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

Portland & the Expansion Draft

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Portland & the Expansion Draft

    After selecting Jahadi White off the Sun's unprotected list I started to have second thoughts about not only that pick, but that of Alonzo Mourning as well.

    Those 2 players will both be over the $5M mark next season & together they make up about a third of what I have selected as the Bobcats roster. Including the Blazers, there are 7 teams remaining to review. That might add 3 or 4 more players to the Charlotte roster & bring them closer to 35M than the 30M they are expected to have available as a first year salary cap.

    Following the Washington thread the middle of next week I plan on going back in & dropping 1 or 2 players. I think Charlotte wants to keep a little room under their 30M in an effort to sign a free agent or two.

    Lets see how this thing plays itself out.

    For those that haven't noticed, the older threads in this series can now be found in the Forum Archive section.

    The disclaimers..........

    From NBA.com, a story on the Bobcats draft.
    http://www.nba.com/bobcats/news/expansion_draft.html

    This paragraph has the basic info.

    Charlotte will receive lists from each of the 27 teams not competing in the NBA Finals 10 days prior to the scheduled Expansion Draft (June 12) and those from the competing teams in the Finals within two days of the conclusion of the Finals. Team lists will designate a maximum of eight protected players for that team’s players under contract or restricted free agents for the 2004-05 NBA season. The unprotected players are eligible for selection by the Bobcats, who will draft a minimum of 14 players from NBA rosters.

    Free agent info from REAL GM.
    http://www.realgm.com/src_freeagents.php?year=2004

    Salary information can be found at Hoops Hype.
    http://www.hoopshype.com/salaries/portland.htm

    This is the Blazers roster

    Damon Stoudamire
    Shareef Abdur-Rahim
    Theo Ratliff
    Dale Davis
    Derek Anderson
    Ruben Patterson
    Darius Miles
    Zach Randolph
    Qyntel Woods
    Vladimir Stepania
    Dan Dickau
    Travis Outlaw
    Eddie Gill
    Omar Cook
    Desmond Ferguson

    Portland has a full 15 man roster. 13 players are signed for next season & of the 2 free agents, 1 is restricted.

    The Blazers signed for the 04-05 season.

    Damon Stoudamire ----- $15,750,000
    Shareef Abdur-Rahim -- $14,625,000
    Theo Ratliff --------------- $10,937,500
    Dale Davis ------------------ $9,000,000
    Derek Anderson ----------- $8,443,500
    Ruben Patterson ---------- $5,899,400
    Zach Randolph ------------ $1,805,126
    Qyntel Woods ------------- $1,172,160
    Vladimir Stepania ---------- Not Listed
    Dan Dickau ------------------- $893,400
    Travis Outlaw ---------------- $843,000
    Eddie Gill ---------------------- $720,046
    Omar Cook ------------------ Not Listed

    Restricted Free agent.

    Darius Miles ----------------- $5,419,480

    Free agent

    Desmond Ferguson

    Abdur-Rahim, Ratliff, Patterson, Randolph, Woods & Outlaw get 6 of the 8 slots on the protected list.

    Abdur-Rahim & Ratliff are priced too high for the Bobcats but they are far too talented to be left off the list. Patterson makes about 5.9, a little pricy but he's averaging 7.1 with 3.7 boards. Throw in 1.19 steals & a FG% of .508 & he makes a pretty solid case for being kept. Randolph is a gimmie. Woods & Outlaw are young & cheap. I don't think the Blazers want to give up on either so quickly.

    I'm gonna add Miles to the list too. He will turn 23 before next season & will have 4 years of NBA experience. In 28 MPG he is averaging 12.7 points & 4.7 boards while shooting a very nice .532 from the field.

    That brings us down to the last spot with the following players to pick from.

    Damon Stoudamire, Dale Davis, Derek Anderson, Vladimir Stepania, Dan Dickau, Eddie Gill & Omar Cook.

    Stoudamire is way over paid & the Blazers are stuck with him. He will not make the list. The upside is that next season is the last of that bloated contract.

    Davis still contributes but at 35 & 9M next season he too will not be protected.

    Anderson has a couple things working against him. First he will turn 30 this summer. Second he has 3 years left on his deal starting with next years 8.4M. Third, he has lost his shot. He is shooting a career worse .369 from the field. His 3pt FG% has fallen the past 4 years too. Even though Anderson is a starter & playing 35 MPG I think the Blazer will take a chance by leaving him off the list.

    Stepania is my boy & I hated to see him sign with the Blazers. He was doing so well in Miani & they were so short of size it made no sence to me that they wouldn't keep him. He has never fit in well in Portland & as loaded as they are up front he will never play more than token minutes. He is probably going to be around the $1M mark next season, not bad for a guy 7-1, 255. I'm gonna give Stepania the last spot because of the combination of his size & contract.

    I'm gonna group the last 3 guys together.

    Dickau, Gill & Cook are end of the bench guys that will play more games in other leagues than they will ever play in the NBA.

    This is the Portland protected list.

    Shareef Abdur-Rahim
    Theo Ratliff
    Ruben Patterson
    Darius Miles
    Zach Randolph
    Qyntel Woods
    Vladimir Stepania
    Travis Outlaw

    Portland will leave the following players for Charlotte to select from.

    Damon Stoudamire
    Dale Davis
    Derek Anderson
    Dan Dickau
    Eddie Gill
    Omar Cook

    Charlotte does not select a player from the Blazers.

    Here is the Charlotte Expansion Draft.

    Atlanta ------------- No Pick
    Boston ------------- C - Kedrick Perkins -------- $729,500
    Chicago ------------ No Pick
    Cleveland ---------- G - Kevin Ollie ----------- $2,704,350
    Dallas --------------- G - Tony Delk ----------- $3,150,000
    Denver -------------- F - Ryan Bowen -------- $1,400,000 (est)
    Detroit -------------- No Pick
    Golden State ------ No Pick
    Houston ------------ GF - Adrian Griffin ---------- $807,546
    Indiana ------------- C - Primoz Brezec ------- $1,554,326
    L.A. Clippers ------- F - Melvin Ely ------------- $1,742,400
    L.A. Lakers --------- No Pick
    Memphis ------------ GF - Dahntay Jones ----- $1,143,360
    Miami ---------------- No Pick
    Milwaukee ----------- F Marcus Haislip -------- $1,655,280

    Minnesota ----------- No Pick
    New Jersey --------- C Alanzo Mourning ----- $5,408,700
    New Orleans -------- No Pick
    New York ------------ No Pick
    Orlando --------------G Reese Gaines ----------- $1,212,200
    Philadelphia --------- No Pick
    Phoenix -------------- C Jahidi White ------------- $5,884,500
    Portland -------------- No Pick

    Total payroll $27,392, 192
    The 4th pick in the 2004 draft (Charlottes pick) is slotted to make roughly $2,523,200. I have yet to add it in, but I do want to keep it in mind.

    After I add in the salary for the #4 pick the Bobcats have a projected payroll of $29,915,392

    Charlotte's payroll next season will be 2/3's of the salary cap. If the cap is 45M then the Bobcats will have about 30M for players.

    Links to previous threads in this series.

    Atlanta ------ http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=996
    Boston ------ http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1038
    Chicago ----- http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1083
    Cleveland -- http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1122
    Dallas ------- http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1162
    Denver ------ http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1216
    Detroit ------ http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1251
    Golden St. -- http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1318
    Houston ---- http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1355
    Indiana ----- http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1427
    LA Clippers - http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1493
    LA Lakers --- http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1543
    Memphis ---- http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1615
    Miami ----- -- http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1681
    Milwaukee -- http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1719
    Minnesota --- http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1743
    New Jersey - http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1798
    New Orleans http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1939
    New York --- http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1953
    Orlando ----- http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1978
    Philadelphia - http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2018
    Phoenix ----- http://www.pacersdigest.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2048

    Next up the Sacramento Kings
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Portland & the Expansion Draft

    Jose, you know I love ya but again I feel the need to disagree.

    I just don't think there is any way in the world that they would keep Stepania & lose Dickau when they are so low on guards. They have big men aplenty.

    My prediction is that the Blazers make Stepania available & that the Bobcats take him.

    Atlanta - no pick
    Boston - Jumaine Jones $ 1,687,500
    Chicago - Chris Jeffries $ 899,040
    Cleveland - Kedrick Brown $ 2,332,388
    Dallas - Tony Delk $ 3,150,00
    Denver - no pick
    Detroit - no pick
    Golden State - Popeye Jones
    Houston - no pick
    Indiana - Primoz Brezec $1,554,326
    L.A. Clips - Melvin Ely $ 1,742,400
    L.A. Lakers - Devan George $ 4,500,000
    Memphis - no pick (trade)
    Miami - no pick
    Milwaukee - Marcus Haislip $1,655,280
    Minnesota - no pick.
    New Jersey - no pick
    New Orleans - no pick
    New York - Frank Williams $957,480
    Orlando - DeShawn Stevenson
    Philidelphia - Kyle Korver
    Pheonix - no pick
    Portland - Vladimir Stepania


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Portland & the Expansion Draft

      I'd have to look at it... I'd be pretty tempted to take Derek Anderson. Veteran, good locker-room guy, solid defender.

      Anybody with me on this?
      This space for rent.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Portland & the Expansion Draft

        I'd have to look at it... I'd be pretty tempted to take Derek Anderson. Veteran, good locker-room guy, solid defender.

        Anybody with me on this?
        Don't get me wrong, I like Anderson. But I am working with a budget here & I don't have 8 mil to spend on him.


        Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Portland & the Expansion Draft

          I'd have to look at it... I'd be pretty tempted to take Derek Anderson. Veteran, good locker-room guy, solid defender.

          Anybody with me on this?
          Nope! What Peck said.


          My two cents; The Blazers have been trying to get rid of Patterson for a couple years now, he won't be protected.

          Since Jose pointed out that Charlotte will want to be a player in the free agent market and they have to select 14 players at a minimum I think they will pick Omar Cook. I think whenever a cheap contract can be had Charlotte will take it.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Portland & the Expansion Draft

            Hey Will I can't find the contracts for Stepania & Cook? How much differance between the two is there?


            Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Portland & the Expansion Draft

              There's no way the Blazers protect Qyntel Woods. He's a joke. He never plays. He's trouble. He's a lost cause.

              And I also would be very surprised if they protect Stepania. Again he never plays.

              I'd also almost believe that they might expose Abdur-Rahim. Bobcats aren't going to pay that high a price, plus Abdur-Rahim is one of the most overrated players in the league. He's never played on a good team....never played on a playoff team. He just piled up big numbers in Atlanta and Vancouver. He'd probably score 20 a game for the Bobcats too, but it wouldn't make them a good team. And they aren't going to pay 14 mil for him.

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Portland & the Expansion Draft

                I understand the part about Stepania but my thinking was, he's 7-1 & only making about a million next season. Of the players left to pick from he was by far the best.

                Woods is still too young to give up on. He is in his second year & came straight outta HS, plus his contract really isn't putting to much of a burden on the Blazers.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Portland & the Expansion Draft

                  Woods is still too young to give up on. He is in his second year & came straight outta HS, plus his contract really isn't putting to much of a burden on the Blazers.
                  Woods played for a JC somewhere in the south for a couple seasons. I think he originally signed to play at Memphis State, but he had eligibility and crime troubles so he had to go to JC instead. Of course his eligibility and crime background made him the perfect candidate to be drafted by the former Trailblazer regime.

                  Unfortunately, in their analysis of Woods, they gave him big props for being an illiterate pothead, but they failed to factor in his inability to play basketball.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Portland & the Expansion Draft

                    Hey Will I can't find the contracts for Stepania & Cook? How much differance between the two is there?
                    Patrica has Cook signed for two years at the minimum. Next year he will have a year in the NBA so the minimum will be $620,046

                    Stepania is also on a two year contract at 1.6 million. Most contracts have yearly 12 to 15% pay raises built in so he probably signed for less than half. So my guess would be the difference is about $200,000.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Portland & the Expansion Draft

                      I don't see Charlotte taking anyone from Portland given the contract situation of many of these guys or considering who I have them taking previously. No Pick.

                      Atlanta - No Pick
                      Boston - Kedrick Perkins - $729,500
                      Chicago - No Pick _or_ Eddie Robinson + Draft Pick - $6,767,540 + Pick or $0
                      Cleveland - No Pick
                      Dallas - Tony Delk - $3,150,000
                      Denver - No Pick
                      Detroit - No Pick _or_ Campbell (in hopes of getting talent for this expiring contract at the deadline) - $4,400,000 or $0
                      Golden State - No Pick
                      Houston - Adrian Griffin - $807,546
                      Indiana - Primoz Brezec - $1,554,326
                      LA Clippers - Melvin Ely - $1,742,400
                      LA Lakers - No Pick
                      Memphis - Theron Smith - $620,046
                      Miami - No Pick
                      Milwaukee - Marcus Haislip $1,655,280
                      Minnesota - No Pick
                      New Jersey - No Pick

                      New Orleans - No Pick
                      New York - Moochie Norris - $3,850,000
                      Orlando - No Pick
                      Philadelphia - No Pick
                      Phoenix - No Pick or Jahidi White (in place of Campbell) $5,884,500
                      Portland - No Pick

                      $25,276,638 if they take both Robinson and Campbell. Draft pick from Chicago will add to that though too.

                      $26,761,138 if they take Robinson and White. Draft pick(s) adds.

                      $14,109,098 if they take none of the above
                      Mickael Pietrus Le site officiel

                      Comment

                      Previous template Next
                      Working...
                      X