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

Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

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

  • Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

    I saw this on another board and I figured that this can generate some good discussion.

    Everyone has said that this year's free agent class is extremely weak. The only guys that were worth anything were Carmelo Anthony, Al Horford, Tony Parker, Caron Butler, and Zach Randolph. Tony Parker and Al Horford have now signed extensions so that makes things even weaker. Carmelo Anthony isn't coming here either. Caron Butler and Zach Randolph potentially can, but there will be some competition to pick either of these players up. However, even though the high echelon players aren't very good, that doesn't mean that the role players are crap as well. So, who do you think are some players that we can bring in that may be under the radar that can come here and be productive and help us out on the win column?

    Kendrick Perkins- First and foremost, I believe that the best under-the-radar player that we can possibly pick up is Kendrick Perkins. His injury has seemingly made everyone forget about him and let's not forget how good of a defensive player he is. He had 132 blocks last year which is good for ninth in the league, and he has an 11.5 offensive rebound percentage which is good for eighth in the league. He sets bonecrushing picks, and he is just mean. I don't think that I have ever seen him smile. Which is a good thing.

    He finishes around the rim (2nd in the league last year with a .602 percentage) and has a respectable back to basket game which is valuable for a 3rd big nowadays. I know that this may be somewhat of a stretch considering that Boston is in love with him, but we must as well make an offer to him as he would tremendously help us as a 3rd big. He has won a championship and he has been around leaders like Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce. Not to mention that if he and Roy worked together in the offseason he would potentially make Roy the best center in the league (no hyperbole).

    So, that is just one player that I have had on my mind. He'd at least be a fan favorite for sure.

    And for good measure here is a very good article wrote on the day of Finals game 7 about Perk: http://nbaplaybook.com/2010/06/17/th...drick-perkins/

    Tayshaun Prince- Kstat I may need some input here, buddy. I know that Tayshaun Prince is a pesky defender and he is made of steel. He is a respectable floor spacer and he has an all around game. He has a good defensive rebounding percentage (13.8 last year), and he can really score at a high percentage for a player of his position (.473 from the field so far this season). He's got long arms, he's a winner, he has ability to create off the dribble, plays with intensity, and he's just a glue guy. Basically James Posey when he was with Boston. Good thing.

    If we brought him off the bench for Danny next year we would have a very, very solid backup small forward. I love the idea of having two good rebounding and defending small forwards both starting and coming off the bench. I know that technically and morally we aren't supposed to be doing any business w/ guys from Detroit, but for the sake of winning I don't really care. Tayshaun would be a real glue guy for us.

    Here is yet another article about what has been "up" with Tayshaun. It just really seems as if it is time for him to part ways with the franchise: http://www.freep.com/article/2010112...ayshaun-Prince

    DeAndre Jordan- If we strictly want to go youth movement here, I think that DeAndre can be a good pickup. First of all, he's a big boy. He's a big time athlete, and he can rebound the ball (2.0 offensive rebounds per game in 18 minutes per game which is a 12.9 offensive rebound %.) He also has had nice or decent defensive rebounding percentages in his first two years in the league (25.5 and 23.5 respecively.)

    To put this into perspective, let's look at Jeff Foster's defensive and offensive rebounding percentages. In his best defensive rebounding percentage year, he was at 25.4 percentage compared to DeAndre's 23.5 last year (his first year he didn't play too many games). Pretty good considering that DeAndre is just 22, eh?

    He is awkward around the basket and doesn't hit very many contested shots around the rim though. He is flat footed and can't really go up very well such as Amare Stoudamire or Javale McGee for example (Perk has this problem too). However, he still hits his shots. He has very good percentages for a big man (.644 fg% this year) and that is decent coming from a 22 year old kid drafted on potential who averages 9.9 ppg per 36 minutes. He's limited offensively, but he doesn't take silly shots.

    Some more downsides: Awful free throw shooter and not good from the perimeter.

    So, to conclude, pick him up if you think that he can steadily improve year by year to become a good-to-elite 3rd big. If he doesn't he'll be okay. Still better than Solomon Jones.

    Some more but I have gotten too lazy to keep going on: Andrei Kirilenko (if he ever learns to stop shooting from the perimeter), Samuel Dalembert (for a one or two year deal at the most), Joel Pryzbilla (be healthy my man), Nick Collison, Marcus Thornton (restricted), Chuck Hayes, Tyson Chandler (I'd love this pickup if cheap. I'd absolutely love it), and Shane Battier*

    *I bet that Shane isn't going anywhere. So I didn't expand on that.

    Who do you guys think we should go after that we haven't really talked about?

  • #2
    Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

    I love Deandea's game cant play offense a lick but would be a good backup to roy.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

      Carl Landry.

      I don't know what's under the radar or not, and I haven't heard any news on him lately...but this is a guy who could help....for 2010 so far: 17.4 pts/36 min; 7.0 rbs/36; 1 asst/36. Good energy guy. Good point production.

      Real GM still shows him unrestricted for summer 2011.

      And the Indiana connection couldn't hurt ticket sales. Not a major factor in this, but true.
      Last edited by kester99; 11-21-2010, 09:58 PM.


      [~]) ... Cheers! Go Pacers!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

        I think our top 2 targets should be Zach Randolph and David West (player option), if they are available. I'd prefer Zach Randolph, because age should have less of an impact on him in final years of a contract - considering his style of play. But I would be very happy with either of them, and would give Granger's type of deal to get them. With an All Star quality PF, I think we have enough talent to win 50+ games. If we miss on those two, we could also go Jason Richardson, he fills a need (SG), but he currently makes 14.5 mil. I like him, but I'm not sure that he improves us enough to compete for home court in the playoffs. So I'd pass on him if it goes above 4 years 40 mil or similar deal.

        If we can't get Zach Randolph, David West or J-Rich, I think we need to settle for role players. I'd absolutely love T-Prince - both for his game and his playoff experience - but he plays the same position as Danny. He's too good to come off the bench on this team, his price would be too high for a backup, and I wouldn't want to force our best player (Granger) to play out of position. Maybe we could play Prince out of position, but he's getting on the old side and probably won't be able to fill out 2 spot permanently, and he's too thin to play PF. Same goes for Caron Butler.

        If we go for role players, then I think a backup C is top priority. I think Perkins is too good to be a backup, and his price will be too big. I mean, average salary for a C is around 7-8 mil in this league. If Brendan Haywood can get 5 years 42 mil guaranteed, Perkins will command so much more.

        DeAndre on the other hand, I like him and he might be had for cheap. Clippers seem to be quite high on him atm, but with a high lottery pick incoming they might just get something better and let him go. He's inconsistent right now as a starter, while Chris Kaman is out. But he's becoming into one of the better backup Cs imo. Anything around 4 mil a year - I think that would be a great deal for us. Our C spot would be fine for years.

        If DeAndre is not available, I wouldn't mind Big Baby Davis. He's way undersized, but he's dealing with backup C minutes just fine for the Celtics. Not to mention, a guy with his toughness and playoff experience is just good for this team. He could also back up 4, and his salary will probably be in 4 mil range.

        My 3rd option at backup C would probably be Nazr Mohammed if we could get him at veteran minimum or a bit above. He's been on multiple playoff teams, and as backup C he'd be better than most. If we can't get any of those at reasonable price, I wouldn't mind Ronny Turiaf - if he's available (has a player option left). Nenad Krstic would also be ok-ish, but he would have to take a paycut, he currently makes over 5.5 mil in his last year, and that's just too much for what he brings imo.

        As for role players at other positions, I'd absolutely love Matt Barnes. His salary this year is 1.8 mil. If we can get him at around 2-3 mil, we should. Toughness, good D, 3 pointers and playoff experience doesn't hurt.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

          Originally posted by kester99 View Post
          Carl Landry.

          I don't know what's under the radar or not, and I haven't heard any news on him lately...but this is a guy who could help....for 2010 so far: 17.4 pts/36 min; 7.0 rbs/36; 1 asst/36. Good energy guy. Good point production.

          Real GM still shows him unrestricted for summer 2011.

          And the Indiana connection couldn't hurt ticket sales. Not a major factor in this, but true.
          I wonder what kind of money he will command this summer. Personally, I wouldn't pay much - he's 27 already so he is who he is right now. Energy guy with inferior rebounding and average defense. I think we can develop Hansbrough into Landry. But if his salary is similar to what he currently makes, sure why not - front court depth doesn't hurt.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

            Originally posted by kester99 View Post
            Carl Landry.

            I don't know what's under the radar or not, and I haven't heard any news on him lately...but this is a guy who could help....for 2010 so far: 17.4 pts/36 min; 7.0 rbs/36; 1 asst/36. Good energy guy. Good point production.

            Real GM still shows him unrestricted for summer 2011.

            And the Indiana connection couldn't hurt ticket sales. Not a major factor in this, but true.
            The thing that kind of scares me is his sup-par rebounding. It's pretty terrible. Here's the stats: http://www.basketball-reference.com/...landrca01.html

            Heres something from a Rockets board about his rebounding back in December: http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=181680

            And for good measure: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/10/28/313..._rss=Kings/NBA

            I don't know if it is effort or ability with the rebounding thing with Landry, but I hope that it is the effort so that it can get fixed.

            I am not way too worried about his rebounding though because as Westphal said he boxes out. He also had a positive +/- stat with Houston (40). It went down with Sacramento, but almost everyone besides Sergio had a negative one as they were a losing team. If I remember correctly they were tanking. It was -129 for Landry with the Kings.

            However, I would welcome Carl Landry to the team with open arms. Hits shots at a high clip, is an active player, and can create his own shot (something that our PF tandem can't do, which is critical for postseason play). But he won't ever get us over the hump into contention.
            Last edited by BringJackBack; 11-21-2010, 10:33 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

              Originally posted by ballism View Post
              I wonder what kind of money he will command this summer. Personally, I wouldn't pay much - he's 27 already so he is who he is right now. Energy guy with inferior rebounding and average defense. I think we can develop Hansbrough into Landry. But if his salary is similar to what he currently makes, sure why not - front court depth doesn't hurt.
              he will problly get a drew gooden type deal 5yrs 32 million

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                Landry is currently better than anything we have now, but he's just not good enough to be the future starting PF of any contender. Although Roy has improved his mobility, we still need a longer player with better athleticism at the 4 if we expect to contend with this group of players. While Landry is currently better, I think Hans is fine coming off the bench in that role backup PF role.

                If we ever expect to contend, we have to acquire better players than this.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                  Originally posted by ballism View Post
                  I think our top 2 targets should be Zach Randolph and David West (player option), if they are available. I'd prefer Zach Randolph, because age should have less of an impact on him in final years of a contract - considering his style of play. But I would be very happy with either of them, and would give Granger's type of deal to get them. With an All Star quality PF, I think we have enough talent to win 50+ games. If we miss on those two, we could also go Jason Richardson, he fills a need (SG), but he currently makes 14.5 mil. I like him, but I'm not sure that he improves us enough to compete for home court in the playoffs. So I'd pass on him if it goes above 4 years 40 mil or similar deal.
                  David West would be great for this team imo. If we do pick n' rolls and pick n' pops, Darren Collison could average 8+ assists per game next season with either Zach or West. I too think that we could flirt with 50 games if we picked up one of the two, got a new coach, and with the improvement of our players. Sorry, but no to Jason Richardson if we are paying him 4/40 million.

                  If we can't get Zach Randolph, David West or J-Rich, I think we need to settle for role players. I'd absolutely love T-Prince - both for his game and his playoff experience - but he plays the same position as Danny. He's too good to come off the bench on this team, his price would be too high for a backup, and I wouldn't want to force our best player (Granger) to play out of position. Maybe we could play Prince out of position, but he's getting on the old side and probably won't be able to fill out 2 spot permanently, and he's too thin to play PF. Same goes for Caron Butler.
                  Tayshaun isn't quite as good as he was in Detroit years ago, and I think that he would be a great, great backup to Danny in my opinion. His price may be high, but he would for sure fill a need which is having a bench. Our bench has been consistently terrible for years and it's finally time that we have a good bench. I think that we will be fighting with Oklahoma City though if we try to pick him up. We could really use his bench defense and offense though.

                  If we go for role players, then I think a backup C is top priority. I think Perkins is too good to be a backup, and his price will be too big. I mean, average salary for a C is around 7-8 mil in this league. If Brendan Haywood can get 5 years 42 mil guaranteed, Perkins will command so much more.
                  Sure, he is too good to be a backup. And I agree with you, 7-8 million is too much for a backup. But the reason that Brendan Haywood got that deal is because of silly management and no one has the money for that this offseason compared to last. But, I'm just saying, if we had Perk and Tayshaun as our backups, we'd have an amazing bench. It'd be crazy. Anywhere around the MLE I would do it without looking back.

                  I wouldn't know what to do though. Roy needs his 33-35 minutes and Perk needs about 25-28 per game. I suppose that we could move Perk to power forward situationally but that wouldn't really work. I would hate to only have Perk out there 14 minutes a game.


                  DeAndre on the other hand, I like him and he might be had for cheap. Clippers seem to be quite high on him atm, but with a high lottery pick incoming they might just get something better and let him go. He's inconsistent right now as a starter, while Chris Kaman is out. But he's becoming into one of the better backup Cs imo. Anything around 4 mil a year - I think that would be a great deal for us. Our C spot would be fine for years.

                  If DeAndre is not available, I wouldn't mind Big Baby Davis. He's way undersized, but he's dealing with backup C minutes just fine for the Celtics. Not to mention, a guy with his toughness and playoff experience is just good for this team. He could also back up 4, and his salary will probably be in 4 mil range.
                  Agreed here, except we have Hansbrough who is as good, if not better, than Davis. So we don't really need Davis.

                  My 3rd option at backup C would probably be Nazr Mohammed if we could get him at veteran minimum or a bit above. He's been on multiple playoff teams, and as backup C he'd be better than most. If we can't get any of those at reasonable price, I wouldn't mind Ronny Turiaf - if he's available (has a player option left). Nenad Krstic would also be ok-ish, but he would have to take a paycut, he currently makes over 5.5 mil in his last year, and that's just too much for what he brings imo.
                  Interesting with Ronny Turiaf there. Not only is he a pretty good defender, he is also a very good teammate.

                  As for role players at other positions, I'd absolutely love Matt Barnes. His salary this year is 1.8 mil. If we can get him at around 2-3 mil, we should. Toughness, good D, 3 pointers and playoff experience doesn't hurt.
                  The only downside is the case that got dropped in Sacramento. As long as that wouldn't bring bad publicity, I'd be all for bringing Barnes in. He's just a smart player who doesn't pretend to like opposing players or teams.
                  .

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                    Josh McRoberts, Mike Dunleavy, Jeff Foster?


                    http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/s...eeAgents-10-11



                    I could see a lot of interest in Carl Landry. If we don't and we don't resign McRoberts, I could see interest in Kris Humphries or Yi Jianlin at PF, but these guys would back up Tyler.


                    I could see interest in Dalembert, if cheap, as a backup Center or Hollins as a end of the bench-type 3rd string Center.


                    I could see interest in Rasual Butler, Jamario Moon, Sam Young, or Luc Mbah a Moute as perimeter defenders, though we have Posey in that role and I'm happy with the rotation of Rush/Granger/George... PG needs to show some development this year, though.

                    Shannon Brown or Kelenna Azubuike as a Dahntay Jones type role, if DJ is moved.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                      Originally posted by BringJackBack View Post
                      .
                      Ohh absolutely, Prince, Perkins, Hansbrough, Rush and AJ Price would be a terrific bench. But if we don't get proper starters before getting those two, we end up starting some of them. Also, you have to wonder how Prince would feel coming off the bench on an up-and-coming young team that isn't a contender. After all, he would be the most experienced player on the team, proven in the playoffs, a key player from a title team, and he's not really that old yet.
                      But if we somehow manage to get Zach and J-Rich (or similar level starters) and then T-Prince for 6th man, I'm absolutely for it.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                        Prince can also contribute spot minutes at PF, dependent on matchups.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                          Perkins is a starting caliber center in this league. No way he comes here unless Hibbert departs.
                          The Most Common Cause of Stress is Dealing with Idiots

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                            We gotta make some noise in the playoffs this year if we hope to sign any of these battle tested Vets to be out backups. Otherwise they'll be the annual crop of players to chase rings and sign with the contenders.

                            Not so sure about DeAndre Jordan, at the game last week he was just terrible. Played pretty dirty too when he was guarding Roy. Got away with pushing Roy in the back all night long.
                            You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Who are some "Hidden gems" in 2011 free agency?

                              Originally posted by cinotimz View Post
                              Perkins is a starting caliber center in this league. No way he comes here unless Hibbert departs.
                              Lamar Odom, Carl Landry, Antawn Jamison, Serge Ibaka, Al Harrington, and Taj Gibson are all starting caliber bigs in this league too. I don't think it really matters as long as Perk gets his 20-25 minutes in a game.

                              Of course he's probably going to want to resign with Boston, sign with Utah, or sign with Oklahoma City, but if we throw enough cash at him we can get him over here. As long as we attract attention this postseason, as graphic-er said, we can start to get guys to come over here.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X