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

93-94 comparison

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    93-94 comparison

    (it's long, but it's the story of how that season finished and I think you will enjoy it, especially the under 30 crowd)

    That season is famous for being the first playoff series win and the first run to the ECF. The coming out party for Reggie and the "Hicks" in general.

    Lost in the haze of memories is the perspective of where that team was when it hadn't yet made that run, but was on the cusp of it. The first, most obvious memory is Larry Brown in his first season, taking over for a coach that was viewed as under performing with the talent he had. Bob Hill had pulled the Isiah, he'd made the first round which had let him linger due to low expectations. But as time wore on management and fans began to suspect that there was more wins on that roster than he was bringing out of them.

    Now know one thought Vogel was taking last year's team to a +500 finish and the playoffs, and it was unclear just what roster changes the team would be able to make to push to the level of this season. But down the line I don't think there were more than 2 (BillS and Buck) that didn't think that JOB was not getting the most out of the roster.

    Vogel of course was a mid-season change and has now had to go into year 2 with a crazy mini-season whereas Brown started properly in a normal summer. But the similarities are there.

    But Brown's first year wasn't just a gravy train. The team traded their current AS and 2 time defending 6th man of the year winner for a little known defensive specialist, and Reggie hadn't really pulled off any big time playoff magic (the Rifleman held that role up till then).

    Near the end of the season the team was a respectable .527 at 39-35, but wasn't dramatically better than the 41-41 teams of Hill.

    The standings as of April 10th games, 1994
    East
    Knicks 52-22*
    Magic 45-29**
    Nets 40-35*
    Heat 40-35**

    Celtics 28-46
    Sixers 23-52
    Bullets 22-53
    *(the Knicks had just beaten the Nets, the Magic had just beaten the Heat)

    Central
    Hawks 52-23
    Bulls 51-24
    Cavs 42-33
    Pacers 39-35 (8th seed)

    Hornets 35-39
    Pistons 20-54
    Bucks 19-55

    It seemed certain that the Cavs would hold them off and that maybe the Nets and Heat would as well, potentially pitting them against ATL or NYK in round 1 for another "Bob Hill" like first round exit as an 8th seed.


    But the Pacers schedule was moderately favorable:

    BOS, who wasn't very good at this point

    Then you had 4 road games, but against dreadful teams.
    @PHI
    @MIN (20-54 as of April 10th, and would not win another game all year)
    @DET
    @WSH

    Then home for 2 games, one being a team trying to hang in there (ahem, like PHI this year) and the other against the terrible PHI team again
    CLE
    PHI

    Note that CLE is the best in this group, the others are really weak teams, and despite the road games the only back to back game was that home gave vs CLE (following @WSH).

    The final game of the 8 to end the year was a good team, the Miami Heat. But it was at home and by then Miami might not even need to win or lose.


    This was the epitome of an easy stretch of the schedule and the Pacers promptly jumped all over it. The ran off a string of big wins, by 13 over BOS, 28 over PHI, 18 over MIN. Dogs getting beat like the weaker teams they were.

    But then came two road games that were a bit tougher than you'd expect. Detroit had an 8 game losing streak coming into the game, and in fact they wouldn't win a game after game 69 on March 29th. But after 3 quarters the game was all tied up. The Pacers managed to pull out a 5 point squeaker win against a team in free fall.

    The Pistons lost the next game to ORL by 28 and the one after that in MIL by 25. And in fact the Pacers had beat them in Indy a few weeks prior by 16 points. The Pacers had almost blown what should have been an easy win.

    The next game versus Washington (think Cavs game the other night) the Pacers held a nice 18 point lead going into the 4th. The Bullets then dropped 37 points on the Pacers only to come up short by 1 point, 111-110. The Pacers had almost blown another easy win, but managed to salvage it.

    Reggie went 14-21 for 37 points, Rik went 11-15 for 23 points with 6 assists and 4 blocks (which is in no way meant to remind you of Roy Hibbert )

    So here they stood, plowing through the easy schedule with 5 straight wins despite 2 near misses.


    They came back home for those final 3 games and promptely put up a few very impressive wins. First by extending a 5 point 3rd quarter lead to an 11 point win over CLE who they were now in a dogfight with for a better playoff spot (end of night had them both at 45 wins with 2 games to go for each team).

    Then they utterly destroyed PHI by FORTY FIVE points (45). And they had that 45 point lead after 3 quarters. No Pacer played more than 30 minutes and no Pacer took more than 9 shots except for Smits, who went 17-24 for 40 freaking points, 11 boards, 3 assists, 2 steals and a block...in 27 minutes. It's not 8 in 8.9 seconds, but 40 points in 27 minutes is pretty darn impressive.


    For the 82nd game vs Miami the Pacers were now sitting on 46 wins and were tied with the Cavs for the 5th seed. They'd blown past the Heat who had gone 2-4 since the 10th, they'd slipped past the Nets who had gone 5-1 in that same span. Normally going 5-1 with a 1 game lead is enough to hold off the other team. The Nets were at 45 wins but had lost the series with the Pacers 3-1 and could only hope for a token tie by that final game.

    So to recap that, the Pacers had used a 7-0 run with a win over the Cavs specifically to set themselves up for a vault from 8th seed to 5th seed in a span of 2 weeks. Had they but lost that Cavs game then they would have lost out to the Cavs for #5 because they'd be one game behind and would have lost the series 3-2. Instead they went into that final night tied and with the tie-breaker.

    The Pacers went out and beat the Heat soundly by 33 to secure the now infamous matchup against young Shaq's Magic team. A Byron Scott jumper later and they'd won their first playoff series and were moving on with a shot to upset the Hawks, which of course they did.


    But had then not had an easy schedule, one remarkably similar to the one they now face, and not rattled off 8 straight wins including a critical win against a playoff seed rival, they might have faced a far different first round opponent and fate. The Nets lost 3-1 to the Knicks and the Cavs went down 3-0 to the Bulls.

    Instead the Pacers got the sweep and the most rest while the Hawks had to go all 5 games vs the Heat before facing Indy. The impact perhaps was the game 1 loss to the Pacers that ultimately did the Hawks in.



    I just wanted to point out how a team with no business being in game 7 of the ECF 2 weeks before the playoffs start can make the most of an easy schedule and some gutsy play to completely change their fate and shock the world.

    This current team and that team aren't just the same due to new coaches or an easy ending schedule. They both live off of balance and 2 top guys that play the arc and the post. Sure you have Reggie, Rik, Dale and McKey, but the starting PG at that point is Workman (42% FG, 6.2 APG) and you are leaning on an FA addition vet SG (Scott, who sounds a lot like Barbosa in role at that point).

    After Scott and Tony the bench goes to Lester Connor who got the 8th most minutes in that Cavs win. Tony > Lou, but Kenny Williams < Tyler. And George Hill > Sam Mitchell in both PT and impact.

    Brown was barely using 10 man rotations and had no one deeper like DJones or Price impacting games.


    11-12 Pacers really do have a precedent to finish strong and roll that right on into a serious playoff run. It's been famously done before right here in this city.
    Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 04-12-2012, 11:05 PM.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: 93-94 comparison

    Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
    (it's long, but it's the story of how that season finished and I think you will enjoy it, especially the under 30 crowd)

    After Scott and Tony the bench goes to Lester Connor who got the 8th most minutes in that Cavs win. Tony > Lou, but Kenny Williams < Tyler. And George Hill > Sam Mitchell in both PT and impact.

    Brown was barely using 10 man rotations and had no one deeper like DJones or Price impacting games.


    11-12 Pacers really do have a precedent to finish strong and roll that right on into a serious playoff run. It's been famously done before right here in this city.
    Good recap! I remember that year vividly. Reggie and Rik came alive that year. Rik had lost weight and spent the offseason working on getting stronger and faster. Reggie had a great series against the Knicks (although they lost 3-1) in the first round the previous season.

    They went into the playoffs with momentum and shocked everyone. I'd love for it to happen again!

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: 93-94 comparison

      Originally posted by naptownmenace View Post
      Good recap! I remember that year vividly. Reggie and Rik came alive that year. Rik had lost weight and spent the offseason working on getting stronger and faster. Reggie had a great series against the Knicks (although they lost 3-1) in the first round the previous season.

      They went into the playoffs with momentum and shocked everyone. I'd love for it to happen again!
      That sounds eerily similar to Roy Hibbert and Danny vs the Bulls

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: 93-94 comparison

        This would have been right after I turned 6 years old (birthday in March). I don't remember the games specifically, or even the match-ups, except the Hawks series because I was visiting my older brother in Georgia during that series. But this is when I really started becoming a Pacers fan. I obviously didn't fully understand everything that was going on, I just assumed that because these guys played for the team my dad cheered for, they must be the best in the world.

        I'm definitely excited for this group to grow and fight and give us some of the same type of memories.
        It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: 93-94 comparison

          This was the first series my mom and dad spent together. It was what made my mom become a Pacers fan. My dad died in 1999 the year before the Pacers went to the NBA Finals. After that my mom never spoke of the Pacers. I had to find them myself when I was 7 years old in 2002 and it was like love at first sight.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: 93-94 comparison

            Originally posted by Pacersalltheway10 View Post
            That sounds eerily similar to Roy Hibbert and Danny vs the Bulls
            And that's the main point. People are evaluating this year differently than history. People get nostalgic and recall a playoff run that while surprising and magic, didn't stem from circumstances that involved a lot of the same issues that send people jumping off the wagon this year.


            Again you are doing OKAY, but not great. You are clearly headed for the 8th seed and probably a first round exit, and it's going to be yet another year of this.

            People this year look at the easy schedule and say "oh no, this is bad because they won't be tested" or they say "sure they had wins but look at the competition". These same people pine for the spunk and fight of the 94 team that never fell apart against bad teams.


            But Hibby just had a night vs CLE on WED that stands out on the season nearly as much as the Smits 40pt night from that year. You do have that CHI vs IND series from the prior year. Freaking Barbosa couldn't be more Byron Scott in his addition to this team without bringing 2-3 rings with him.

            And people forget this was Antonio's FIRST YEAR with the team after playing 2 years in Europe to improve his game. This was not all-star AD, just a good big off the bench. I don't think Lou is AD caliber, but in terms of what he brings this year vs what AD did that year it's not that far off.



            Go back in a time machine and some version of Shade is watching the Pacers almost lose to the horrible Pistons saying "these guys can barely beat this dud team, they are going to get killed by the elite teams". Some fans on April 11th are saying "we don't have a star like Ewing or Shaq or Nique that will get all the calls and make all the great plays, we'll never be good enough till we get one of those types".


            The team this year has a chance to end the season on an extremely similar season ending run of games, and to make it spookier they could even face the Magic in round 1 again.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: 93-94 comparison

              Also thanks for making me feel old.



              And I probably should have added that another point to something like this, something that I used to like to bring up about Peyton a few years ago, is that THIS IS THOSE MEMORIES. I mean maybe they'll blow it, maybe they won't do anything worth remembering.

              But it's shaping up with a lot of markers that say that this is what that magical history looked like while you were in the middle of it. You didn't know they were going to even win one game vs Shaq, let alone the series. You didn't know they were going to win the final 8 games.

              So appreciate that this is probably what a magical season looks like from the current inside looking out rather than the distant past outside looking in. I know that regardless of the playoffs outcome this is already going to be one of my more favorite seasons to remember, just due to the growth, the style and quality of play and most importantly the personalities.


              And you whippersnappers will be telling your kids or kids on PD that are only 4-6 years old now what it was like to watch this team grow and maybe what it was like to watch them make a playoff run even.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: 93-94 comparison

                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                Also thanks for making me feel old.



                And I probably should have added that another point to something like this, something that I used to like to bring up about Peyton a few years ago, is that THIS IS THOSE MEMORIES. I mean maybe they'll blow it, maybe they won't do anything worth remembering.

                But it's shaping up with a lot of markers that say that this is what that magical history looked like while you were in the middle of it. You didn't know they were going to even win one game vs Shaq, let alone the series. You didn't know they were going to win the final 8 games.

                So appreciate that this is probably what a magical season looks like from the current inside looking out rather than the distant past outside looking in. I know that regardless of the playoffs outcome this is already going to be one of my more favorite seasons to remember, just due to the growth, the style and quality of play and most importantly the personalities.


                And you whippersnappers will be telling your kids or kids on PD that are only 4-6 years old now what it was like to watch this team grow and maybe what it was like to watch them make a playoff run even.
                I wish there had been a PacersDigest back in those days. That way we could go back and look through game threads and see people freaking out. And we could also see the "Reggie is a good scorer but he's not enough of a superstar to take us anywhere in the playoffs!".

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: 93-94 comparison

                  Well said Seth...

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: 93-94 comparison

                    I did go back and look at playoffs back to 1990 and #3 seeds often get to the conference finals and even the finals.
                    "Danny Granger is one of the top players in the league. To move Danny, you better get a lot back." - Larry Bird

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: 93-94 comparison

                      Originally posted by ndcoltsnpacers View Post
                      I wish there had been a PacersDigest back in those days. That way we could go back and look through game threads and see people freaking out. And we could also see the "Reggie is a good scorer but he's not enough of a superstar to take us anywhere in the playoffs!".
                      I joined PD in 2004, during my junior year of high school. Had PD existed in the ol' glory days of the mid-to-late 90's, I would've never done any schoolwork. I would've flunked out in 6th grade!
                      It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: 93-94 comparison

                        Also, I entirely missed noting when I entered the 3,000 Post Club, so this is my 3,100th post! Go me!
                        It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: 93-94 comparison

                          Very well said Seth. I was only 4 then so can't really say anything about that team, but its hard not to see the parallels. This organization built a championship contending team (that contended for years btw) the same way Larry Bird has done it the past few years. People like to think you need to be a big market and get big FA's or tank and get a top 3 pick to build a contender. But thats just not true. Not only did the Pacers do it this way in the 90s, but the Pistons did it in the 2000's.

                          I am extremely happy with this teams progression. Let's not forget where we were just one year ago. Oh and things are gonna get better. We have young pieces that show great promise and have serious cap room to add a big piece as well.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: 93-94 comparison

                            Tonights games falls right in with where we were at in 94. Almost down to the part about extending a 3rd quarter lead. That is kind of scary.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: 93-94 comparison

                              Even at 39-35 that team was gaining momentum and in the midst of a run. If memory serves they were seven games under .500 (16-23 ?) in late December or early January.

                              Not saying we couldn't be on the cusp of something good but that team under performed at the start of the season and basically turned it around the night of the road loss to the Bulls after Reggie hit the go ahead basket and bowed to the crowd.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X