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

2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

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

  • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

    Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
    The Magic started out 10-3. They've since lost 6 of their last 8. In those 8 games, they've shot 61-179 from behind the three-point line, for a .341 3P%.

    That's pretty much in line, with the league average of .342 for 3P%, this season. The Magic are a .386 3P% team so far, so they've been below their average, but they are losing for a long list of reasons. "Living and dying by the three," is pretty low on that list.
    I disagree, they might be league average on treys, but being average does not get you wins against top teams. Especially when they take so many, being only average is a detriment. So yes live and die by the 3 is pretty damn accurate when talking about Orlando.
    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

    Comment


    • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

      I want to create a signature with Roy's quote, "I'd run through a brick wall for that man" (about playing for Frank,) but I'm stuck on figuring out how to do so. Lil help, please!


      "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

      - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

      Comment


      • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

        Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
        I disagree, they might be league average on treys, but being average does not get you wins against top teams. Especially when they take so many, being only average is a detriment. So yes live and die by the 3 is pretty damn accurate when talking about Orlando.
        They aren't an average three-point shooting team. They are the 4th best in the NBA. If they weren't so awful from inside the arc, it might make sense that they take too many threes.

        http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story...-orlando-magic

        Originally posted by John Hollinger, ESPN.com

        Cue up the drama another notch in Orlando.

        A solid start to the season had folks in Central Florida wondering optimistically about possibilities for a future that included Dwight Howard. The sunglasses aren't nearly as rose-colored now after a brutal five-game stretch that featured three defeats by 20 or more points and a collapse from a 27-point lead.

        Sunday's 106-85 beatdown by Indiana -- at home, no less -- served to underscore many of the Magic's problems. With no Jameer Nelson, the Magic were using Chris Duhon and Larry Hughes at the point and often had trouble just getting the ball across halfcourt.

        Duhon had four turnovers and all four produced home run trot layups going the other way; by the second half the Magic were having Hedo Turkoglu or Jason Richardson bring the ball up and basically abandoning any possibility of quick-hitting transition play. (Duhon, incidentally, still has 2½ years left on a four-year, $16 million deal. Take a bow, Otis!)

        It's been part of a recurring theme in Orlando of late. The Magic scored 67 points against the Hornets, 56 in the first meeting against the Celtics, and 25 in the second half of their epic collapse against Boston days later. We can't just pin it on Duhon replacing Nelson, either -- Nelson played in the other games and had nearly as much trouble navigating the ball across the time line.

        Which takes us back to the lost optimism of 10 days ago. The Magic began the season 11-4, and the thought was that they could play well enough to persuade Howard to stay. With Ryan Anderson emerging as a deep-shooting threat that provided a perfect frontcourt complement, and the guards not overtly awful, the hope was that the Magic could have a Lakers-in-2008 type campaign. That season, you'll recall, Kobe Bryant was agitating for relocation before his team unexpectedly found itself in first place in the West.

        Alas, even Orlando's 11-4 start wasn't overwhelmingly impressive. The schedule had been soft, the margins of victory small. And the elephant in the room was this: Virtually all of this team's previous success had been predicated on the dominance of Howard, who impacts games in countless subtle ways that the ball-watching public has been slow to appreciate.

        Howard has still been good. Very good. He's seventh in PER and leads the NBA in Rebound Rate. But you can't help watching and thinking he's coasting on his prodigious talent, particularly on defense. The Magic were a dominant defense for years despite employing average-to-poor perimeter defenders because Howard was there to protect them. This season he's had their backs less often; in a related story, the Magic are tied for 16th in defensive efficiency.

        That, in turn, magnifies the offensive problems. Instead of cold-shooting nights being the difference between winning ugly and winning pretty, they've become the difference between winning and losing. The Magic will always be a high-variance offensive team because they depend so heavily on 3-pointers; at 32.7 percent of their field goal attempts, Orlando has the highest rate of 3-point tries in the league. But they haven't been very good overall because of all the turnovers and because they can't shoot 2s; the Magic are 19th in the league in 2-point percentage even with all of Howard's dunks, and they are 30th at 42.7 percent once you subtract him.

        Sum it up, and even with Howard the Magic aren't all that good. Now at 12-8, the Playoff Odds project Orlando to finish 32-34 and land as the No. 8 seed in the Eastern Conference, two places behind Milwaukee. (Side note: If the Bucks really get the No. 6 seed without Andrew Bogut, there are nine teams in the East that should consider disbanding.)

        Yes, we're evaluating the team after a particularly ugly five-game stretch, and I suspect this is about as badly as the Magic can play. But that doesn't raise the water level enough to wash away the inescapable conclusion: These Magic, even with Howard, aren't good enough to contend for anything important.

        And if that's the case, it follows that Orlando's hopes of persuading Howard to stay by fielding a contending team around him are similarly kaput.

        This has been suspected for some time, of course, but the optimism spawned by those first 15 games left openings for doubt. The last five games have crushed those hopes like a grape, with Howard's comments questioning his teammates' effort after the New Orleans debacle providing the hammer.

        All this is going to make for some awkwardness over the next five weeks. There's no more pondering slivers of chances; Howard is gone and everybody knows it. If he's not dealt by the March 15 trade deadline, his free-agent departure for either Dallas or New Jersey is a foregone conclusion. Thus, Orlando's best move is to trade Howard before the deadline rather than lose him for nothing over the summer.

        Ideally, the Magic would do it now and get on with their lives, but that can't happen for two reasons. First, reality: The All-Star Game is in Orlando this season and there is no freaking way the Magic are having Howard come back in another uniform for that game. Second, technicality: roughly half the players in the league aren't trade-eligible until March 1, and any deal with Howard is likely too big and complicated that at least some of them (such as New Jersey's Kris Humphries) will need to be involved.

        Instead, we'll be treated to The Dance. Here's the script: Dwight visits town, reporter asks Dwight if he'd consider playing there, Dwight gives vague hypothetical answer that doesn't completely slam door, everybody runs with it. (Yesterday a Chicago paper jumped the gun on this by doing this exact dance with Howard even when his team wasn't playing there.)

        There's a logic behind that vagueness, actually: It's not clear that Howard knows yet where he wants to go. It's evident he values big markets, sunlight and winning, but we're not sure in what order. Maybe Chicago or Boston (another city he didn't totally eliminate when asked this week) makes the list, maybe they don't. Maybe a Houston or Golden State can worm its way into the picture; maybe it can't.

        There is one warm-weather city we can probably rule out, however: Orlando.

        Comment


        • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

          Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
          They aren't an average three-point shooting team. They are the 4th best in the NBA. If they weren't so awful from inside the arc, it might make sense that they take too many threes.
          Isn't that the defintion of living and dying by the three point shot? They're a good team when they hit 3s and they're not a good team when they don't.

          Seems like a textbook definition of the phrase.

          The shooting percentages back that up. When they're playing hitting them, they're living (winning) when they're not they're dying (losing).

          I don't see where the difference is coming from.

          If they shoot an average percentage, which is what they're doing, they're an average/below average team. When they're hitting from the outside, which is what they were doing, they're an above average team.
          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

          Comment


          • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

            Originally posted by Since86 View Post
            Isn't that the defintion of living and dying by the three point shot? They're a good team when they hit 3s and they're not a good team when they don't.

            Seems like a textbook definition of the phrase.

            The shooting percentages back that up. When they're playing hitting them, they're living (winning) when they're not they're dying (losing).

            I don't see where the difference is coming from.

            If they shoot an average percentage, which is what they're doing, they're an average/below average team. When they're hitting from the outside, which is what they were doing, they're an above average team.
            Do you think that the Pacers are a team that "lives and dies by the 3?"

            Comment


            • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

              Prior to Vogel, most certainly. Now? No.
              Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

              Comment


              • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

                If Orlando doesn't fit the definition, then who does? They led the league in 3pt attempts last year, at 25 per game, they're second this year with 24 attempts per game.

                A third of their total FG attempts are threes. When they shoot them on an above average pace, they win. When they shoot them at average, they lose.

                They don't have a consistent inside game. They don't have players who can create their own shots, nor for their teammates.

                Offensively, they rely on the 3pt shot.

                If it's not applicable to Orlando, then there isn't a team that it does apply too. They're the current gold standard of a team relying heavily on the 3pt shot.
                Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                Comment


                • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

                  Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                  Do you think that the Pacers are a team that "lives and dies by the 3?"
                  We are shooting approx 38% from 3. Above the norm.

                  3 players shooting above 40%. Granger's 35% is bringing us down!

                  And Foster is a 100% 3pt shooter this year. Dudes been working on his game.
                  First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

                    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                    Prior to Vogel, most certainly. Now? No.
                    There is this whole myth that somehow the Pacers being "smashmouth" (the dumbest basketball term ever?) means they are more built to last than teams like the Magic, or the Pacers of old, that shot tons of threes.

                    If the Magic "live and die by the three," the Pacers do even more so.

                    Orlando's averages in wins:

                    26.0 for 52.2 = .498 on two-point shots.
                    11.3 for 26.3 = .430 on three-point shots.
                    37.3 for 78.5 = .475 on all shots.

                    Orlando's averages in losses:

                    20.5 for 51.5 = .398 on two-point shots.
                    6.6 for 21.1 = .313 on three-point shots.
                    27.1 for 72.6 = .373 on all shots.

                    Indiana's averages in wins:

                    29.7 for 68.1 = .436 on two-point shots.
                    6.5 for 14.2 = .458 on three-point shots.
                    36.2 for 82.3 = .440 on all shots.

                    Indiana's averages in losses:

                    26.3 for 62.2 = .423 on two-point shots.
                    3.2 for 15.0 = .213 on three-point shots.
                    29.5 for 77.2 = .382 on all shots.

                    Variance for Orlando between wins and losses:

                    .100 on two-point shots.
                    .117 on three-point shots.
                    .102 on all shots.

                    Variance for Indiana between wins and losses:

                    .013 on two-point shots.
                    .245 on three-point shots.
                    .058 on all shots.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

                      Originally posted by Mackey_Rose View Post
                      There is this whole myth that somehow the Pacers being "smashmouth" (the dumbest basketball term ever?) means they are more built to last than teams like the Magic, or the Pacers of old, that shot tons of threes.

                      If the Magic "live and die by the three," the Pacers do even more so.

                      Orlando's averages in wins:

                      26.0 for 52.2 = .498 on two-point shots.
                      11.3 for 26.3 = .430 on three-point shots.
                      37.3 for 78.5 = .475 on all shots.

                      Orlando's averages in losses:

                      20.5 for 51.5 = .398 on two-point shots.
                      6.6 for 21.1 = .313 on three-point shots.
                      27.1 for 72.6 = .373 on all shots.

                      Indiana's averages in wins:

                      29.7 for 68.1 = .436 on two-point shots.
                      6.5 for 14.2 = .458 on three-point shots.
                      36.2 for 82.3 = .440 on all shots.

                      Indiana's averages in losses:

                      26.3 for 62.2 = .423 on two-point shots.
                      3.2 for 15.0 = .213 on three-point shots.
                      29.5 for 77.2 = .382 on all shots.

                      Variance for Orlando between wins and losses:

                      .100 on two-point shots.
                      .117 on three-point shots.
                      .102 on all shots.

                      Variance for Indiana between wins and losses:

                      .013 on two-point shots.
                      .245 on three-point shots.
                      .058 on all shots.
                      Wow, the variance for the Magic is quite shocking. They can't even hit 2s in their losses.

                      Magic are also a pretty bad FT team. It's not just Howard. They only have 2 guys shooting above 80%, Reddick and Anderson. The Pacers shoot 80% as a freakin team!
                      First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

                        Consider the fact that Orlando averages 101.9 points in wins, and just 77.0 points in losses. They average 33.9 points from threes in wins, and 19.8 points from threes in losses.

                        They average 24.9 points per game less in losses, but just 14.1 points from threes, less than they do in wins. There is still 10.8 points per game missing somewhere.

                        The Pacers average 96.5 points in wins, and 85.6 points in losses. They average 19.5 points from threes in wins, and just 9.6 points from threes in losses.

                        They average 10.9 points per game less in losses, and 9.9 of them are coming from the fewer threes made. Only 1 point per game in the losses are coming from shots other than threes.

                        Now tell me, which team "lives and dies by the three?"

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

                          Because it's the basic style of play. The Pacers are dependent, AS MUCH, on the three point shot that Orlando is. That's fairly obvious.

                          So basically you've shown us that in wins teams shot well and in losses they don't shoot well. Earth shattering research, if you ask me.

                          Shooting percentages is only half the equation. How frequent they take 3pt attempts, compared to how many two point attempts/FTs they shoot as a team is another part of the picture.

                          The Pacers are ranked 23rd in total three point attempts. We're talking about a team that is 2nd in total 3pt attempts in the league compared to a team that is 23rd in 3pt attmepts.


                          If you're premise is that teams need to hit a good percentage of their 3pt shots to win, then no duh. That's common sense.

                          The Pacers average 93 points per game. Out of that 93, 15 points comes from 3. Meaning 78points comes from twos or FTs. Or 84% of their total points from places inside the 3pt arc.

                          The Magic? They average 91pts per game. Of those 91pts, 27pts come from 3pters. Meaning 64 points comes from inside the arc. That comes out to 29.6% of all their points comes from the 3pts line.

                          Orlando relies on the 3pt shot almost twice as much as the Pacers do. That's why just talking about percentages doesn't give you a good picture of the situation, because percentages don't have anything to do with volume.

                          But yeah, Pacers struggle to win when they're shooting badly. There's no surprise with that.
                          Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

                            Mackey, aren't you being a bit remiss to ignore the fact that in Orlando's losses they are taking 5 less 3s a game than they are in wins? Yet, with the Pacers, they are averaging roughly the same amount of attempts regardless of a win or a loss.


                            Comment


                            • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

                              Also, when your second leading scorer is Ryan Anderson, you are going to have problems.

                              & since signing his large contract Turk is a shell of his former self. Talk about falling off the deep end. He got paid though.
                              First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2011-12 NBA Random Thoughts Thread VIII: Random Thoughts the 8th I am!

                                Is anyone surprised that Agent 0 is still a FA? You'd think a team like the Lakers would have given him a look.

                                I'm just surprised.
                                First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X