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

Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

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

  • #76
    Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

    Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
    I was just thinking that this morning when I read Hollingers power rankings.
    He has us at 12th. http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/powerrankings
    We don't have the talent of Miami, Chicago, or OKC but we're better then 12th.
    Well Stein ripped on Hollinger's "Points Diff" issue due to the Philly situation. Look where Stein ranks them compared to Hollinger's ranking formula.

    Like all stats, there are caveats and anomalies that screw up the system.



    But that's a formula, that's not the same as national opinions and which teams get the lead. In the OKC win they showed more of the losing team (Durant mostly) than of the winning team during ESPN highlights.

    I know you "need a star" but I call BS. There are plenty of good plays to show and people don't need to know the players to enjoy them. And then after a few months of Paul George or Roy Hibbert showing up you start to get fans who don't just know Danny, plus West/Hill from playing on other teams.

    I mean David West is a multi-time all-star. He's known. If you can't show highlights of one of the THREE all-stars playing on this team then I don't know what to say. You can't talk about the dunk contest player Paul George a bit more?

    You've got guys pushing toward the top of blocks and steals and yet this isn't a sports news item? Hibbert is FIFTH in blocks in his AS season, Paul is 12th in steals and is the 4th highest "non-small" on the list (Lebron, Milsap, Iggy). He's also 8th in steals/min for players with more than 15mpg (and ahead of Lebron by that measure).


    When 8 vs 9 is more important to ESPN and a Pacers-Hawks or Pacers-Magic game then something is wrong.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

      This morning on Fox radio, they named scores from "games of note." Pacers/Cavs wasn't mentioned. The 3rd place team isn't "noteworthy" smh.
      Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

        I always query the different power rankings because I like to see the different types of insights. And I found one that basically sums up where we are; the guy isn't even willing to look up anything that we accomplished or anything somebody said about us.

        http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/1...d-teams-rising

        If you click on the Pacers "Trends," you will see his last two entries have been:

        1) They're fine.
        2) They're still fine.

        Oh, and in that time we've gone 6-3. We went 2-2 to slip from 8th to 11th 2 weeks ago. Then we wen 4-1 and stayed at 11th. (Everywhere else we're basically 7th, which is approximately correct imo)

        It's a little sad that we had to be good for the lockout season, because it gives people all over basis for rationalizing why this "bad team" in Indiana is doing so well.
        Time for a new sig.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
          I know you "need a star" but I call BS.
          It isn't that you "need a star", it's that you need a player from a very specific hype list. We've all seen "highlights" that showed an injured player on the bench more than "unknown" players on the winning team.
          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


          • #80
            Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

            Originally posted by FlavaDave View Post
            I wouldn't care about the lack of media attention except for the impact the lack of attention has on our attendance. We have pathetic attendance for a 3 seed. I'm still having conversations with people where people are saying "Really? The Pacers are good? Huh..." The word still isn't out completely.

            The Pacers marketing department is doing a good job (I've heard chatter about the billboards), but the media needs to validate their success. That's a big piece of the puzzle in the casual fan's eye.
            This is a big issue. I think you are exactly right. I work with people who sort of know, but they still aren't seeing this national buzz or even really local buzz about how good the team is. Local fans honestly do not realize they have a team in 3rd place that is ahead of other very good teams, not just in the playoffs by being the best of bad teams. They don't realize there are 3 all-star caliber players on the team (Roy, West, Danny).

            In fact I think a lot of people don't realize George Hill is on the team. I had one person ask if he gets any playing time, so that person doesn't even know how good Hill is in general.




            I mean at this stage of the season how are the Pacers not the LEAD STORY on local TV news. If this is 1998 and 8-10 games from the end of the season with the team looking at this level of a seed they'd be a lead item, and I know this because they were.

            It took them a few years to realize it, but by 98 the casual fans were starting to pay attention and care.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

              Originally posted by BillS View Post
              It isn't that you "need a star", it's that you need a player from a very specific hype list. We've all seen "highlights" that showed an injured player on the bench more than "unknown" players on the winning team.
              But who creates that? Not the casual fan. It's all about the media.

              If WTHR and WISH were freaking out about the Pacers run then the casual local fans would be thinking about these guys as local stars.


              And it's not playoff success because guys like Melo were stars before they won a playoff series.


              Think about the amount of weekly TV and radio coverage devoted to the Colts, even last year while headed to 2 wins. You have hour long recaps of the week all over the place, and player's showing up on the nightly news, etc.

              I think the 500 gets more daily feedback on local TV during the entire month of May than the Pacers have gotten for years. If the media treats it like it's a ho-hum story then it becomes a ho-hum story.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

                Originally posted by Really? View Post
                Your confusing me, and sure the Pacers will have confidence, there are lots of ways to get confidence, but it also helps out when you are facing a team that you already have beat in a season series...
                The 2nd half of the last ATL game showed the team all they needed to know about how they match up. Just like how they turned it around and were able to keep pressing the Spurs did the same. Just like recovering from blown leads vs TOR and CLE showed them that they are good enough to get back on track rather than falling apart.


                This team knows they can compete with anyone and they know that they have consistency issues that undermine that. Confidence isn't a problem, this team hasn't shown much in the way of late game freeze ups. What they show is periods of OVER confidence or lack or direction based on matchups.


                But there is NO WAY this group of guys is in the locker room sweating an ATL, ORL or BOS matchup. I mean they gave the frakking last game to Boston, it was there for the taking with just a little more care and energy. Ditto the last ATL game and really ditto on the Super Bowl Orlando game.

                This is a team that's come up just short in situations where if they'd stayed dialed in the whole time they would have won the game with better overall talent.

                I think some of those moments is making them hungrier, and I think some of the disinterest we see vs CLE or TOR stems from looking past them to the targets they really want another shot at.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

                  Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                  But who creates that? Not the casual fan. It's all about the media.
                  Absolutely.

                  Unfortunately, local media is becoming more and more irrelevant. I absolutely agree that more local buzz would help (hey, I about had heart failure when I saw trucks for all 4 affiliates parked outside the Fieldhouse a couple of weeks ago, never mind seeing the Fox 59 guys walking around the main concourse interviewing people last game). Unfortunately, on a day-to-day basis they get their stuff from their national organizations, who essentially ARE ESPN, NBC Sports, and so forth. If the team isn't hyped nationally, the footage simply won't be there until some marketing guy at the local station can prove that more people will watch if they invest some $ in having a reporter at the game to get a story.

                  The "hype list" is the guys that get on SportCenter if they pass gas outside the arena. You don't have one of those guys, you have to be in a major media market to get the PR before making the noise (like winning the championship - though in my darkest days I STILL think the Pacers could win the NBA and still not get more than a couple of national televised games, while the Heat could end up out of the playoffs and still get 30 or more.)

                  How spoiled are the guys on that list? KOBE was whining about how little attention the LAKERS were getting this year, and they were still being talked about nationally Every Single Day.
                  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


                  • #84
                    Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

                    Originally posted by Since86 View Post
                    Just for fun I looked up ATL's records against playoff teams. They've won a whopping 2 matchups against playoff teams and lost 5.

                    Bulls 1-3
                    Heat 1-2
                    Pacers 2-1
                    Boston 0-1
                    Orlando 2-0
                    Knicks 1-1
                    Philly 0-3

                    So should Atlanta should feel confident going into the playoffs?
                    Looks like you convinced Hicks, but not Really.

                    This is similar to what I got on Peck about the other day. People see THEIR team and these "bad" losses and somehow ignore that it's happening just as much to the other teams.

                    I mean the Pacers have the EASIEST schedule the rest of the way compared to BOS, ATL, and ORL. This means that up to this point the Pacers have had the HARDEST schedule but are still 2 games ahead of those other teams.

                    That means that those other teams 100% MUST HAVE some "bad" losses on their list too. And of course they do.

                    And few if any teams can boast winning records against all the playoff teams combined because if that were the case and they weren't losing ANY games to bad teams because those would be "bad" losses that good teams just don't have, then those teams would have maybe 8-14 losses MAX by definition.

                    I mean you only play so many games vs playoff teams and if you are winning those series then it's only 1 loss max, maybe you split a couple and maybe you swept 1 or 2, and you didn't play as many against the playoff teams from the other conference this season.

                    So to meet the expectation of not losing to anyone you shouldn't and being good against all playoff contenders then you need to go 54-12 this year which translates to about 67 wins in a normal season.

                    So, yes, if you aren't going for one of the top 20 seasons of all time then you probably lost to some non-playoff teams or didn't win all your series against other playoff teams. The math says this 100% must be true.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

                      Not only that, but I just can't believe that we would want to use a smaller sample size rather than a larger sample size when evaluating statistics.

                      We're really going to give 25 games more meaning than 55? It's just so backwards.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

                        Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                        Looks like you convinced Hicks, but not Really.

                        This is similar to what I got on Peck about the other day. People see THEIR team and these "bad" losses and somehow ignore that it's happening just as much to the other teams.

                        I mean the Pacers have the EASIEST schedule the rest of the way compared to BOS, ATL, and ORL. This means that up to this point the Pacers have had the HARDEST schedule but are still 2 games ahead of those other teams.

                        That means that those other teams 100% MUST HAVE some "bad" losses on their list too. And of course they do.

                        And few if any teams can boast winning records against all the playoff teams combined because if that were the case and they weren't losing ANY games to bad teams because those would be "bad" losses that good teams just don't have, then those teams would have maybe 8-14 losses MAX by definition.

                        I mean you only play so many games vs playoff teams and if you are winning those series then it's only 1 loss max, maybe you split a couple and maybe you swept 1 or 2, and you didn't play as many against the playoff teams from the other conference this season.

                        So to meet the expectation of not losing to anyone you shouldn't and being good against all playoff contenders then you need to go 54-12 this year which translates to about 67 wins in a normal season.

                        So, yes, if you aren't going for one of the top 20 seasons of all time then you probably lost to some non-playoff teams or didn't win all your series against other playoff teams. The math says this 100% must be true.

                        Like I'm the only reactionary around here.

                        http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...t=70539&page=4 You might not want to look at post # 91


                        Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

                          Originally posted by Peck View Post
                          Like I'm the only reactionary around here.

                          http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...t=70539&page=4 You might not want to look at post # 91
                          Did you know Antonio and Dale aren’t actually brothers?

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

                            Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                            Looks like you convinced Hicks, but not Really.

                            This is similar to what I got on Peck about the other day. People see THEIR team and these "bad" losses and somehow ignore that it's happening just as much to the other teams.

                            I mean the Pacers have the EASIEST schedule the rest of the way compared to BOS, ATL, and ORL. This means that up to this point the Pacers have had the HARDEST schedule but are still 2 games ahead of those other teams.

                            That means that those other teams 100% MUST HAVE some "bad" losses on their list too. And of course they do.

                            And few if any teams can boast winning records against all the playoff teams combined because if that were the case and they weren't losing ANY games to bad teams because those would be "bad" losses that good teams just don't have, then those teams would have maybe 8-14 losses MAX by definition.

                            I mean you only play so many games vs playoff teams and if you are winning those series then it's only 1 loss max, maybe you split a couple and maybe you swept 1 or 2, and you didn't play as many against the playoff teams from the other conference this season.

                            So to meet the expectation of not losing to anyone you shouldn't and being good against all playoff contenders then you need to go 54-12 this year which translates to about 67 wins in a normal season.

                            So, yes, if you aren't going for one of the top 20 seasons of all time then you probably lost to some non-playoff teams or didn't win all your series against other playoff teams. The math says this 100% must be true.
                            While I agree with most of what you say, I have to correct you on this point. The Pacers have actually had the easiest schedule out of all playoff teams thus far ( though this is based on the SOS measure, which only factors in team records i believe, and not b2b, days rested etc...) Boston for instance, has had the toughest EC schedule.

                            This, i suppose, is the payoff for "lack of attention" in a shortened season. The NBA needs to compensate for $$ lost, which means the Boston's and Miami's get more marquee matchups, while the Pacers are fed a steady dose of Detroit's and Cleveland's.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

                              It sickens me when ESPN completely blows off the rest of the East. They keep saying it's the Bulls and Heat in the ECF again. Not even deep playoff mention of Boston which is suprising. Lebron's even saying he's treating the Bulls-Heat game like its going to be the ECF.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Has any 3rd place team received such little attention?

                                Yeah, don't tell me we haven't earned it. The SportsCenter clip of us tonight:

                                *open highlights with "now the Pacers already have a Playoff spot," followed later by saying we were playing like we actually had something to play for. I guess we should be content just being in the playoffs. PARTICIPATION AWARD!!

                                *4 Bucks highlights, 2 offensive and defensive, followed by the wide-open Granger jumper off of the screen (as if we didn't hold the lead basically all game)

                                *Final score on the screen, PACERS shock the Bucks


                                I mean....seriously. We were the team in the playoffs last year, one of only 3 teams BEFORE tonight in the east to clinch a spot, are fighting with the inside track for the 3 seed, and we shock the Bucks???

                                I suppose every individual win we might get in the playoffs would be some legendary upset.
                                Time for a new sig.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X