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:
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

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

Worst finishes by Pacers teams that won a playoff series

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Worst finishes by Pacers teams that won a playoff series

    Only 1 ECF team finished worse than 7-3, no ECF team finished at 5-5
    9 1st round losing teams finished the season at 6-4 or 5-5. Only 1 playoff team finished at 4-6, and they lost in round 1 obviously.

    The 2 teams to lose in round 2 lost to the East champs. Last year they finished 8-2 and probably could have gone 9-1, but they lost to the champion Heat. The other 2nd round loss was to East champs Detroit and it came after the brawl, and with JO and Tinsley injured down the stretch.

    The Pacers need to win 2 games (NYK, BOS, PHI) to reach 6-4. ECF looks doubtful based on history.

    11-12, 2nd round vs MIA
    8-2, 1 loss in OT, 1 loss is meaningless final game of season

    04-05 Brawl season, 2nd round loss vs DET
    6-4, no loss by more than 4, one was OT

    03-04, top record in NBA, lost in ECF to DET
    8-2, but did lose by 18 @DET who would beat them in the ECF

    99-00, Finals team, lost to LAL
    8-2, one odd 16 point loss @CHA

    98-99, ECF vs NYK, Larry Johnson 4pt play, strike season of 50 games
    7-3, lost by 22 @NJN but also smashed Knicks in game 49, went 7-0 to start playoffs

    97-98, ECF vs CHI, only team to take Jordan to game 7
    8-2, includes meaningless rest-players loss @CLE to end season

    94-95, ECF vs ORL
    6-4, bad loss to ATL but came back to thrash them later on, won @NY but lost at home to NY, their 2nd round opponent

    93-94, ECF vs NYK
    8-2, scored over 130 in 2 games including 35 point win over PHI. Ended season with 33 point win over Miami the next game (114-81)
    This group was beating the hell outta people which made their "upsets" of ORL and ATL less surprising


    10-11, lost to Bulls in 5, Vogel takes over and turns season around
    5-5, not great but way above their record on the season or when Vogel took over

    05-06, Ron requests trade, Peja refused to play in most playoff games due to "injury"
    6-4, including going 5-1 with the 1 loss being in OT to close out the season

    02-03, meltdown season, Isiah fired
    6-4, but 2-3 finish had losses of 12, 12 and 9

    01-02, Reggie almost steals the Nets series
    6-4, but it took a 5-0 finish to get that. They had been 3-8 just prior to that.

    00-01, stole gm 1 vs Philly but lost 4-1
    8-2, had been way below .500 but rallied to make playoffs during rebuild season

    95-96, upset by ATL in round 1, Reggie out for 4 games with eye injury but returned for game 5 loss
    8-2, rolled into playoffs and likely would have gone past round 1 without Reggie injury

    92-93, lost to NYK in 4, Bob Hill fired
    5-5, classic .500 run for Bob Hill's "Indy 500" teams, finished 1-3

    91-92, swept by BOS 0-3
    5-5, see above

    90-91, classic series where they took BOS to game 5, Larry smacks head then returns, Person nearly saves the day
    5-5, see above, team finished 41-41 even

    89-90, swept by DET, Versace would be fired during the next season after a slow start
    6-4. Ran into the NBA champs in round 1

    86-87, lost by 4 to ATL
    4-6 including a destruction at the hands of the Pistons by 46 points (73-119), no reason to expect a playoff series win

    80-81, swept by PHI 0-2
    5-5, well below the 41-33 record they reached at one point, clunked to the finish on the way to a quick exit.

  • #2
    Re: Worst finishes by Pacers teams that won a playoff series

    Thanks for doing all this work. All signs point to a first round loss.
    There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.


    • #3
      Re: Worst finishes by Pacers teams that won a playoff series

      I appreciate all this work, Seth. Can you tell us in which seeds those teams finished their seasons as well?
      Originally posted by IrishPacer
      Empty vessels make the most noise.


      • #4
        Re: Worst finishes by Pacers teams that won a playoff series

        I mean, looking at this is shocking, but stats are just that, STATS. This is a sport, not math. These teams are all different, I am not taken aback and ready to throw in the towel just because of that.

        With that said, I appreciate the work you put into this.


        • #5
          Re: Worst finishes by Pacers teams that won a playoff series

          I appreciate that stats, but they mean absolutely nothing, it's not like since pacers team x lost x amount of games to finish the season 15 years ago and lost in the first half means that pacers team y will lose in the first round because they lost y amount of games to finish a season, those stats are meaningless


          • #6
            Re: Worst finishes by Pacers teams that won a playoff series

            Honestly - when I saw the thread title, I thought this might be interesting and informative, after reading all the stats I decided it doesn't prove anything to me.


            • #7
              Re: Worst finishes by Pacers teams that won a playoff series

              I'm not a stats guy in general, but I think he has proven a basic trend: teams that excel in the post season tend to also play well at the end of the regular season.

              Assuming this is true across the NBA, not just with the Pacers, I think it is an instructive point. Certainly, they are not doomed to playoff failure, but this doesn't look like the general character and consistency of an excelling playoff team.

              Here's to bucking the trend.

              "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference


              • #8
                Re: Worst finishes by Pacers teams that won a playoff series

                Interesting numbers, but it would be good to have a little context for them.

                How many of those years were ones where we had to win just to get into the playoffs at all (like '94)? How many were years where we coasted the last few games against teams resting their own players for the playoffs? If we DO win against resting Boston and Phillie teams this week, will that be written off as not counting?

                I'd need a little more logic to show why this is causation rather than just correlation.

                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...


                • #9
                  Re: Worst finishes by Pacers teams that won a playoff series

                  Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
                  Thanks for doing all this work. All signs point to a first round loss.
                  If that is how you want to make your bet, fine, but each one of those seasons is an independent event. We also don't know how those ending affected seedings, which would be a much better way to indicate IMO. I.E. did one of those teams drop from 4 to 5 and lose home court? This team was the 3 seed when this stretch started and will be the 3 seed at the end so the record means little. Plus they can still win the last 2 which would place them at 6-4 over the last 10. I appreciate Seth spent the time doing this and I usually agree with him, but this is one of those times where I think a conclusion is being drawn from evidence and the link between them isn't as strong as it seems at first blush, but we will see. We may lose int he first round, but I won't think our performance over the last 10 has much to do with it. Heck our stretch right before this was what 8 of 9 won? Is that stretch now meaningless? is the run in February meaningless? Are the first 72 games of the season now meaningless? Isn't this the same board that often says the last 10 or so games of the season are a bloody crap shoot, becuas eyou have fatigue, teams tanking, the playoffs looming? I will put my stock in what the pacers did for the first 72-75 games thank ya very much. And either way, the old cliche is still so very true, everyone is 0-0 when the playoffs start and as long as the team is rested and gets that I still like our chances against everyone not named Miami in the East.

                  I think the 94-95 team that closed out 6-4 and still hit the ECF is probably the closest "doppelganger" to this group.

                  The 2011 Dallas Mavericks that won the title finished 6-4. All 4 losses came straight in a row right after they had ripped off a 5 game winning streak, including 3 straight wins on the road to close that 5 game winning streak. This mirrors almost exactly what the Pacers are going through right now. A huge 5 game winning streak, coupled with a big chunk of that streak on the road and then suffering a big let down in the following chunk of the season.
                  Last edited by Trader Joe; 04-15-2013, 12:09 PM.


                  • #10
                    Re: Worst finishes by Pacers teams that won a playoff series

                    Although I agree that these stats mean nothing because we make our own destiny, the way we are playing as of late points to a probable first round exit. So lets hope we prove history wrong.