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

Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

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

  • #76
    Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

    Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
    I have not read the entire thread yet and I may catch wrath for this but I am as frustrated as ever with George Hill. And I am a big fan of his. Tonite his 3 was off which is alright I don't expect him to be consistent at all times, but at this point I believe Mario Chalmers is a better player than him and that bothers me. I am not calling for a trade or antyhnng but more and more I am on board with having to choose between Lance or GHill hypothetically I want to keep Lance even if it meant Lance at a few mill more.

    Hill when he first arrived gave us everything we could ask for, winning attitude and experience with class organization, along with nites where he led the team in scoring and hit clutch shots. I realize this team has way more talent now but there are nites where Hill seems invisible. Im holding out hope Hill gives us what we need in the postseason and that for me now he is simply sacrificing for the greater good but to be blunt I expect more from Hill than what were getting.

    For this offense we need a knock down 3 pt shooter or someone that can play lockdown defense at the point position. dare I say it I just feel Hill has become average at both shooting (despite a solid %) and defensively (where he has off nites way too often).

    Hill eluded to it in the postgame and I realize he went heavy minutes tonite but its more overall and just the lack of assertiveness that has become the norm; but again Hill made a comment about the point guard position running through screens etc.. I just don't believe Hill is comfortable as a point guard and believes himself to be a shooting guard. as irrelevant as that may be the big picture solution may be this team needs a defensive minded point guard who can lockdown and at 8 Mill a season that should be achievable.

    again, not calling out Hill and a big fan but as as even bigger fan for the Franchise I expect more than what Hill has given. if his sole role is passing the ball to DWEST than give us lockdown defesne which he is capable of if the energy is not exerted on the offensive end.

    all im sayin is I want better defense because if he gets lit up by Mario chalmers again this postseason to quote Bird I will be "disappointed."


    * I am going to add his % should be high since most of his looks are of the open variety. one of the reasons stats and %'s are sometimes misleading. other 3pt assasains are likely to be contested and yet may shoot same%.
    I couldn't disagree more with this post. One, Hill shot 38% from three tonight. Thats good. Two, his defense was quite fantastic. MCW didn't score against him once in the second half. The one bucket in the second half MCW hit was against Lance. Once Hill re-entered the game in the 4th, we gave up a total of 12 points over the last ~8 minutes, 4 being scores when the game was all but over. Hill is hitting at 38% from three on the season.

    Not to mention he had 9 assists. Hill was pretty damn solid tonight. He had two poor passes in the 4th that didn't let us capitalize on the Philly TO's, but he also hit some big shots and got West some good looks.

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

      Originally posted by Pacerized View Post
      We've beat that horse to death. Stephenson steals rebounds almost every game, and Roy is the main player he pulls them from. Vogel has pointed it out humorously and I've heard opposing announcers make issue of it. Lance's rebounding stats are as valuable to the team as Murphy's where.
      I wouldn't go that far. Lance has both the ability to grab tough rebounds in traffic and to become an instant fast break, two things Troy wished he could do. Plus, I haven't seen Lance steal a rebound from Roy in at least a couple of games.

      Lance's ability to rebound is one of his and the team's biggest strengths/advantages.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

        Originally posted by aamcguy View Post
        Hill shot 38% from 3, held MCW (16.7ppg) to 12 points on 5/16 shooting with 3 TO, and just narrowly missed a double-double at 14 pts/9 assists. He had the fewest turnovers in our starting unit. If that doesn't fit your requirements of knocking down 3 pointers and playing lockdown defense, you will never be happy with George Hill.
        Read my **** post please before inserting your view upon my opinion. I know what Hill is capable of giving us and its the reason as I stated the frustration is present when I believe Chalmers may have become the better player at this point in time.

        I am not making an evaluation off of simply one game. At one point in the game he was 1-6 from 3, he hit 2 big corner 3's that were wide open, and missed a couple of other wide open looks. As I stated %'s don't always tell the true picture.

        If player A hits 3 of 8 and all the 3's were contested is he the same shooter as player B that hit 3 of 8 3's that were uncontested/open.????? I think my opinion taken in its entirety was fair.

        now if someone disagrees with me that chalmers may have surpassed hill as the better player I can respect that opinion and hope to be wrong. simply put I expect Hill to be an advantage over Chalmers speaking in terms of games that matter not vs the sixers in mid march.

        and this tides from last postseason where I felt hill played chalmers to about even. its hard to have good conversation on PD when it seems most misinterpret others quotes. never did I bash hill and call out the FO to trade him for a bag of peanuts.

        at 8M and the # of open looks he gets I expect more. so crucify me. however, if plays chalmers to draw again this postseason I will not be in favor of losing lance in order to keep hill.

        again, a part of me still holds out hope he is sacrificing for the greater good and will give us more this postseason from an offensive standpoint because he gets open looks as the 4th/5th option on this team.

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

          liked what Evan gave us tonite. he didn't seem to be forcing anything and is looking more comfortable in BnG as we go along. There were 3-4 very solid assists he made tonite which is rarity on this team that a player actually get another player a true assist.

          Evan created and drawed the defense than kicked and set a teammate up for an open look. most of our assists come of one player making a pass with 4 seconds on the shot clock to player that has to shoot the ball it seems.

          Evans limited offensively but he is kinda finding his niche a little bit in our offense. nothing fancy just solid fundamental passing. I still hold out hope PG and Lance will figure it out in time for the playoffs but its still nice to see from Turner getting other players easy looks.

          his D still sucks.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

            Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
            Read my **** post please before inserting your view upon my opinion. I know what Hill is capable of giving us and its the reason as I stated the frustration is present when I believe Chalmers may have become the better player at this point in time.

            I am not making an evaluation off of simply one game. At one point in the game he was 1-6 from 3, he hit 2 big corner 3's that were wide open, and missed a couple of other wide open looks. As I stated %'s don't always tell the true picture.

            If player A hits 3 of 8 and all the 3's were contested is he the same shooter as player B that hit 3 of 8 3's that were uncontested/open.????? I think my opinion taken in its entirety was fair.

            now if someone disagrees with me that chalmers may have surpassed hill as the better player I can respect that opinion and hope to be wrong. simply put I expect Hill to be an advantage over Chalmers speaking in terms of games that matter not vs the sixers in mid march.

            and this tides from last postseason where I felt hill played chalmers to about even. its hard to have good conversation on PD when it seems most misinterpret others quotes. never did I bash hill and call out the FO to trade him for a bag of peanuts.

            at 8M and the # of open looks he gets I expect more. so crucify me. however, if plays chalmers to draw again this postseason I will not be in favor of losing lance in order to keep hill.

            again, a part of me still holds out hope he is sacrificing for the greater good and will give us more this postseason from an offensive standpoint because he gets open looks as the 4th/5th option on this team.
            Hill doesn't take contested 3's that often because if his man closes out on him he moves the ball to the open man, drives to the hoop, or waits for a PnR partner. When he does take contested 3's, they're because the team didn't manage to get a good shot off before the end. Hill passes up contested 3's so other players get open looks, and you seem to want to penalize him for that. You also want to penalize him for making corner 3's because they're easier. Well, you don't get extra points for making harder shots. If every shot the Pacers took were wide open corner 3's and layups, we would win every game.

            I read your post, and responded to it. I didn't impose my view on your opinion, you said you were as frustrated as ever with him. It's not much of a stretch to believe you mean tonight included in a postgame thread. You even argued my point, saying he in fact performed poorly. And no, Hill was never 1/6 from 3 in this game. By quarter, he was 1/2, 0/2, 1/2, and 1/2. That's not a fluke either; that's basically what he averages.

            Chalmers has improved as a player; it's not Hill's fault. I also don't think Chalmer's as good as Hill even now. But if you think Chalmers is taking more contested looks than Hill as part of a spread offense where he's being passed to by LeBron and Wade, I don't know what to think. And Chalmers shoots just a little bit worse than Hill.
            Time for a new sig.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

              Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
              liked what Evan gave us tonite. he didn't seem to be forcing anything and is looking more comfortable in BnG as we go along. There were 3-4 very solid assists he made tonite which is rarity on this team that a player actually get another player a true assist.

              Evan created and drawed the defense than kicked and set a teammate up for an open look. most of our assists come of one player making a pass with 4 seconds on the shot clock to player that has to shoot the ball it seems.

              Evans limited offensively but he is kinda finding his niche a little bit in our offense. nothing fancy just solid fundamental passing. I still hold out hope PG and Lance will figure it out in time for the playoffs but its still nice to see from Turner getting other players easy looks.

              his D still sucks.
              Turner can get into the paint whenever he wants. But I agree, he's not a greed-head when it comes to stats. He's about the team, not jacking up shots and trying to drop 15+ a game. Some games he will get his, others he'll find the open man.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

                Why was Sloan inactive tonight? In the after game interview it sounded like George Hill might have said Sloan was injured. He said something like "Hopefully we'll get Donald back soon"

                Put me on the list of people disappointed with Hibbert's game tonight. When I make a list of opposing centers that Roy should dominate, Henry Sims is on the list.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

                  I need to go to bed after reading that George Hill post. Good lord....

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

                    Originally posted by Strummer View Post
                    Why was Sloan inactive tonight? In the after game interview it sounded like George Hill might have said Sloan was injured. He said something like "Hopefully we'll get Donald back soon"

                    Put me on the list of people disappointed with Hibbert's game tonight. When I make a list of opposing centers that Roy should dominate, Henry Sims is on the list.

                    Sloan was gone tonight for personal reasons if I am not mistaken. Anyways, my idea would be to shut CJ down until the Knicks game on ESPN Wednesday. I think he'll be okay, and maybe he didn't return tonight simply because we have a B2B tomorrow. But I think the wise thing would be to shut him down till Wednesday. We'll need him vs. NYK in MSG, more than @ Detroit tomorrow, and vs. Philadelphia Monday. Bynum back tomorrow will be good enough. Our bench would be......


                    LaVoy
                    Copeland
                    Bynum
                    Solo
                    Turner



                    LaVoy over Scola because tonight he showed he's more athletic, better defender, and can shoot. I am not saying no longer play Scola, but vs. Drummond, Smith, Monroe, LaVoy is the better option.

                    I think phasing Lance out of the bench unit needs to start ASAP.
                    Last edited by Grimp; 03-15-2014, 12:52 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

                      Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                      I think there's a strong possibility we cut Scola loose and give his minutes to Lavoy next year.
                      I didn't really watch the game.

                      I looked at the Box Score and saw that he went 6-6. Was he getting his scores off of put-backs ( basically cleaning up on rebounds )?

                      What did he do that impressed most everyone?
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

                        Originally posted by PacersPride View Post
                        Agree. Like this idea more and more, esp against a Heat team that will utilize Bosh at the 3pt line. Not sure where the minutes are going to come from tho. Guessing Scola but his ceiling is too high despite the struggles to sit him. However, if Bosh is on from deep Levoy will be a nice situational player off the bench for us in the postseason.
                        I think it isa combination of things. Roy just has no lower body strength. He is always in the process of being rooted out of position.
                        Also we just do not have elite passers. countless times Hill holds the ball and looks longingly like he'd sure like to deliver the sweet pass into the post... yet he DOESN'T DO IT. Instead he passes around the perimeter and someone jacks a late three.
                        I have no doubt what so ever that a guy like Rondo, or Shaun Livingston,or Jose Calderon etc etc would not even think about it. See and PASS, no delay,just score. Hill is an inferior passer by any standard.
                        On the other hand most of those guy's are turnstyles on D.
                        Still I have maintained for a couple of years that Hill is best suited as a two position backup, playing starters minutes.

                        Five minutes practice with an excellent post passer and this team would look entirely different. IMO.
                        Last edited by solid; 03-15-2014, 03:49 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

                          I would be very nervous judging a players lack of offense based on the way this team plays offense. ie George Hill.
                          {o,o}
                          |)__)
                          -"-"-

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

                            My my my... What have we here?

                            Perhaps Lavoy Allen wasn't just a "throw-in" in that deal after all.

                            Would most certainly like to see more of that!

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

                              Originally posted by BenR1990 View Post
                              I need to go to bed after reading that George Hill post. Good lord....
                              what was I thinking... I forgot since GHill is from Indy he is above any deragoratory comments regarding his game. now I would nvr have made this statement about dj Augustine prior to this season.. but would anyone be upset if we cloned cj Watson , paid him 1.5 to start and saved 6.5 million to add another shooter/scorer ie jj Reddick, korver, jamal Crawford for the difference.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Pacers - 76ers 3/14 Post Game Thread

                                Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                                I couldn't disagree more with this post. One, Hill shot 38% from three tonight. Thats good. Two, his defense was quite fantastic. MCW didn't score against him once in the second half. The one bucket in the second half MCW hit was against Lance. Once Hill re-entered the game in the 4th, we gave up a total of 12 points over the last ~8 minutes, 4 being scores when the game was all but over. Hill is hitting at 38% from three on the season.

                                Not to mention he had 9 assists. Hill was pretty damn solid tonight. He had two poor passes in the 4th that didn't let us capitalize on the Philly TO's, but he also hit some big shots and got West some good looks.
                                Because your bias for george hill. And so are the majority of you because he's from Indiana. For heavns sake people he's not a god damn point guard. The man and lary bird have said this themselfs. How much more evidence do you need to wake up from the realization ??????

                                My god ..

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X