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

Our record vs playoff caliber teams is worse that I thought

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

  • Our record vs playoff caliber teams is worse that I thought

    I've been saying that I was concerned that our record was somewhat skewed because I questioned how we were doing vs teams above .500%

    Well according to NBA radio today they stated we had the 22nd worst record in the league vs teams with winning records.

    Right our our seasonal record is

    19 - 3 vs sub .500 teams

    and a paltry

    4 - 9 vs teams above .500

    I haven't dug deeper yet but I also wonder in those 9 losses how many of them were by double digit losses.

    I mean at the end of the day you have to beat the bad teams to have a winning record but, wow, to be that bad vs. above.500 teams is more than a little concerning. It also bothers me that we have only played above .500 teams 13 times.


  • NuffSaid
    replied
    Originally posted by Peck View Post
    I've been saying that I was concerned that our record was somewhat skewed because I questioned how we were doing vs teams above .500%

    Well according to NBA radio today they stated we had the 22nd worst record in the league vs teams with winning records.

    Right our our seasonal record is

    19 - 3 vs sub .500 teams

    and a paltry

    4 - 9 vs teams above .500

    I haven't dug deeper yet but I also wonder in those 9 losses how many of them were by double digit losses.

    I mean at the end of the day you have to beat the bad teams to have a winning record but, wow, to be that bad vs. above.500 teams is more than a little concerning. It also bothers me that we have only played above .500 teams 13 times.
    I thought I'd tackle this topic again only from a different perspective.

    Comparing apples to apples, let's look at the Pacers' win/lose record against a team whose current overall record mirrors their own. In this case, I'm talking about the Denver Nuggets.

    As of this date, 01-16/2019, both the Pacers and the Nuggets share the same record at 29-14. When comparing the Paces' record against teams that at or above .500 to the Nuggets, there's no contest. The Pacers are 11-11 compared to the Nuggets who are 16-10. But when you compare them to the defending NBA champs, the Golden State Warriors, things even themselves out as the Warriors as 12-12 against teams at or above .500 and they're only .5 game above the Pacers with a record of 30-14.

    So, when I hear this talk about how soft the Pacers' schedule is or a comparison against +.500 teams I have to shake my head over it. Granted, they may not be doing as well as they should be against some of the top ranked teams in the league (those teams setting at 1-10), but against everyone else they're right their in line with every other top ranked team in the league.

    Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

    I agree with most of your post and I especially agree with the part I'm quoting but I want to add something on top of it. The other reason that this whole "vs .500 or above" stat is flawed is that it is easily malleable. Our current record against .500 or above teams is 9-11. We got those 5 extra wins (from 4 to 9) without actually doing anything about it ourselves (since we lost to both Boston and Toronto and haven't beaten a .500 or above team lately). We got those 5 extra wins because Miami, Utah and Sacramento are on winning streaks and got their record at or above .500. All 3 of those teams were 1 or 2 games below .500 at the time that this thread was started but they have won a number of games lately so they're all above .500 now. We are 5-1 against those 3 teams (2-0 vs Miami, 2-0 vs Utah, 1-1 vs Sacramento) so that's why our record looks better now. It has nothing to do with that we have done lately. Those wins were back in November - early December and in fact most of those games happened when Dipo was out (the Utah and Sacramento games, Dipo was there for the wins against Miami). Heck, if Brooklyn beats Houston tomorrow (a tall task, I know) then they will also reach .500 and our record against those teams will then become 11-11 (since we are 2-0 against Brooklyn).

    If people want to look at our record against the top teams of each conference then fine, that does make sense. It is far less malleable than ".500 or above" since we more or less know who those teams are. Especially in the East, the division between the top teams and the rest is crystal clear. Things in the West are a bit murkier since there are more teams capable of being in that tier but we have yet to face any of the teams at the very top (Denver, GSW, OKC). We have faced Houston and Portland and we did poorly against both of them (0-3, with the Houston losses being the most disappointing, Portland is just a team that we rarely beat no matter what).
    I hadn't even read your post before posting my own commentary, but it would seem great minds think alike.
    Last edited by NuffSaid; 01-16-2019, 03:12 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nuntius
    replied
    Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
    The biggest reason that 4-9 record against above .500 teams is flawed is because 4 of those loses came on the road out West and without Victor Oladipo. The 2 most recent loses we're without Myles Turner, the leading shotblocker in the NBA. So 6 of the 9 loses were on the road and without key starters. Take that loss record with a heaping grain of salt.
    I agree with most of your post and I especially agree with the part I'm quoting but I want to add something on top of it. The other reason that this whole "vs .500 or above" stat is flawed is that it is easily malleable. Our current record against .500 or above teams is 9-11. We got those 5 extra wins (from 4 to 9) without actually doing anything about it ourselves (since we lost to both Boston and Toronto and haven't beaten a .500 or above team lately). We got those 5 extra wins because Miami, Utah and Sacramento are on winning streaks and got their record at or above .500. All 3 of those teams were 1 or 2 games below .500 at the time that this thread was started but they have won a number of games lately so they're all above .500 now. We are 5-1 against those 3 teams (2-0 vs Miami, 2-0 vs Utah, 1-1 vs Sacramento) so that's why our record looks better now. It has nothing to do with that we have done lately. Those wins were back in November - early December and in fact most of those games happened when Dipo was out (the Utah and Sacramento games, Dipo was there for the wins against Miami). Heck, if Brooklyn beats Houston tomorrow (a tall task, I know) then they will also reach .500 and our record against those teams will then become 11-11 (since we are 2-0 against Brooklyn).

    If people want to look at our record against the top teams of each conference then fine, that does make sense. It is far less malleable than ".500 or above" since we more or less know who those teams are. Especially in the East, the division between the top teams and the rest is crystal clear. Things in the West are a bit murkier since there are more teams capable of being in that tier but we have yet to face any of the teams at the very top (Denver, GSW, OKC). We have faced Houston and Portland and we did poorly against both of them (0-3, with the Houston losses being the most disappointing, Portland is just a team that we rarely beat no matter what).

    Leave a comment:


  • bball_nomad
    replied
    It appears that not everything is as "rosy" in the Boston as they try to put it in front of the media.

    Take a good look how Pacers were acting after Kyrie's last shot. After that I'll post some tweets from some people.

    Here we go:











    Seems like a giant Colossus has foundation made of clay.

    Leave a comment:


  • bball_nomad
    replied
    OK, I thought BOS-BKN game would be fight till the end, but boy, how apocalyptically wrong I was.... Boston stayed in the game till almost mid third quarter.That moment, with the score Celtics still down by 2 points, 59-61, Brooklyn finished the quarter with a 29-7 run, completely taking Celtics out of the game, making their lead unreachable: 90-61. Nets kept rolling a little bit more, till 8:47 minutes were left in the game, with the lead 92-67 (they missed second free throw , but not be greedy, show some sympathy ).
    92-67, +25 with before mentioned 8:47 til the final whistle.
    Right now Celtics are 5th in the East with 25-18 record. they are 2.5 games behind 4th place and 7 games behind the East and NBA best Raptors. Streak - L3, Last 10 is 5-5.

    Bonus material: Boston, WE HAVE A PROBLEM!!! Watch below:




    Leave a comment:


  • bball_nomad
    replied
    According to some, who might be wrong, the very good Celtics team so far is yet struggling on the road. This time it's in Brooklyn. The score after two qs was 46 - 45, Celtics down by one.

    The game is tight, evenly matched and played.

    First points by the way of three point shot belong to home team, 3-0. After - it's a see-saw: 7-12, 20-16, 31-25, 37-39 and after the two - 46-45 in favor of BKN.

    Now BKN still ahead, 59-55. This is a close one, the night be entertaining. We'll see.

    Leave a comment:


  • bball_nomad
    replied
    Originally posted by able View Post

    A glass knows only 2 states, empty (thus absolutely useless) or full (thus ready to be made useless) a bottle with only half left we can discuss but if you don't empty glasses you shouldn't be drinking.
    Yes, comrade!!! You quoted me with a 100% efficiency and effectiveness and with the full directness. On just the very rare occasions humans are able (you got me?) to communicate, to interact, to be together with a 100% of understanding and correctness. Usually people "We are visible miscommunicating here." (once said Daenerys Targaryen), thus creating problems for each other. Sometimes some simple misunderstanding evolves into complete and utter miscommunication. The point break for such evolution happens to be a WW.We already had WWI, with the sequel WWII. Can't wait for the WWIII. Because after WWIII will be done, and maybe I evolve into homo sapien saipen sapien and only me will be for whatever reason the only lucky one in the range between completely doomed participants between 0.0000000002% and 100% who will make it through. Cause we know that WWIV will be fought with the clubs and stones. WW using just clubs and stones is the second most humane form from the result of 'miscommunicating" between at least two members of the homo sapiens , homo sapiens sapiens and homo sapiens sapiens sapiens family group. We , as a members who belong to the certain related family of species, were deprived of just a single one WW, (unlucky us). Homo sapiens was the reason for the WWI, their brothers and sisters, the homo sapiens sapiens caused WWII. I haven't met a single homo sapien sapien sapien personally yet and I know nobody who have already met (or maybe they they did, but just I don't know that they did). BUT we know that homo sapiens sapiens sapiens will be the culprits in that deed ( I mean WWIII).

    Oops, I did it again ... I am , I ... ,

    Oh well..., hey, WHAT THE BLEEP????????

    Let's and get completely

    OK, it's time to chill out and

    P.S.

    My relationship to any type of liquids containing containers is simple: When all is done, never ever a single drop of the fluids could be found.

    Last edited by bball_nomad; 01-14-2019, 09:38 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • McKeyFan
    replied
    Originally posted by able View Post

    A glass knows only 2 states, empty (thus absolutely useless) or full (thus ready to be made useless) a bottle with only half left we can discuss but if you don't empty glasses you shouldn't be drinking.
    Sounds like a Brit with a lot of experience in such things.

    Leave a comment:


  • able
    replied
    Originally posted by bball_nomad View Post

    Exactly, You never get the glass 100% full. Some people see half full, some - half empty.
    A glass knows only 2 states, empty (thus absolutely useless) or full (thus ready to be made useless) a bottle with only half left we can discuss but if you don't empty glasses you shouldn't be drinking.

    Leave a comment:


  • bball_nomad
    replied
    Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
    I remember many seasons where we bemoaned our inability to beat the teams that had worse records. We're finally doing that. And we have a few teams that are better that we don't beat as much. What's to hate? We're a top five team and act like it.
    Exactly, You never get the glass 100% full. Some people see half full, some - half empty.

    Leave a comment:


  • naptownmenace
    replied
    The Celtics and the Sixers struggle on the road. In the Playoffs, if the Pacers have the homecourt, that's a major advantage. Sabonis and McDermott play better on the road than at home so the Pacers have that going for them. Their slower pace and defense are tailor-made for the Playoffs.

    Regarding the Celtics, I think they might have too many alpha males on that team and Kyrie, although a great player, really isn't the leader he thinks he is. This Pacers team on the other hand reminds me of the 2004 Pistons in how their team was loaded with selfless players who played together, played lockdown defense, and didn't care who lead them in scoring each night.

    Leave a comment:


  • McKeyFan
    replied
    I remember many seasons where we bemoaned our inability to beat the teams that had worse records. We're finally doing that. And we have a few teams that are better that we don't beat as much. What's to hate? We're a top five team and act like it.

    Leave a comment:


  • bball_nomad
    replied
    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    If Boston gets it together they are easily the 2nd best team in the east. But as of right now with their issues I agree Milwaukee has them beat. I have very little faith in Kyrie leading that team. Letís just say he is no LeBron in terms of leading a team. So I guess I have another revision but Boston certainly has better raw talent.

    Ok maybe I am enamored by the talent...it may be a collection of great talent instead of a great team.
    Boston is HUGELY overrated. JMHO I mean Boston players, not the coach. BUT, then a very good new coach shows up, after awhile other good coaches (there are like half or even maybe more in the NBA) cracks his little magical tricks that makes him special. After that, still maybe even the best coach's impact on the team's overall performance diminishes. To what degree it diminishes - that depends. Let's not get into that. Initially by a slight margin, later it goes up and down and finally someone else takes his place as the best of the best.
    Sure, Celtics drubbed us, but after - they put two stinkers on the road: against MIA and WAS.
    So, let's agree to disagree
    Last edited by bball_nomad; 01-14-2019, 02:00 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Eleazar
    replied
    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    If Boston gets it together they are easily the 2nd best team in the east.
    Eh, I think people overrate Boston's talent. I think they are talented enough to be the 2nd seed, but are in no way easily better than the Bucks or Pacers. All of these teams are very close in talent and ability. If one team wins more games than another team it is only because it is an 82 game season and quantum fluctuations can be the difference between 56 wins and 54 wins.

    Leave a comment:


  • freddielewis14
    replied
    Dipo has missed 11 games, and Turner has missed time. As we have seen itís very difficult to win against good teams w/o those guys.

    But the important thing is to win the games youíre supposed to win in the regular season. I donít care if we win 45 games or 55, I just hope this team is built for playoffs.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X