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

The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

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

  • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

    Originally posted by Jermaniac
    We got a workout set up with James White on the 15th of this month, I like this guy I wanted him in the 2nd round but he is going up the charts fast.

    6-7, and air out of this world. At 17 if Brewer is gone, and we wanted a 2 I would consider him.
    I wouldn't mind James White at 45. He may not have been what he could have in college, but he still could be a very good defender/role player in this league and at 45 he wouldn't be a bad choice.

    Comment


    • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

      Originally posted by gph
      i really like aldridge, but hands down is a little strong. which is why he keeps getting flip flopped with tyrus thomas. Not to mention most people would say Joakim Noah was the best big man in the NCAA and would have been the consensus number one draft pick.

      Keep in mind also that Aldridge also was nothing special against the LSU front court of Davis and Thomas. Sure, he feasted on other Big 12 teams, but...er...how did the Big 12 fair in the tourney again?
      Ok, the Noah part is correct. He is easily the best overall big man available. Tyrus Thomas is the best defensive big man. It depends on what teams need, offense and defense or just defense.
      STARBURY

      08 and Beyond

      Comment


      • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

        sweet and simple... u can argue ur point all u want but we wont know until draft day and the top 5 are practically decided....
        Bargani, Thomas, Morrison, Aldrige, and Gay

        and we should go for Mardy Collins... you never know another tall PG might mean another Magic?? besides we could use a PG/SG combo that is NOT short for his position...

        Comment


        • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

          Originally posted by Ron who?
          sweet and simple... u can argue ur point all u want but we wont know until draft day and the top 5 are practically decided....
          Bargani, Thomas, Morrison, Aldrige, and Gay
          I'm not positive Gay will be in the top 5, he could slip or someone else could springboard.
          STARBURY

          08 and Beyond

          Comment


          • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

            Looks like Brandon Roy will be in that group as well.

            Bargnani, Thomas, Morrison, Aldrige, Roy & Gay.

            After the top 6 is where the fun begins.

            Comment


            • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

              Well the PD posters dont think Roy will be in the Top 6. We don't even have him in the top 8.
              STARBURY

              08 and Beyond

              Comment


              • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

                Originally posted by Ron who?

                you never know another tall PG might mean another Magic??
                Just how many "another Magics" have there been?
                The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                Comment


                • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

                  Originally posted by Robertmto
                  Well the PD posters dont think Roy will be in the Top 6. We don't even have him in the top 8.
                  1. Toronto ------ LaMarcus Aldridge ---- 16 of 48
                  2. Chicago ------ Tyrus Thomas -------- 22 of 39
                  3. Charlotte ----- Adam Morrison ------- 19 of 32
                  4. Portland ------ Brandon Roy --------- 13 of 39
                  5. Atlanta ------- Andrea Bargnani ----- 24 of 45
                  6. Minnesota ---- Rudy Gay ------------ 19 of 21
                  7. Boston ------- Patrick O'Bryant ------ 12 of 41

                  Comment


                  • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

                    Originally posted by CableKC
                    I understand that Tyrus Thomas has potential....but can someone explain to me why the Bulls would go with him instead of Aldridge?.
                    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft...had&id=2470898

                    Insider article:

                    Updated: June 6, 2006, 3:35 PM ET


                    Is Tyrus Thomas the No. 1 pick in the draft?By Chad Ford
                    ESPN Insider
                    Archive

                    Tyrus Thomas is hungry.

                    He's working out in a gym in Orlando, and providing ESPN Insider a first, exclusive look at the player many think will be one of first three picks in the NBA Draft -- perhaps the very first pick.


                    He's shooting 3-pointers in a gym in Orlando. With every swish he remembers a slight, a doubter, someone who said his dream was impossible.


                    To Tyrus Thomas' critics: Look who's laughing now.
                    He comes from a broken home in Baton Rouge. His father was in and out of prison. His mother worked two jobs to keep him off welfare. His grandmother and uncle took him under his wing to raise him.

                    Thomas grabs the ball and flies up and down the court. He's dribbling with his left hand, then his right hand. He crosses over, turns on a dime and accelerates to the hoop.

                    At the age of 15, he was a scrawny, 5-11 point guard who couldn't make his high school team. His sophomore year he spent the winter playing ball in the streets.

                    "I kept telling everyone that I was going to college, that I was going to the NBA," Thomas says. "No one believed me."

                    By the end of his high school season he had grown to 6-6, but was painfully thin and didn't really have a position. LSU, the hometown team he had dreamed to play for, didn't recruit him. When he approached them about playing, they asked him to walk on.

                    Thomas grits his teeth as he remembers the experience.

                    "They didn't recruit me at all," he says with emphasis on the all. "It was just another time in my life that I had to prove myself. That's my story. But I see it as a blessing. It made me hungry. I wanted it more than most guys."

                    LSU redshirted Thomas his freshman season, which is when he met one of LSU's most famous alumni, NBA journeyman Randy Livingston.

                    Tyrus Thomas could be the top pick in the NBA Draft on June 28 in New York City.

                    "I remember coming down and seeing this scrawny kid and wondering how he was going to fare with those bigger name recruits that LSU had landed," Livingston says. "I knew his uncle from when we used to play to together in AAU games. I knew he had a lot of challenges ahead of him. To be honest, I just didn't know."

                    A year or so later, Livingston received word in Turkey that Thomas was blowing up. By January, Livingston was in the U.S. playing for the Bulls and keeping close tabs. By mid-April, he'd been asked by the family to conduct Thomas' pre-draft training.

                    "I've never met a kid so driven," Livingston says. "He's an amazing guy to train. The hard part is keeping him out of the gym. We'll do a hard morning and afternoon session and a weightlifting session in between and Tyrus will call me up late at night and say, 'Randy, we got to go back to the gym tonight to get some shots up.' That's refreshing."

                    Thomas stands calmly at the free-throw line and swishes shot after shot. He's cool. He's been going for an hour and he's barely sweating. Every free throw is automatic.

                    By the beginning of his sophomore year, Thomas was standing nearly 6-9 in shoes. He had blown away the coaching staff in preseason practices and landed a spot in the rotation.

                    By December, NBA scouts were buzzing that Thomas had the makings of a lottery prospect next year, in the 2007 NBA Draft.

                    A 15-point, 13-rebound, seven-block performance at Connecticut in front of a host of NBA scouts and executive moved that time frame up. Suddenly he was a candidate for this season's lottery.

                    Thomas came back down to earth with a a shaky performance against Florida in February, combined with an ankle injury that kept him out of LSU's last four regular-season games.

                    But the buzz picked up again after his dominant 21-point, 13-rebound, three-block performance against Texas (and top draft prospect LaMarcus Aldridge) put the Tigers in the Final Four. Thomas was suddenly a favorite to be the No. 1 pick in the draft.

                    Thomas is out to prove that his offensive game isn't that raw.

                    "I don't like when people say that I came out of nowhere," says Thomas. "I understand why they think that because the media or the NBA scouts didn't really know about me. But it doesn't reflect the hours I put in the gym trying to get my game to this point. Everything I'm getting right now I've worked hard for. Real hard."

                    Thomas' workout on Friday wasn't what I expected.

                    There were no post moves. No flying dunks. In fact, Thomas didn't dunk the ball once in his workout.

                    Thomas has read the scouting report on him. It says that he's an amazing athlete, excellent shot-blocker and rebounder and a good hustle guy. However, it also says that he's very raw on the offensive end.

                    Another doubter.

                    Thomas decided he would show me that his offensive skills are anything but raw.

                    Thomas spends the better part of an hour doing ball-handling and shooting drills.

                    It's clear that he was once a point guard. He handles the ball very well for a big man. He can dribble with his right and left, change directions and bring the ball up the floor. We didn't see much of that at LSU.

                    The shooting is a mixed bag. His jump-shooting form is very good. He's got a high, consistent release on his jumper with nice rotation. But on the day I saw him, the results were streaky.

                    He started off the workout missing just about everything, especially from 10 feet in. He did show a nice kiss off the glass from about eight feet in on the right side. Then, 20 minutes into the workout, his shot started to fall.

                    He stepped out to the college 3-point line and hit 22 of 33 during one catch-and-shoot drill. As he got tired toward the end of the workout, his shot started to come up short.

                    I didn't come out of the workout thinking Thomas was an amazing shooter. But he was clearly more skilled in that area than advertised. Given his shot mechanics, he looks like he'll be the type of guy who will be able to hit the 15-to-18 foot jumper.

                    "He's a better ball-handler than I thought he'd be," Livingston said after the workout. "I think that will really help him in the pros. His shooting has improved, but he still needs to keep working on it. His skill level needs to improve a little, but as you can see, the package is there. And when it isn't there, he'll work on it until he gets it there."

                    Livingston then tells me about the first time he took Thomas through the Mikan drill, the foundational drill for every big man in the NBA.

                    "He'd never done it before," Livingston remembers. "He couldn't do it. I remember it was a Friday and we spent a while on it and he just couldn't get it right -- especially the reverse Mikan.

                    "He had to go away to a funeral over the weekend. He got back on Sunday night and called me and said, 'Randy, meet me up at the gym, I've got to show you something.' I came in and the kid is in the gym doing the drill perfect. The thing is, where did he find time to work on it? The kid was traveling and at a funeral. It was right then I knew I had something special. He wants to get better."

                    Thomas said after the workout that he sees himself more as a three than a four in the pros.

                    "I really wasn't allowed to play the three at LSU so people don't understand that I've been either a guard or a small forward my whole life," Thomas explained. "This is the first year I've ever really played the four. I think I'll always be more comfortable on the perimeter."

                    While some scouts have consistently compared him to a more energetic Stromile Swift, others have said that Shawn Marion may be a better comparison.


                    Thomas' game and demeanor might be similar to KG's.
                    Livingston has his own comparisons.

                    "I thought when I first got him that he'd be somewhere in between Amare Stoudemire and Shawn Marion," Livingston says. "But after working with him I think he's more a hybrid between Tracy McGrady and Kevin Garnett. He's not as skilled on the perimeter as Tracy, but he can do just about everything and do it with amazing athleticism. As for KG, the thing about that is that Tyrus plays with that energy and passion.

                    "He plays with a chip on his shoulder. That's what has made KG such an amazing player and I think it's what drives Tyrus. The kid is ultra-competitive. He's mature for his age. He's not obsessed with living the NBA lifestyle. I think all of that is going to make him successful in the league."

                    Livingston says that Thomas is an inquisitive young man who asks a lot of questions about life in the NBA. He wants to understand what it takes to succeed.

                    "Part of the reason I wanted Randy to be my trainer is because he's been there," Thomas said. "I wanted a guy who could prepare me to be a pro, not just on the basketball court but off the court too. I wanted teams to see how serious I was about this and make sure I can make a quick adjustment."

                    Thomas said his favorite player in the NBA is Shaquille O'Neal. While that might be because Shaq starred at LSU, Thomas cites a different reason for his choice.

                    "I like Shaq because he dominates the game," Thomas said. "I think that's how the game has to be played. You've got to dominate it. That's how I approach it."

                    Shaq was a No. 1 overall pick for Orlando 14 years ago. Is going No. 1 also the destiny for Thomas?

                    The Toronto Raptors, who hold the first pick, have been in to see him once. He has workouts coming up with the Chicago Bulls (No. 2), Charlotte Bobcats (No. 3), Portland Trail Blazers (No. 4) and Raptors after the pre-draft camp in Chicago.

                    Like most other top-tier prospects, he's likely to work out for teams by himself. Likewise, Andrew Bogut and Marvin Williams refused to work out against anyone last year. Ditto for Dwight Howard, Emeka Okafor, LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony, Darko Milicic, Yao Ming and Jay Williams in years past.

                    Where is he likely to go? The Raptors have shown interest and asked him to move up his workout so they can make a better decision on whether they want to keep or trade the pick.

                    If they keep the pick, they could draft Thomas and move Chris Bosh to the five and keep Villaneuva at the three. If they trade it, a number of teams might be willing to move up to get Thomas.

                    The Bulls, drafting second, still seem like the most likely team to take Thomas. We've been reporting for several months that Chicago has him ranked No. 1 on their board. The Bulls have been keeping close tabs on his workouts here in Orlando and according to his agents, Brian Elfus and Michael Siegel, have been showing daily interest.


                    Thomas might have the highest upside in his draft class.
                    Livingston, who finished the season as a backup guard with the Bulls, thinks it's the perfect fit of player and team.

                    "Chicago's a great situation for Tyrus," Livingston said. "I've played for Coach [Scott] Skiles in both Phoenix and Chicago and know he's a tough and demanding coach. But that's what Tyrus likes. He wants to be pushed. What the Bulls are going to like is the kid's toughness and dedication. Skiles demands that and the Bulls are really missing that up front."

                    What about the concerns that Thomas is a duplication of Bulls forward/center Tyson Chandler, a defensive specialist?

                    "I don't see that at all," Livingston said. "[Chandler] doesn't have any offensive skills really. As soon as he touches the ball he wants to get rid of it. He doesn't want to be fouled. And Tyson doesn't play with a chip on his shoulder.

                    "Scott wants a motor guy and Tyrus is the best of the group. Once he gets a little more weight on him he's going to be a four that does it all, scoring and defense. I just don't know how the Bulls could pass on him."

                    In the event that the Bulls trade the pick or select LaMarcus Aldridge or Brandon Roy (one NBA exec is convinced the Bulls are taking Roy and then addressing their front-court needs via free agency by making runs at Joel Przybilla and/or Nazr Mohammed), the Bobcats and Blazers remain possible destinations as well.

                    The Bobcats have three interesting big men -- Emeka Okafor, Sean May and Primoz Brezec -- but they don't have anyone with the athleticism or upside of Thomas at the four or five spot. He'd be a great compliment to Okafor in the starting lineup. While most observers think that they'll try to add a small forward like Adam Morrison or Rudy Gay to their roster, Thomas' blossoming perimeter skills could persuade them to take him.

                    The Blazers are the toughest team to figure out. They're too young and the whole roster is in flux. Taking another young player like Thomas doesn't seem like the direction that coach Nate McMillan would like to go. But once McMillan sees Thomas' work ethic and determination, he could change his mind.

                    If for some reason he slips past the top five teams, I'm told he's a lock at Minnesota with the sixth pick.

                    Wherever he lands in the lottery, Thomas will hit the jackpot, with far more cash than he's ever seen before. Players from poor backgrounds often get overwhelmed by the money. Thomas promises that he won't be like that.

                    "My family likes to live the simple life," Thomas said. "My mom worked two or three jobs just so she didn't have to ask anyone for anything. I'm like that, too. If I need something I figure out a way to get it myself. I know a lot of guys are into it because of the bling or the rims. I'm not like that. I don't care about that stuff. I just want to be the best. It's the competition that drives me."

                    Chad Ford covers the NBA for ESPN Insider.
                    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                    Comment


                    • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

                      "SportsNation Chad Ford: (4:26 PM ET ) I think the Blazers and the Pacers are two other teams are trying hard to move up into the top of the draft."

                      This means we are obviously trying to get someone. I wonder who.

                      http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=11943

                      Comment


                      • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

                        Originally posted by rexnom
                        "SportsNation Chad Ford: (4:26 PM ET ) I think the Blazers and the Pacers are two other teams are trying hard to move up into the top of the draft."

                        This means we are obviously trying to get someone. I wonder who.

                        http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=11943
                        Thanks for finding this. Now let the speculation begin!

                        I don't think we'd trade current contributing players to move up into the lottery only to select a project with potential like Tyrus Thomas or Rudy Gay. I think we'd be looking for someone who could contribute -- and possibly be a starter -- right now.

                        My first thought is the supposed Bird-clone, Adam Morrison. Although, with Granger and possibly Peja we've already got starting-quality SFs covered.

                        LaMarcus Aldridge is a good possibility, either playing alongside JO or allowing us to trade JO for backcourt help.

                        Brandon Roy could step in at SG immediately, so he's a possibility.

                        Marcus Williams is the only other player projected in the upper lottery that I could see trading up for, as he might be able to step in as our first or second option at PG.

                        If we have our eyes on moving into the lower lottery, however, then players like JJ Redick, Ronnie Brewer, or perhaps even Shelden Williams might be postential targets. However, I don't think the talent in the lower lottery this year is that much better than that at pick #17, and we'd have to give up too much to move up 5-10 spots without much gain.

                        So, either trade up into the top 5 or don't bother trading up at all.
                        "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
                        -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

                        Comment


                        • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

                          Originally posted by rexnom
                          "SportsNation Chad Ford: (4:26 PM ET ) I think the Blazers and the Pacers are two other teams are trying hard to move up into the top of the draft."

                          This means we are obviously trying to get someone. I wonder who.

                          http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=11943
                          ... and in addition to the question of which player we might be after, these questions also must be considered:

                          1) How far would we have to trade up in order to draft that player? Top 10? Top 5? Top 3?

                          which begs the next question:

                          2) Which player or group of players would we likely have to trade in order to move up to that higher draft position? Obviously, the higher we want to go the more/better player(s) we'd have to give up...
                          "I'll always be a part of Donnie Walsh."
                          -Ron Artest, Denver Post, 12.28.05

                          Comment


                          • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

                            i think this speculation should get its own thread... better yet instead of thinking i should make one...

                            Comment


                            • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

                              Originally posted by Jose Slaughter
                              Looks like Brandon Roy will be in that group as well.

                              Bargnani, Thomas, Morrison, Aldrige, Roy & Gay.

                              After the top 6 is where the fun begins.
                              IMO Roy can be the ROY or rookie of the year if given a starting job. His upside may not be on the same level as the other 5, but IMO he is the most NBA ready player in the draft.


                              Comment


                              • Re: The mock draft thread, 2006 NBA draft

                                Originally posted by Jose Slaughter
                                1. Toronto ------ LaMarcus Aldridge ---- 16 of 48
                                2. Chicago ------ Tyrus Thomas -------- 22 of 39
                                3. Charlotte ----- Adam Morrison ------- 19 of 32
                                4. Portland ------ Brandon Roy --------- 13 of 39
                                5. Atlanta ------- Andrea Bargnani ----- 24 of 45
                                6. Minnesota ---- Rudy Gay ------------ 19 of 21
                                7. Boston ------- Patrick O'Bryant ------ 12 of 41
                                Ooops, it was late. lol.
                                STARBURY

                                08 and Beyond

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X