than it hurt us. That doesn't mean it did not help them. Just not as much as some people are claiming. I like Jackson a lot. Hate the antics but loved his game. Loved Harringtons attitude and his emotion on the court. I feel that with a different coach things would have worked out differently this year, but that is a big what IF.

              Karma I never insinuated that the series was over. In fact I don't understand your reply.

              Comment


              • Re: Golden State winning because of Jackon?

                Can we merge all this different threads about the Warriors and Jax?

                This is getting out of hand, seeing 5 different topics about the same thing.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • Re: Golden State winning because of Jackon?

                  That's what I thought was crazy. GSW has guys like B Diddy, JRich, Monta, Barnes, Beidrins, and Pietrus.

                  After hearing the Pacers made an 8 player swap, I figured I would at least see ONE of these guys in the trade. LOL jokes on me

                  You add SJax and Al to that group of players, with Nellie system, and they were bound to succeed.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Golden State winning because of Jackon?

                    As a Warrior fan of many years who had to go 13 years w/o seeing a playoff game before Sunday night, I can tell you that everyone (best 7 players) on the team has been essential to the team finally ending the drought.

                    Davis, JRich, Jackson, Harrington, Ellis, Biedrins and Barnes are the main guys. Pietrus has been up/down (mostly down) all year. The W's probably wont' re-sign him.

                    One thing that's deceptive are the records of the W's before and after the trade. I think the record before the trade was 19-20 and the record aftewards was 23-20.

                    That doesn't illustrate, however, how much tougher our schedule was during the 2nd half of the season. We had more road games against tougher opponents. In the 1st half, not only did we had a heavy home schedule, we were at home when opposing teams would play us on the 2nd game of a back to back. We were pretty disappointed with the 19-20 pre-trade record b/c we knew up to that point that we had a very cushy schedule. When we didn't do better than that, we figured we hadn't stored up enough wins for the cold hard winter when the schedule would get considerably harder.

                    We figured it was over when we didn't make hay when things were easy. Incredibly, the team responded after a close loss to Washington and went 16-5 after that game.

                    In the last 10 games of the season, Nellie started using his small ball lineup because he thought Biedrins (then 20 years old and playing his first season of big minutes) had been worn down since January. So he started a lineup of Harrington, Jackson, JRich, Baron, Monta Ellis.

                    That team went 9-1 to finish the season (one loss was to the Spurs), and we needed everyone of those wins. What was really amazing was how skeptical/doubtful our fans were compared to the players. We figured it was just another late season run of lowering our lottery pick while falling short again, but the players never seemed to doubt they would do it. They were confident and you could see it in the way they spoke and in their body language.

                    It was a total team effort from every guy. Everyone had a hand in it. They played unselfishly and had a look of determination in their eyes that I haven't seen in any W's team in a long, long time.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Golden State winning because of Jackon?

                      Originally posted by d_c View Post
                      As a Warrior fan of many years who had to go 13 years w/o seeing a playoff game before Sunday night, I can tell you that everyone (best 7 players) on the team has been essential to the team finally ending the drought.

                      Davis, JRich, Jackson, Harrington, Ellis, Biedrins and Barnes are the main guys. Pietrus has been up/down (mostly down) all year. The W's probably wont' re-sign him.

                      One thing that's deceptive are the records of the W's before and after the trade. I think the record before the trade was 19-20 and the record aftewards was 23-20.

                      That doesn't illustrate, however, how much tougher our schedule was during the 2nd half of the season. We had more road games against tougher opponents. In the 1st half, not only did we had a heavy home schedule, we were at home when opposing teams would play us on the 2nd game of a back to back. We were pretty disappointed with the 19-20 pre-trade record b/c we knew up to that point that we had a very cushy schedule. When we didn't do better than that, we figured we hadn't stored up enough wins for the cold hard winter when the schedule would get considerably harder.

                      We figured it was over when we didn't make hay when things were easy. Incredibly, the team responded after a close loss to Washington and went 16-5 after that game.

                      In the last 10 games of the season, Nellie started using his small ball lineup because he thought Biedrins (then 20 years old and playing his first season of big minutes) had been worn down since January. So he started a lineup of Harrington, Jackson, JRich, Baron, Monta Ellis.

                      That team went 9-1 to finish the season (one loss was to the Spurs), and we needed everyone of those wins. What was really amazing was how skeptical/doubtful our fans were compared to the players. We figured it was just another late season run of lowering our lottery pick while falling short again, but the players never seemed to doubt they would do it. They were confident and you could see it in the way they spoke and in their body language.

                      It was a total team effort from every guy. Everyone had a hand in it. They played unselfishly and had a look of determination in their eyes that I haven't seen in any W's team in a long, long time.
                      Last time we saw that in Indiana was January.

                      Comment


                      • Re: We should trade for this guy

                        [QUOTE=Y2J;568634]Don Nelson is only an average coach, and an average coach known to say ridiculous things at times.


                        Stephen Jackson is a borderline top-20 shooting guard.

                        17 SG's Easily Better than Stephen Jackson....
                        Joe Johnson
                        Paul Pierce
                        Ben Gordon
                        Larry Hughes
                        Allen Iverson
                        Rip Hamilton
                        Jason Richardson
                        Tracy McGrady (GF)
                        Kobe Bryant
                        Dwyane Wade
                        Michael Redd
                        Vince Carter
                        Andre Iguodala (GF)
                        Brandon Roy
                        Manu Ginobili
                        Kevin Martin
                        Ray Allen


                        12 SG's Arguably Better than Stephen Jackson.....
                        Jerry Stackhouse
                        J.R. Smith
                        Corey Maggette (GF)
                        Ricky Davis
                        Monta Ellis
                        Marquis Daniels (GF)
                        Mike Dunleavy (GF)
                        Quentin Richardson
                        Jamaal Crawford
                        Raja Bell
                        Morris Peterson
                        Mike Miller (GF)
                        QUOTE]

                        I'm calling BS on most of these, sounds like pure hate.....None of those guys in bold are better than Jackson......

                        Comment


                        • Re: We should trade for this guy

                          I would take Kevin Martin and Raja over Jackson, just basketball related.

                          Those aren't the only two I would take over him, just the two that are so far ahead of Jax is laughable.

                          You need to watch more Sac, if you don't think K. Martin isn't a very good SG.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • Re: We should trade for this guy

                            I would add Iguodala, next to Kevin Martin.
                            2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                            2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                            2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                            Comment


                            • Re: Golden State winning because of Jackon?

                              Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                              I think that SJax is one of the reasons why they are winning....but the main reasons IMHO is because BDiddy and JRich are back and that the entire 8-man rotation is healthy.

                              IMHO....the Warriors are doing good now cuz everything that has to go right for them ( everyone is healthy, good team chemistry, overall confidence, etc. ) is happening at the right time.
                              Um, they had 19 games healthy together BEFORE the trade, and that was less total games played than post-trade, which means that the 20 games post-trade with Davis and Rich were a smaller % of their total games played.

                              Check out this view
                              GS with Jack 23-15 (.605)

                              With Al 23-19 (.548)


                              Of course they aren't just winning because of Jack/Al. They were .500 before the deal basically and that meant guys like Baron and Rich were getting the team SOME wins. What Jack and Al did was push it over the top.

                              Obviously if GS traded Baron and Rich to Indy for Dun and Troy the Warriors would drop like a rock. It's not JUST Jack/Al, it's adding their talent to a team that just needed a little bit more.


                              BTW, I fully expect Dallas to win this series, and so does Chris Mullin (on Tony Bruno today). Mullin admitted that Dallas has more talent and that his team has to play above their level to win games.

                              But the key is that GS is clearly better than a .500 8th seed now, and that is due directly to making that trade. Mullin said trades have to pan out and he wouldn't go on record as saying GS won the deal, but he's trying not to burn trading bridges. Bruno on the other hand made no bones about the fact that the Pacers got jobbed.


                              That doesn't illustrate, however, how much tougher our schedule was during the 2nd half of the season.
                              This is also true. As I posted in the "we should trade for this guy" thread, after Jack and Baron returned from injury (around the WSH technical foul loss) they only lost to ONE non-elite team (POR). Their other losses were SAS, @SAS, @UTH, @LAL. They lost to LAL by 2 and Utah by 4. They beat Utah later, they won @DET, they beat DAL twice and the first time was before DAL was cruising. They beat PHX and won @HOU. They also beat the playoff Nuggets, and their win over the Clips helped put them into the 8th seed over LAC. They even beat the Wiz WITH Arenas still.

                              Basically the only elite team they saw in the last month and a half that they didn't beat was SAS. DAL, PHX, HOU, UTH - that's the other 4 of the top 5 West playoff teams, and throw in the #1 seed in the East. They were 9-1 at home after Jack returned from the foot injury at Detroit, and 7 of those wins were vs playoff teams.


                              Sorry Jack haters, but if that was the Pacers doing that down the stretch we'd be doing backflips and talking about how they were a lot better than their record and had a legit shot to go deep in the playoffs or even to the Finals. As long as GS doesn't catch SAS it doesn't sound that far fetched.

                              Again, I don't think they beat Dallas ultimately, but it shouldn't be surprising that they can win some games against them in the playoffs.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Golden State winning because of Jackon?

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                                Um, they had 19 games healthy together BEFORE the trade, and that was less total games played than post-trade, which means that the 20 games post-trade with Davis and Rich were a smaller % of their total games played.

                                Check out this view
                                GS with Jack 23-15 (.605)

                                With Al 23-19 (.548)


                                Of course they aren't just winning because of Jack/Al. They were .500 before the deal basically and that meant guys like Baron and Rich were getting the team SOME wins. What Jack and Al did was push it over the top.

                                Obviously if GS traded Baron and Rich to Indy for Dun and Troy the Warriors would drop like a rock. It's not JUST Jack/Al, it's adding their talent to a team that just needed a little bit more.


                                BTW, I fully expect Dallas to win this series, and so does Chris Mullin (on Tony Bruno today). Mullin admitted that Dallas has more talent and that his team has to play above their level to win games.

                                But the key is that GS is clearly better than a .500 8th seed now, and that is due directly to making that trade. Mullin said trades have to pan out and he wouldn't go on record as saying GS won the deal, but he's trying not to burn trading bridges. Bruno on the other hand made no bones about the fact that the Pacers got jobbed.



                                This is also true. As I posted in the "we should trade for this guy" thread, after Jack and Baron returned from injury (around the WSH technical foul loss) they only lost to ONE non-elite team (POR). Their other losses were SAS, @SAS, @UTH, @LAL. They lost to LAL by 2 and Utah by 4. They beat Utah later, they won @DET, they beat DAL twice and the first time was before DAL was cruising. They beat PHX and won @HOU. They also beat the playoff Nuggets, and their win over the Clips helped put them into the 8th seed over LAC. They even beat the Wiz WITH Arenas still.

                                Basically the only elite team they saw in the last month and a half that they didn't beat was SAS. DAL, PHX, HOU, UTH - that's the other 4 of the top 5 West playoff teams, and throw in the #1 seed in the East. They were 9-1 at home after Jack returned from the foot injury at Detroit, and 7 of those wins were vs playoff teams.


                                Sorry Jack haters, but if that was the Pacers doing that down the stretch we'd be doing backflips and talking about how they were a lot better than their record and had a legit shot to go deep in the playoffs or even to the Finals. As long as GS doesn't catch SAS it doesn't sound that far fetched.

                                Again, I don't think they beat Dallas ultimately, but it shouldn't be surprising that they can win some games against them in the playoffs.

                                I agree that the trade sent them over the edge. Jackson burnt some fans around here and seeing him succeed burns them again. I want to say that he is not the only reason the GSWs are winning and I am tired of people infering that in order to get a rise out of the Jackson haters.

                                Would GSWs have made the playoffs if they were healthy without the trade? Yes

                                If they were healthy and made that trade (if you are GSW how do you not make it) would they have been a higher seed? YES

                                Jackson is playing great and I hope he puts the off court antics behind him. The difference between the PAcers and the Warriors is that if Jackson gets thrown into jail we could not have parted without him. The Warriors are deep enough they can.

                                Remember the depth we had a few years back. IT IS GONE.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X