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

Are we contenders?

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

  • #61
    Are we a contender?

    Guys, I've followed contenders. I've known contenders very well. Contending is about all I care about. Guys, this team is no contender.

    Comment


    • #62
      This team believes it's a contender and that's the only thing I care about on this matter.

      Comment


      • #63
        The Pacers have about 10 games left against teams that will probably make the playoffs and 16 games against lesser talented teams. I think they could reasonably finish the season 16-10 the rest of the way, which would give them a 53-29 record. I think that might be enough for a #4 seed. That certainly would make things interesting going into the playoffs.

        All of that might not result in us declaring this team a contender but it will clearly show how close the team is to contending next year. Next season is year 3 of the current 3-year plan. Next Season is the one they are supposed to be contenders.
        Last edited by naptownmenace; 02-09-2019, 11:28 PM.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
          Ive paid to see us get blown out at home 5 times this year, WITH our franchise player.
          There have been two teams that have blown us out at home. Golden State and Philadelphia. Both of those teams are among the elite in the league (with GSW being the absolute elite). We were even missing Oladipo in the GSW game so that blowout was well-expected. What other home loss was a blowout? You could claim that the Spurs game wasn't very close (we lost by 11) but we were missing Myles in that game. Other than those 3 games, everything else has been within 10 points (and the San Antonio game was just 1 point over it). The numbers really don't add up.

          Also, we have only lost 7 games at home. It would be weird if 5 of those losses were blowouts.
          Last edited by Nuntius; 02-10-2019, 05:48 AM. Reason: Fixed the thing that PacerDude pointed out
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

            There have been two teams that have blown us at home. Golden State and Philadelphia. Both of those teams are among the elite in the league (with GSW being the absolute elite). We were even missing Oladipo in the GSW game so that blowout was well-expected. What other home loss was a blowout? You could claim that the Spurs game wasn't very close (we lost by 11) but we were missing Myles in that game. Other than those 3 games, everything else has been within 10 points (and the San Antonio game was just 1 point over it). The numbers really don't add up.

            Also, we have only lost 7 games at home. It would be weird if 5 of those losses were blowouts.
            You are partially correct, I am counting the Golden State game in which Vic didnt play, and one of the losses was back in November when I watched them get worked in Charlotte.

            The other three were Sixers, Spurs and the Blazers very early in the year. Blazers beat us by double digits. The Spurs game wasnt nearly that close, they outscored us every quarter, and I considered it a **** poor effort. And when I walked out of the Sixers game we were down 25 i believe.

            We also lost to the lowly Cavs at home, which is just inexcusable. If thats even a decent team that night, its most definitely a blowout

            If youre a contender, and lets say you win 55 games total. That leaves 27 losses. If 7- 10 of those are home losses, you are not really a great home team and likely wont be able to protect your home court in the playoffs against really good teams. And you have no chance of winning without HCA, because it now requires you to win 2 out of 4 on the opponents home court, which probably isnt gonnna happen, considering youre only a .500 club on the road (which is reqlly good) against the entire league, which includes the games against non playoff teams.

            Just fyi, when I look at records, I eliminate most of the games and just focus on tough matchups. Who cares if we beat Detroit at home? I dont. I wanna know how they compete against Golden State or the Spurs or in road games against the elite teams. THAT tells you so much more about the team. They SHOULD be up for that game and give their best performance.

            You ever heard the saying "lets see what we are made of"? Well, you dont say that when youre doing something easy, like beating a bad team.

            We have not fared well against good teams this year, thats just a fact. And its an easy way to gauge just how good we are. This year, we are a good team of overachievers that gets exposed against more talented clubs. Its not an insult to the team, its just reality.
            Last edited by Taterhead; 02-10-2019, 05:41 AM.
            "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

              There have been two teams that have blown us at home. .
              I'll attribute it to the language differences, but you might have wanted to say "blown us OUT at home". What you said has a slightly different meaning.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Taterhead View Post

                You are partially correct, I am counting the Golden State game in which Vic didnt play, and one of the losses was back in November when I watched them get worked in Charlotte.

                The other three were Sixers, Spurs and the Blazers very early in the year. Blazers beat us by double digits. The Spurs game wasnt nearly that close, they outscored us every quarter, and I considered it a **** poor effort. And when I walked out of the Sixers game we were down 25 i believe.
                The GSW and the Sixers games were definitely games that we were blown out. 100% agreed here. The Charlotte game, as you noted, wasn't a home game so it shouldn't be a part of the games that you mentioned there. We were definitely blown out in that game, though, and you were there to watch it which sucks. Granted, that game was mostly a result of aberrant 3-point shooting on Charlotte's part (62.1% from 3 in 29 attempts) but yes, it was a blowout even if it wasn't a blowout at home.

                The game against the Spurs was pretty borderline. The Spurs had a solid lead throughout the game and I will agree that the effort wasn't good but it is important to note that we were missing Myles Turner that game. Myles is a very important player for us this year, especially on the defensive end. It's no wonder that we struggled defensively.

                As for the Blazers game, I don't consider it a blowout. We were down by 2 points to start the 4th quarter and only down 6 points with about 6 minutes to go. That's when the game got out of control and the Blazers built a double-digit lead. Then Lillard hit a contested jumper, DC missed an open 3 and Zach Collins hit a quick 3 and we're suddenly down 11. We then made another run to bring the game within 5 points (98-93) with 1 and a half minute to go but then they hit a couple of FTs, Dipo missed a J and then Lillard hit the dagger. That wasn't a blowout. It was a game with 6 lead changes and 8 ties. It was a game that went back and forth for most of the game but the Blazers were able to control it in the final minute. It was closer than the final score indicates.

                Plus, we generally suck against Portland. We have a 34-55 record against them overall (ever since the two franchises first faced each other) and a 3-10 record against them since they drafted Lillard. I don't know why we suck so much against them but we do. I always expect us to lose when we play them regardless of whether our team is good or not.

                Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                We also lost to the lowly Cavs at home, which is just inexcusable. If thats even a decent team that night, its most definitely a blowout
                True. That was certainly an inexcusable loss. But the Pacers have been really good at beating those below .500 teams this season. It's one of the reasons why our record is so good. We are currently 25-6 in games against teams below .500 and that's despite the fact that we have dropped 3 games against such teams (@Memphis, @Washington, @Orlando) ever since Dipo went down. Do you want to know how many teams have lost less games against those kind of teams? Only 2. Toronto (24-3) and Golden State (21-2).

                Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                If youre a contender, and lets say you win 55 games total. That leaves 27 losses. If 7- 10 of those are home losses, you are not really a great home team and likely wont be able to protect your home court in the playoffs against really good teams. And you have no chance of winning without HCA, because it now requires you to win 2 out of 4 on the opponents home court, which probably isnt gonnna happen, considering youre only a .500 club on the road (which is reqlly good) against the entire league, which includes the games against non playoff teams.

                Just fyi, when I look at records, I eliminate most of the games and just focus on tough matchups. Who cares if we beat Detroit at home? I dont. I wanna know how they compete against Golden State or the Spurs or in road games against the elite teams. THAT tells you so much more about the team. They SHOULD be up for that game and give their best performance.

                You ever heard the saying "lets see what we are made of"? Well, you dont say that when youre doing something easy, like beating a bad team.

                We have not fared well against good teams this year, thats just a fact. And its an easy way to gauge just how good we are. This year, we are a good team of overachievers that gets exposed against more talented clubs. Its not an insult to the team, its just reality.
                Beating Detroit (who isn't even an outright tanking team) at home is definitely not an indication of greatness. No one has claimed that. But do you know what winning those games results to? It results in getting HCA. It results in getting a good seed. That's exactly what we were doing before Dipo's injury. That was our trajectory. Our trajectory indicated that we would win about 52-53 games and possibly retain the 3rd seed and HCA. How were we doing that? By playing nearly .500 ball against the above .500 teams (we were around 11-12 at the time, we're 12-13 now) and by beating the snot out of the below .500 teams (we were 22-3 at the time, 25-6 now).

                Is playing .500 ball against above .500 teams optimal? No, it isn't. But we were hardly the only good team to do that. Philadelphia is 13-14 against above .500 teams. Boston is even worse at it than both us and Philly at 10-13. Do you see anyone thinking that Philly and Boston is a good team of overachievers? No, that would be totally wrong. Both Philly and Boston are part of the East's elite. They are the second tier of the East's elite as Milwaukee and Toronto are still a tier above them but they are quite close. And until Dipo's injury we were right there with them.

                It's not just an East thing either. Looking over to the West, you see that Portland has a 16-15 record against above .500 teams. Utah has a 15-18 record against above .500 teams. Heck, even the Spurs that you name-dropped as one of the elite teams are 16-17 against above .500 teams.

                The only teams in the NBA that have a great record against teams .500 and above are Milwaukee (16-7), Houston (20-13), Denver (17-12), Golden State (18-13), Toronto (17-13) and OKC (15-11). If you want to claim that those 6 teams are in a class of their own then that's 100% fine with me. I would agree. I also believe that these teams are better than the rest and their record against the best teams in the league is a pretty good indication of that. We belong in that tier immediately below those teams.
                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Boston just blew a 30 point lead at home to a team that is literally trying to lose. They hate each other. Hate playing with each other. All want to leave. Boston is not a contender.

                  Atleast Indiana tries. Vic or not they’ll be a tough out.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Come on Ryan - it's not that bad. It was only a 28 point lead.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Ryan View Post
                      Boston just blew a 30 point lead at home to a team that is literally trying to lose. They hate each other. Hate playing with each other. All want to leave. Boston is not a contender.

                      Atleast Indiana tries. Vic or not they’ll be a tough out.
                      I appreciate the fact that you're adding some outside perspective on this topic. A common phenomenon I've seen in team-specific forums is that fans tend to put a huge emphasis on what their own team is doing and very little emphasis on what the rest of the field is doing. Of course, that's largely natural. A fan will obviously care more about the team they support than about a team they don't support. But watching the trends around the league is important. It helps to temper expectations. Seeing how other teams do (and what their fans think that they're doing) will make one realize that their team isn't the only team that blow big leads, that can't defend 3s, that turns it over a ton, that isn't good at beating elite teams or anything that their team is doing wrong. In an 82 game season, almost every team is bound to do some of those things. Granted, some teams do more of X while they do less Y. Teams have different strengths and weaknesses after all, plus not every team is as good or as talented. But, still, even the best teams in the league have weaknesses that their fans often criticize. No one is perfect.

                      That's why I consider it very important to talk with fans of other teams. To get their perspective. That's why I appreciate your presence in this forum (same goes for shags, Kstat and even posters who no longer post like Sookie). You bring an outside perspective that this (and every other team-specific) forum needs.

                      Earlier today I was reading Celtic-specific forum. There was, obviously, a lot of disappointment there. You know that better than I do. But what caught my eye was the way that the people were talking about the team's chemistry. The comments that Marcus Morris made about no one having fun this season were also telling. In a way, it reminded me of our collapse back in 13-14. The way that the forum talked about the team and the kind of comments that were coming out of the locker room at the time were very, very similar.

                      I hope that you get it together and that you bounce back. It's always sad to see a team suffer chemistry (or injury) issues. At the end of the day, that Pacers team still regrouped, made the ECF and pushed the Heatles to 6 games. So, there's still hope for your team. You can still be contenders.
                      Originally posted by IrishPacer
                      Empty vessels make the most noise.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Taterhead View Post

                        You are partially correct, I am counting the Golden State game in which Vic didnt play, and one of the losses was back in November when I watched them get worked in Charlotte.

                        The other three were Sixers, Spurs and the Blazers very early in the year. Blazers beat us by double digits. The Spurs game wasnt nearly that close, they outscored us every quarter, and I considered it a **** poor effort. And when I walked out of the Sixers game we were down 25 i believe.

                        We also lost to the lowly Cavs at home, which is just inexcusable. If thats even a decent team that night, its most definitely a blowout

                        If youre a contender, and lets say you win 55 games total. That leaves 27 losses. If 7- 10 of those are home losses, you are not really a great home team and likely wont be able to protect your home court in the playoffs against really good teams. And you have no chance of winning without HCA, because it now requires you to win 2 out of 4 on the opponents home court, which probably isnt gonnna happen, considering youre only a .500 club on the road (which is reqlly good) against the entire league, which includes the games against non playoff teams.

                        Just fyi, when I look at records, I eliminate most of the games and just focus on tough matchups. Who cares if we beat Detroit at home? I dont. I wanna know how they compete against Golden State or the Spurs or in road games against the elite teams. THAT tells you so much more about the team. They SHOULD be up for that game and give their best performance.

                        You ever heard the saying "lets see what we are made of"? Well, you dont say that when youre doing something easy, like beating a bad team.

                        We have not fared well against good teams this year, thats just a fact. And its an easy way to gauge just how good we are. This year, we are a good team of overachievers that gets exposed against more talented clubs. Its not an insult to the team, its just reality.
                        I think that's an incredibly high standard to have less than 7 losses at home. Nobody in the league managed it last year. Two years ago only Golden State managed it. And this year only 4 teams are even still eligible, and probably only Denver has better than a 50/50 shot of getting there.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

                          ... The comments that Marcus Morris made about no one having fun this season were also telling. In a way, it reminded me of our collapse back in 13-14...
                          Spot on assessment. Just another example of "selfish dudes" on the Celtics roster. Pure immaturity. Worse, they have Kyrie Irving as their "leader" and he's everything but a good leader. The talent level is so high though they are bound to beat teams...but I am afraid that team is broken in terms of advancing very far.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Taterhead

                            We also lost to the lowly Cavs at home, which is just inexcusable.

                            Just fyi, when I look at records, I eliminate most of the games and just focus on tough matchups.
                            Can you reconcile these two statements?

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by kent beckley View Post

                              Can you reconcile these two statements?
                              Substitute the word "wins" for "records". Because wins over the non-top teams don't count.

                              Sent from my LG-H700 using Tapatalk

                              BillS

                              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
                              Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by BillS View Post
                                Substitute the word "wins" for "records". Because wins over the non-top teams don't count.

                                Sent from my LG-H700 using Tapatalk
                                Yeah, that is where I was going. Playing the lower tier teams are a no-win proposition for some, either you win, which you should, or you lose which is a travesty. And even if you win, it better be by 40, or you just barely scraped by.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X