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.
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
-
-
Re: ESPN - Marc Stein Rates The East's Offseason
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print...126&type=story
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Updated: September 14, 1:02 PM ET
Offseason review: Rating the East from Heat to Sixers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Marc Stein
ESPN.com
Add an unofficial conference championship to the shiny gold trophy they won in June.
That's right. The Miami Heat had the best summer of any team in the East.
Better, even, than the Chicago Bulls had.
Just by getting Pat Riley's commitment to coach another year -- and with an assist from the Bulls, who weakened the Heat's chief rivals by signing away Ben Wallace -- Miami will begin the new season as a heavy favorite to get back to the NBA Finals. It doesn't matter that a clutch of East teams were far more active than the Heat this offseason. No move will have a bigger impact on the title race than Riley's decision to come back to the bench.
With training camps scheduled to open in a little more than two weeks, it's a good time to review everyone's summer dealings. The following is a 1-15, team-by-team ranking of the Eastern Conference based on who has done the best business. (Just to be clear: These are offseason assessments, not predictions for the coming season.)
1. MIAMI HEAT
Who says you have to bring in new blood to have a big summer? The Heat eventually will need a healthy dose of youth and athleticism around Dwyane Wade and Shaquille O'Neal, but that's a longer-term issue. This was a momentous offseason even without significant changes.
First, Wade signed a contract extension. Then, Alonzo Mourning agreed to play another season when he had every reason to retire. Then Riley, who had even greater justification to go out on a championship high after suffering through nearly two decades without winning a ring, heeded his players' pleas to come back at 61. Good thing, too, because the Heat wouldn't feel nearly as hot about their repeat chances with any other coach. Believe it.
2. CHICAGO BULLS
Did the Bulls overpay by committing $60 million to Wallace over the next four seasons? Of course. Yet as we've said numerous times, overpaying is the only way to persuade a good player to leave a good situation. The Bulls, furthermore, can handle the expense because they needed a title-tested veteran and because the outlay -- for all the concern about Wallace's offensive limitations -- doesn't immediately take away John Paxson's flexibility to keep improving the roster. Paxson eventually must address the Bulls' lack of dependable scorers, but he still has several trade chips to keep tweaking and should even have some decent cap room to burn next summer.
In the short term, meanwhile, Wallace and fellow newcomer P.J. Brown will lend size and savvy to complement the Bulls' young drive-and-kick stalwarts. As one GM told me recently: "Imagine what kind of [coaching] job Scott Skiles will do now that he actually has a couple bigs."
3. INDIANA PACERS
Donnie Walsh has always been good. But you know the saying: Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good ... and this summer was that time. New Orleans/Oklahoma City could have signed Peja Stojakovic outright, leaving Indy with no compensation for the sharpshooter who replaced Ron Artest in January. The Hornets instead consented -- for a mere cash payment of roughly $250,000 -- to absorb Stojakovic via sign-and-trade, creating the trade exception that (eventually) enabled the Pacers to reacquire Al Harrington for a bargain $35.3 million over four years.
Without that fortuitous trade exception, Indy had no shot at Harrington. With it, Indy became the only team Atlanta wanted to work with on a sign-and-trade because it enabled the Hawks to move Harrington without taking back any salary. Without that trade exception, Indy's summer is a disaster. With the Hornets willing to help keep Harrington away from Golden State, either to help their own playoff odds or to spite Baron Davis, Harrington's return reenergizes Jermaine O'Neal more than Indiana's other 10 new faces combined.
4. CLEVELAND CAVALIERS
What's better than winning a championship? For the Cavs, it's getting LeBron James' signature on a contract extension. That alone made it a celebratory offseason in Cleveland, even if James signed for only three extra years as opposed to the maximum five ... and even though Cleveland lacks the financial flexibility to chase more glamorous free-agent help for LBJ than Scot Pollard and David Wesley.
The flip side to the glee, of course, is that pretty much everyone signed by the Cavs in their summer of 2005 spending spree -- Larry Hughes, Donyell Marshall, Damon Jones and Zydrunas Ilgauskas -- faces an uncertain future with the club because Cleveland is pressed right against the luxury-tax threshold. The Cavs are thus forced to trade their way into roster upgrades between now and LeBron's free-agent summer of 2010, meaning everyone not named James is at risk for possible relocation.
5. MILWAUKEE BUCKS
The two big Bucks questions: Where would Jamaal Magloire finally go? And how much would Team USA miss Michael Redd's shooting? The answers: Portland and a lot. In the biggest nonsurprise of the offseason, Milwaukee finally parted with Magloire, choosing to ship him to the Blazers for two reserves with favorable contracts: Steve Blake and Brian Skinner. The surprise is that Milwaukee actually made two bigger trades to sandwich the Magloire move.
The follow-up trade sent Joe Smith to Denver for Ruben Patterson. But the biggie came just moments before the free-agent buzzer sounded July 1, sending T.J. Ford to Toronto for Charlie Villanueva in a widely praised small-for-big swap that (A) established Andrew Bogut as the unquestioned starting center, (B) anointed Bogut and Villanueva as the frontcourt of the future and (C) guaranteed a favorable summer report card.
6. TORONTO RAPTORS
The best word to describe the first Bryan Colangelo offseason in Toronto? Decisive. Colangelo knew exactly how he wanted to remake the Raptors and did it quickly, bringing in nine new players. Five of them (No. 1 overall pick Andrea Bargnani, swingman Jorge Garbajosa, Maccabi Tel Aviv star Anthony Parker, veteran center Rasho Nesterovic and 2005 second-round selection Uros Slokar) were either born in Europe or starred there, with Colangelo convinced that players accustomed to more cosmopolitan surroundings will adapt better to Canada than young Americans would.
Will it work?
I definitely wouldn't expect a playoff berth in Year 1, after so many changes and given the inevitable struggles awaiting the NBA newcomers, but the plan already has won Chris Bosh over. The Raps' franchise forward signed a three-year contract extension in July and actually applauded that risky big-for-small trade because Ford is one of his best friends.
7. BOSTON CELTICS
The good news: Paul Pierce was signed to a three-year contract extension that will keep him off next summer's free-agent market. The better news: Danny Ainge didn't pull a Brian Scalabrine and needlessly bestow $15 million over five years to a marginal reserve.
Ainge also just locked up Stein Line favorite Kendrick Perkins on reasonable extension terms ... and I'll even sanction the notion that Theo Ratliff occasionally might provide a much-needed defensive presence. But let's not get carried away.
Even after Ainge acquired Rajon Rondo's draft rights and traded for Sebastian Telfair to join holdover point guard Delonte West, not much has changed for the Celts. They still have a slew of interesting youngsters around Pierce, but we've been saying that for a while now. Unless a few of them graduate from interesting to something, starting with Al Jefferson, it won't be long before the Pierce trade chatter fires up again.
8. ORLANDO MAGIC
The Magic have been quiet lately, but that's fairly understandable. February's ambitious trade swoop for Darko Milicic -- and the knowledge that they'll be major free-agent players next summer, with Vince Carter believed to be their top target -- explains any recent silence. Strong play at the World Championship by Dwight Howard, Carlos Arroyo and Milicic, furthermore, makes it a productive summer for the Magic even though they didn't make any significant roster upgrades ... and even though we can't forget last summer's Fran Vazquez fiasco.
Now to see whether last season's 16-6 finish, with Jameer Nelson at the controls, actually means something. We'll also find out whether the Dukies old and young, Grant Hill and J.J. Redick, can add anything to that promising young nucleus. (One warning, though: Orlando is going to seriously regret not signing Milicic to an extension this summer. The way he's progressing, Darko's price is bound to keep rising.)
9. WASHINGTON WIZARDS
On the surface, it looks as though the Wiz absorbed a significant free-agent defection for the second successive offseason.
On this scorecard, they've responded to Jared Jeffries' exit smartly, reminiscent of their counter to Hughes' big-money move to Cleveland. The Wiz decided they were better off replacing Hughes with two more affordable players (Caron Butler and Antonio Daniels) and have swung a similar two-for-one by using some of the money earmarked for Jeffries to bring in forward Darius Songaila (a good fit for Eddie Jordan's offense) and swingman DeShawn Stevenson.
They also extended Jordan's contract and, in perhaps the biggest development, should benefit from a Team USA snub that figures to have Gilbert Arenas starting the season at his chip-on-the-shoulder best. The Wiz still have to get bigger up front and drastically improve their defense -- chores that likely will require some creative (and lucky) trading -- but I see a better team than the one that lost three playoff games to the Cavs at the buzzer.
10. NEW YORK KNICKS
Knicks fans who blame Isiah Thomas for everything can't lose now. Larry Brown's ouster and Isiah's, uh, promotion to team president/coach will either spark a drastic improvement in the standings or lead to Thomas' dismissal at season's end. What a deal.
The growing consensus seems to be that Thomas can indeed coax a playoff-contending 40 wins out of these misfits by playing a lot of guards and going up-tempo. That's still the way I'm betting, too, figuring that Stephon Marbury and Steve Francis are so desperate to spruce up their reputations that they'll find a way to coexist. For 82 games, anyway.
(As for the only roster newcomer of note: New York definitely didn't need to add Jeffries to a group already teeming with swingmen, given that Thomas also just drafted Renaldo Balkman, but what's a little more payroll overkill for a better defender than anyone else on the books?)
11. DETROIT PISTONS
I'd love to join the Better Off Without Ben chorus. But I can't. If the Pistons still had Milicic, perhaps. If the Pistons had signed Bonzi Wells as their Wallace replacement instead of Nazr Mohammed, maybe. But they don't and they couldn't, thanks to an unlikely chain of events.
The Pistons knew it eventually would be too expensive to re-sign Milicic and Wallace but only consented to trading Darko in February because they believed Big Ben was staying. Yet worse, in my view, was to follow Wallace's exodus: The Pistons quickly signed Mohammed as Big Ben's replacement, only for Wells -- a free agent they loved -- to fall unexpectedly into Mohammed's price range. When Sacramento withdrew its $7 million-a-season offer, Wells was suddenly available for the $5.2 million midlevel exception. But by then, Detroit's emergency fund was gone, robbing the Pistons of an ideal addition to their new 'Sheed-at-center plans.
12. NEW JERSEY NETS
They haven't done a lot, but they weren't expected to. Bringing back Clifford Robinson, after Uncle Cliffy's drug suspension in the playoffs, shows just how limited the Nets' flexibility is. They simply won't be able to do anything drastic to the roster unless Rod Thorn decides to move Richard Jefferson, and I concur with Thorn's sense that it's not quite time to break up the three-man core of Jason Kidd, Carter and R.J.
So I can understand why the Nets went for pedestrian tweaks, such as signing Eddie House and trading for Mikki Moore, while maintaining hope that Nenad Krstic continues to develop and that rookie center Mile Ilic (another Serbian big man) and rookie point guard Marcus Williams (to lessen the toll on Kidd) have a bigger-than-expected impact.
13. CHARLOTTE BOBCATS
If you're itching to see what Michael Jordan does in his reincarnation as a chief of staff, you'll have to be patient.
The Bobcats continue to spend as little as they have to, preferring to focus on the development of their youngsters as opposed to splashing out on a so-so class of free agents. The immediate goal is integrating Adam Morrison and Argentinean forward Walter Herrmann with Raymond Felton, Gerald Wallace and a back-from-injury Emeka Okafor.
And then next summer (assuming he sticks that long) is when we'll get a better read on MJ's ability to get penurious owner Bob Johnson to finally spend. Jordan keeps saying he can and the 2007 free-agent pool is much deeper, with whispers already circulating about the Bobs joining Orlando in the free-agent chase for another UNC high flier of some renown: Vince Carter.
14. ATLANTA HAWKS
Billy Knight bashing is one of the NBA's most popular pastimes, but the Hawks actually have added a few players who might make them marginally better. Speedy Claxton is a legit NBA point guard; Lorenzen Wright was signed to back up Zaza Pachulia; and No. 5 overall pick Shelden Williams joins the Hawks' long line of frontcourt lottery picks.
You certainly can't call it a great summer, especially after the Hawks decided they didn't want anything more than a future first-round pick for Harrington, but at least it wasn't as nightmarish as last summer. That's when Knight bypassed Chris Paul in the draft -- you might have heard here once or twice that Paul wanted Atlanta to take him -- and happily banished Boris Diaw to Phoenix in the Joe Johnson trade ... only for Diaw to blossom into a multipositional wonder the Hawks never knew they had.
15. PHILADELPHIA 76ERS
It has been what you might call a Seinfeldian summer in Philly. A summer, in other words, about nothing. How else to describe what the Sixers have done to change a team environment that, when we last saw them, couldn't have been more toxic.
Philly has consummated zero trades and signed zero free agents -- unless you count Alan Henderson -- amid suspicions that Allen Iverson was yanked off the trading block only because the team is now up for sale. It can't be too surprising that a team has gone quiet on the personnel front while looking for new ownership, but the inactivity means Iverson, after bracing himself for a new start, soon must return to work knowing he was shopped harder than he ever has been shopped before.
Nearly getting traded to Detroit in 2000 sparked Iverson into an MVP-worthy fury in the 2000-01 season, but you're expecting a ton if you think he'll respond like that again. Don't forget that those Sixers had an idyllic blend of role players to bring out Iverson's best. These Sixers, remember, don't like each other, can't guard anyone and are coming back with the same group that ended last season so unhappily.
Marc Stein is the senior NBA writer for ESPN.com. To e-mail him, click here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESPN.com: Help | Media Kit | Report a Bug | Contact Us | Site Map | Tools | Jobs at ESPN | Supplier Information | Copyright ©2006 ESPN Internet Ventures. Terms of Use for our Site, Terms of Use for ESPN Motion and Privacy Policy and Safety Information/Your California Privacy Rights are applicable to you. All rights reserved. -
Re: ESPN - Marc Stein Rates The East's Offseason
I didn't read all of it, just the Miami and Indiana sections. Re-signing DWade is huge, and knowing who the coach will be is also important. My only problem with the Miami section is what Stein said about Mourning: "He had every reason to retire." Why then, is this a victory for Miami? If a guy should retire, in Zo's case because of age and justing getting a ring, isn't it not always good to come back?
For Indiana, he praised the NO/TE/Al deal, but neglected 'Quis for Cro. Maybe he's not a world-beater, but that's a big move for us, IMO. We dumped a ridiculous salary of a player who wasn't going to bring us much on the court, for a good salary of a player who may even crack the starting lineup, and at worst will be 6th man. Not a big deal to the league maybe, but for the Pacers, I think it was a great move.It's a new day for Pacers Basketball.Comment
-
Re: ESPN - Marc Stein Rates The East's Offseason
No question about it pizza. I'm still beaming about the Quis acquisition. This is a guy I've wanted on the team for over a year now and we actually went out and got him for a ridiculously low price. When you look at our offseason we really improved a lot from a talent stand point.
Comment
-
Re: ESPN - Marc Stein Rates The East's Offseason
Probably true. Sure, we have nine other new players.Originally posted by Marc Stein
Other than Daniels and perhaps our draft pick of White, they get a collective
Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
And life itself, rushing over me
Life itself, the wind in black elms,
Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you
Comment
-
Re: ESPN - Marc Stein Rates The East's Offseason
Jay you upgraded your tickets eh?Comment
-
Re: ESPN - Marc Stein Rates The East's Offseason
Yeah, we moved down but fewer games.
(Meaning, for the Chicago resident and my buddy the research Ph.D. workaholic, fewer unused tickets for about the same price
).
Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
And life itself, rushing over me
Life itself, the wind in black elms,
Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you
Comment
-
Re: ESPN - Marc Stein Rates The East's Offseason
Traitor!
PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731Comment
-
Re: ESPN - Marc Stein Rates The East's Offseason
Not true. If the Hawks wouldn't take any players back for Harrington he would have been forced to take some teams mid-level exception. The Pacers would have had company in that regard, but Al would have more than likely signed here anyway under those circumstances.Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
When you look at it that way that fortuitous trade exception might not have been so fortuitous. It could have cost the Pacers a couple million dollars. That's the difference between what Al signed for and what he would have been forced to sign for. (He would probably only signed a one year contract)
And if a trade was made for Al we could have been the ones to do it. So to say the Pacers had no shot at Al is just wrong.Comment
-
Re: ESPN - Marc Stein Rates The East's Offseason
I knew that was coming.Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
I was overruled.Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
And life itself, rushing over me
Life itself, the wind in black elms,
Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you
Comment
-
Re: ESPN - Marc Stein Rates The East's Offseason
Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View PostYeah, we moved down but fewer games.
(Meaning, for the Chicago resident and my buddy the research Ph.D. workaholic, fewer unused tickets for about the same price ).
Jay, I'd like to officially welcome you down to the lower bowl where we don't watch the games, we only go to be seen, and the only reason we go to the game is to close business deals. But at least you got out of the ghetto
alive.
I need to find that old post from Rats that we had fun with about the differences between the balcony and the lower section.Comment
-
Re: ESPN - Marc Stein Rates The East's Offseason
Yeah, I've already been PM'ed about that a couple of times.
My favorite was,
Originally posted by Anonymous
Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
And life itself, rushing over me
Life itself, the wind in black elms,
Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you
Comment
-
Re: ESPN - Marc Stein Rates The East's Offseason
Man, last week was horrible for business deals.
I am in section 118 for the Redskins, that is the very botton level on the ten yard line, and you can get into the stadium three hours early for a all you can eat buffet and there is a hooters and a bar open after the game, and we have access to a cigard bar during the game should we like (I beleive it is indoors).
Man, this one group of guys was in front of us for the opener, and they were all in suits. They were standing when we were on O (the rule is you sit when we have the ball, you stand when we are on D) and they would not sit down. We ragged then so hard about coming to the game in suits (the kid beside me threw a couple of comments taunting them, telling them to take there law deals elsewhere. was kind of funny)
Needless to say, they did not come back for the second half.
Please, Jay, do not turn into one of these people
*VA ends side random rant*Comment
-
Re: ESPN - Marc Stein Rates The East's Offseason
VA, I don't think those type of people ever had to sit in the upper bowl, ever.Comment
-
Re: ESPN - Marc Stein Rates The East's Offseason
Ehh, you never know. Just because you have a nice suit doesnt mean you have (or in this case had, lol) money.Originally posted by Isaac@Section216 View PostComment
Tweet
Comment