Tweet
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
We're gonna see what Gordon is made of in the second half today with IU down 28 at the break.
We're gonna see what Gordon is made of in the second half today with IU down 28 at the break.
The Rules of Pacers Digest
Hello everyone,
Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.
A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.
Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.
Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.
Rule #1
Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:
"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"
"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"
"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"
"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"
"He/she is just delusional"
"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"
"I'm going to take a moment to point and
/ laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"
"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good?"
In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.
We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.
Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.
That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.
A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.
There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.
Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.
In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.
Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.
If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!
All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.
Rule #2
If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.
The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.
The right places to do so are:
A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.
B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.
If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.
Rule #3
If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.
When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:
A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.
B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.
To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!
Rule #4
Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.
Rule #5
When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.
An example:
If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:
http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star
Rule #6
We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.
The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.
Rule #7
Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.
It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).
We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).
However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.
Rule #8
We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.
Rule #9
Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.
Rule #10
We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.
Rule #11
Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.
A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.
Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.
Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.
Rule #1
Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:
"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"
"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"
"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"
"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"
"He/she is just delusional"
"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"
"I'm going to take a moment to point and
/ laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*""Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good?
"In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.
We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.
Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.
That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.
A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.
There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.
Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.
In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.
Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.
If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!
All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.
Rule #2
If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.
The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.
The right places to do so are:
A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.
B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.
If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.
Rule #3
If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.
When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:
A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.
B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.
To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!
Rule #4
Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.
Rule #5
When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.
An example:
If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:
http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star
Rule #6
We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.
The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.
Rule #7
Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.
It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).
We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).
However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.
Rule #8
We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.
Rule #9
Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.
Rule #10
We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.
Rule #11
Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less
-
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
Another game with Gordon providing scoring and little else. With him being not much more than a scorer and with his lack of size, I just can't see him going top-5.Last edited by Kofi; 03-02-2008, 04:31 PM.Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
turnovers, no handle, 0 defense, lack of quickness, and slowly losing his shot...boy there's a bunch to love about ej :-\Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
Ya, and that damn EJ is already a relic at 19 yrs of age too. No way
he'll get any better at all or have any shot at developing his game
once he's in the NBA and has chance to be coached-up and work
on it every day.
Sarcasm intended !Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
Yes, but the same thing could be said for everyone in the draft, especially the young (Freshman, Sophomore) kids.Originally posted by Rajah Brown View PostComment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
ej, like most players/propects have limitations to their games however...sure ej is young, but he's only gotten worse as the season has gone along. watching him in high school, he had better ball handling skills then than he does now...ej has potential, but not more potential than at least 15 guys in this upcoming draft. drafting ej, would be a huge mistake for the pacers...Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
Kevin Love is a beast. 17/11/2, 58% from the floor, 75% from the line, all in 29 mpg as a freshman. If he's a legit 6'10", how is this guy not a top-10 lock at any point he decides to declare? He's far better than Spencer Hawes last season.Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
i still think his wrist is bothering him and honestly i think he has hit a freshmen wall. once he learns to play under control and his ballhandling improves he'll be a solid proOriginally posted by croz24 View PostComment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
I think thats the problem with Love, is he a legit 6'10". If he is he could be a very good system player for many years in the NBA.Originally posted by Kofi View Post
Gordon's got his issues right now though. Which is good for Pacer fans because he could drop to us. His defense comes and goes as does his ball handling. Those are the two biggest things he needs to work on by a mile. People would think more of his passing if IU played an offense that relied on ball movement instead of this 4 out 1 in iso we run. (Really you can't even call it an offense at this point its just one on one play.) I don't know how you can knock Gordon's quickness though, his first step is deadly. You combine his first step with his above average strength and you have the recipe for how he gets so many free throws. Gordon though hasn't had the ideal experience for a freshman player in college so I'm not surprised that his game hasn't improved as much as some of the other freshmen this season. He's had the wrist injury plus the whole Sampson situation and I have no doubt that has stunted his growth recently.
Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
his 1st step is solid for a college guard, but it will not be good enough in the pros...it's quick, but not mayo, bayless quick, and when you don't have the handles you're looking at a turnover waiting to happen. which is what ej is right now. ej is a one-trick pony who's struggling at that one-trick...i'll cheer for ej at the nba level and even hope he gets taken before the pacers pick. that way a player who will make more of an impact on our team will fall to us...Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
These other freshman haven't had the controversy and side show distractions in their freshman seasons as Gordon has with Sampson and Illinois and a new coaching change. That stuff throws a yung undeveloped mind off. I hope he does slip out of the top 5 because by ALL counts he is very smart and a hard worker. He is intense in practice and his game will definitely come around with some pro coaching and a structured system. Also, his numbers have gone down since his wrist injury. Your ball handling and overall game are dfinitely going to suffer when you are playing with a brace on one hand. I could see him being afraid of reinjuring it again and hurting his draft stock, therefor playing softer than normal.
Now, lately...i would probably be more content with Mayo coming to the Pacers...he has serious game and is tepping up as the season goes on. Maybe Gordon reinjures his wrist...goes really late in the 1st round and by then we have securd two more picks and get Mayo, White, and Goron.....or maybe I'm way off...but That is my NBA 2k8 roster...Last edited by jmoney2584; 03-02-2008, 06:49 PM.Roy Hibbert.... It's the POWER!!!Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
ej's "wrist" by all accounts is healthy, and he's struggled with ball handling/decision making all year long...Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
THis is what I do not get. If WEstbrook can get a ride by being young why can't Gordon. Yeah he was hyped and over-hyped. But just because he was over-hyped does not mean he is overrated. He is a freshman and if this was 20 years ago he would have at least another season with IU. But it is not and the kid does have potential. He does have the skill set to be a future All-star. If that happens or not who knows. But if we have a 10-15 pick and we do not select him then TPTP is plan retarded.
Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
I am not sure I want Gordon on the Pacers. It may not be the easiest place for him to develope
being a hometown favorite. Plus I think center and point guard are a bigger need anyway.
I hope he is picked before the Pacers have to make that decision.{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
This article from Chad Ford is interesting. He's thinking what I am, that if the Pacers get the #1 pick they will take Rose. That's also the result that happens if you do the lottery and the Pacer's get the first pick.
---------------------------------------------
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft...Lottery-080304
Is Beasley the consensus No. 1 pick for lottery teams?
By Chad Ford
ESPN.com
Updated: March 4, 2008
• Play the lottery! Try all 2,184 combinations
Last year, the best debate in sports centered on the NBA draft. Who do you take No. 1 -- Greg Oden or Kevin Durant? After more than a month of deliberation, the Blazers settled the debate by taking Oden with the top pick.
This year, there is far less to argue about.
Kansas State's Michael Beasley is having a freshman season that is even more impressive than Durant's freshman campaign. He's the country's leading rebounder and third-leading scorer.
[+] Enlarge
Peter G. Aiken/US Presswire
When it comes to the No. 1 pick, Beasley has the inside track.
Beasley is a coach's dream on the court. A 6-foot-10 power forward, he is a prolific scorer both inside and outside. He also has great athleticism, sick range on his jump shot, the power to bang in the paint, the speed to run the break, the nastiness to mix it up down low and the cockiness to think that he can deliver a victory for his team every night.
The other contenders for the No. 1 spot in the draft don't come close to Beasley's résumé. There are no 7-foot centers who play like Bill Russell. There are no other dominant college players rewriting the record books. There are no mysterious international players who can claim No. 1 status.
Beasley's closest competition is Memphis' Derrick Rose. Rose is an elite point guard prospect who has size, athleticism and leadership abilities, and he plays on one of the best teams in college basketball. But Rose's lacks a consistent jump shot, and that combined with the NBA's aversion to selecting players under 6-foot-6 as the top pick in the draft make him a hard sell over Beasley.
For better or for worse, this is the Michael Beasley draft.
However, it is still not a lock that he will be the No. 1 pick in June. Why? For the same reason we had Beasley ranked No. 2 in July. There are so many questions about his character swirling around that it will take some serious vetting before a team chooses him No. 1.
To his credit, Beasley has been on his best behavior at Kansas State. People say he has matured. He has avoided trouble. His coach, Frank Martin, sings his praises. He has been a committed teammate and player. And by almost all accounts, Beasley is a good kid who just hasn't always kept his nose clean.
But it is clear that NBA scouts and especially NBA executives are still wringing their hands a little. I can't go a day without a scout or executive telling a story that begins with, "Did you hear about the time Beasley … "
In other words, rightly or wrongly, they're worried. Derrick Coleman's name gets thrown out there from time to time. He too was an incredibly talented phenom. But he never seemed to care enough to be great.
A couple of GMs said they'd have reservations about making Beasley No. 1 because of fan sensitivities over his character. Another contingent says it's his work ethic and commitment to the game that give them pause. Others seem ready and willing to pull the trigger if their team gets to pick first.
The GMs who have serious doubts usually draft for need -- and several of the teams vying for the top pick in the draft don't need a power forward, they need a point guard.
With the debut of our annual Lottery + Mock Draft generator, we break down the issue from a practical standpoint. If we gave each of the 14 worst teams in the league the No. 1 pick, what would they do?
Over the past few weeks, Insider talked to scouts or executives from almost every team projected to be in the draft lottery in an effort to determine what each would do. Some were open, some refused to answer. Here's what we can gather on where each team stands in the debate to determine who's No. 1.
Miami Heat
Odds of winning the lottery: 25 percent
The Heat could really use a franchise point guard like Rose, but all indications are that Beasley would be the man if the draft were held today. Talent-wise, he'd be a big upgrade over Udonis Haslem. And he would give the Heat a formidable trio of athletes alongside Dwyane Wade and Shawn Marion.
Edge: Beasley
Minnesota Timberwolves
Odds of winning the lottery: 19.9 percent
The Wolves need a franchise point guard more than they need a franchise power forward right now. Al Jefferson is having an All-Star caliber season, and Sebastian Telfair is easily replaceable. The Wolves, however, would likely opt for Beasley. Jefferson can move to the center position if Beasley comes on board. Meanwhile, the Wolves still believe that Randy Foye will eventually be the team's point guard.
Edge: Beasley
Memphis Grizzlies
Odds of winning the lottery: 15.6 percent
This is one of the most clear-cut choices for Beasley. The Grizzlies have a hole at power forward after giving away Pau Gasol, and they currently are stacked with three young point guards. Put Beasley on the floor with Rudy Gay and Mike Conley and the Grizzlies have a very formidable young core.
Edge: Beasley
Seattle SuperSonics
Odds of winning the lottery: 11.9 percent
Is it possible that the Sonics could land both Durant and Beasley? Yes, and a few of the GMs I spoke with think it would be an amazing combination. Beasley and Durant are close friends and, together, they could one day give the Sonics the most potent inside-outside scoring duo in the league. The team has more pressing needs at center and point guard, but if they get the pick, Beasley is the likely choice.
Edge: Beasley
New York Knicks
Odds of winning the lottery: 8.8 percent
This is a really tough call. What the Knicks need more than anything else is chemistry and a floor leader who can bring all of the egos on the Knicks together. On that account, Rose sounds like the right guy for the job. Furthermore, the Knicks need a point guard much more than they need a 4. Remember, before Zach Randolph was traded to the Knicks, he was considered one of the premier young power forwards in the league. However, would you rather have Randolph or Beasley? In the end, Isiah Thomas and company seems to worship stardom over chemistry and I think they opt for Beasley. On paper, they're right. But on paper, the Knicks have always been better than the product that shows up on the court each night. However, since I'm betting that someone other than Isiah will be calling the shots at this draft … I'm going with Rose. He's the type of player who can turn the culture around.
Edge: Rose
Los Angeles Clippers
Odds of winning the lottery: 6.3 percent
The Clippers are another team that really needs a point guard. Sam Cassell is gone and there's no telling whether Shaun Livingston will ever recover from the knee injured he endured last season. However, they may need a power forward sooner than you think. Elton Brand can terminate his contract this summer and there are rumblings in L.A. that he might opt out for the chance at a title. If he leaves, it's a no-brainer that Beasley's the guy. If he doesn't, it will be a tough call for the Clips.
Edge: Beasley
Charlotte Bobcats
Odds of winning the lottery: 4.3 percent
The Bobcats are another team that should be easy to peg. They desperately need athleticism and rebounding in the frontcourt. Raymond Felton isn't as talented as Rose, but he'll do. This one is Beasley all the way.
Edge: Beasley
Milwaukee Bucks
Odds of winning the lottery: 2.8 percent
The Bucks spent last year's lottery pick on an athletic power forward with inside-outside skills -- Yi Jianlian. Would they do it again to get Beasley? Probably. Yi is a very good prospect, but he can play multiple positions. Beasley is ready now and has more upside. They could use Rose as well. But with Mo Williams entrenched at the point, the position isn't really a need.
Edge: Beasley
Chicago Bulls
Odds of winning the lottery: 1.7 percent
Beasley would be a godsend to the Bulls. He's the perfect antidote to what they lack -- a confident, athletic low-post scorer who can draw double-teams. Put him on the floor with Luol Deng, Ben Gordon, Joakim Noah and Kirk Hinrich and I think the Bulls' playoff future suddenly gets much brighter again.
Edge: Beasley
Indiana Pacers
Odds of winning the lottery: 1.1 percent
Here's the first team that seems like a lock not to draft Beasley. Given all of the off-court problems their players have faced, Larry Bird and company are looking for model citizens. I doubt they take the risk on Beasley. Besides, after years of watching Jamaal Tinsley's off-again, on-again performances, I think the idea of a young, talented point guard like Rose would actually hold more appeal. This team needs leadership and Rose can provide it.
Edge: Rose
Phoenix Suns (via Atlanta Hawks)
Odds of winning the lottery: 0.8 percent
This one's a no-brainer. Beasley would be a monster in the Suns' system -- an excellent replacement for Shawn Marion. Once Shaq peters out (which looks like sooner rather than later) Amare Stoudemire will be back playing center and Beasley would be a great fit next to him as a 4. Rose would be a great consolation prize -- a point guard capable of giving Steve Nash a break. But if they hit a home run and get the No. 1 pick, it'll be Beasley.
Edge: Beasley
Sacramento Kings
Odds of winning the lottery: 0.7 percent
The Kings have needs at both the 4 and point guard but it seems very likely that they'd lean toward bringing in Beasley. His talents on both ends of the floor would be a great complement to Kevin Martin and Ron Artest. Rose would be great too, running the point, but Kings should go with the best talent.
Edge: Beasley
Portland Trail Blazers
Odds of winning the lottery: 0.6 percent
The Blazers are another team that would likely hesitate at taking Beasley. GM Kevin Pritchard believes strongly in character, and I think Beasley would give him pause on such a talented, young team. The Blazers also have a bigger need at the point guard position. They have been searching for a franchise point guard to put on the floor with Oden, Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge, and Rose is it.
Edge: Rose
Denver Nuggets
Odds of winning the lottery: 0.5 percent
The Nuggets could go either way here. They have a ton of money wrapped up in Kenyon Martin and Nene, but Beasley's a better talent. They also have been out searching for a legit point guard who can run the floor with Carmelo Anthony and distribute -- and Rose should be ready from Day 1. In this case, I think the Nuggets err on the safe side and pick Rose.
Edge: Rose
Chad Ford covers the NBA for ESPN Insider.Comment
Comment