Tweet
I would love you forever 
.
.
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.
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
-
No, but this has reminded me that kerosene has said a ton of times that there are a couple other forums that openly post all the insider stuff (at least I think it's all of it). So can kero or anyone else who knows what I'm talking about, please post in this thread the URL of those sites, so now anyone can just go get them and post them here if they aren't already posted? Thanks. -
Re: Anyone have the Insider and mock drafts for 5/27/04?
Usually at:
phxsuns.net in the Suns/NBA forum
hawksquawk.net in the Around the League forum. Sometimes in the Draft forum (like today) when it's about the draft and not much else.
kstat's forum seems to have it posted a lot as well.
http://wc4.worldcrossing.com/webx?co...Xc.1@.1dde5991 -
Re: Anyone have the Insider and mock drafts for 5/27/04?
By Chad Ford
ESPN Insider
Chat with Chad Ford at 1 p.m. ET today!
# Ford's Mock Draft
Emeka Okafor may not be a franchise player, nor a savior on the court. But the Connecticut standout could very well be the guy who saves the Orlando Magic from self-destructing this summer.
Tracy McGrady's future in Orlando has never been more tenuous. After a tumultuous season in which McGrady openly questioned his desire to remain in Orlando, he had a heart to heart with new GM John Weisbrod. The rub was this: The Magic wanted to know, needed to know, whether T-Mac planned to exercise an opt-out clause in his contract at the end of the 2004-'05 season.
McGrady didn't have an answer. All he knew was that he wanted to win. He'd prefer to win in Orlando. But if the Magic didn't quickly get their act together, he'd take his ball elsewhere.
The task before the Magic was formidable. The team lost more games than anyone else in the league. They were capped out, thanks in large part to an injured Grant Hill sitting on the bench, wearing a cast and earning millions a month to hobble around on crutches. They had the best chance of winning the NBA draft lottery, 25 percent, but history indicated the team with the best shot almost never won.
Tracy McGrady may now have some incentive to stay in Orlando.
This year's draft is filled with talented players who could make an impact on a team in three or four years. The Magic need someone who can help them now. There isn't a team in the NBA that needs Okafor more than the Magic. After earning the No. 1 pick in the draft in Wednesday's lottery, the Magic might now have the ammunition to convince T-Mac they are back on track.
Okafor won't score 20 points a game his rookie season. He'll probably struggle to fill a highlight reel. But he could give the Magic something they desperately need -- a heart transplant. Okafor's toughness, determination, focus and ability to defend and block shots have been missing ingredients in Orlando for years.
If the Magic choose anyone other than Okafor in the June 24 draft, Weisbrod should go back to chasing hockey pucks.
With Okafor at center (yes, he'll be big enough to do that in the East), the Magic could focus on free agency. Centers don't come along for the mid-level exception, but point guards do. Adding Okafor would allow them to trim down the roster at power forward. Currently Juwan Howard and Drew Gooden both play the position. Perhaps they can package Gooden and a player like Pat Garrity for a veteran point, cap space or another first-round pick.
The point is that for the first time since they started falling apart, the Magic have hope. And hope equals a chance to convince T-Mac to stay around Orlando. The Magic didn't have that before Okafor bounced into their lap Wednesday night. In my book, that qualifies Okafor as a franchise savior.
Well ... almost. Now the Magic just have to hope Okafor's back is OK.
After their miserable experience with Hill -- and a McGrady recurring back injury -- the Magic understandably will be a wary of Okafor's back. If what Okafor and his agent, Jeff Schwartz, claim is true -- that Okafor's back is totally healed -- it won't be an issue. If problems arise, the Magic are in a difficult position. They can take Okafor anyway and hope he'll be OK. Or they can try to move a pick that no one will want.
More Lottery fallout
# Having the Los Angeles Clippers move all the way up to No. 2 may be the best thing that could have happened to the Atlanta Hawks -- short of Atlanta getting the No. 2 pick itself. The Clippers have no use for high schooler Dwight Howard. They have Elton Brand, Chris Wilcox and Melvin Ely at the four. Howard might be more talented than all three, but the Clips aren't about to wait three years to find out.
What the Clippers really need is a point guard. There are several in this draft -- Ben Gordon, Shaun Livingston, Devin Harris -- who they really like, but none is worth the No. 2 pick. Enter Atlanta. The Hawks want Howard in the worst way and just so happen to own two first-round picks.
Don't be surprised if Billy Knight picks up the phone and offers the No. 6 and No. 17 choices to the Clippers for No. 2 and a player such as Peja Drobjnak (to clear more cap space in L.A.). The Clippers could use their No. 6 overall pick on a point guard, or they could use it on a big man such as Andris Biedrins or Martynas Andriuskevicius -- and then use No. 17 on a point such as Jameer Nelson or Sebastian Telfair.
# This year's mock draft was virtually impossible to put together. Just about every team has players ranked dramatically different. For example, one team has Gordon ranked as the No. 5 pick in the draft. Another has him 18th. One team has Peter John Ramos ranked in the top 10. Two don't have him in the first round. The list goes on and on.
And the lottery teams will be entertaining offers. The Bulls like Duke's Luol Deng, but GM John Paxson will likely try to move at least one of his high school players (probably Tyson Chandler) and could try to package him with the No. 3 pick to get another solid veteran.
The expansion Charlotte Bobcats, believe it or not, are also exploring moving their pick. If they can pick up something of value and still get their man, they'll do it.
The Washington Wizards are in an awkward position as well. The top players projected to be on the board at No. 5 are point guards (the Wizards already have Gilbert Arenas, Larry Hughes and Juan Dixon), threes (they drafted Jarvis Hayes and Jared Jeffries the past two years) and big guys who will take years to develop. The Wizards are anxious to get to the playoffs and may not have patience for any of that.
The Phoenix Suns don't really have a many needs right now other than clearing cap room. They say they won't dump their pick for that reason, but at No. 7, there might not be anyone on the board that fits their plan.
The bottom line is that most of the teams in the lottery aren't comfortable with their draft positions, and many of the teams in the second half of the draft covet high school or international players. They have the patience and roster room to bring them along slower. I think you'll see a flood of deals before the draft and on draft day, with playoff teams swapping younger veterans for lottery picks with bigger upsides.
# Don't be surprised if two teams with three first-round picks -- Boston and Utah -- also try to consolidate. There's no value in having three picks, given this year's draft crop. Both teams could try to package picks to move up higher.
If that doesn't work, the Celtics and Jazz will move on to another popular strategy -- drafting young international players who are willing to stay overseas for another year or two. The Jazz could use two of three picks in that fashion. The Celtics may only go that route with one pick.
Several international players, including Marytnas Andriuskevicius, Kosta Perovic, Tiago Splitter, Sergei Monya and Peja Samardziski, appear willing to do it. Teams such as the New Jersey Nets, Detroit Pistons and the Jazz have gone that route with great success in the past.
But they've always drafted players late in the first round. No one's done it in the lottery -- yet. This year may be a first.
Comments? E-mail Chad Ford here.
___
Insider Special: Rumours (updated 5/27)
Ostertag to pursue 'dream' job
WHO INTERESTED THE SKINNY
Greg Ostertag
Jazz
Jazz
Mavericks May. 27 - Utah may have been his first and only NBA gig so far, but home has always been Texas for center Greg Ostertag. And when he becomes a free agent on July 1, he has no reservations of returning. "I'm hoping they'll bring me in to talk about it at the appropriate time," Ostertag said in the Dallas Morning News. "I'm not a scorer and they don't need a scorer. They need a rebounder and shot-blocker, which I can be. I'm going to look at all my options. But it would be my ultimate dream to play in Dallas."
The paper goes on to note that the Mavs could split their mid-level exception between Ostertag and Marquis Daniels, spend their $1.6 million minimum exception on him or negotiate a sign and trade with the Jazz. But even if Ostertag stays in Utah, he is expected to take a big cut from the $8.6 million he made last season with the Jazz.
WHO INTERESTED THE SKINNY
Marcus Camby
Nuggets
? May. 26 - The Rocky Mountain News reports Camby is strongly considering exercising the opt-out clause of his contract, which would make him an unrestricted free agent June 30. The player's agent, Rick Kaplan, told the paper Camby is looking for about $60 million over six years and is hoping the Nuggets can accommodate him. "If the price is right, I'll play," Camby said.
If Camby opts out before June 12, the Nuggets would not have to protect him in the upcoming expansion draft.
WHO INTERESTED THE SKINNY
Tyson Chandler
Bulls
? May. 26 - Chandler told the Chicago Tribune he hopes the Bulls land one of the top picks in the draft, even if it means the team could selecti a player like Emeka Okafor and make it more likely Chandler could be traded.
"I hope we get the No. 1 pick," Chandler told the paper. "That means our team is better. Drafting Okafor wouldn't bother me. They can pick whomever they want, trade for whomever they want. My job is to be the best player I can be coming into camp and work as hard as I can this summer. If the franchise feels trading me is better for them, that's fine. I just want the Bulls to get better. I prefer to be here, though. This is my home. And nobody is going to run me out of my home."
WHO INTERESTED THE SKINNY
Mehmet Okur
Pistons
Pistons
Mavericks
Knicks
Jazz
Suns May. 25 - While the Pistons have been positioning themselves to ensure their ability to re-sign Okur, set to be a restricted free agent this summer, teams are starting to line up to bid for the second-year PF/C from Turkey. The Deseret News of Utah indicates the Mavericks and Knicks have joined a list that already included the Suns and Jazz.
WHO INTERESTED THE SKINNY
Head coach
Hornets
Brian Hill
Michael Cooper
Mike Fratello
Byron Scott May. 25 - New Jersey assistant coach Brian Hill will interview for the Hornets' head coaching job, reports the New Orleans Times-Picayune. The paper also reports George Karl's agent has said the former Bucks' and Sonics' coach isn't interested.
Other candidates are said to include Michael Cooper, coach of the WNBA's Los Angeles Sparks, and TNT analyst Mike Fratello, former coach of the Atlanta Hawks and Cleveland Cavaliers. Byron Scott, fired by the Nets during the season, interviewed in New Orleans last week.
WHO INTERESTED THE SKINNY
Brent Barry
Sonics
Sonics
Nets
Nuggets
Cavs
Warriors May. 25 - Expect the Nets, Nuggets, Cavs and Warriors to make runs at Barry in free agency, according to the New York Daily News. The paper indicates Barry will be seeking the mid-level exception of $5 million per year over three to four years. However, the Seattle Times cites sources who say Barry has turned down a three-year, $18 million deal to re-sign with the Sonics and is seeking a four-year contract. The Times indicates the Sonics still hope to re-sign him.
WHO INTERESTED THE SKINNY
Leon Smith
Sonics? May. 26 - Smith told the Chicago Tribune he's participating in the Bulls' free-agent tryout camp this week only because another player dropped out, and his agent indicated to Insider that the 6-foot-10 Smith is committed to returning to Seattle, where he played on a 10-day contract last season and appeared in one game.
Earlier reports out of Chicago suggested the Bulls were looking at Smith, who led the Continental Basketball Assoctiation in rebounding last season.
Smith, 23, was drafted in the first round draft by San Antonio in 1999 and promptly traded to Dallas. But personal and legal issues led to his release, and he was out of the league until joining Atlanta for 14 games in the 2001-02 season.
WHO INTERESTED THE SKINNY
Troy Hudson
Timberwolves
Clippers
Suns
Hawks
Jazz May. 25 - The New York Daily news reports the Clippers are among teams interested in Minnesota's backup PG, who had ankle surgery in April and is out for the season. However, the paper also suggest Hudson will draw interest from teams like the Suns, Hawks and Jazz.
WHO INTERESTED THE SKINNY
Gordan Giricek
Jazz
Blazers?
Nets? May. 25 - Published reports indicate the Trail Blazers have Giricek on the list of shooting guards they hope to pursue this summer, and the Nets could come after him, as well. But according to the Deseret News, Giricek will give the Jazz every opportunity to retain his services. "They (the Jazz) will be in front of anybody," Giricek said.
WHO INTERESTED THE SKINNY
Shawn Bradley
Mavericks
Jazz? May. 25 - A report that the Mavericks and Jazz were considering swapping centers has been shot down almost as quickly as it cropped up. A Dallas radio station apparently first floated the idea of a Bradley-for-Greg Ostertag deal, and the Memphis Commercial-Appeal subsequently picked it up.
However, the Deseret News reports there "is no substance whatsoever" to the report. The proposal as floated had the Jazz re-signing Ostertag, an unrestricted free agent, then trading him to Dallas for Bradley, who has three years left on his contract.Comment
Comment