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

There may be footage of Wilt Chamberlain's 100 point game out there

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

  • There may be footage of Wilt Chamberlain's 100 point game out there

    http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.c...00-point-game/

    Wilt Chamberlain feared someone would poison his soda, there may be film of 100 point game

    Everything about Wilt Chamberlain is shrouded in mythology. Everything he did on the court, everything he did off the court.

    Like the new revelation he used a Sixers’ ball-boy as the “King’s cup-bearer” — the boy tested all the soda Chamberlain drank during games because Wilt feared he would be poisoned.

    Or the night in Hershey, Penn., when Chamberlain dropped 100 points on the Knicks. Part of the reason it is so mythological in modern terms is there is no film of it, we only have the stories, which get exaggerated over time.

    Except their might be film of that night… but that film too is shrouded in mystery — nobody knows where it is.

    All of this comes from Memphis coach Josh Pastner, who was in Philly as his Tigers took on the Temple Owls. When asked about his ties to the Philadelphia area Pastner said this eye opening stuff about Chamberlain, via The 700 Level at CSNPhilly.com.

    My father was the ball boy for the 76ers for many, many years, and he and Wilt Chamberlain were very close. … And Wilt Chamberlain always felt somebody was trying to get him on timeouts with assassination through drinking. And he drank 7-Up or Sprite, one of the two. And my dad always had to taste it before Wilt– He made my father drink it before [he] would taste it to make sure my dad didn’t conk out.But Wilt took care of my father. They always went around. Like my dad said, he never had a front seat; Wilt sat in the back when he was driving because his legs were so long.

    And in fact, my father and his father taped the game reel-to-reel in the second quarter when it was in Hershey, Pennsylvania in the 100-point game. They started when he had like 30-something; they thought it was going to be a special night. They gave it to Wilt — the 100-point game — and Wilt gave it back to my dad and my dad’s dad. He gave it back to them, they boxed it up, and he’s still trying to find it. He’s got all kinds of boxes, and he doesn’t know if he lost it. He’s trying to find the sucker. … I mean he’s got jerseys of Wilt, pictures.
    Is that true?

    Who knows? Who cares? It’s Wilt Chamberlain, where the myth is way more fun than the reality (the reality being he scored 100 points because his teammates kept setting him up at the end of an already decided game, and the Sixers would foul the other team to stop the clock and get the ball back to get him points).

    Personally, I’d rather believe the myth of Chamberlain. So for me, this is all true. Even if it isn’t.

  • #2
    Re: There may be footage of Wilt Chamberlain's 100 point game out there

    I'm happy about the 100 point game, but isn't that kinda like throwing the ball at the other team's backboard to get a rebound for your triple double?
    "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: There may be footage of Wilt Chamberlain's 100 point game out there

      Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
      I'm happy about the 100 point game, but isn't that kinda like throwing the ball at the other team's backboard to get a rebound for your triple double?
      ....you're comparing force-feeding the ball to a player having a career night to that?

      You don't break 50 in a game unless that happens, let alone 100. Nobody does.

      Watch Bird's 60, Kobe Bryant's 81 or David Robinson's 71.

      In all 3 instances, they spent most of the 2nd half jacking shot after shot at the basket in the 2nd half, even after the outcome was already decided. No one else on the team even thought about shooting.

      Bird was chasing down his own rebounds with a minute left in a 10-point game so he could immediately shoot again. The celtics were intentionally fouling the hawks late in the game to get him the ball back.

      In Robinson's case, he was firing jumpers over double-teams with teammates standing wide open under the rim. On two instances, Robinson backed out of traps to shoot a three.

      We don't need to go over Kobe' big night. You could count the amount of passes he made in that game on one hand.

      If we ever see footage of Wilt's 100, I suspect it'll be even more extreme than those instances. But that's how these obscene point totals add up. One guy gets really hot early, and the rest of the team throws the gameplan out with the trash to try and make history.
      Last edited by Kstat; 01-13-2014, 06:23 PM.

      It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

      Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
      Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
      NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: There may be footage of Wilt Chamberlain's 100 point game out there

        Originally posted by McKeyFan View Post
        I'm happy about the 100 point game, but isn't that kinda like throwing the ball at the other team's backboard to get a rebound for your triple double?
        It sounds exactly like how that DIII team helped that one kid set the scoring record.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: There may be footage of Wilt Chamberlain's 100 point game out there

          Originally posted by Kstat View Post
          We don't need to go over Kobe' big night. You could count the amount of passes he made in that game on one hand.
          Actually I do think Kobe's game was different. Yes it was a one-man offense for much of the game, but the game wasn't really decided until the last few minutes, and I don't remember any intentional fouls on the opponent to slow the game down, or any deliberate stats-padding (though at the end when the other team kept fouling, everyone made sure the ball was in Kobe's hands for the free throws, and yes Phil Jackson left him in the game a few minutes longer because of the record). Pretty much all of those shots were in the flow of the game (though I'll agree he made almost zero attempts to get any teammates involved offensively, but then again there were very few other options on that team).

          That's why out of all of these I find the Kobe game to be the most impressive, even though I'm not a Kobe fan.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: There may be footage of Wilt Chamberlain's 100 point game out there

            His teammates may have been fouling to get the ball back, but the other team was also grabbing other players besides Wilt, so that the other player would have to shoot free throws. To counter, they had the ball inbounded to Wilt and he brought the ball up court.

            I don't think that anyone ever shot 63 shots "in the flow of the game".

            Wilt always thought that the 100 point game was a bit artificial and was not his best game. He had as I recall about 100 games of over 30 points and over 30 rebounds, 25 of them when guarded by Bill Russell, and even a few 40-40 games, and the famous 20-20-20 game (22 points, 25 rebounds, 21 assists, in 1968).

            Wilt apparently said point blank that his greatest accomplishment was the 55 rebound game vs. Bill Russell.

            Guerin and Attles said Chamberlain wanted out of the eventual 169-147 blowout when it was apparent the Warriors would win. But with many of the 4,124 fans chanting, "Give it to Wilt," McGuire kept his star center in the game.


            "I don't know what the [time] was, but [Chamberlain] was trying to get out of the game," Attles said. "Frank McGuire wouldn't take him out."


            Chamberlain reached the 100-point mark on a dunk with 46 seconds left, a watershed moment in sports history that, like the rest of the game, wasn't filmed. Some fans ran onto the floor to celebrate, delaying the end of the game. When it was over, Chamberlain had made 36 of his 63 shots and 28 of his 32 free throws. Yet he didn't take much pride from the performance.


            "The guy that had the toughest time with it was Wilt," Attles said. "We were in the locker room and I was sitting next to him. He used to sweat profusely. He has his stat sheet and he's raining down water, shaking his head. I said, 'Big fella, what's the matter?' He said, 'I'd never take 63 shots in a game.' I said, 'But you made 36, that's a good percentage any time.'


            "He still struggled with it."

            ...the record he actually cherished the most was his 55-rebound game against Bill Russell and the Boston Celtics on Nov. 24, 1960...


            "I think he always felt a little embarrassed about the whole thing," she (his sister) said.

            http://sports.yahoo.com/news/wilt-ch...0246--nba.html
            Last edited by Slick Pinkham; 01-13-2014, 08:29 PM.
            The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: There may be footage of Wilt Chamberlain's 100 point game out there

              Nobody ever scores over 50 "in the flow of the game," so that's a moot point.

              Maybe 1% of all 50+ point games in NBA history were not artificial. Jordan's 63-point playoff game comes to mind.

              It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

              Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
              Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
              NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: There may be footage of Wilt Chamberlain's 100 point game out there

                Reggie's 57 point game was not artificial...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: There may be footage of Wilt Chamberlain's 100 point game out there

                  Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                  ....you're comparing force-feeding the ball to a player having a career night to that?

                  You don't break 50 in a game unless that happens, let alone 100. Nobody does.

                  Watch Bird's 60, Kobe Bryant's 81 or David Robinson's 71.

                  In all 3 instances, they spent most of the 2nd half jacking shot after shot at the basket in the 2nd half, even after the outcome was already decided. No one else on the team even thought about shooting.

                  Bird was chasing down his own rebounds with a minute left in a 10-point game so he could immediately shoot again. The celtics were intentionally fouling the hawks late in the game to get him the ball back.

                  In Robinson's case, he was firing jumpers over double-teams with teammates standing wide open under the rim. On two instances, Robinson backed out of traps to shoot a three.

                  We don't need to go over Kobe' big night. You could count the amount of passes he made in that game on one hand.

                  If we ever see footage of Wilt's 100, I suspect it'll be even more extreme than those instances. But that's how these obscene point totals add up. One guy gets really hot early, and the rest of the team throws the gameplan out with the trash to try and make history.
                  Kobe didn't get hot really until the second half, when he started raining 3's. He had like 30 in the first half, but it wasn't an efficient 30.
                  Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: There may be footage of Wilt Chamberlain's 100 point game out there

                    Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                    Reggie's 57 point game was not artificial...
                    I agree. He sat out most of the 4th quarter, with 50 points after 3 quarters.

                    He played 38 minutes, took just 29 shots, and even had 8 assists

                    http://www.basketball-reference.com/...211280CHH.html
                    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: There may be footage of Wilt Chamberlain's 100 point game out there

                      Originally posted by rabid View Post
                      Actually I do think Kobe's game was different. Yes it was a one-man offense for much of the game, but the game wasn't really decided until the last few minutes, and I don't remember any intentional fouls on the opponent to slow the game down, or any deliberate stats-padding (though at the end when the other team kept fouling, everyone made sure the ball was in Kobe's hands for the free throws, and yes Phil Jackson left him in the game a few minutes longer because of the record). Pretty much all of those shots were in the flow of the game (though I'll agree he made almost zero attempts to get any teammates involved offensively, but then again there were very few other options on that team).

                      That's why out of all of these I find the Kobe game to be the most impressive, even though I'm not a Kobe fan.
                      This is correct. Kobe had 26 points at halftime and the Lakers were down by 14 at halftime. They trailed late into the 3rd quarter of that game.

                      I'm lucky that I was able to watch that game live. I've never been more amazed by a player more in my life. He was unstoppable. They were triple teaming Kobe at times and it didn't matter.

                      Remember the names Smush Parker, Chris Mihm, and Kwame Brown? Yeah, those were the other starters on that team with Kobe and Lamar Odom. Kobe scored 55 points in the second half because the rest of his team was terrible and was playing even worse than usual. Had Kobe scored less than 60-65 points, the Lakers would have had no chance to win.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: There may be footage of Wilt Chamberlain's 100 point game out there

                        Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                        Nobody ever scores over 50 "in the flow of the game," so that's a moot point.
                        Care to elaborate? I agree that it's rare but it has happened. You mentioned the Jordan 63 game and I think the Kobe 81 game falls into that category as well.

                        By "in the flow of the game," I mean that the shots were taken in order to help win the game, not just to pad stats.

                        I think you can argue that for the final 6-8 points (free throws) Kobe didn't need to be in the game anymore (in fact Phil Jackson was about to take him out before being told about the record), but besides that? Legit IMO. Yeah he was playing selfish but the circumstances kind of warranted that.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X