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
-
-
Re: 06-02-04
Chad Ford's mock draft: Standard version | Slideshow version
TREVISO, Italy -- Two-and-a-half years ago, Pavel Podkolzine was a big oaf stumbling through the frozen tundra of Siberia in shoes three sizes too small, squeezing basketballs like grapefruits, wasting his life away in the middle of nowhere.
One year ago, Podkolzine appeared virtually out of nowhere to take the NBA world by storm at the NBA pre-draft camp in Chicago.
Then he just as abruptly dropped out of the draft after he was diagnosed with a rare growth-hormone disorder called acromegalia.
Monday, he was here, at the Reebok Eurocamp, and after two days of workouts with NBA coaches in front of a plethora of NBA scouts and GMs, Pavel once again has risen from obscurity into the upper echelons of the NBA draft.
Pavel Podkolzine (left) towers over 6-foot-11 Anton Dudukinhas at the Eurocamp.
Emeka Okafor may be more battle tested. Dwight Howard is certainly more athletic and skilled at the same age. But there is no one in the draft with a bigger upside than Pavel. At 7-foot-5 and 300 pounds (his measurements in Treviso), Pavel has the potential to dominate physically in the league some day. He is huge, strong, fairly athletic for a player his size and bursting with energy.
"The camp lit up the second he walked in," Warriors scout Ron Michaels told Insider. "The guys were feeding off his energy. I've never seen anything quite like it, or quite like him."
Neither has anyone else here. Most were left just shaking their heads after Pavel stepped into the camp and pummeled (literally) the top competition. He may not have played more than token minutes on his team in Varese this year, but the consensus from scouts who saw him work out here and in Chicago last year was that he's improved dramatically.
"Where do you find someone like that?" one longtime international scout asked. "Where do you find a player that size, that tough, that aggressive? He's going to be great."
That wasn't just the minority opinion here. It was the unanimous one. While a couple of NBA people were still worried about the risks associated with drafting Pavel, the 25 NBA people Insider talked to over the past two days unanimously agreed Podkolzine was the top international prospect in the draft.
Most went further. Twenty of the 25 NBA scouts, coaches and executives Insider interviewed claimed he should be a top-five pick based on what they saw here. Three scouts said he should be the third player taken in the draft. One respected international scout and one NBA executive said they'd take him No. 1 -- over Okafor and Howard -- if their team owned the No. 1 pick (they don't, by the way).
“ Where do find someone like that? Where do you find a player that size, that tough, that aggressive? He's going to be great. ”
— A veteran international scout, on Podkolzine
Ironically, just a few weeks ago many of these same scouts were claiming Podkolzine's stock was slipping.
Why the abrupt change? Scouting is an inexact science. Much of it has a flavor-of-the-month feel to it. Many of the scouts and executives Insider talked to here were unimpressed in recent trips to Italy to watch Podkolzine play. Pavel received very little playing time this year. When he did play, he almost never got the ball and often drifted to the perimeter. He broke a bone in his arm last month, keeping him off the radar entirely.
Meanwhile, other top center prospects like Peter John Ramos and Rafael Araujo were tearing it up in games and in workouts. But minutes after Pavel stepped on the floor in Italy, almost everything changed.
Pavel has retained his amazing strength and coordination for a big guy. In individual workouts, no one could guard him in the post. He was just too strong, physical and aggressive. On the perimeter, he's a dead eye. During the 3-point drill run for big men by Mavs vice-president Donnie Nelson on Tuesday, Pavel hit 18 of 25 from behind the international 3-point arc -- the second-best tally in the camp.
What surprised a lot of people was Pavel's ability to handle and pass the ball in the open court. Several times during the event Pavel decided to play "point center" and was surprisingly adept running the show. He often got into showboating with the ball, making no-look passes and executing cross-over dribbles. Several scouts told him to quit clowning around, but privately they said he was the first kid that size who they've ever seen do something like that.
Tracking the Russian Giant
# Insider's Chad Ford has followed the discovery and development of Pavel Podkolzine as an NBA draft prospect for the last 18 months: From Serbia, Dec. 2002
# From Italy, May 2003
# From Chicago, June 2003
Pavel also won fans with his demeanor on the court. He was constantly cheering on his teammates, translating the coaches' instructions from English to Russian for several players and, at times, even wandering into situations to give advice to the younger players at the camp.
Overall, scouts and coaches got a good 12 hours of work in with Pavel -- significantly more than they had ever seen of him previously. If there was a facade to be exposed, they would've found it here. They did.
Pavel's problems are still pretty obvious. For starters, he had very little stamina in the workouts. He hadn't played in more than a month because of the broken bone in his arm, and it showed. He was usually exhausted after five minutes of drills. When the fatigue set in, he began really lagging behind the other players on the floor.
Pavel's decision making and basketball instincts also are very raw. He just hasn't played enough basketball yet for observers to get a clear read on what kind of player he'll be. While it's clear he's a quick learner, in game situations he often pauses too long before making a decision. You can see from watching him in five-on-five scrimmages that he's still learning the game and looks lost a lot of times.
His biggest problem, however, probably has to do with identity. While he showed plenty of strength and toughness in the post, too often he took the ball out on the perimeter, tried to take his man off the dribble or shoot a 3-pointer. He thinks he's Magic Johnson, but I don't know a coach in the league (with the possible exception of Don Nelson) who would ever want a kid that big to play that way.
The bottom line with Pavel is that it will be at least two years before he'll begin to realize his full potential on the basketball court. But at that size and with that much talent, someone is going to be willing to wait. After his performance here, the reward is substantially outweighing the risk.
Pavel also has more medical obstacles to overcome. Over the past year he's been on medication to stop a pituitary adenoma from producing any more growth hormone. The medication has been working, but according to a medical report sent to all 29 teams that Insider obtained exclusively from Pavel's agent, Justin Zanick, Pavel will need minor endoscopic surgery after the summer league.
The surgery will remove the adenoma altogether, stopping the need for medication. According to the report, signed by Dr. Hrayr Shahinian of the Skull Base Institute in L.A., the recovery period is just two weeks.
"I am confident," Shahinian writes in the letter, "that in the long run Pavel will achieve his potential both as a normal young man and a professional basketball player without any long-term effects from the surgery."
How will all of that ultimately affect his draft stock? Only one team Insider talked to was overly concerned about the medical portion. They claim the potential of surgery might prohibit them from taking him, but it didn't necessarily preclude it. No one else seemed overly concerned. Most NBA teams had their doctors look him over last year, and he was rated a mild-to-moderate medical risk. It's unusual for teams to pass on someone with that rating.
“ I just want to play in the NBA. I know that I need better coaching. I know I need stronger competition. I don't care where I go in the draft. Just playing in the NBA is my dream. As long as I get to a team who will teach me and let me play, I'll be happy. ”
— Pavel Podkolzine
Where does that put Pavel on draft night? While he might be the perfect long-term fit in Orlando and worthy of consideration at the No. 1 pick, it's highly unlikely the Magic would take him there. The Magic want and need a player who can help them now, and Pavel just doesn't qualify. If the Magic were to trade down in the draft, however, they'd have interest.
The Clippers are interested. It was their international scout, Fabrizio Besnati, who discovered Podkolzine three years ago. The team flew in coach Mike Dunleavy to see him play on Tuesday. If the Clippers want him, chances are they'd trade down to No. 6 with the Hawks and hope to take him there.
It's unlikely the Bulls, Bobcats, Wizards or Hawks would select him, based on needs and the fact most haven't scouted him heavily.
The Suns at No. 7 seem like a realistic fit. They like international players, know Pavel well and need a center down the road. Coach Mike D'Antoni and big-man coach Marc Iavaroni would be great with Pavel.
The Raptors at No. 8 (they got a private workout Wednesday), the Warriors at No. 11 and the Sonics at No. 12 are all big fans after watching him here. It's unlikely he'd slip past Seattle at No. 12.
There's also a chance a team will trade up into the lottery to get Pavel. Several veteran teams like the Mavericks, Nuggets (they also got a private workout Wednesday) and the Pacers are high on Pavel and could try to leverage a few of their veteran players to get up high enough to take him.
All of this, of course, has Pavel's head spinning again. "I just want to play in the NBA," Podkolzine told Insider. "I know that I need better coaching. I know I need stronger competition. I don't care where I go in the draft. Just playing in the NBA is my dream. As long as I get to a team who will teach me and let me play, I'll be happy."
Andriuskevicius shocks scouts
If Pavel is the No. 1 international player on the board, where does that leave the guy who was atop our draft board for most of the year?
Lithuanian big man Martynas Andriuskevicius also took part in the Reebok Eurocamp and played to mixed reviews the first two days. Day one and two were mainly big-man drills, and most NBA folks were disappointed with how physically weak Andriuskevicius was. As we reported from Israel last month, he really struggled to gain or hold position in the block -- an essential skill for any NBA big man.
Andriuskevicius struggled in the paint, but impressed scouts with his perimeter skills.
However, after two days of lackluster drills (a bad back also was slowing him down), things changed dramatically Tuesday, when Andriuskevicius got into 5-on-5 drills.
Because there are no point guards in the camp right now, the coaches let big guys volunteer to run the point. Andriuskevicius stepped up and stunned scouts with ball-handling and passing skills that rivaled Dirk Nowitzki.
Andriuskevicius was much more comfortable out on the perimeter. He showed excellent court vision and made a number of picture-perfect passes off the dribble to driving big men. He has great court instincts and always seemed to know when and how to make the right play. The game comes easy to him. He ran the floor as well as anyone in the camp and showed impressive athleticism for a guy his size. He also has a stellar perimeter shot. He shot 15-for-25 from the international 3-point line and has the ability to shoot off the dribble.
In other words, the scouting report on him was just totally wrong. He's not a center. He's much closer to a four or even a three than he is to a center right now. He's not the next Sabonis. He's much closer to Nowitzki or Pau Gasol. At 7-foot-3, that's impressive.
While he's at least two years away from becoming an NBA center, could a team draft him early with the intention of turning him into a four/three like Nowitzki or Gasol?
At least one guy familiar with Nowitzki thinks so. "I saw Dirk when he was 18, and I'm not sure he was as comfortable with the ball as this kid is," Donnie Nelson told Insider. "I think his true position in the pros is at forward. He's really talented."
Still, don't expect Andriuskevicius to go in this draft. As Insider reported Monday, his agent is looking for a top-five guarantee and also asking teams to allow Andriuskevicius to stay in Lithuania one more year. It's unlikely any of the top five teams in the draft would go for something like that.
Instead, look for Andriuskevicius, if he continues to develop, to challenge Nemanja Aleksandrov for the No. 1 pick in the draft next year.
Miralles a big hit with scouts
Scouts were impressed with Albert Miralles' toughness.
One other draft-eligible player at the Eurocamp really stood out for NBA scouts. His name is Albert Miralles. Miralles is a 6-foot-11, 240-pound power forward from Spain. He's probably the toughest, most experienced player in the camp. He also recorded the biggest vertical jump (29 inches) of any prospect here.
Teams were impressed with how hard Miralles played on every possession. He was one of the few kids in the camp who knew how to defend, and his grittiness earned him praise from a number of NBA folks. He has a decent mid-range jumper and is pretty aggressive taking the ball to the basket.
Nelson compared him to Eduardo Najera, an energy guy who comes off the bench and does all the little things coaches ask of role players. That should be enough to get him drafted in the second round.
Gomenyuk the next BIG thing
The big discovery in this year's camp was a 17-year-old kid from the Ukraine named Roman Gomenyuk, who measured 7-3½. He's still very, very skinny (217 pounds) but showed great determination and good athleticism and skill for a player his age.
His coach claims Gomenyuk only started playing basketball two years ago, and the rawness certainly shows. However, almost every scout agreed he was the best under-18 prospect in the camp. That probably will change when Nemanja Aleksandrov arrives on Thursday.
The thing that teams really like about Gomenyuk is how his body is proportioned. He has low hips and a long torso that should give him great stability in the post once he puts on weight. He's already a good shot blocker, and he already can finish around the basket. He's also a decent leaper and is fairly athletic. He still needs a lot of work, but there wasn't a kid who progressed more over the past three days than Gomenyuk.
Expect to hear his name prominently over the course of the next year.
Chad Ford covers the NBA for ESPN Insider. Send him an e-mail here. -
Re: 06-02-04
"There's also a chance a team will trade up into the lottery to get Pavel. Several veteran teams like the Mavericks, Nuggets (they also got a private workout Wednesday) and the Pacers are high on Pavel and could try to leverage a few of their veteran players to get up high enough to take him."
Very Interesting! A bigger guy than Smit's who can shoot three pointers. Sound's like someone both Bird and Walsh would like to have.Comment
-
Re: 06-02-04
I'm going to move this to the front page, but I won't post the article. I want to see some comment on it. That's ok isn't it? As long as I don't post Insider?
I assumed it was okay.Comment
-
Re: 06-02-04
I think technically this IS Insider, but I'll let this one pass; I doubt anything negative will come from it.Comment
Tweet
Comment