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


  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 06-03-04

    Insider Special: Global Perspective
    By Chad Ford
    ESPN Insider

    # Chad Ford's mock draft: Standard version | Slideshow version

    TREVISO, Italy -- In ancient times, mariners claimed that all important trades routes ran through Venice, Italy. For hundreds of years the ancient city, literally built on the ocean, with wooden pillars and a series of canals serving as streets, was the center of maritime commerce in Europe. Now, it's sinking back into the ocean.

    Nowadays, scouts claim that all roads in international scouting run through Treviso, a smaller city about 30 kilometers north of Venice and home to international clothing giant the United Colours of Benetton. Here, Benetton GM Maurizio Gherardini -- possibly the most powerful GM in the world outside the United States -- has built the most modern and innovative basketball franchise not in the NBA.

    Gherardini, a former banker, caught a vision, as an exchange student in St. Louis, of how a good basketball team should be run. A few years later, he returned to Italy with a passion for the game and began transforming European basketball as we know it.

    Maurizio Gherardini is one of the most respected talent evaluators in Europe.
    Gherardini translated important books on basketball and coaching into Italian and passed them out to coaches around the country. He began organizing basketball camps and clinics, including the first-ever coaches clinic in Europe -- an affair that brought the likes of Hubie Brown, Bill Walton, Detlef Schrempf and Bob McAdoo to Italy.

    In 1992, he took over the most coveted basketball job in Europe -- GM of Benetton. The Benetton family already had sunk enormous resources into creating the most impressive basketball infrastructure on the continent. La Ghirada, their sport complex, is the most beautiful and modern practice facility in the country. Their arena is stunning.

    Armed with unprecedented resources from the Benetton family, Gherardini set out to do more than just build a championship basketball team in Treviso -- he set out to change the way European teams ran their operations.

    "The big plus of this place is you can dream," Gherardini told Insider. "You can have ideas and you have the resources to turn those ideas into realities. I wanted to do more than win. I wanted to give back to the community."

    Over the past decade, Benetton has become the standard-bearer for European basketball. NBA scouts are here almost on a weekly basis. Every summer, Benetton holds an enormous array of extra curricular activities that draw people from around the NBA and the world. They include the Reebok Big Man camp and the Reebok Eurocamp, where top European young players learn and compete; a summer league where international free agents compete for jobs in front of just about every GM and coach in Europe; Basketball without Borders, a program that brings young basketball players from war torn areas together and teaches them life lessons as well as basketball skills; and an international coaches clinic that sometimes draws upwards of a 1,000 participants.

    In the process, Gherardini has built a powerful alliance with the NBA and many of the teams in the league. In addition to his expertise running the franchise, he has developed the most sophisticated scouting system in the Euroleague. He gives many teams advice concerning NBA prospects and is one of the few GMs in Europe who doesn't soak a team or player when he gets drafted in the NBA.

    "You do things that make sense," Gherardini said. "Players have dreams, and we should help them achieve it. This is not a one-way business. We are involved in a common project."

    Gherardini has become so well respected that he was interviewed and seriously considered for the vacant GM job in Charlotte last year. It was the first time a non-U.S. executive ever had been interviewed for a top job in the NBA. Gherardini didn't get the job, but many people in the league think that within the next five years he'll be running an NBA team.

    "Maurizio is one of the best GMs in the world," Nuggets GM Kiki Vandeweghe told Insider. "He really runs a first class organization here. I don't think there's anything in Europe that rivals it. I think there's no question he'll be a great GM in the league. No question."

    "You have to have that dream," Gherardini said when asked about his interest in leaving Benetton for the NBA. "It would have to be the right time and the right system, but yes I would want that. I think I could bring a global vision to the NBA and provide a very deep evaluation of players both in America and around the world."

    Given Gherardini's reputation and his intimate knowledge of international players (he attended every camp session this week), Insider asked him to provide his take on the top international players in this year's draft. Here's the way he sees it:

    Pavel Podkolzine, C, Russia
    "I've known him since he arrived in Italy two years ago. He has obviously improved quite a bit. He has many qualities that are unusual for a 7-foot-5 player. He has great hands for a big guy. He's a very good ball handler for someone that size. His body is very good, and he's not afraid to be aggressive in the post. I think he will be a success in the NBA. The question with him is just how good he'll get. He could be good, or he could be great."

    Gherardini calls Andris Biedrins a "very intriguing big man."
    Andris Biedrins, PF, Latvia
    "He's a very intriguing big man. We almost signed him earlier in the year, so I know him well. He has no fear. A nice stone face. He's unusually aggressive and very mature mentally. I think he will have a shorter adjustment in the NBA than most players. He has good experience for his age. Latvaa is a second-level league, but people forget he also plays about 20 games a year in international competition against first-level talent. He has a lot of minutes under his belt for a kid his age."

    Martynas Andriuskevicius, F/C, Lithuania
    "I believe he is a small forward. At 7-foot-3 he could be really special. He has a great 3-point shot. He has good feel for the game and smart instincts. I have no doubt he will be a huge prospect in the NBA. If he stays in the draft, teams very high will have to seriously consider him. He just needs to get stronger."

    Kosta Perovic, C, Serbia
    "He's played an important role on his team this year. He has the size to be an NBA player and has very good skills and a steady shot. His game is probably closer to a four right now, but I don't know if he has the athleticism or footwork to play that position in the pros just yet. Another year or two in Europe may be helpful."

    Sergei Monya, SG/SF, Russia
    "He will require the smallest adjustment to play in the NBA. He already has an NBA 3-point shot and an NBA body. And let's not forget he is just 20 years old. He has very good athleticism for a European player. He plays more like an American. He's ready for the NBA."

    Tiago Splitter, PF, Brazil
    "He's finally getting some minutes under his belt this year. He's a four I think. Splitter's a smart player. He really understands the game. He's very long and a pretty good athlete. He may just need one or two more seasons of tough Euroleague fighting to complete his game."

    I think he will be a success in the NBA. The question with him is just how good he'll get. He could be good or he could be great.
    Maurizio Gherardini on Russian big man Pavel Podkolzine

    Johan Petro, PF/C, France
    "He's very intriguing. I'm surprised at how much he's improved. He's played just one year with the top team and didn't really get a chance to play. He has everything to be an NBA player. A great body and a good athlete. Teams will have to think twice before passing on him."

    Anderson Varejao, PF, Brazil
    "He is one of the most gifted athletes in Europe right now. He plays very hard and aggressive. I'm still not sure what position he plays. He is improving every year but still needs to add a few things to his game."

    Viktor Khryapa, SF, Russia
    "He has a lot of tools. He's had a good experience playing in Russia. He has long arms and is a good defender. Again, I'm just not sure what position he will play in the NBA."

    Sasha Vujacic, PG/SG, Slovenia
    "He is playing in Italy at Udine this year, so I know him very well. He has no fear. He has very nice size for his position. He is playing an important role on his team, which is very good. He can play two positions, but in Italy he spends most of his time at the two. I think to be successful in the NBA he has to be a point guard."

    Gherardini declined to discuss several of the younger players in the draft, because he hadn't seen them enough. That raised another interesting question. If Gherardini, one of the most active scouts in Europe, didn't have a handle on them, were NBA teams reaching too far into Europe?

    Remember, Gherardini was Nikoloz Tskitishivili's GM when he was drafted.

    "You could feel it coming even before Skita," Gherardini said. "You could see how the demographics of the NBA were changing, and you knew it would eventually come to Europe. I am not as bothered by it as some. I think European players are closing the gap physically with international ones. They play basketball 12 months a year and play games against much older players under very intense pressure. I think most of them come pretty well prepared to play in the NBA."

    Still, mistakes are made, and Gherardini admits that sometimes he raises his eyebrows when he sees certain players on NBA draft lists.

    "Everyone in this business makes mistakes," Gherardini said. "I can understand. It's not easy to make correct evaluations when players are so young. Five years ago, the NBA was picking the cream of the crop after we had discovered and developed them. Now they are in the same boat we are. We are all searching for young players with potential. That will lead to errors."

    Chad Ford covers the NBA for ESPN Insider. Send him an e-mail here.
    Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel

  • #2
    Re: 06-03-04

    Insider Special: NBA Execs? rank the draftees...
    By Chad Ford
    ESPN Insider

    # Chad Ford's mock draft: Standard version | Slideshow version

    TREVISO, Italy -- At 8 a.m. on Wednesday, a slow trickle of bleary-eyed NBA executives, coaches and scouts began crowding into a conference room at the Hotel Maggior Consiglio.

    The Reebok Big Man camp was over, and another 60 or so international prospects would be arriving Thursday for the second part of Reebok's Eurocamp.

    With the stellar play of Pavel Podkolzine and Martynas Andriuskevicius at the Big Man Camp, many of the previously held assumptions about this year's draft have been turned on their head. At dinner Tuesday night, a sizable group of NBA personnel was locked into deep discussions about the lottery that stretched until 3 a.m.

    Hours later, a number of them gathered to rank the top 59 prospects in the draft, a number chosen because that's how many players will be drafted later this month. Insider was granted a seat at the back of the room in exchange for agreeing not to name the 16 participants. Most were NBA front-office personnel, who didn't want to tip their employer's hand by being identified, and a handful were international scouts for NBA teams. Suffice it to say many of the names would be recognizable to NBA fans.

    In some respects the exercise could be considered a mock draft, as the best players were "selected" first. But the choices were made without concern for specifics like position or team need.

    Everyone was given a list of the top available players, broken down by position, and everyone was required to vote on each "pick." The player with the most votes was "drafted" and taken off the board. In the event of a tie, a re-vote was taken. For the purpose of this exercise, the group assumed everyone on the list would remain in the draft.

    The mood in the room was jovial, but there was little commentary. Instead of a debate, it was more like a high-stakes poker game. Here's what they came up with:

    1. Emeka Okafor, C, UConn
    Insider comment: There was no debate. Okafor received a unanimous vote as the No. 1 pick. That's a bit interesting considering some of the same people have expressed reservations over the past week about Okafor's back, his offensive skills and his height. Still, it's a pretty good indicator that whether the Magic keep this pick or not, Okafor is going to go No. 1.

    2. Dwight Howard, PF, Southwest Christian Academy
    Insider comment: Again, there was virtually no debate here. This has been referred to as a two-person draft for months. Apparently there was some truth to it.

    3. Pavel Podkolzine, C, Siberia
    Insider comment: Pavel won this slot by one vote over high school point guard Shaun Livingston. Remember that the group was not drafting for the Bulls (who currently own the No. 3 pick). Instead they were voting on the best prospect left on the board. It would be pretty surprising to see Pavel go this high, but the vote confirms what we wrote Wednesday -- Pavel helped himself immensely in Treviso.

    4. Shaun Livingston, PG, Peoria (Ill.)
    Insider comment: Livingston cleaned up here. There are several people in the group who believe Livingston may be, overall, the best prospect in the draft. Everyone I talked to believes the Bobcats should take him with the fourth pick. Are you listening Bernie?

    5. Luol Deng, SF, Duke
    Insider comment: Deng and international big man Andris Biedrins duked it out for this spot. The consensus on Deng is that he's a safe choice -- a player with a great chance to be good, but only a small chance to be great.

    6. Ben Gordon, PG/SG, UConn
    Insider comment: The vote was starting to splinter now, but Gordon just edged out Biedrins. There's a definite split in the room on this pick, with the international guys strongly supporting Biedrins. Gordon received the vote of most of the U.S. guys. Later, there was a pretty lengthy debate about this particular pick -- I think a bit of buyer's remorse. It's awfully tough to take a 6-foot-1 inch combo guard over a young, athletic 7-footer. Size usually rises to the top on draft night, and I think there's a general feeling that Biedrins eventually will catch Gordon.

    7. Devin Harris, PG, Wisconsin
    Insider comment: Biedrins lost yet another close vote. The consensus among the group was that Harris is the most NBA-ready point guard in the draft.

    8. Andris Biedrins, PF, Latvia
    Insider comment: The split on Biedrins clearly rests between international guys (who would've put him fifth) and the U.S. scouts, who clearly preferred several college players. This time Biedrins picked up a couple of votes and narrowly defeated Stanford's Josh Childress and Arizona's Andre Iguodala, who split the U.S. vote.

    9. Josh Childress, SF, Stanford
    Insider comment: There's a split between Childress and Iguodala. Having agreed not to name names, I can't be more specific, but I thought it was interesting who was choosing whom. Childress won by a nose.

    10. Andre Iguodala, SG, Arizona
    Insider comment: With Childress off the board, Iguodala was a unanimous pick. From what I hear around the league, however, the folks who have seen him in workouts the past few weeks are raising his stock. No one here has seen him work out yet, so take this placement with a grain of salt.

    11. Martynas Andriuskevicius, F, Lithuania
    Insider comment: There are a couple of people in the room who believe he should be much, much higher. I think the belief that he likely will drop out of the draft hurt him more than anything. Later in the process, other players who also are expected to pull out also take a big hit. If this projection is anywhere near accurate, Andriuskevicius definitely will pull out.

    12. Josh Smith, SF, Oak Hill Academy
    Insider comment: The most athletic player in the draft appears to be slipping in everyone's mind. He really wasn't seriously considered before here. May be time to downgrade the stock a bit.

    13. Sergei Monya, SG/SF, Russia
    Insider comment: Almost every international scout loves Monya. The U.S. guys aren't as sold. Monya squeaked out a win over J.R. Smith, whom most of the U.S. contingent backed at this spot.

    14. Kosta Perovic, C, Serbia
    Insider comment: Another guy who's stock probably slipped because he's expected to pull out of the draft. Interestingly, it's the U.S. guys, not the international ones, who voted him into this spot. I'm not sure that's a good thing.

    15. J.R. Smith, SG, New Jersey
    Insider comment: Apparently, the reports that he's been terrible in workouts don't really faze anyone. With his shot and his athleticism, scouts are willing to overlook a lot of things.

    16. Johan Petro, PF/C, France
    Insider comment: This was the biggest surprise of the event for me. Obviously Petro is impressing some of the NBA people here. He already has worked out privately for several teams here. Everyone has walked away raving about the kid. It may be time to buy some Petro stock.

    17. Kirk Snyder, SG, Nevada
    Insider comment: Obviously this group wouldn't have given him a guarantee in the lottery, which word has it some team has. Snyder narrowly beat out Jameer Nelson and Peja Samardziski.

    18. Jameer Nelson, PG, Saint Joseph's
    Insider comment: A great senior year helped his stock, but not as much as everyone had thought.

    19. Rafael Araujo, C, BYU
    Insider comment: When you are drafting by talent, not position, things like this happen. However, with so many teams in need of a center, it's pretty unlikely he'll slip this low.

    20. Al Jefferson, PF, Prentiss (Miss.)
    Insider comment: Jefferson just edged Samardzisiki and Kris Humphries.

    21. Kris Humphries, PF, Minnesota
    Insider comment: Humphries snuck past Samardziski. For the first time in this process, more than four picks have gone by without an international prospect coming off the board.

    22. Peja Samardziski, C, Serbia
    Insider comment: The U.S. streak is broken. If Samardziski slips this low, you can bet his agent will yank him from the draft.

    23. Luke Jackson, SG/SF, Oregon
    Insider comment: At one point earlier, Jackson's name was mentioned, and a number of people shouted back that he wasn't athletic enough to go that high. One guy calls him Luka Jackson three times, inadvertently hinting where some scouts' heads are at. If his name really was Luka Jackson from Slovenia, he would've been drafted in the lottery.

    24. Robert Swift, C, Bakersfield (Calif.)
    Insider comment: I was surprised at how many people in the room really like Swift. Almost all of them cite his performance in the McDonald's All-American game. Interesting ...

    25. Peter John Ramos, C, Puerto Rico
    Insider comment: Ramos barely beat out Anderson Varejao for this spot. It's the first time anyone mentioned his name all morning. I think Podkolzine's performance has pushed Ramos into the background.

    26. Anderson Varejao, PF, Brazil
    Insider comment: Varejao is an eye-of-the-beholder guy. Some love him. Some hate him. The group in this room knows him better and believes he may be a nice pro.

    27. LaMarcus Aldridge, PF, Seagonville (Texas)
    Insider comment: Aldridge slipped because the rumor in the room is that he's already pulled out of the draft. Apparently he canceled several workouts on Tuesday. Not sure how much higher he'd go if folks believed he'd stay in the draft. I can't see him rising too much.

    28. Sasha Vujacic, PG/SG, Slovenia
    Insider comment: Apparently everyone in the room has heard the same Lakers rumors.

    29. Viktor Khryapa, SF, Russia
    Insider comment: He's developing a buzz of late. Many scouts believe he just plays in the wrong system.

    30. Tiago Splitter, PF, Brazil
    Insider comment: If he actually fell this low, his agent would pull him out. Splitter is looking for a lottery commitment. From the looks of things, he isn't going to get one.

    31. Sebastian Telfair, PG, Brooklyn
    32. Dorrell Wright, SG, South Kent Prep (Conn.)
    33. Luka Bogdanovic, SF, Serbia
    34. David Harrison, C, Colorado
    35. Delonte West, SG, Saint Joseph's
    36. Lawrence Roberts, PF, Mississippi State
    37. Arthur Johnson, PF/C, Missouri
    38. Romain Sato, SG, Xavier
    39. Ha Seung Jin, C, South Korea
    40. Roko Leni Ukic, PG, Croatia
    41. Tony Allen, SG, Oklahoma
    42. Rickey Paulding, SG, Missouri
    43. Donta Smith, SF, Southeastern Illinois CC
    44. Damir Omerhodzic, SF, Croatia
    45. Antonio Burks, PG, Memphis
    46. Miguel Marriaga, PF, Venezuela
    47. Uros Slokar, PF, Slovenia
    48. Ryan Gomes, SF/PF, Providence
    49. Chris Duhon, PG, Duke
    50. Christjan Drejer, SF, F.C. Barcelona
    51. Andre Emmett, SG, Texas Tech
    52. Marko Tomas, SG, Croatia
    53. Tim Pickett, SG, Florida State
    54. Trevor Ariza, SF, UCLA
    55. Sergei Lishouck, PF, Ukraine
    56. Ricky Minard, SG, Morehead State
    57. James Thomas, PF, Texas
    58. Jackie Butler, C, Coastal Christian Academy (Va.)
    59. Michel Morandis, SG, Colorado
    Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel