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

Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and TANK it

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

  • #16
    Re: Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and TANK it

    Very good article. I agree almost entirely.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and TANK it

      I'd be perfectly fine at this point with sitting JO and Jeff for as long as need-be and forcing Rick to play the young guys. But I don't condone intentionally giving a half-assed effort, trying to lose games.

      We also may as well get Dun and Murph used to coming off the bench, because neither is a starter on a contending team.

      Diogu
      Harrison
      Granger
      Williams
      Tinsley

      Those are the starters I'd like to see, starting with the Orlando game.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and TANK it

        For those of you who don't know it's pretty much accepted PD lour that from time to time Kravitz crashes the forum parties. I'd bet Kegboy's paycheck that the old dude with the computer at the Apr 2006 party was Kravitz. I'm starting to wonder if crichard is really just a badger in kids clothing.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and TANK it

          I used to think Kravitz had no clue what he was talking about, but looking back if he were running thsi team we would almost certainly be better.

          Comment


          • #20
            Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and PHONE it in (the article I mean)

            Originally posted by Slow-footed Hack
            I figure, if you're going to have a horrible season, there might as well be some kind of payoff, right?
            And I figure that if you are going to give Atlanta a pick it might as well be the 15th this year rather than the 9th next year or the 6th the year after that.

            Acie Law is a REACH. He's not shown any NBA level talent, he looks solid in college. He MIGHT become something, but many, many players looked better than him in college and became nothing.

            The Pacers HAVE to get Mateen Cleeves. Let's tank to get Cleeves, he'll fix everything. No thanks. If things are going this bad now what are they going to look like next year?

            And then at some point you remove JO from the list (maybe when he walks) and build with Law-Dun-Granger-Ike-Murph, have a few more terrible years and watch ATL take your #1 pick in 2010 when Tim Duncan part 2 comes out, a guy you don't even know about.


            To me this pick is like ball possession in college. Sure when the arrow is against you a jump doesn't get you the ball...but it does get you the arrow. In this case once the arrow flips it never goes back to ATL. To me the safety of future picks is just as important as getting the #9 this year.



            Meanwhile everyone listening to Bob needs to go check the archive on his Colts comments from the beginning of the 13-0 season. Yeah, he's got real vision.

            If you are negative then he's your messiah. Jesus Sourpuss, not to be confused with the RayRay character.


            BTW, I suggest the Pacers use the pick to get this guy...
            NBA Comparison: Scottie Pippen

            Strengths: Very good athlete, can shoot with super range. He has abilities almost never found in a 6-9 player. His offensive potential is limitless. He has one of the silkiest touches from outside, combine that with great handles and super athleticism and you have a special talent. He can play the 1,2, or 3 positions and is a very good passer.
            Spoiler Spoiler:

            Can't freaking miss pick right there.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and TANK it

              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
              What I love about Kravitz is he tells the Pacers they should have traded Artest sooner, should have traded Jackson sooner and he's been telling all the world that they should have traded Tinsley long ago. How many one-liners have we read from him about trading Artest for a bag of chips, about trading Jackson for a second round draft pick in the year 2025 and about trading Tinsley for any point guard that can walk.

              But then when the Pacers trade these guys, Bob is the first one to rip the trade. And suggest that the "trade hasn't worked out" Bob we got more than you wanted us to get

              How many times has he said they need to blow the team up and start over and yet when they make a major trade to "start over" he criticizes it.

              And I'll never forget Bob was the one who recommended the Pacers not trade Artest in the summer of '04 when there were some McGrady rumors.

              When Tinsley is traded as Bob has wanted for a few years, he'll be the first one to rip the Pacers and say they didn't get enough.


              Bob, and everyone else, if I ever think the Pacers are tanking a game or a series of games (tanking means to lose on purpose) I will demand my money back and if the pacers won't give it to me, then I'll pester Bob until he does.
              QFT. And that's all there really is to say.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and TANK it

                Originally posted by Mal View Post
                Maybe if we all start channeling some absurd line of thought we can know for sure.

                Quick, everyone start saying "Librarians are hiding something, and it's Donnie Walsh's fault!"
                BRILLIANT!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and TANK it

                  Giving up their pick next year doesn't mean the Pacers won't HAVE a draft pick next year. It just gives them more time to get the best possible offer for O'Neal and/or Tinsley or whoever. The Pacers have an entire year to figure out how to get into next year's draft, so that is not some significant loss when you consider that wholesale changes are pretty much confirmed at this point.

                  And calling Acie Law a reach is pretty silly. He is the total package as far as PG go. He is exactly what the Pacers need, a PG who can not only penetrate but SHOOT as well (and I like Tinsley) and play defense.

                  By your logic in referencing Dermarr Johnson, teams should stay away from Greg Oden because of Kwame Brown. You wanna read the scouting reports on Kwame from before he was drafted?

                  The Pacers have holes on the team. The sooner they stop filling the round ones with square pegs, the better. The sooner they stop beating around the bush regarding personell problems, the better.

                  I don't know how you can be against the Pacers picking up Law/Conley this season if you are a Pacers fan. It WILL make them better for the long-term.

                  Playing the status quo and trying to squeeze blood from a stone is what got the franchise into the web of mediocrity that it is now in.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and TANK it

                    Originally posted by MagicRat View Post
                    Kravitz channels his inner Bball. If he starts talking about gigs and the price of quality A/V cables I'm going to be officially scared......
                    It is clear the man is brilliant!

                    -Bball
                    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                    ------

                    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                    -John Wooden

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and PHONE it in (the article I mean)

                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                      And I figure that if you are going to give Atlanta a pick it might as well be the 15th this year rather than the 9th next year or the 6th the year after that.
                      I figure if we're gonna keep a pick, it might as well be #9 in this stacked draft rather than #20 in next years draft.

                      See? It goes both ways.

                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                      Acie Law is a REACH. He's not shown any NBA level talent, he looks solid in college. He MIGHT become something, but many, many players looked better than him in college and became nothing.
                      This is absurd. Acie Law has size, quickness, ball handling, a nice shooting touch, clutchness....everything you'd look for in an NBA point guard. And that's why he's about to be a lottery pick.

                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                      The Pacers HAVE to get Mateen Cleeves. Let's tank to get Cleeves, he'll fix everything. No thanks. If things are going this bad now what are they going to look like next year?
                      Mateen Cleeves isn't Acie Law. Cleeves didnt have Law's skills, his size, or his athleticism. Acie has a better chance of being Chauncey Billups than he does of Mateen Cleeves.

                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                      And then at some point you remove JO from the list (maybe when he walks) and build with Law-Dun-Granger-Ike-Murph, have a few more terrible years and watch ATL take your #1 pick in 2010 when Tim Duncan part 2 comes out, a guy you don't even know about.
                      You're constantly throwing out wild worst-case scenarios with very little basis behind them.

                      What if, next year, Daniels and JO each play in 70+ games, the team develops a little chemistry in the offseason, and we win 45 games and finish with the #5 seed in the East? Then we've got the #20 pick in the draft to give Atlanta and still have a Mike Conley or Acie Law ready to takeover as the franchise PG for the next decade. That scenario is approx. 20x more likely than the outrageous scenario you posted.

                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                      To me this pick is like ball possession in college. Sure when the arrow is against you a jump doesn't get you the ball...but it does get you the arrow. In this case once the arrow flips it never goes back to ATL. To me the safety of future picks is just as important as getting the #9 this year.
                      Next years pick is top-8 protected. Worst case scenario, we give up #9. That means, worst case scenario, we break even.


                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                      BTW, I suggest the Pacers use the pick to get this guy...


                      Spoiler Spoiler:

                      Can't freaking miss pick right there.
                      DerMarr messed his neck up badly in a car accident 2 years into his NBA career, so badly he missed the entire 2002-2003 season. It's a shame too, he had a fairly solid sophomore season as a 21 year old and had the size and athleticism and skillset to be a very good NBA player.

                      And I suggest the Pacers use the pick to get one of these guys.....


                      Spoiler Spoiler:



                      .....all drafted at #9 or later of the past 10 NBA Drafts (excluding this past draft)

                      Point being, there will future All-Stars and probably a future Superstar or two available for the Pacers to draft. It's up to management to make sure they draft that player, and not a bust. One thing they've done well lately is draft, so I have confidence in them.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and PHONE it in (the article I mean)

                        Originally posted by Shawne View Post
                        And I suggest the Pacers use the pick to get one of these guys.....


                        Spoiler Spoiler:



                        .....all drafted at #9 or later of the past 10 NBA Drafts (excluding this past draft)

                        Point being, there will future All-Stars and probably a future Superstar or two available for the Pacers to draft. It's up to management to make sure they draft that player, and not a bust. One thing they've done well lately is draft, so I have confidence in them.

                        You have to have a pick to actually draft someone.

                        Unless they finish 1-10 in the lottery, the Ps won't even have a chance to land a pick.
                        Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and PHONE it in (the article I mean)

                          Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                          And I figure that if you are going to give Atlanta a pick it might as well be the 15th this year rather than the 9th next year or the 6th the year after that.

                          Acie Law is a REACH. He's not shown any NBA level talent, he looks solid in college. He MIGHT become something, but many, many players looked better than him in college and became nothing.

                          The Pacers HAVE to get Mateen Cleeves. Let's tank to get Cleeves, he'll fix everything. No thanks. If things are going this bad now what are they going to look like next year?

                          And then at some point you remove JO from the list (maybe when he walks) and build with Law-Dun-Granger-Ike-Murph, have a few more terrible years and watch ATL take your #1 pick in 2010 when Tim Duncan part 2 comes out, a guy you don't even know about.


                          To me this pick is like ball possession in college. Sure when the arrow is against you a jump doesn't get you the ball...but it does get you the arrow. In this case once the arrow flips it never goes back to ATL. To me the safety of future picks is just as important as getting the #9 this year.



                          Meanwhile everyone listening to Bob needs to go check the archive on his Colts comments from the beginning of the 13-0 season. Yeah, he's got real vision.

                          If you are negative then he's your messiah. Jesus Sourpuss, not to be confused with the RayRay character.


                          BTW, I suggest the Pacers use the pick to get this guy...


                          Spoiler Spoiler:

                          Can't freaking miss pick right there.

                          For the record, Mateen Cleaves was taken very lightly as an NBA prospect, and Joe Dumars was ripped apart for a) making a homer pick, and b) not taking MoPete if he was dead set on reaching for a Spartan. Also, Khalid El Amin was a clutch college point guard, and no one took him until round two.

                          If I recall correctly (and I don't have time to do the research to back this up), point guards taken in the top ten have had a pretty good track record in recent years, especially in relation to other positions.
                          The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                          http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                          RSS Feed
                          Subscribe via iTunes

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and TANK it

                            Let's say we do wind up with the top 10 pick this summer. There's nothing that says we have to draft a PG, right? Maybe we do. I like both Law and Conley (if he comes out) reasonably well. Think Conley's got better overall upside, but probably neither is a sure fire NBA calibur starter immediately. Nor is either a guaranteed superstar down the line, but then again who truly is without the benefit of hindsight.

                            It's just that the PG scenario seems to be the focal point on here. Is that like having blinders on? If this draft is so great, but top heavy on bigs, pick a big and then trade one of our multitude of frontline guys for an established point. Perhaps that big would be JO or perhaps not. Or even just trade the top 10 pick for an established back court presence.

                            Just saying it's not written in stone that if we end up with the pick that we certianly will take a PG. There are other alternatives.
                            I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

                            -Emiliano Zapata

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and TANK it

                              Regarding Cleaves, here is the press I found about him right after he got drafted.

                              ESPN.com gave the Pistons a B in the draft (they actually picked Brian Cardinal, who turned out to be pretty good, in the second round) and said that "With Crawford and Dooling already gone, and the Pistons having a need for a point guard, getting Cleaves does make sense. He's basically a hometown guy, and while there are questions about his game, there aren't any when it comes to his leadership ability. The two-time Big Ten player of the year is not a great shooter, plain and simple. He can handle the ball and find the right man, though, and is a character guy. The pick will be popular in Pistonland, which will be key if Grant Hill flies the coop. "

                              NBAdraft.net gave the Pistons a C and said that "The Pistons went local with Championship catalist Mateen Cleaves. He may not have quickness or a beautiful J, but he's got the heart of a champion, and brings toughness and leadership to a team likely losing it's marquee player (Hill)."

                              CNNSI also gave the Pistons a C and said " Detroit (C) -- Joe Dumars goes Big Ten all the way with Mateen Cleaves (No. 14) and Brian Cardinal (No. 44). Cleaves is a winner, and fills a need, but will he make shots?"

                              Based on that, I would say that Cleaves wasn't extremely highly touted out of college and was regarded as more of a late first rounder than a lottery pick. I'm not using this to affect my judgement on Acie Law, who I know little about, but I'm just throwing this out there.
                              Proudly supporting the Indiana Pacers since 1992.

                              Currently on the Darrell Armstrong, Mike Dunleavy, Jr., and Marquis Daniels bandwagons.

                              sigpic

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Kravitz: What's the point? Go ahead and TANK it

                                Move over, Rick. The Pacers tank has a new driver...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X