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

5-10-04

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

  • 5-10-04

    Pacers waiting for first real challange

    By Terry Brown
    NBA Insider
    Monday, May 10
    Updated: May 10
    11:57 AM ET

    Maybe if the Indiana Pacers win 16 playoff games in a row for their first NBA title, we'll try to remember their starting center's name. Maybe if they just win one more playoff game by double-digits to extend their record-breaking streak to seven, then we'll stop making fun of Reggie Miller's tattoo.

    Or . . . maybe they can play somebody worthy during the 2004 postseason and we'll start paying attention.

    "We didn't play very well," Miller said in the Indianapolis Star after beating the Heat by 13 in Game 1 of their second-round series. "We can play much better. We still haven't put a complete game together (against the Heat). I'd rather us be playing well rather than coming up with a way to win. We've just got to play better. When this team plays well, I'll acknowledge that, but we're not playing very well right now."

    This is what he said after the Pacers beat the Heat by 11 in their second game.

    "We can play much better," Reggie Miller said in the Palm Beach Post. "I'm not happy yet with the way we've played."

    As Miami Herald columnist Dan LeBatard puts it: "Indiana isn't playing very well. And Miami is. And Indiana has, nonetheless, blown Miami out twice. That's what happens when the other guys are better than you. Indiana is deeper, bigger, more experienced and more talented. Other than that, though, Miami is in great shape."

    Of course, it's not the Pacers' fault that they're playing the Heat in the second round after playing the Boston Celtics in the first round after playing the watered down Eastern Conference during the regular season.


    Jermaine O'Neal better break out of his shooting slump before the Pacers face a real opponent.
    But it would be our fault if we didn't point out a few things before heaping too many superlatives on their 6-0 playoff record.

    The regular-season record for their playoff opponents thus far is 78-86.

    Needless to say, this is easiest bracket in the whole NBA postseason tournament. And it's not even close. Here's how the remaining contenders stand so far.

    Sacramento Kings' opponents: 110-54 for 67 percent.
    San Antonio Spurs' opponents: 106-58 for 64.6 percent.
    Los Angeles Lakers' opponents: 102-62 for 62.1 percent.
    Miami Heat's opponents: 102-62 for 62.1 percent.
    Minnesota Timberwolves' opponents: 98-66 for 59.7 percent.
    New Jersey Nets' opponents: 93-71 for 56.7 percent.
    Detroit Pistons' opponents: 88-76 for 53.6 percent.
    Indiana Pacers' opponents: 78-86 for 47.5 percent.

    Even if the Pacers go on to sweep the Heat and play the top two teams remaining in their bracket (which would be Detroit in the Eastern Conference Championship and Minnesota for the NBA Title), the best their opponents' record will be is 190-138 for 57.9 percent.

    Last year, the Spurs won the championship by defeating opponents with a record of 203-125 for 61.8 percent . The New Jersey Nets came in second by playing opponents with a record of 196-132 for 59.7 percent.

    In other words, the Pacers have had it easy.

    "I don't know how good the teams they played on the road were (all season)," Heat sixthman Rafer Alston said in the Indianapolis Star. "But we're extremely good at home. (This) is a place where our energy is extremely high. Guys shoot the ball from half court and think they're going to make it because we're at home. And we witnessed what (home court can do) by what happened to us against New Orleans. We're playing great basketball in (this) building and we look forward to playing great basketball (tonight)."

    He can say this because he knows the Pacers haven't been tested yet.

    They played a Celtic team that is on its third head coach in less than a season. They got rid of their second-best player before the season started in Antoine Walker. They released their starting power forward Vin Baker after he had played in only 37 games because of substance abuse. And they lost their starting center in Raef LaFrentz after he played only 17games for them because of injury.

    And to top it all off, their best player, Paul Pierce, had his worst shooting season of his career. Their first coach quit. Their second coach was fired. And their third coach, recently named, started the season 1-10 before getting fired by his previous employer this season.

    For heavens sake, they finished at 36-46 after losing five of their last six games of the regular season. They were 10 games below .500.

    These Celtics finished with only one returning starter from last season. There were only two starters who were even on the Boston team at the beginning of the 2003 season.

    This wasn't a team. It was a requirement for an eight-team Eastern Conference field.

    And in the second round, the Pacers are facing a Heat squad that played its sixth game of the first round on May 2 in New Orleans. The Heat played their seventh game on May 4 in Miami. Then, they played their first game against the Pacers on May 6 in Indianapolis and second game on May 8.

    For those of you keeping track at home, that's four playoff games in three different cities in seven days for a team that never won a road game against a .500 team all regular season.

    Of course, the Pacers were going to blast the Celtics by an average of 16.7 points per game. Of course, they were going to hammer the Heat by an average of 12 in their first two games.

    But what would have happened of they opened up against the Houston Rockets with 7-foot-6 Yao Ming in the middle instead of 6-foot-9 Brian Grant for the Heat. Or Dallas Mavericks with Dirk Nowitzki at power forward at a playoff-best 26.6 points per game instead of Walter McCarty of the Celtics and his seven points per game.

    It is true that the Pacers never lost more than two games in a row during the regular season. But it is also true that they played more then two consecutive opponents with a winning record only three times all season.

    And in those 11 games, they were a very average 6-5.

    That's right. Tonight will mark only the fourth time all year that they have faced three or more quality opponents in a row.

    So it's easy to forget that the Pacers finished with the best regular-season record in the entire NBA. Easy to forget that they have won six playoff games in a row by double-digits. Easy to forget that in the process their best player, Jermaine O'Neal, has gone 10-for-32 from the field for 15 points and eight rebounds per game in the second round.

    "I don't know why my shots aren't falling," O'Neal said. "I might be putting too much pressure on myself and causing me to lose part of my touch. I'll continue to work on it to get it corrected so we can continue our run toward the championship."

    But you can't help but wonder if he had opened up the second round against Shaquille O'Neal, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett or Chris Webber rather than Lamar Odom, who is about to play in the 10th playoff game of his career.


    * Heat need an edge on home floor
    Sekou Smith / Indianapolis Star
    * Heat strong at home; Pacers good on road
    Chris Perkins / Palm Beach Post
    * Here's the scary part: Heat is playing well
    Dan LeBatard / Miami Herald
    * A record-breaking pace
    Mark Montieth / Indianapolis Star

    Are the Spurs and Pistons still in control?

    By Chad Ford
    NBA Insider
    Send an Email to Chad Ford Monday, May 10
    Updated: May 10
    10:50 AM ET

    Three weeks into the NBA postseason, every remaining team has now, thankfully, played at least two games in the second round.

    You've already read countless times that we're viewing the longest playoff season in NBA history -- but now we have proof. Over the course of the last three weeks we've seen Tony Parker grow from superstar and shrink back to aging veteran in the course of the seven games the Spurs have played so far this postseason.

    Here's Insider's look at what's going on in the playoffs, with the lottery teams sitting at home and the NBA draft as underclassmen have until midnight to declare.

    The Playoffs
    # Who's playing the best basketball? Before Sunday's games, it was pretty easy to make the argument that we were looking at a Pistons-Spurs Finals this year. Yes, the Pacers (the only team that hasn't lost) also look great but the Pistons' and Spurs' stifling defenses looked poised to carry them all the way to the Finals this year. Then the Lakers and Nets came out in Game 3 and plastered San Antonio and Detroit and we're all left scratching our heads a little bit.

    It's just one playoff game . . . but does home court really make that much of a difference this late in the season? If the answer is yes, then the Timberwolves are screwed and the Pacers are on the verge of their first defeat at the hands of a red-hot Heat team at home.

    # The Spurs' Tony Parker has been the story of the playoffs so far. Like Mike Bibby two years ago (who's not having such a bad playoff run himself), Parker has gone from the Spurs' wallflower to the most important player on the court in the playoffs. When he's aggressively pushing the ball, penetrating and hitting his 3s, I don't think there's a team in the league that can beat the Spurs in a seven-game series. Through the first six games, Parker was amazing. So what happened on Sunday? The Lakers finally got smart and physical with France's greatest import.


    The key to slowing Tony Parker? Push him around a little bit.
    Flash back to the Spurs' first-round scare versus the Suns last season and their tough series versus the Nets in the Finals. Parker struggled when Stephon Marbury and Jason Kidd played very physically with him. Parker's biggest weaknesses are the fact that he's just 21-years-old and, like most European guards, hates contact. The Lakers finally got physical and Parker responded with an eight-point night on 4-for-12 shooting. It was Parker's first bad playoff performance of the year. If the Lakers want it to continue, keep knocking Tony to the floor.

    # Speaking of coming-out parties, can anyone credibly argue that Jermaine O'Neal is an MVP candidate when he isn't the most valuable player on his own team? So far in the playoffs, O'Neal is averaging 18 ppg and 8.3 rpg on 41 percent shooting. Those averages are all significantly below what O'Neal did during the regular season when he averaged over 20 ppg and 10 rpg on 44 percent shooting. In the Miami series, his numbers have slipped to 15 ppg and eight rpg on 31 percent shooting -- and the Heat don't have one significant big man to guard him.

    Meanwhile, Ron Artest continues to amaze. He's averaging 21.2 ppg, five rpg and 4.4 apg on 43 percent shooting. Those averages are all significantly higher than what he did in the regular season. And here's the kicker: What Artest does offensively is always secondary to what he does defensively for the Pacers. He sets the tone for the team. He has the ability to go out and shut down the most important player on the opposing team. Put that with the great offense and Artest, not O'Neal, should be getting the mention for MVP.

    # While we're on the subject of clutch playoff performers, it's good to see Mike Bibby regaining his 2001-02 playoff form. That year Bibby went from averaging 13.7 ppg in the regular season to 20.3 ppg in the playoffs -- a pretty serious jump. He was awful in the playoffs last season, averaging just 12.7 ppg on 42 percent shooting.

    This year, after recording a career year for the Kings in the regular season, he's outdone himself so far in the playoffs, averaging 23 ppg on 45 percent shooting. Bibby's already recorded two 30-point games in the playoffs, which is pretty amazing considering that the 36 points he scored against Dallas in Game 5 and his 33 points against Minnesota in Game 1 both surpassed anything he'd done the entire season. Bibby cracked 30 points only twice the entire regular season.

    # I love Larry Brown and think he's done a fantastic job for the Pistons this year. But why did he go out of his way to start a controversy with his team up 2-0 in the series by first, ripping Nets head coach Lawrence Frank and second, flirting with the Knicks' job in the New York media?

    The Nets looked pretty lifeless in the first two games, but the digging of their coach (who most of the players love) seems to have awakened them. The Knicks' speculation wasn't created by Brown -- he was asked a question by the N.Y. Daily News -- but his answer was a head scratcher. Larry's been in the league long enough to know what a paper like the Daily News was going to do with those comments.

    Given his history of quick coaching stints, why even put it in the back of anyone's head? Just to clear up any confusion, Brown, who is in the first year of a five-year, $30 million contract, said that Detroit will be his last coaching gig in the NBA. "That was when I was a young kid," he said of his desire to be the Knicks' coach. "(Knicks legendary coach) Red Holzman helped teach me to play. But I am 63 years old. This is my last coaching stop."

    Lottery Land
    # Is it just a matter of time before David Stern calls in NATO to put a halt to the mass coaching carnage that is taking place? Toronto's Kevin O'Neill was the first to get kicked to the curb this summer followed by Philly's Chris Ford and Boston's John Carroll. Terry Stotts, who had the most tenure of any coaching in the Eastern Conference, was let go late last week. Tim Floyd got the axe, despite earning a fifth seed in the playoffs without all-star Jamal Mashburn, a day later.


    The coaching carnage is likely to continue, and Jeff Bzdelik's name is at the top of the list.
    Warriors head coach Eric Musselman is said to be the next coach to hit the curb and speculation still abounds that it's only a matter of time before Jeff Bzdelik, Lenny Wilkens and maybe even Phil Jackson pack their bags. In total, 22 coaches have lost their jobs in the space of just a little over a year. The fact that the number could rise to as many as 26 over the coming weeks has to scaring the hell out of the league.

    # Hornets owner George Shinn replaced Floyd because he wants someone with more experience and a proven track record . . . someone like Paul Silas perhaps?

    # Now three teams are without a head coach and two of them -- the Hornets and the Raptors -- don't have a GM in place to hire one. That's a problem on a number of fronts. One, it's crazy to hire a coach without the head guy in place. Two, now that two GM gigs and three coaching spots are open, suddenly the Raptors must now compete with other teams for the same people. Case in point. The Raptors had narrowed their GM list down to two scouts (the Nuggets' Jeff Weltman and the Wolves' Rob Babcock) but, according to the Toronto Star, they're not in love with either guy. That means that they may have to open the process back up.

    The Star also reported over the weekend that Pistons vice president of basketball operations John Hammond may be back in the picture in Toronto. Hammond withdrew his name from consideration before the first interview was ever conducted, claiming that he was happy in Detroit. According to the report, the Raptors wanted Hammond initially and may come back and sweeten their offer for him. However, Hammond's name is also being mentioned prominently in connection with the Hornets' GM gig.

    # Raise your hand if you thought Mark Cuban was going to massacre everyone in the Dallas front office and on the coaching bench after the Mavs' pitiful performance this year both in the regular season and in the playoffs. Folks inside the Mavs were quietly talking to media sources for weeks as they wrung their hands over the their fates.

    Why hasn't the ax fallen? In part because Don Nelson has painted Cuban into a bit of a corner. Over the course of the past few years, Nelson has put together a team that only he can really coach? Pat Riley? Please. Riley is a great coach, but he'd want to blow up a team like the Mavs almost immediately. Riley loves players who play defense, and the 15 guys on the Mavs roster are among the league's worst defenders.

    While Cuban isn't afraid to wheel and deal, he loves his core three -- Dirk Nowitzki, Steve Nash and Michael Finley -- and doesn't want to trade them. Considering that none of the three is a great defender . . . I'm not sure who you can get who can coach this collection of players any better than Nelson. Besides, Cuban, who's a very active owner, was behind every personnel decision the Mavs have ever made. Is he going to fire himself?

    # Here's a little prediction. The honeymoon between Doc Rivers and Danny Ainge will end before the season even begins. Rivers' little revelation to ESPN's Dr. Jack Ramsay that he was given final say on all personnel moves in Boston was quickly denied by both Rivers and Ainge. Ainge claimed he retains control and Rivers claimed that he was just talking about coaching personnel decisions. Ramsay stands by his story.

    Who do you believe? Either Rivers was exaggerating in a moment where he felt like the tape recorders weren't rolling and was caught in a fib. Or, what Rivers said was true, but it wasn't supposed to get out. Or, Dr. Jack misunderstood what Rivers was trying to say. However you read the quotes from Rivers ("Everyone I talked with said that I had to have the authority to approve all personnel deals. So I have it in writing in my contract. Nothing happens without my yea or nay.") it sure doesn't sound like Rivers was talking about hiring assistant coaches. Either way, if you're Ainge, you can't be happy with the rocky start.

    Draft Cards
    # How bad do the Magic want the No. 1 overall pick in the draft? While many suspect that Emeka Okafor may be the guy who could help give the Magic that blue collar guy they've been missing since Ben Wallace left town -- the Magic may have other ideas.


    Antoine Walker
    Forward
    Dallas Mavericks
    Profile


    2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
    GM PPG RPG APG FG% FT%
    82 14.0 8.3 4.5 .428 .554

    A quickly spreading rumor around the league has the Mavs offering Antoine Walker to the Magic in return for the No. 1 pick and Grant Hill.

    Why would the the Magic do something like that? Because Walker is in the last year of his contract and Hill's salary has been a millstone around the team's neck for years. Players want to play in Orlando, but the team hasn't had enough cap room to make a significant offer to anyone decent in the open market. If the Magic were to pull the trigger on that deal, they'd be looking at roughly $15 million in cap room in the summer of 2005 to land a free agent to play alongside T-Mac.

    If the Magic told T-Mac that he was free to recruit the teammate of his choice -- would it be enough to convince him not to opt out of his contract next summer? Why would the Mavs do it? Okafor is seen as the perfect fit for what ails the Mavs -- a tough, smart shot blocker who will clean up the glass and give the team a physical presence that they've lacked for years.

    # The deadline for underclassmen to declare for the draft is today and it looks like most of the fence sitters have made up their minds. Over the weekend, Providence's Ryan Gomes put his name in the draft. Several other prominent underclassmen or high school players, including Gonzaga's Ronny Turiaf and high school players Randolph Morris, Glenn Davis and Darius Washington, all look like they are going to college next season.


    Mile Ilic
    # Add one interesting name to the list of international players in the draft. Serbia forward/center Mile Ilic. Ilic, a 20-year-old, 7-foot-1, 235-pounder playing for BC Reflex, has drawn the attention of several international scouts recently after an impressive game in March against Buducnost. Initially, the plan was for Ilic to stay in Europe one more season before declaring for the draft. However, strong interest by several teams in the mid first round prompted agent Marc Cornstein to put Ilic's name in.

    # Another international underclassman to watch? Venezula's Miguel Marriaga has put his name in the draft. Marriaga is a 19-year-old, 6-foot-10, athletic forward who specializes in rebounding and shot blocking. Several international scouts claim that he's an interesting prospect. Like several other international players, he's working out in the U.S. right now in an attempt to help his draft stock.

    # Maybe the NBA doesn't need Ivan Chiriaev after all. Russia's Chiriaev, the 7-foot-1, self proclaimed "point guard" playing high school basketball in Canads, torpedoed his draft stock over the weekend with a middling performance in a Canadian high school basketball game. A large contingent of NBA scouts and GMs made the trek to Canada to see Chiriaev play. Most walked away very disappointed. "He was very, very average," one scout old Insider. "He can do some amazing things in workouts, but I still haven't really seen in translate into a game. Unless I'm really missing something, this kid has no business declaring for the NBA draft."

    What scouts will say is that watching Chiriaev in practice can be amazing. All year scouts who've made the trip to Canada claim that he's one of the best-shooting, best-ball handling big men they've ever seen. Based on his workout skills, Chiriaev earned a reputation as a possible lottery pick. However, the scouts who actually watched him play in games came away with a very different conclusion. "Lots of guys can hit shots in practice or dribble around cones," the scout told Insider. "The question is . . . can he do it in games? I'm not sure he can right now."

    Chiriaev will get another chance to improve his stock in Chicago on May 22nd. His agent, Bill Duffy, has scheduled a workout for all 29 NBA teams -- and Insider has received an invite. This is a situation in which Chiriaev tends to look more impressive. But with the bad buzz coming out of Toronto right now . . . he better look like Toni Kukoc.

  • #2
    Re: 5-10-04

    I could **** on a piece of paper and it'd be a better read than anything Terry Brown has ever written.
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

    Comment

    Working...
    X