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

4-22-04

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

  • 4-22-04

    Sonics' shake-up coming this summer?

    By Chad Ford
    NBA Insider
    Send an Email to Chad Ford Tuesday, April 20

    Chat with NBA Insider Chad Ford at 1 p.m. EST today!

    Patience.

    That was the buzzword last fall at the Sonics' first training camp without Gary Payton in 13 years.

    "We've been flirting with the rebuilding process for several years," Sonics GM Rick Sund told Insider in October. "But this is the first year that you can say that we're fully into rebuilding."

    The Sonics faced an interesting dilemma last summer. They knew they had a ton of talent -- Ray Allen, Brent Barry, Rashard Lewis, Vladimir Radmanovic and first-round picks Nick Collison and Luke Ridnour. What Sund wasn't sure was how it was all going to fit together.

    Privately, Sund was hoping both Lewis and Radmanovic would take the next step toward stardom. Lewis had put together two nice seasons in a row, but under the wilting glare of Payton, he had never shown much leadership. Radmanovic, who happened to play the same position as Lewis, was asked to take the lead at power forward after Collison went down with a season-ending shoulder injury early in training camp. Should both of them emerge, Sund thought, the Sonics would be a playoff team with a bright future. If they failed?

    "We know we need three stars to have a real chance at competing in such a tough conference," Sund said in October. "Obviously Ray Allen is a superstar. Rashard Lewis has shown us that he's a very good player on the brink of becoming a star. We need one more guy to step up. This year we've got to see if that guy is here. If he is, great. If he isn't, we'll have to go get him next summer."

    Now next summer is here -- for the Sonics, anyway -- and the jury is still out.

    Allen put up superstar numbers but acted at times like an abused diva. Lewis looked awesome in Allen's absence. He scored 25 and 50 points in two October games, then posted a career-high 18.9 ppg in November. After Allen's return, though, Lewis' numbers starting falling off fast. By April, he was averaging just 14 ppg and 3.8 apg. Radmanovic was in a similar boat. He averaged 14 ppg and 6.3 rpg in November. In March? 9.9 ppg and just 3.8 rpg -- not too good for a power forward.


    Ronald Murray
    Shooting Guard
    Seattle SuperSonics
    Profile


    2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
    GM PPG RPG APG FG% FT%
    82 12.4 2.5 2.5 .425 .715

    However, no one suffered a second-half breakdown quite like Ronald Murray. With Allen out for the first 18 games of the season, Murray, an unheralded second-round pick in his second year in the league, came out of nowhere, averaging 20 ppg for the first six weeks of the season. He rebounded, dished out assists and looked like a lock for the most-improved player award. Once Allen returned, though, his minutes and numbers were cut in half. By the end of the season, everyone, including coach Nate McMillan, looked frustrated and worn out.

    After the season Allen and Lewis were both convinced it was time for the team to make the changes necessary to get a "beast" down in the post. Allen spoke of taking a pay cut to get it done. Lewis acknowledged the Sonics might have to trade him. Barry, a soon-to-be free agent, had a different request.

    "I don't think it's a change in direction, it just needs to define the direction," Barry said. "This year, we seemingly tried a few different styles of play, at least those were the ideas that were floated around. It's about committing to what direction you're going to go to, and then putting all your energy, harnessing all your energy in that one direction."

    That sounds like a direct dig at McMillan. If it was, it wasn't the first.


    Ray Allen
    Shooting Guard
    Seattle SuperSonics
    Profile


    2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
    GM PPG RPG APG FG% FT%
    56 23.0 5.1 4.8 .440 .904

    Allen also took a dig at McMillan, saying that, "I thought we were very inconsistent all year. A lot of times we didn't know what we wanted to do as a team. This team, going into next year, we're a running team. We play well when we run. When we play fast, when we get up quick shots."

    That raised McMillan's blood pressure. In his season-ending press conference, he lobbed a few bombs back in Allen's direction.

    "This season was more a year of developing, and I don't think Ray Allen understood that. I think he was playing to play. We've talked about our style changing, I think it did change at times some this year. But it had to. We had to slow it down because at the beginning of the year, our turnovers were high. So, yes, we did talk about changing, slowing down, to concentrate, focus, on the half-court part of the game, and Ray being an All-Star, he should be able to adjust to that."

    The in-fighting has led to enormous speculation. Over the past week there have been rumors that owner Howard Schultz is looking to sell, that Sund will leave for the Raptors, that McMillan is on the hot seat and that Allen, Lewis and Radmanovic are on the trading block.

    Suddenly, that patience Sund and the team possessed in October now seems in short supply.

    How much patience can the Sonics have? Here's a look at what to expect as Insider continues its summer blueprint series.

    Sonics Summer Blueprint

    Other blueprints: Free agents | Bulls | Warriors | Clippers | Magic | Celtics | Blazers

    DRAFT: The Sonics continue to get roughly the same draft spot every year. This year they are tied for the 11th spot in the draft lottery along with the Warriors and have a 0.9 percent chance of winning the No. 1 pick. Over the last few years that slot has produced Corey Maggette, Radmanovic, Ridnour and Collison. Not too shabby.

    The problem for the Sonics is the pick is just low enough to keep them from drafting what they really need -- a big-time big man. Collison was supposed to fill that role last year, but a shoulder injury kept him out all season. Even with a healthy Collison, the Sonics know he's one of the pieces of the puzzle ... not the piece.

    This year the power forward/center crop is fairly deep, but there are no sure things this deep in the draft. The power forwards left on the board tend to be young, international players who'll need more experience. Latvia's Andris Biedrins, Brazil's Tiago Splitter and Serbia's Kosta Perovic could all be here. All have great upside, but none could give immediate help or address the team's long term needs for blue-collar toughness. Minnesota's Kris Humphries could be an option here, but he's not that much different from Collison.

    The center prospects at this point will be Siberia's Pavel Podkolzine, Sebia's Peja Samardziski, BYU's Rafael Araujo and Colorado's David Harrison. Araujo's the most ready but has the smallest amount of upside. Podkolzine is huge, but he's at least two years away. Harrison bears a striking resemblance to Jerome James.

    Like most teams in the lottery, the Sonics will explore trading this pick. They have enough young players. What they need is a veteran or two to do the dirty work in the paint.

    FREE AGENCY: The Sonics will suffer a major loss in the backcourt if Barry decides to change addresses. Barry is an unrestricted free agent and will try to capitalize on two solid seasons in Seattle with one last contract. There will be major interest from a number of contending teams, and the Sonics sound like they won't be willing to break the bank to keep him.


    Jerome James
    Center
    Seattle SuperSonics
    Profile


    2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
    GM PPG RPG APG FG% FT%
    65 5.0 3.5 0.5 .498 .660

    Jerome James has an opt-out clause in his contract, and his agent, Marc Fleisher, has hinted he might use it. James doesn't feel Nate McMillan plays him the right way. If you've seen James play (and we use the term loosely) the last two years, you know why McMillan hasn't wanted to give him minutes.

    James is guaranteed $5.4 million next year. The chances are slim he exceeds or even matches that salary on the open market. Still, if he wants to play next year, a change of scenery is probably the only way. Given his lack of production, the Sonics would welcome the move.

    The Sonics will be just over the cap next season, giving them the financial flexibility to use their mid-level exception if they choose. However, it's unlikely there will be a decent post player on the market willing to settle for that type of salary.

    TRADES: Expect Sund & Co. to be pretty active this summer. The team was patient all year, trying to get a feel for what players like Lewis, Radmanovic and Murray were going to bring to the table. Murray was an early-season revelation. Lewis and Radmanovic had their moments. But all three watched their production plummet when Allen returned from injury.

    Murray's ability to play the point is now in question. Lewis, once again, seems to lack the assertiveness to lead. Radmanovic doesn't appear to have the toughness or willingness to play the four in the league. Or maybe ... it's all Allen's fault. While Allen put up great numbers when he returned, the rest of the team went to hell. Allen's constant bickering with McMillan probably means no one is safe from the trade talk swirling around the Sonics these days.


    Shareef Abdur-Rahim
    Power Forward
    Portland Trail Blazers
    Profile


    2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
    GM PPG RPG APG FG% FT%
    85 16.3 7.5 2.0 .475 .869

    What are they going to do? There are already rumblings that the Sonics and Blazers could rekindle talks for Shareef Abdur-Rahim. Rahim is the type of low-post scorer Seattle is looking for. What will it cost them? Reports that Rahim could be involved in a trade straight up for Allen seem a little far fetched. More likely, the Sonics would offer Barry (in a sign-and-trade), Radmanovic, James (just one year left on his deal) and their first-round pick.

    Would the Blazers go for it? They have no use for Abdur-Rahim, and Barry would be a great addition in the backcourt. Radmanovic could find a nice role at the three along with Darius Miles.

    The Blazers won't be the only team they talk to. The Bulls have interest in Allen and Lewis, and have a number of young players like Jamal Crawford and Eddy Curry who the Sonics would have interest in. The Warriors (Jason Richardson, Erick Dampier) and the Rockets (Steve Francis) might also show some serious interest.

    COACHING: McMillan has been at odds with management all year. It's not that they don't get along. It's just that Nate's style of basketball emphasizes defense, grittiness and half-court execution. The players Sund keeps giving him are open-court players who need to run and gun to be successful.

    The two conflicting styles created serious unrest in the locker room. That spilled over to the postseason press conference, in which McMillan complained about Allen and the style of basketball he was being forced to play. McMillan claims he'll be back next season, but clearly the marriage hasn't worked out like everyone had hoped.

    FRONT OFFICE: Sund's name has been floating around for weeks in connection with the Raptors' opening. Why? Is he unhappy in Seattle? Is he on the hot seat? Or is it just another bogus rumor? His vision of a Mavs-like run-and-gun team is at odds with what his coach is trying to do. Does he think McMillan will change his style? Or does he know something we don't? Sund spent the year (rightfully, in my mind) observing the young players and trying to figure out whether they fit with the long-term goals of the team. After a frustrating season, you could make the argument the answer is "no" when it comes to Lewis, Radmanovic and even Allen.

    With the season over, Sund continues to preach patience, but he may no longer have that luxury. One season spent evaluating talent we can buy. Two? He's going to have to make some tough decisions this summer. The good news is he has plenty of assets. Figuring out the right combination (who stays, who goes) will be very tricky. The most likely scenario has Radmanovic being offered in a sign-and-trade package along with Barry and their first-round pick. Will that give them enough back to begin competing with the Western Conference elite? Folks are running out of patience.

    Around the League

    # O'Brien is Sixers' final ultimatum to AI: Allen Iverson made nice at the end of the season, meeting with Sixers GM Billy King and reiterating his desire to stay in Philly and his commitment to play by the rules next season.


    Allen Iverson
    Shooting Guard
    Philadelphia 76ers
    Profile


    2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
    GM PPG RPG APG FG% FT%
    48 26.4 3.7 6.8 .387 .745
    King's quick hire of Jim O'Brien is his insurance policy. Iverson, who over the space of one year has killed three coaches -- Larry Brown, Randy Ayers and now Chris Ford -- won't be killing a fourth. At least not in Philly.

    O'Brien said all the right things in his press conference Wednesday. He said he wanted to coach Iverson. In fact, he insisted on it before he'd agree to join the Sixers.

    "When you're dealing with somebody like Allen, I really wanted to be as close to 100 percent sure as I possibly could that I'd be coaching him," O'Brien said. "Billy obviously makes those decisions, but I wanted Billy to understand what I thought of Allen."

    Later, O'Brien expanded on that thought by saying: "When you're the franchise player, the team has succeeded, and now you lose, you're going to get hit [with criticism and speculation]; the coach is going to get hit. I'm sure he expects that. [But] that was then. Give any new coach a chance to wipe the slate clean."

    "He said to me, 'If I'm going to take this job, I want to have the chance to coach Allen Iverson,' " King said. "He said, 'I think he's one of the best offensive players, and an underrated defensive player. You don't get players like that, and I think I can win with him.' I don't think it was a [hiring] condition, but he made his point clear what he would like."

    O'Brien appears, on paper, to be the perfect fit for the job. He'll ask his team to give its all on defense. In return, he'll let players do pretty much whatever they want on offense. Both roles should fit the Sixers. The team has a number of very capable defenders, including Iverson, Eric Snow and Samuel Dalembert. Sources claim they are eyeing Stanford small forward Josh Childress, in part, because of his 7-foot wingspan and ability to guard multiple positions. The team also has one very creative scorer who is at his best when he's improvising on the floor. After watching O'Brien let Antoine Walker and Paul Pierce jack up shots in Boston the past few years, the O'Brien-Iverson combo should be a match made in heaven.

    However, should Iverson stumble again, it won't be O'Brien packing his bags. Iverson has earned one last reprieve. If he wants to stay in Philly, he'll play by O'Brien's rules. If he doesn't ... pack your bags AI.

    # Bass, Floyd getting kicked to the curb? The Hornets are on the verge of an embarrassing first-round ouster. The team has the second-worst home attendance record in the league. Players are fighting with each other. Jamal Mashburn is threatening to retire. All is not well in New Orleans at the moment.

    Owner George Shinn said Wednesday that first-year coach Tim Floyd may not be back next season. ''The decision hasn't been made," Shinn told the Miami Herald. "At the end of each season we evaluate everybody. Tim is a wonderful person. We'll have to wait and see. If we win a couple rounds, that might answer the question."

    Floyd's players have refused to give him a vote of confidence, "We're a veteran squad," Darrell Armstrong told reporters last week. "We already know a lot. I think he's still learning us more than we're learning him. That's how I look at it. As a coach, you have to learn your team, have to learn your players."

    Floyd isn't the only one in the hot seat. Sources claim Shinn also has lost patience with GM Bob Bass. The team hasn't drafted particularly well in recent years and looks stagnant. The team, despite being in New Orleans just two years, also isn't drawing fans. If the Hornets are eliminated quickly this year, Shinn may look for a new GM to shake things up. The new guy would bring in a new head coach, remake the roster and start winning some fans. With the team heading to the Western Conference next year, something's got to happen to shake things up.

    The speculation about Bass' future is running so hot right now that a handful of candidates for the Raptors head job are quietly rethinking whether they want to head north of the border. Not only are several of the candidates concerned with how the process is being run (no one likes to be part of a cattle call -- especially if you already have a good job), they also believe the Hornets may present a better chance to win.

    # Celtics get break in Baker deal: On Monday we discussed how the Celtics would be forced to spread Vin Baker's buyout number over the course of the final two seasons of his contract. That's how it usually works. However, Insider learned Wednesday that the league will allow Boston to spread Baker's deal over the next three seasons -- something of an unprecedented move. Those same sources claim Baker's buyout number was around $15 million. That means the Celtics will add $5 million to their books over each of the next three seasons, giving them a payroll of around $52 million or $53 million next year -- still about $7 million over the projected $45 million cap.

    # The Zeke watch: This is a day late (I didn't write on Wednesday), but how about all the face-time Isiah Thomas is getting on national TV these day? It was tough not to notice that every time the Knicks made a bone-headed play in Game 2 against the Nets, the camera cut to Thomas, who has a bad habit of always standing in one of the corridors directly in front of a camera.

    Stephon Marbury makes a turnover? Cut to Zeke looking like his dog just got run over. Penny Hardaway shoots an airball? Switch to a close-up of Thomas with tears welling up in his eyes.

    My question is, why doesn't Thomas go take a seat in his luxury box? The camera can't pan to him every play if he was up there. Wait ... I think I just answered my own question.

  • #2
    Re: 4-22-04

    Beat me by 10 seconds! Thanks for always posting these.
    I always want to read them so when I can find them I post them. I figure a lot of other people want to see them too.

    Comment

    Working...
    X