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:
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

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

Some rumors coming out of the Chicago pre-draft camp

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Some rumors coming out of the Chicago pre-draft camp

    Courtesy of Chad Ford

    Not too earth shattering here

    Pierce to the Blazers?By Chad Ford

    Check out Chad Ford's blog for the latest on draft workouts in Chicago.

    CHICAGO The Chicago predraft camp officially got under way Tuesday night with 64 prospects playing their hearts out in scrimmages in front of hundreds of NBA scouts and executives.

    The action was fast and furious on three different courts for an hour and a half, but serious scouting won't begin until today, when individual drills and actual games start.

    That meant that the name of the game Tuesday night was rumors. Lots of them. Some good, some not so good.

    Insider talked to dozens of NBA executives and scouts to get the latest scuttlebutt. Here's what we're hearing.

    The most interesting draft rumor flying around this weekend had the Blazers and Celtics talking about a deal that would send Paul Pierce to Portland for the No. 3 pick in the draft and Nick Van Exel.

    On Tuesday, Celtics director of basketball operations Danny Ainge shot that rumor down, telling Insider it was "ludicrous." Ainge said he had no intention of trading Pierce, especially for a draft pick.

    Still, it's an interesting idea.

    Van Exel has a team option on his contract this year. That means the Celtics could trade for his $12.7 million contract, and essentially waive him without owing him a penny. In other words, the Celtics would get the draft pick and cut their cap by more than $13 million (Pierce makes a little more than Van Exel).

    It's obvious why the Blazers would do it. Adding an All-Star like Pierce at the two would be a major upgrade. If Portland could find a veteran point guard in free agency to back up Sebastian Telfair, it could be back in the playoff mix next year.

    The Celtics also have motivation to do a deal like this. Pierce is unhappy. The Celtics don't sound like they're bringing back Antoine Walker and Gary Payton (both are free agents) next season, which is only going to make matters worse with Pierce.

    By not re-signing Walker and Payton and by trading Pierce, the Celtics could accomplish a couple of things.

    First, by making the move, Boston would be around $10 million under the cap going into the summer. That would allow Ainge to be aggressive on the free agent market. The Celtics would love to have a long, athletic shot blocker like Samuel Dalembert, Tyson Chandler or Stromile Swift. They would have enough cash to be a contender for one of these players by trading Pierce.

    Second, the Celtics would be in a position to draft a potential superstar such as North Carolina swingman Marvin Williams or Wake Forest point guard Chris Paul. One of these two should be on the board at No. 3. They'd also retain their No. 18 pick in the draft.

    While making these moves would likely mean the Celtics slip a little in the standings next year, Ainge would be putting together a pretty awesome long-term foundation for the Green. Both Paul and Williams have the potential to be superstars. Al Jefferson looks like he could be an All-Star someday. Delonte West and Tony Allen also appear to have bright NBA futures.

    The downside of the deal is just as troubling. Ainge would be trading a proven star and scorer for potential and cap room. Given how lopsided the trades of Shaquille O'Neal, Vince Carter and Tracy McGrady have looked in hindsight, you can understand the hesitation.
    Every year about this time we start hearing about team promises to underclassmen. The draft promise is steeped in folklore, but also is very real. It doesn't happen as much as agents and the media claim it does, but it does happen.

    Telfair, Ben Gordon, Andris Biedrins, Robert Swift and Sasha Vujacic all received promises in 2004.

    Promises happen when teams tell players they pledge to take them with their picks if they agree to shut down their workouts or stay in the draft (for underclassmen eligible to withdraw).

    This year, there have already been two false Internet reports about promises.

    The first had the Warriors promising to take Channing Frye at No. 9. While the team is strongly considering him at that position, both the Warriors and Frye's agent say it's bogus. Considering that Frye is a senior and is planning on working out for teams above the Warriors, what would the Warriors gain by making the promise?

    The other ridiculous one had the Suns promising to take Arizona State's Ike Diogu at No. 21. Diogu held a press conference Tuesday claiming he wasn't even sure he'd stay in the draft. Factor in that the Suns haven't even had him in for a workout, and that Diogu is working out for teams drafting both before and after the Suns, and it doesn't seem to make any sense.

    Tuesday night, the buzz was that Russian prospect Yaroslav Korolev got a promise in the "12-15 range," according to multiple NBA general managers. GMs were split on whether it was the Clippers or the Nets who made the promise.

    Korolev was expected to join the Russian junior national team in a tournament in San Diego this weekend. However, he withdrew at the last second with a mild ankle sprain. That's partly what has been fueling the rumors.

    Korolev's agent, Marc Fleisher, denied to Insider Wednesday that a promise had been made. However, he said it is "very likely" Korolev will stay in the draft.

    "There's been significant interest," Fleisher said. "We haven't made a final decision, but I think he stays in."

    As far as sure-fire NBA prospects go, Korolev looks like the real thing. He's been on scouts' radars now for two years, but he really put it all together at a juniors tournament at the Euroleague Final Four in Moscow in May, averaging 17.3 points, 6.5 rebounds and 3.2 assists per game.

    Korolev is one of the most complete young players in Europe. He's a long, 6-foot-9 small forward with great athleticism, an excellent long-range jumper and superb ballhandling skills. His father is a former Russian basketball player and coach, and it's clear dad has rubbed off on him. While scouts are a little concerned about his toughness and decision-making skills (he takes a lot of unnecessary chances), he's clearly a blue-chip NBA prospect. The only thing he really lacks is significant playing time at the senior level.

    Fleisher says Korolev's buyout with CSKA Moscow still has to be negotiated, but he said it looks like a framework is starting to come into place that would pay CSKA $1.5 million if he's a top-10 pick, $750,000 if he goes 10-20 and $500,000 if he goes below No. 20. Under those scenarios, Korolev would be available to come directly to the NBA next season.

    The Hawks have been in numerous conversations with teams about adding more first-round picks. They know they are going to struggle to lure top free agents to Atlanta this summer with all of their cap room and are trying to fill out the roster with young players.

    That could open the door for a Hawks-Bobcats swap on draft night if Marvin Williams is available at No. 2. The Bobcats sound willing to part with the No. 5 and No. 13 picks for Williams.

    As happens every year, not every prospect who promised to attend actually showed. Two of the 12 best prospects due in the camp, Kentucky's Randolph Morris and prep star Louis Williams, pulled out Tuesday afternoon. They were replaced by Georgia Tech's Will Bynum and Fresno State's Mustafa Al-Sayyad.

    Morris is in Chicago and is expected to participate in a private workout today with prep star Amir Johnson, Arkansas' Olu Famutimi, Duke's Daniel Ewing and Georgetown's Brandon Bowman.

    Two other top prospects, Arizona's Salim Stoudamire and Kentucky's Kelenna Azubuike, also weren't in attendance. Stoudamire had travel problems. Azubuike was injured in practices Monday.

    The players just went through scrimmages Tuesday evening, but Maryland's John Gilchrist, Memphis' Sean Banks, Florida's David Lee, St. Joseph's Dwayne Jones, George Washington's Pops Mensah-Bonsu, Louisville's Ellis Myles, Poland's Marcin Gortat, Chicago State's Deji Akindele, Pepperdine's Alex Acker and Washington's Will Conroy caught the eyes of several NBA scouts in attendance.

  • #2
    Re: Some rumors coming out of the Chicago pre-draft camp

    This is from a few days ago

    Bobcats buying, Hornets selling?By Chad Ford
    ESPN Insider

    One week after the NBA draft lottery and it seems like no one, with the exception of the Bucks, is particularly happy with where they landed in the draft.

    While it's still pretty early in the process, there's been a flurry of draft trade talk and speculation flying around the league.

    Who's willing to sell draft picks? Who's willing to buy? Insider breaks down the trade market for the draft this season.

    Charlotte Bobcats: GM Bernie Bickerstaff got screwed on lottery night. The Bobcats needed to end up with either Marvin Williams or Chris Paul, and everything would've been perfect. Both were local products who have the talent to energize the fan base in Charlotte. By slipping all the way to five, the chances of landing either are slim.

    Bickerstaff almost immediately began exploring how to move up in the draft, sources told Insider. He has the goods to do it, but is he willing to pay the price?

    A combination of their own No. 5 pick and the 13th pick they got from Cleveland could get them the second or third pick in the draft. That would guarantee they'd get one of the two players they want, but it's an awfully high price to pay. Bickerstaff thinks he'll get a starter at 13, and on an expansion team with just four players under contract, that's pretty important.

    The alternative is to try to convince a team to take the fifth pick and either Melvin Ely, Jason Hart or a future first-rounder as compensation. So far, the Bobcats haven't had any luck going that route.

    Utah Jazz: The Jazz slipped from fourth to sixth last week and face a dilemma similar to the Bobcats'. They need a point guard desperately, but most likely, their top choices, Paul and Deron Williams, won't be on the board when they pick.

    In a perfect world the Jazz would move up and add another high pick. They have a thing for Andrew Bogut as well.

    The Jazz have another first round pick to offer (No. 27) and they have a number of other assets, including Matt Harpring, Mehmet Okur, Carlos Boozer, Kirk Snyder and Kris Humphries, that they might be willing to include in the right deal. The only Jazz player who is untouchable at this point is Andrei Kirilenko.

    Toronto Raptors: After the draft debacle of 2004, the Raptors would prefer to play it safe and move into the top four this year. Right now, they sit at No. 7 and nothing is certain about where they're drafting.

    They'd love to add Bogut if they could, but that would mean getting at least the No. 2 pick. They also are high on Paul and Deron Williams, meaning they'd need to get to at least No. 5. Gerald Green is an option, too.

    Toronto also has assets. In addition to their own pick, the Raptors have the No. 16 pick (from Philadelphia) as trade bait. They also have Rafer Alston, Eric Williams and Morris Peterson to offer. Given their current situation, Chris Bosh is the only guy on the team that they wouldn't be willing to trade.

    Los Angeles Lakers: The Lakers feel they must make a big splash in the draft and have also been trying to move up into the top four. They have several needs. The team loves both Williamses, Bogut, Paul and Green. None of them will be on the board when they select.

    Their bait? The 10th pick in the draft and Caron Butler, according to sources. For a team like the Hornets, who need a good starting small forward badly, it might be a deal that makes sense.

    Cleveland Cavaliers: The Cavs should have the 13th pick in the draft this year. However, they foolishly dropped their lottery protection on the pick they owed Charlotte so that they could send their 2007 first-rounder to Boston for Jiri Welsch. That worked out.

    Now owner Dan Gilbert is trying to get back in the draft. They team has no draft picks to dangle, but the Cavs are offering teams their choice of Sasha Pavlovic or Welsch in return for a mid first-round pick. Given the number of teams in that area Clippers, Celtics, Grizzlies that are willing to deal out of the first round, it appears they might get their wish.

    Atlanta Hawks: GM Billy Knight needs a lot of help and is in a difficult position. If the Bucks select Marvin Williams, Bogut falls into their laps and the pick becomes much more valuable. However, if the Bucks take Bogut at No. 1, keeping the pick doesn't make much sense. The next best player on the board, Williams, doesn't fit a need, and there seems to be a strong sentiment coming out of Atlanta right now that the Hawks prefer Deron Williams to Paul.

    If that's true, the Hawks could make a deal with the Bobcats, Hornets or possibly the Jazz, and still get the guy they want plus either another first-rounder or an established young player. The Hawks probably won't pull the trigger until they have a better idea what the Bucks are going to do.

    Portland Trail Blazers: GM John Nash has been quietly calling teams such as the Bobcats, Hornets and Jazz to offer a deal. The team is drafting third, and most likely will have its choice of either Paul or Green. The Blazers would pass on Paul because they've already committed to Sebastian Telfair. They like Green a lot, but some in the organization feel they might be able to trade down, still get Green and pick up another asset in the process.

    The Bobcats are the primary target, though it's unlikely that they'd give the Blazers both the No. 5 and the No. 13 to move up two spots. The Raptors are another possibility if they include the No. 7, No. 16 and Morris Peterson to get a deal done. That's a pretty high price to pay, but the Raptors are hungry to move up.

    New Orleans Hornets: The Hornets had a lot of interest in Marvin Williams and would move up to get him offering the No. 4 pick and either Speedy Claxton or David West as compensation. However, if that's impossible, don't be surprised if they move down in the draft. They need a starting small forward and a young backup power forward they can groom to eventually replace P.J. Brown. Where they sit right now, the best prospects on the board are guards.

    While Paul or Deron Williams would be an upgrade from what they have, they sound willing to deal. The Raptors could offer the No. 7 and the No. 16 to move up to No. 4. The Lakers have the 10th pick and Caron Butler to dangle. And the Timberwolves might be willing to offer Wally Szczerbiak for the pick. The Hornets are actually one of the few teams that would have the cap room to absorb Szczerbiak's contract.

    Los Angeles Clippers: The team has filled most of its needs in the draft the past few years and appears to be on the precipice of the playoffs. What the Clippers need most right now is the financial flexibility to re-sign Bobby Simmons and Marko Jaric and perhaps one more free agent in the open market.

    If a team is willing to offer the Clippers a veteran who can help them now (the Clips are also willing to throw in Chris Wilcox for good measure) or future considerations and cap relief, they'll be willing to deal.

    One deal they might want to consider: Wilcox and the No. 12 to Golden State for Mike Dunleavy, Jr. Head coach Mike Dunleavy Sr. told reporters last year that he didn't think he'd be comfortable coaching his son. However, that's changed in recent months. Dunleavy would love to get a deal done if he could.

    If the Warriors could land a great small forward prospect like Danny Granger at No. 9, they might be inclined to move Dunleavy. With Mickael Pietrus showing improvement and a bright future for Granger, the team might be able to address two needs (defense and a long, athletic power forward) in one fell swoop.

    Boston Celtics: Celtics vice president Danny Ainge has had five first-round picks in the past two years. Do they really need a sixth? If a team can offer a nice, proven young player, the Celtics will sell the 18th pick.

    Memphis Grizzlies: Jerry West has also been shopping his pick along with point guard Jason Williams or Bonzi Wells. The team hasn't really had a chance to give much playing time to its picks from the past two years and doesn't need another rookie on its roster. With the 19th pick, the chances the Grizzlies get someone who could help them right away are slim anyway.


    • #3
      Re: Some rumors coming out of the Chicago pre-draft camp

      Awesome, cheers for that.. i've been seeing the Insider logo and hoping some one would post it

      Good Read.. Intresting read
      Ya Think Ya Used Enough Dynamite there Butch...


      • #4
        Re: Some rumors coming out of the Chicago pre-draft camp

        How 'bout Ron for the #3 pick?


        • #5
          Re: Some rumors coming out of the Chicago pre-draft camp

          How bout no?


          • #6
            Re: Some rumors coming out of the Chicago pre-draft camp

            Originally posted by Harmonica
            How 'bout Ron for the #3 pick?

            That would be the best pr move for Portland ever....
            "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

            ----------------- Reggie Miller


            • #7
              Re: Some rumors coming out of the Chicago pre-draft camp

              Originally posted by PacerFanInAZ
              That would be the best pr move for Portland ever....
              There is athread about that already, but I'm to lazy to look it up.


              • #8
                Re: Some rumors coming out of the Chicago pre-draft camp

                Originally posted by Harmonica
                How 'bout Ron for the #3 pick?


                Yes Yes!
                You, Never? Did the Kenosha Kid?


                • #9
                  Re: Some rumors coming out of the Chicago pre-draft camp



                  • #10
                    Re: Some rumors coming out of the Chicago pre-draft camp

                    Originally posted by Harmonica
                    How 'bout Ron for the #3 pick?

                    : : : : :