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

5-25-04

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    5-25-04

    Shaq sets own market value

    By Terry Brown
    NBA Insider
    Tuesday, May 25
    Updated: May 25
    9:24 AM ET

    The bidding for Shaquille O'Neal, if we are to believe the latest reports, begins at $30 million per season.

    Do I hear $31?

    "His agent isn't dumb," said NBA salary-cap specialist Larry Coon. "He's one of the sharper guys out there and he knows that it's perfectly feasible for the Lakers to pay Shaq this amount of money and more and not change any of the personnel around him. No matter what amount they pay him, they're going to be over the cap. So that's not going to affect any future acquisitions. It's the luxury tax they have to worry about but Shaq can certainly command this amount."

    As ludicrous as these numbers may sound to you and me and the next guy waiting to make the balloon payment on his second mortgage, let's make it even more absurd by stating that the bidding cannot even begin for two more seasons when his contract completes and, at this asking price, there is only one qualified bidder.

    "He'll be making about $30 million dollars at the end of his contract," Coon said. "So a team can pay him up to 105 percent of that amount provided they have the cap space."

    And considering that the cap is at $43.8 million this year, how many teams do you really think are out there that have only $12.3 million in salary?

    You're right. The answer is none.

    But before we get too far with the Los Angeles Lakers monopoly, let's put a little more emphasis on Mr. Coon's point.

    As just mentioned, the cap this year was at $43.5 million. The Lakers' payroll for this season is at $65.5 million. Even without Shaq on the books, the team is at $39 million, giving the Lakers all of $4.8 million in cap space.

    That's it. Enough to sign someone like Michael Olowokandi or two Joel Przybillas or three Jake Tsakalidases.

    Cut Shaq's current salary of $26.5 million in half and the Lakers are still $8.4 million over the cap.

    Cut his salary by 75 percent, paying the big guy $6.6 million, and the Lakers are still $1.8 million over the cap.

    Cut his salary by 90 percent, to $2.6 million, and you've now created $2.2 million in cap space and pissed off one heckuva big fella for the opportunity of signing the likes of DeSagana Diop.

    In other words, any reasonable pay cut for Shaquille O'Neal is not going to affect the Lakers' ability to attract future free agents because the Lakers can still only pay them mid-level exceptions because they will still be over the cap.

    Shaq knows this.

    His agent knows this.

    Laker owner Jerry Buss knows this as well, but is hoping inaccurate articles in the local and national press put enough public opinion pressure on Shaq to take a pay cut.

    "At some point, these players are only competing against themselves," said Coon. "No other team can even come close to these figures . . . but we have to remember that Dr. Buss isn't anywhere close to being one of the richer owners in the NBA. In fact, he's not even on the Forbes list. While other owners have other income, the Lakers are all he has. The franchise may be worth about $400 million but that's all he's got."

    So this is one auction with one article up for bid and only one bidder.

    And this is one way to look at it.

    Shaq is going to be 32-years-old at the end of this season. That puts him at 34 when his current contract expires and still well within the traditional prime years. But that's also 730 dinners in the future, too, from tonight. So we'll try to guess his output as best we can.

    Between the 1999 season and 2001 season, Shaq averaged 28.2 points, 12.3 rebounds and 2.4 blocks per game. Between the 2002 season and 2004 season, he averaged 25.5 points, 11.1 rebounds and 2.2 blocks. Using those ratios, we can guess that after two more seasons, he'll be averaging about 22.8 points, 9.9 rebounds and two blocks per game.

    Those are still All-NBA numbers, even league MVP-like should the Lakers ever decide to take the regular season seriously again.

    But we've also got to factor in games played.

    In 1999, he played in 98 percent of the shortened 50-game schedule.

    In 2000, he played in 96 percent of the 82 regular-season games.

    In 2001, he played in 90 percent.

    Between 2002 and 2004, he played in 67 games each season or 81.7 percent.

    By 2007, we can guess that he'll be playing in about 58 games per season or about 71 percent of them, and if you saw his last playoff game on Sunday night then you know we're being generous here.

    So if we take those estimated statistical averages and multiply them by games played, we see that Shaq could very well be scoring 1,322 points per season, grabbing 574 rebounds and blocking 116 shots at that time.

    And at the asking price of $30 million per season, that equals to about $22,692 per point or $52,264 per board or a whopping $258,620 per blocked shot.

    Compare that to today's going prices for the same stats.

    Tracy McGrady led the league in scoring and by his numbers, he was paid $6,709 per point (1,878 points at $12.6 million). Kevin Garnett led the league in rebounding and he was paid $24,582 per board (1,139 boards at $28 million). Theo Ratliff led the league in blocked shots and he made $32,899 per swat (307 blocks at $10.1 million).

    By these figures, Shaq is way overpaid, often slower up and down the court and sometimes a bit more surly that we like our middle-aged cartoon characters. Let's all say it together. He isn't half the man that he used to be.

    But it wasn't too long ago that we were convinced that he was twice as good as anyone else.

    So maybe the better question is, do the Lakers want a motivated Shaq at $30 million or do they want the guy shooting 4-for-10 on Sunday night at $20 or $15 or $10? Or even the $4.9 mid-level exception?

    Do they load down his contract with incentives and clauses hitched to waist measurements, field goal percentages, team standings and number of jerseys sold?

    Can the Lakers pay him his weight in gold bullion on nights he leaves a pile of unworthy centers and power forwards in his wake and then empties the lint out their collective pockets when he plays Oliver Miller to a standstill?

    "There are a limited amount of things you can do here," Coon said. "The league will classify these incentives as either likely to happen or unlikely to happen. And if he's ever done them in the past then they're likely and they're going to count against the cap anyways."

    Score 61 in a game before? Check.

    Grab 28 rebounds in a single contest? Check.

    Block 15 shots in one night's work? Check.

    Win three Finals MVP awards while leading your team to three consecutive championships? Check.

    But while we're at it, here's another game.

    What can we get for $30 million in an NBA open market?

    Well, for starters, Kobe Bryant and Tim Duncan combined made $26.1 million this year in salary.

    How about an entirely new front line in Elton Brand, Peja Stojakovic and Erick Dampier. That's 56.5 points, 28.6 rebounds and 4.1 blocks per game plus 240 3-pointes on the season for $24.9 million.

    How about Tracy McGrady and Jermaine O'Neal, average age of 25, for about $26.3 million.

    Or how about another front line of Shawn Marion, Paul Pierce and Ben Wallace. That's 51.5 points, 28.2 rebounds and 4.9 blocks per game plus 205 3-pointers and some tenacious defense for $26.8 million.

    Sure, the Lakers are perfectly justified in not paying Shaquille O'Neal $30 million plus per season.

    But then, of course, they'd have to play against him.

    Do I hear $32 million?
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: 5-25-04

    No Kidding

    By Ric Bucher
    Comment on this article


    The Sacramento Kings tried everything to bring out the old Kevin Garnett, the one who punched himself in the temples, screamed obscenities in opponents' faces and occasionally threatened teammates; the one who would hyperventilate during games or, in timeouts, shake so badly he'd spill his trademark two-fisted refresher, a cup of water and a cup of Gatorade, before it reached his lips.

    A few years ago, the Kings' rough tactics almost certainly would have derailed KG, leaving Sacramento a clear path to the next round. But this time, Garnett had the ballast to keep himself on track. He had devoted the previous summer to getting better: morning runs on a private beach near his off-season Malibu home, afternoon shooting drills and lifting sessions at Pepperdine, evening scrimmages at UCLA's Pauley Pavilion. In the fall he was joined by a vastly upgraded roster, making it a foregone conclusion the Timberwolves would advance past the first round of the playoffs for the first time in eight tries. There was also that five-year, $100 million contract extension on top of KG's current six-year, $126 million deal.

    None of which stopped the Kings from doing their WWE best to frustrate the man, including an Anthony Peeler elbow to the jaw in Game 6. "I don't know if I've been around a more emotional guy than KG," says Minnesota assistant Randy Wittman, who played for Bobby Knight at Indiana. "Remember," he says, "Anthony Peeler played with KG for five years here. There's no doubt in my mind that what the Kings did was premeditated."

    There's also no doubt that it didn't work. Instead of losing his cool, Garnett coolly converted whatever Sacramento stirred into a laser beam of energy that carried Minnesota to its first-ever conference finals. He didn't play well every night -- most nights, in fact -- but by not giving in to the Kings' antics, he was around at the end (unlike his good buddy Peeler). And that allowed Garnett, already established as one of the game's best all-around players, to enter the elite stratosphere of those who deliver their biggest performances in the biggest games. He also may have exorcised a few demons along the way, including the knock that he isn't a fourth-quarter scorer, his inferiority complex about Spurs superstar Tim Duncan (more on that later) and the haunting memory of teammate and close friend Malik Sealy dying in a car accident on his way home from Garnett's 24th birthday party.

    "Finally," said someone in KG's tight-knit inner circle, who requested anonymity for fear of upsetting the ultraprivate star, "we have something good on his birthday to celebrate."

    While the Nuggets went for verbal digs in the first round -- Francisco Elson called KG "gay," an unenlightened barb but the new "your mama" in the macho world of sports -- the Kings went for physical insults. Brad Miller palmed KG's face as if he were smearing a cream pie in it. Vlade Divac nailed him in the chest on a dunk attempt and then stumbled into Garnett, following up with a what-are-you-gonna-do-about-it stare. Peeler, well aware of Garnett's hair-trigger potential, hit him with elbows from Game 2 on, culminating with a Game 6 shot to the ribs that dropped KG to the floor and, seconds later, another upside to the jaw that snapped his head sideways.

    "The first thing I had to do was gather myself," Garnett says of his reaction to the cheap shots. "There can only be one winner and one loser in the course of any kind of heated moment."

    Garnett did retaliate, forearming Peeler in the chest after the rib shot to draw a flagrant foul. But after the elbow to the face, he merely bounced on his toes like a boxer, hands down by his sides. He was fined $7,500; Peeler was ejected and suspended for two games, putting him out for Game 7.

    Lakers scout Brian Shaw watched from courtside in wonder, noting what KG would've done to Miller a few years ago: "Punched his ***." And to Peeler? Shaw simply laughed and made a face of mock terror.

    "KG put his ego and his pride in check in that situation," teammate Gary Trent says. "He saw the big picture. He knew our chances of winning without him wouldn't have been good."

    Garnett credits Wittman for warning him before Game 6 in Sacramento that things would escalate. "It's a mind game," KG says. "And it's not one that I'm willing to play."

    If these playoffs have shown anything, it's that dealing with the emotional ebb and flow of the postseason is very new to Garnett. While David Stern was presenting him with the MVP trophy before tip-off of Game 1, KG hid his hands behind his back, nervously flicking his thumb across his fingertips. Once Stern finally handed him the bronze hardware, Garnett immediately called his teammates over for a group hug.

    The crowd roared as he held the trophy up in a way that suggested he wasn't showing it so much as sharing it. Pouring out love isn't the way KG typically prepares for battle. He moves around the locker room and the court talking to no one. Before stepping over the lines for the jump ball, he slaps a cloud of resin in the faces of the team's broadcasters. "I knew that ceremony was going to be a drain on him," Peeler says. "Here he was, making a speech. He normally doesn't even say 'What's up?' prior to a game."

    Peeler was right, of course. By the second quarter, Garnett's jersey was already transparent from sweat. By the third quarter, he had a ring of white film around his mouth. Usually, when Minnesota struggles, he is the first to clap his hands and bark encouragement. But he didn't do that once. Instead, he contributed as many turnovers (six) as baskets to a 104-98 loss, wasting in one night a season's worth of work for homecourt advantage.

    If KG didn't look like a league MVP for most of the series, credit that to a strong showing from Chris Webber, Sacramento's effective trapping defense and the rest of the Timberwolves alternately losing their cool. Coach Flip Saunders was hit with a technical for alerting referee Dan Crawford to the fact that he'd officiated in two of Minnesota's previous three losses. Sam Cassell fouled out twice and got T'd twice as well. And Latrell Sprewell earned a T for arguing about an offensive foul called on Garnett, who simply closed his eyes, took a deep breath and got back on defense. "At that point, you have to let your basketball do your talking," KG says.

    In the end, he unloaded on the Kings the old-fashioned way, by knocking them out with the finest clutch all-around performance of his career. Garnett celebrated his 28th birthday the night of Game 7 by single-handedly matching the Kings' starting front line in rebounds, with 21, and outscoring them 32-31.

    His numbers were staggering -- 14 fourth-quarter points, 5 blocked shots, 4 steals and 2 turnovers in 46 minutes. But it was his demeanor that struck Saunders. "He had a ton of pressure on him," says the coach, "but an amazing calm about him."

    * * *

    There was a time when Garnett instigated the mind games, at least with his No.1 nemesis, Duncan. Born less than a month apart, the two have represented opposite ends of the NBA spectrum from the start -- and Garnett always suffered for the comparison. He arrived first, the high school kid from the powerhouse program in Chicago and the backwater streets of Mauldin, S.C., a Timberwolves' gamble with the fifth pick and the one who started a trend. Duncan arrived two years later from Wake Forest, a four-year grad taken No. 1, and immediately stole the spotlight. Garnett was all sinew and bared teeth and primal screams, a jump-shooting, crossover-dribbling seven-footer who insisted on being listed at 6-11 so he wouldn't be forced to play with his back to the basket. Duncan was the Big Fundamental, with the solid footwork and the soft jump hooks from either hand, a grown-up whose most volatile reaction was widening his eyes. KG joined a roster of malcontents and wild cards at the bottom of the Midwest Division, while Duncan stepped into a lineup of classy veterans at the top.

    For all of KG's competitiveness, he so relishes being part of the league's great-player fraternity that he is downright chummy at times when going against the likes of Webber and Rasheed Wallace. (Pressed into point duty with Cassell ailing in Game 3 against the Kings, Garnett grinned as CWebb took a guard's defensive stance and smiled back.) But Sam Mitchell, Garnett's former teammate and mentor, made sure his young charge never took that attitude toward Duncan.

    "I told him from the start to be careful about being overly friendly with Tim," says Mitchell, now an assistant with the Bucks. "I told him, 'You've got to keep a competitive edge. This is a guy you're going to be battling for the next 15 years for all the same things -- championships, MVP trophies, All-NBA honors.' Kevin could overwhelm certain guys with his talent, but against Tim he really had to bring it."

    So maybe the profanities Garnett screamed in Duncan's face minutes into their first playoff meeting in 1999 shouldn't have come as a surprise; nor the exchange of words that got them both ejected from a regular-season game two years ago. Even now, KG remains reluctant to get to know his counterpart, never mind that they filmed a commercial together for Nike a few years ago, have spent the past five seasons starting together on the Western Conference All-Star squad and are now once again working for the same shoe company, adidas.

    Ask Garnett about almost anyone, and he's generally gracious. Ask him about Duncan, and the conversation doesn't go far. "I don't know Timmy," he says. "We're very different. It's not like I hang out with him. But everybody matures in different ways. He's always been pretty quiet and had his emotions in check, and I had to learn to control mine. To say we're alike is far-fetched."

    They are more alike now, though, than ever. With the retirement of David Robinson, Duncan finally dropped the stoic leader approach this season, getting on teammates and celebrating big plays with fist pumps and yells. He even traded barbs with Lakers coach Phil Jackson. And like TD, KG now has a supporting cast. "That's why he's able to dominate in the fourth quarter," Mitchell says. "He's got energy left."

    The lighter workload also benefited Garnett in another way, allowing him to keep 240 pounds on his 7-1 frame. In seasons past, he'd shrink to 220 by the playoffs, the very time he needed that extra girth to keep from getting pushed right out of the picture.

    Minnesota GM Kevin McHale figures Garnett's growth is the result of a young man maturing on and off the court after years of playing loose and wild and paying the price. "Nobody's engine revs higher than KG's," McHale says. "I tell him all the time, 'You have to slow down and read where you're going. You can't always drive a car at maximum speed. You can't see the signs and you can't make the turns. Go fast in the straightaways, but if it starts to get away from you, back off. You can always take it up again.' "

    Make no mistake, KG still has his razor tongue. When Wolves guard Darrick Martin passed up an open shot against Denver in the first round, Garnett was quick to snap at him. When Sprewell and Cassell questioned KG's attempted pass to center Ervin Johnson in Game 6 against the Kings, Garnett barked, "Shut the f-- up, I know what I'm doing!" And when Mark Madsen fumbled a potential layup out of bounds in Game 7, Garnett glared at the bench and mouthed to get Madsen out of the game. More often than not, such displays are taken in stride, as the competitive fire of a veteran willing his team to win.

    "You can't minimize the value of experience," says Martin, who also played with KG the rookie. "He has a great sense now of who he can get on and who he can't."

    So to what do we owe this transformation? Saunders points to yoga and breath-control lessons Garnett has taken on his own the past couple of years. Teammate Wally Szczerbiak credits KG's engagement earlier this season to Brandi Padilla, sister-in-law to music impresario Jimmy (Jam) Harris, Garnett's long-time mentor and a Wolves season ticket-holder. As KG himself says, "That's one thing I do have a lot more control of -- my emotions."

    He still looks every bit Da Kid, his original moniker back in 1995 as the first high school player drafted by an NBA team in 20 years. As Garnett prepared for his MVP press conference, he dusted off a sand-colored suit, then had his representative, Michael Moore, knot his tie. With no cuff links, his French cuffs hung from the suit as if he'd borrowed the shirt from an older brother, while black socks and white sneakers cemented the image of a 12-year-old forced to dress up for church. When team owner Glen Taylor commented on the shoes, Garnett looked down at him and offered to get him a pair, joking, "We have kids' sizes, Glen."

    But once the spotlight was on him, Garnett the grown-up showed up, revealing a genuine respect for his charmed life. He noted that without the Wilts, Kareems and Magics, "there would be no Kevin Garnett." Then he thanked Spencer Haywood, Darryl Dawkins and Moses Malone -- the three men who'd made the big jump before him -- for "paving the way for the young guys."

    In the end, though, the only value the MVP trophy had for Garnett was in assuaging his disappointment over losing out last year to Duncan. Winning this year and, for the first time in the postseason, outlasting "the other 21," as Jimmy Jam's kids refer to Duncan, ends a run in which TD seemed to have everything KG wanted.

    The wish list has been winnowed to one: a championship. "If ..." says Garnett, before the auto-correct kicks in, "when I get that big gold trophy, that will solidify my long journey. That's really what I want." It will be tough to get there this season. The Lakers, having escaped their own Duncan demons, appear to be clicking on all cylinders. But for now, Garnett has at least changed how teams attempt to stop him, because getting in his head will not work anymore.

    After the Wolves did away with the Kings, KG broke loose, jumping on the scorer's table and shouting to the crowd -- "Yeah, ******* it!" -- before walking off the floor while yipping into a microphone. It was just the kind of emotion that Karl Malone is sure to try and unleash before the buzzer sounds. But Shaw's scouting report undoubtedly included a word of caution for the Lakers: Better have a Plan B.

    This article appears in the June 7 issue of ESPN The Magazine.

    Comment

    Previous template Next
    Working...
    X