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

Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

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

  • #46
    Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

    DC couldn't make a shot, but he was pretty good. Until crunch time. Didn't this game look familiar to last year? Have the lead with three minutes to go and then don't score again. I don't care how bad Hill is playing, DC doesn't play in crunch time. And if Hill is really that bad, then I don't care who else you throw in at point..throw Dahntay in, I don't care, DC doesn't play in crunch time. He's never good. He may learn how to play at the end of games in his career, but right now he doesn't know how to, so don't play him there.

    Sookie?
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

      Originally posted by Eddie Gill View Post
      David was selfish out of necessity. By my count the rest of our starters shot 16/49 (32%). West went 8/14.

      This is why we signed David West - to steady the waters in the playoffs should the rest of the team play tight and be ineffective. If anything, I would have liked to see feed West even more than we did.
      He forced shots instead of passing it to open players. I don't have a problem with him taking shots. I have a problem with him taking shots when he's double/triple teamed and other players on the floor are open. We heard Frank saying "make the extra pass" over and over again in the huddles. Well, guess who the number one person who didn't was. (Followed closely by Danny Granger)

      If this was a rare occurrence with David, I wouldn't have mentioned it. But it's not. It (along with defense) is a flaw in his game. If he had shot 2-14 he would have been doing the same thing.

      Vnzla81....I have always been aware that it was a pretty major flaw in DC's game. I've never said DC was without flaws. I just see potential for a pretty good player, and I don't think he's nearly as bad as people make like. I think you've confused my "sticking up for" certain players with fangurling or being overly optimistic. No, I just don't like it when players become "whipping boys." I think he's capable of being a good starting PG for a team. But this series isn't about "learning about the team." We're supposed to win this series. Playing DC during crunch time gives our team a pretty big handicap. He's perhaps the worst crunch time player on the team. If he was still starting, and Hill was the backup, I'd still finish the game with Hill.
      Last edited by Sookie; 04-29-2012, 02:08 PM.

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

        I thought we should have fed West every time down the court we could. He was solid all night.

        In West we trust.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

          Originally posted by Sookie View Post
          He forced shots instead of passing it to open players. I don't have a problem with him taking shots. I have a problem with him taking shots when he's double/triple teamed and other players on the floor are open. We heard Frank saying "make the extra pass" over and over again in the huddles. Well, guess who the number one person who didn't was. (Followed closely by Danny Granger)

          If this was a rare occurrence with David, I wouldn't have mentioned it. But it's not. It (along with defense) is a flaw in his game. If he had shot 2-14 he would have been doing the same thing.

          Vnzla81....I have always been aware that it was a pretty major flaw in DC's game. I've never said DC was without flaws. I just see potential for a pretty good player, and I don't think he's nearly as bad as people make like. I think you've confused my "sticking up for" certain players with fangurling or being overly optimistic. No, I just don't like it when players become "whipping boys." I think he's capable of being a good starting PG for a team. But this series isn't about "learning about the team." We're supposed to win this series. Playing DC during crunch time gives our team a pretty big handicap. He's perhaps the worst crunch time player on the team. If he was still starting, and Hill was the backup, I'd still finish the game with Hill.
          DC has never been a "wipping boy", people overreact around here when people like me critize a player, at the end of the day guys like me were right in wanting to start Hill over DC, I'm actually agreeing with what you are saying about DC I've been saying it forever, he is not good in closing games, he is horrible.

          And regarding West, I kind of agree with you about him been selfish in a way, but the problem is that so many players were sucking so bad that I wasn't really mad at him for taking it to the hole, in fact my gripe with Vogel choosing DC over Hill was related to West and Hibbert, once DC came in those two players didn't get the ball and if they did they got it at the wrong time and at the wrong place.

          Again like I said on the postgame thread, this game is on Vogel we had a chance to win it and for some reason he tried to outcoach himself.
          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

            Originally posted by Downtown Bang! View Post
            I don't get to see as many games as most of you but the thing that always bothers me when watching Roy on the offensive end is how impatient he is with the basketball. Especially yesterday with the size mismatches he had against the Magic defenders. Take your time Roy. You can make a move or two, gather yourself and make a strong play with the basketball. No need to ever fling up an off balance left handed hook in this series.

            If Roy can establish himself as a consistent low post threat this series will be over very quickly and it will reinforce the same blueprint the Pacers must have to compete with the Heat in the next round.
            I agree with this to a certain extent. Sometimes he rushes his moves.

            However, quite a few times last night Roy got the ball after he had already been in the paint for a second or two. He got late passes from DC, Hill, West, PG...you name it. We just don't swing the ball with enough speed and precision to get it to him early on a consistent basis. When he throws it out and re-posts we hardly ever get the ball back to him. Sometimes a defender is hedging in a way that makes it difficult for him to pass back out quickly. So if he keeps it, he has to make a quick move to avoid the 3 second call.

            No doubt Roy still has significant flaws to his game. But we're also not good, as a team, at passing into the post.
            "Freedom is nothing else but a chance to be better." - Albert Camus

            "Appreciation is a wonderful thing. It makes what is excellent in others belong to us as well." - Voltaire

            "Everyone's values are defined by what they will tolerate when it is done to others." - William Greider

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

              Originally posted by bellisimo View Post
              Side note - What happened to PG's 3pointers the second half of the season? He used to have one of the nicest strokes in the game the start of the season but lately its just not there...his form seems a bit off.
              I think that he has lost confidence in his offensive game and has settled...for now...on his rebounding, attempting to steal the ball and his defense. You could tell throughout the 2nd half......in plays where he didn't have time to assess the situation and had to think...he passed up the ball....in the few plays where he had to simply act ( and therefore had to rely more on his instincts than thinking what was going on ) he was able to execute ( to a certain extent ).
              Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

                Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                I'm not going to lie, the Magic concerned me too. And still do.

                The biggest problem I really see with them, is that our team is built, defensively, to protect the paint. The guards sag and ball hawk, the posts stay in the post...Well the Magic are built to take the open three point shot. Which they are always going to get.

                That said, no one played that well. I'll give David, Roy, and Tyler credit. But David was selfish, Roy couldn't make a shot, and Tyler stinks defensively (although, was better than normal.)

                Hill, I was most upset with. He was terrible on both sides of the ball. Like, Abysmal. No running offense, no making shots, no typical Hill smart decisions, and Nelson completely had his way with him. DC outplayed Hill defensively. Let me repeat that. DC outplayed Hill defensively.

                I agree about the egg Timer, and I'll go even further, we can't have the five and five units any longer. It was one thing when our bench was AJ, Hill, Dahntay, Tyler, and Amundson..and they all fit together, and they ran the offense well, and were stifling defensively. These *four* bench players do not play well together at all. And as much as Frank has tried to get them all minutes together, they've never gelled. (not surprising given who the four/five bench players are) I think two of Hill, PG, and Danny need to be in the game at all times, and I think either Roy or West need to be in the game at the same time.

                DC couldn't make a shot, but he was pretty good. Until crunch time. Didn't this game look familiar to last year? Have the lead with three minutes to go and then don't score again. I don't care how bad Hill is playing, DC doesn't play in crunch time. And if Hill is really that bad, then I don't care who else you throw in at point..throw Dahntay in, I don't care, DC doesn't play in crunch time. He's never good. He may learn how to play at the end of games in his career, but right now he doesn't know how to, so don't play him there.

                It's not time to panic, but everyone took Orlando lightly, and they clearly used that as motivation. The Pacers still should win this. It's tough for many of the players to play worse.


                I saw the Pacers many times with all defenders far from the basket trying to stop 3 point shots and then giving up layups. And allowed them to push him way out from where he wanted to be.
                {o,o}
                |)__)
                -"-"-

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

                  I have always harbored an extreme level of disgust for Baby Davis.

                  Last edited by billbradley; 04-29-2012, 07:19 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

                    Yea I'm off my rocker and West is clearly the superior option! That's why Ryan Anderson mopped the floor with West defensively and didn't let him get any position at all for the last 6 minutes of crunch time, you know when the game really mattered and we were held scoreless. I can name countless ways you can win a game without scoring, like Tyler did in the Pistons game. Fighting for a huge offensive rebound to seal the game. Or just one hustle play that causes the other team to make a mistake and we win the game. Or just one great defensive play that shuts the other team down. All it takes is one great defensive play or rebound or hustle play to win this game and West didn't deliver, but Tyler did. If you guys really think West makes us that much better I think you are off your rocker. We just got beat by an inferior Magic team and it would not surprise me if they took the series after that performance.

                    West could have scored 50 points and 20 rebounds but if he gets shut down in the final 6 minutes by a scrub then it was all for nothing. Remember Anthony Johnson's 50 point playoff loss? I'm under the belief that Tyler would have impacted the game in a way like he always does to pull something off. And you're right, we have to stay close to win the game. Tyler was the only thing clicking before the starters came in and lost us the game, 3 for 9 or not. He impacted the game hence why Roy was slow to come back. Once it was West, Roy, Gragner, George, and DC we got absolutely punked, something that wasn't happening when Tyler was in the game right before that. They didn't score once Tyler left, and they allowed the Magic to close out on a 11-0 roll. West was part of this and if he is our leader and our best player then he deserves every bit of the blame. I would put anything on it that if Tyler was in for the last 6 minutes instead of West last night we win.

                    So take your difference of opinion and shove it. You think you are all sooooo much smarter and this and that. Troy Murphy put up better numbers than both of them. D West is way worse defensively than Tyler and it isn't even close, and he doesn't come with half the intensity or hustle. He is a better low post option but that is all. His mid range game is also worse than Tyler's. Able I know you hate Tyler, and I know most of you do, but you really think West is all world better but he really isn't when you honestly compare the two.

                    West isn't a better rebounder, they are about even on that front. But I've seen Tyler fight for ONE big rebound to win a game and deliver more times than West has. Stats be damned, all it takes is one play to win a game. Tyler has a better mid range shot, and he is better defensively, and is WAY more clutch. If you think he isn't better defensively, there is a reason West does not roam the perimeter like him, because he is not capable. All West has is a better low post game and I would expect a 31 year old veteran to have developed that move better than a guy technically in his second year.
                    Last edited by Midcoasted; 04-29-2012, 03:52 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

                      Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                      Yea I'm off my rocker and West is clearly the superior option!
                      About the only part of your post I agree with.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

                        Originally posted by Sookie View Post
                        He forced shots instead of passing it to open players. I don't have a problem with him taking shots. I have a problem with him taking shots when he's double/triple teamed and other players on the floor are open. We heard Frank saying "make the extra pass" over and over again in the huddles. Well, guess who the number one person who didn't was. (Followed closely by Danny Granger)

                        If this was a rare occurrence with David, I wouldn't have mentioned it. But it's not. It (along with defense) is a flaw in his game. If he had shot 2-14 he would have been doing the same thing.
                        If West had shot 2/14 yesterday I still wouldn't have a problem with him taking those shots. He wasn't selfish in the way Tyler is selfish (head down, charging to the basket, pump fake, throw up a prayer while falling to the ground kind of selfish). He was assertive.

                        Nobody was making shots - hell, Paul George looked petrified to even TAKE a shot out there (but did manage to take and miss two wide open 3s that would've all but iced the game). It's not like West shoots 20-30 times a game. He took 14 shots! He was brought in to take shots and provide a veteran presence, both of which have been paramount to our success this season - especially this past month.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

                          Originally posted by rabidpacersfan View Post
                          About the only part of your post I agree with.
                          Oh nice rebuttal there! You must be quite the expert yourself, hell with all those analytical skills you just showed. Follow the herd mentality sheep! Because West put up like 3 more ppg while getting a lot more minutes over the season and has not absolutely proven he is better than Tyler in any other facet. I can see now why he is clearly the superior option and him getting mopped up in crunch time by scrubs last night proves he is the better player!

                          We paid him 10 million to get the 3 seed and get punked by the Magic. If they had Howard they would win 4-1, or maybe even 4-0. I really think the Magic will take this thing. So in all honestly, West did not make us any better at all. We played better against the Bulls last year in game 1 and way worse this year against a vastly inferior Orlando without the best center in the game. Yea he just made us sooooo much better.

                          Watching the Colts all those years, I guess I learned that regular season stats and wins mean everything when the playoffs come along and the big lights are on! Hell if we win at a SLIGHTLY higher percentage than when Vogel took over last year, and show we actually took a step back in the playoffs, I guess that means that 10 million dollar investment really paid off when the Magic who finished the year 4-8 sweep us 4-0?
                          Last edited by Midcoasted; 04-29-2012, 04:27 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

                            Originally posted by Midcoasted View Post
                            Oh nice rebuttal there! You must be quite the expert yourself, hell with all those analytical skills you just showed. Follow the herd mentality sheep! Because West put up like 3 more ppg while getting a lot more minutes over the season and has not absolutely proven he is better than Tyler in any other facet. I can see now why he is clearly the superior option and him getting mopped up in crunch time by scrubs last night proves he is the better player!

                            We paid him 10 million to get the 3 seed and get punked by the Magic. If they had Howard they would win 4-1, or maybe even 4-0. I really think the Magic will take this thing. So in all honestly, West did not make us any better at all. We played better against the Bulls last year in game 1 and way worse this year against a vastly inferior Orlando without the best center in the game. Yea he just made us sooooo much better.

                            Watching the Colts all those years, I guess I learned that regular season stats and wins mean everything when the playoffs come along and the big lights are on! Hell if we win at a SLIGHTLY higher percentage than when Vogel took over last year, and show we actually took a step back in the playoffs, I guess that means that 10 million dollar investment really paid off when the Magic who finished the year 4-8 sweep us 4-0?
                            If we win game 2 by 20 points you better still be predicting a magic overall win in the series.
                            Time for a new sig.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

                              There's no need to play a proper PF all the time. More time for Dahntay, who can guard Nelson, Redick and J Rich, and less time for Lou/Tyler and have Granger guard Anderson.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Odd Thoughts: Round 1 Game 1 2012 playoffs

                                Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
                                Maybe his game was Reggie-like. NBA Finals Game 1 Reggie. It happens. Move on and win the next one.
                                Now point out Grangers positive playoff Reggie like moments. Bet you can't find one.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X