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

Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

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

  • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

    Originally posted by Kofi View Post
    Sorry sir, I didn't realize you had a working crystal ball.
    That's awesome.

    Of everybody in the universe to use that line, irony mandates that it must be you.
    This space for rent.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

      Originally posted by d_c View Post
      Teams in the tournamount winning and losing games isn't what's really important. Scouts don't really care who's team wins or loses. I suppose it's important in that a player on a winning team can continue displaying his abilities if his team keeps playing, but that about it.

      But Love has already played 4 games and is going to play a 5th. The only thing important is that he's shown a lot of ability that can probably translate to the NBA level. He's shown better defense and rebounding than people previously thought he had. Bottom line is he can do a lot of good things and more and more NBA people are being convinced that he can do them at the next level.
      I understand your point. The only thing he can't do is improve on his impression if he doesn't stay in the tourny. The really big thing Love has going for him is his bball IQ. He physically isn't going to improve but say his last game he blows a win and shows that he really isn't that mature. All that could do is help.

      I am really cautious of westbrook. Its really hard to judge a guy that doesn't play first string alot. He might be crazy good but who knows. The only thing that I trully like about him is that people say he is coachable and motivated. That matters more to me than almost anything.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

        http://blogs.herald.com/miami_heat/2...-and-heat.html

        I'm guessing Wade wants Rose although I guess he could be talking about Love too.


        http://realgm.com/src_wiretap_archiv...he_final_four/

        If you haven't been following this stuff much, check this realgm piece summarizing the final four for NBA fans.
        You Got The Tony!!!!!!

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

          Originally posted by Gamble1 View Post
          I understand your point. The only thing he can't do is improve on his impression if he doesn't stay in the tourny. The really big thing Love has going for him is his bball IQ. He physically isn't going to improve but say his last game he blows a win and shows that he really isn't that mature. All that could do is help.

          I am really cautious of westbrook. Its really hard to judge a guy that doesn't play first string alot. He might be crazy good but who knows. The only thing that I trully like about him is that people say he is coachable and motivated. That matters more to me than almost anything.
          What's he going to do? Blow a game like Chris Webber did? That didn't keep him from going #1 overall. I think scouts pretty much have a good impression of what they think of Love and another 1 or 2 games isn't going to change it.

          The Pacers will get a good player. Either Love or Westbrook would improve their talent level.

          A guy like Augustin would help too. He'd immediately improve your PG play and Pacer fans would be happy with it because of the poor play at that position the past few years, but once people understand what his ceiling and limitations are, they'll be right back to NBADraft.net again looking for the next Derrick Rose.

          People don't really notice it for some reason, but these true PG prospects are every bit as much of a crapshoot as 7 foot bigmen. Acie Law was the 2nd best PG prospect in the country last year. He was getting pimped left and right. On this board there were people saying "Boy I'm gonna be pissed if that pick we gave to Atlanta turns out to be Law." This year Law couldn't get playing time for a team that was in desperation for a PG.

          You'll get your Pauls, Deron Williams and Barons every now and then that are pretty much surefire prospects, but otherwise you're sifting through the Ridnours and Acie Laws of the world.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

            Originally posted by quote
            Dwyane Wade has been superman for two seasons. He carried Marquette to unimaginable heights (the Final Four) during in his two seasons there.
            Somehow I'm having trouble thinking that sounds just like a guy who's the third best player on his team and averaging 12.5 ppg.
            Read my Pacers blog:
            8points9seconds.com

            Follow my twitter:

            @8pts9secs

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

              So...with a guy like Westbrook, do we hope that he somehow contains Rose in the final four or that he gets lit up (and his stock drops)?

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                D c I think everyone is not above being influeced by a game or two. You might think scouts are above that but I don't.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                  Originally posted by JayRedd View Post
                  Somehow I'm having trouble thinking that sounds just like a guy who's the third best player on his team and averaging 12.5 ppg.
                  I don't think anyone here expects Westbrook to be Wade. Monta Ellis, probably. Dwyane Wade? Not likely.

                  A point you made yourself, Westbrook plays with NBA caliber teammates, so of course he wont have the padded stats that Wade had playing at third-rate Marquette in big ol' Conference USA. And yes he lead his team to the Final 4, which was impressive, but let's not overlook how weak that years NCAA talent level was. I'd argue there are no less than 5 teams that are better than that years national championship Syracuse team. Impressive, but really no more impressive than what Stephen Curry did this year.

                  You have to learn to look above and beyond the stats. Westbrook is considered the best NBA prospect on UCLA for a reason. His physical gifts, combined with his skills and work ethic are the makings of something special.
                  Last edited by Kofi; 04-03-2008, 06:01 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                    I hear ya, Kofi.

                    It's just one of my jobs here at PD to make sure people know how good DWade is now -- and was at Marquette.

                    And don't forget about Ball Boy.
                    Read my Pacers blog:
                    8points9seconds.com

                    Follow my twitter:

                    @8pts9secs

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                      Im sorry but I think taking Love will be a huge blunder... what is he gonna give us that Troy Murphy is not giving us right now? Better passing, maybe. but this team is full of fundamentally sound slow white dudes, That is not a team need.

                      I guess if you are thinking we are in a full on rebuild lets not worry about anything but whats gonna happen til 5 years from now kind of deal, sure take Love... but I guess I just lean toward fixing our current host of problems. I also don't see Love having much upside really, he is fairly limited physically and IQ will only take you so far on this level. If he had better size I would be more open too it.

                      The last thing we should ever draft are more players who will be a defensive liabilities...
                      Last edited by Infinite MAN_force; 04-03-2008, 07:43 PM.
                      "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                      - ilive4sports

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                        Here's a RECENT (ie, not Nov or something, this is early March) snippit from a report on Westbrook by Draft Express.

                        Offensively, Westbrook’s biggest source of production (nearly 30% of his offense) curiously comes in transition. He plays a fairly small role in UCLA’s half-court offense (only 8% of his offense comes from either pick and roll or isolation plays) , mostly as a complimentary piece—moving off the ball trying to find holes in the defense to get to the rim with his tremendous strength and leaping ability, or shooting wide open jumpers. It’s pretty clear when breaking down his footage that he lacks quite a bit of polish on this end of the floor, even if he is extremely effective at the few things he does well.
                        Wow, how odd that they see the exact same things that several of us have been saying about his game and his role with UCLA (not a PG that is).

                        Again, just like Fred Jones, he's is certainly capable of bringing the ball up and getting a basic offense started. That's started, NOT created. For himself he can create, for others he doesn't. He's a smallish SG with great hops, decent but not great handles, and no sign of a deep ball.

                        I will maybe give you Ellis, though he's not as fast as him and again less of a PG.

                        Collison I would say is still higher rated even in terms of NBA athlete. Size no, but he is ready to handle NBA pressure on his dribble and is already at the Daryl Armstrong level of talent.

                        And while Love doesn't blow people away as a physical player this is just like the freaking combine that says guys will be great...as long as no actual basketball craft is asked of them. Smarts is a skill that scouts look at, just like clutch. For all the hops in the world it's worthless if you choke it up like the Pacers did vs Boston the other day.

                        so of course he wont have the padded stats that Wade had
                        More scoring options means more options for assists, yet like Collison he fails to make halfcourt plays for assists on a regular basis.

                        PPG might be limited on a true team, but other numbers can be raised simply because you are free to do what you need to and have help along the way. You can lock a guy down if you don't have to double off all the time. You can get a board if you have guys that can actually block out. And you can get transition assists if a guy like Shipp is breaking out on a rebound.



                        Westbrook does play first string. He's their starting SF with Shipp at SG and Collison at PG. This is all season, not just lately.


                        And I'm not even worried about this. Love is above the Pacers at this point, they won't get him at 10-11. Augustin might be gone too.

                        They will take Collison. He will be decent but will too often go Best clock-killing-dribble on us. You just hope he's learns his way out of this habit.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                          Originally posted by Kofi View Post
                          I also vividly recall an article that claimed Wade was a less talented version of Fred Jones, but I couldn't find it via Google.
                          I vividly recall Wade being drafted just a tad higher than Fred Jones, no need for Google. So the NBA SCOUTS gave you their opinion, Wade was considered better than Jones. Actually picking the guy is action, and actions speak louder than words.

                          When Westbrook is taken 5th like he's Wade, and Love goes 20th like a fat loser, then the NBA scouts will have agreed with you.


                          Also, from Draft Express, is this bit on "athletes" and the combine that measures that ability...
                          In 2004, we found a similar story. Kirk Snyder came out as the top overall athlete, while players like Andre Iguodala, Luol Deng and Al Jefferson’s draft stock supposedly took a hit by measuring out as relatively poor athletes. That same Andre Iguodala who was robbed of the slam dunk championship a few months ago, only recorded a 34 inch vertical leap, one inch more than J.J. Redick this year. Rickey Paulding, Timmy Bowers and Luis Flores were all declared amongst the top 10 athletes in the draft. One struggled to average double figures this past season in France, one starred in the Israeli league, and another is currently playing in the Dominican Republic.

                          The 2005 draft combine was equally as pointless. Monta Ellis ranked as the worst athlete of all the players measured, coming out slow, weak and with very little leaping ability. Once the NBA season started and the ball actually rolled out on the court, though, he magically transformed into a spectacular athlete who can get his shot at will and dunks anything and everything that is remotely close to the basket, despite only being 6-3. Eventual rookie of the year Chris Paul was declared only the 15th best athlete amongst the players tested, and was somehow deemed slower than Deron Williams, Sean May and Wayne Simien. The athletic tests also led you to believe that Andrew Bogut was some kind of stiff who would never be able to keep up with the speed of the NBA--that is, until the players actually started playing basketball and we found out that he is actually a fine athlete for a player his size.
                          Bogut 14-9.5 at 50% FG this year, 1.7 blocks.

                          For all his slow fatness, Love seems to be keeping up with the spry young kids just fine. He's no Beasley, but no one is claiming he is. The claim is that Love uses a smart game to succeed. Why would that go away at the next level?

                          Frankly athletic players without smarts are the ones most likely to flop.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                            Weaknesses: Still must gain maturity. He gets frustrated far too easily and loses his composure quickly when calls go against him, or when he's struggling ...
                            And to repeat, this also describes Bill Walker. He's Jackson, top to bottom, for better and worse. Dude looks set to make it, I don't doubt his game at all, but I just couldn't trust him in the Indy situation. Too bad because he does a lot of nice things on the court.

                            Who drops?
                            the Pacers do, probably 11th, maybe 10th. To me Express has the closest mock I've seen, and they put Love out at 8 to Charlotte.

                            Beas, Rose, Bayless
                            Lopez, Mayo, Gallinari
                            Gordon, Love, Jordan
                            Augustin, Randolph, Collison

                            I didn't watch LSU so I have no opinion on Randolph. They have Indy at 9 and taking Jordan but I don't see it with Collison/Augustin on the board. Of course they may just be slotting by that point rather than truly mocking.


                            Well, Jeff Capel got his extension at OU. So Griffin is probably
                            sticking around another year.
                            Let next year's tanking begin.


                            Originally posted by Anthem
                            JO's not leaving.
                            It's starting to feel this way for sure. I love the guy personally so I don't mind, but that salary and this team's situation sure make moving him seem tempting.
                            Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 04-04-2008, 04:50 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                              Originally posted by d_c View Post
                              People don't really notice it for some reason, but these true PG prospects are every bit as much of a crapshoot as 7 foot bigmen. Acie Law was the 2nd best PG prospect in the country last year. He was getting pimped left and right. On this board there were people saying "Boy I'm gonna be pissed if that pick we gave to Atlanta turns out to be Law." This year Law couldn't get playing time for a team that was in desperation for a PG.
                              For the record I was not saying this. I was saying that with the pick unprotected this year down to 9-10, I'd rather give it up last year when the options were Conley and Law vs this year when a slew of more talented PG prospects were coming out. Of course this is back when Gordon appeared headed to PG stardom.

                              Still here we are facing a possible 9-10 pick. Imagine if they tanked into keeping the pick last year and it cost them the #9 this year. No way I take Law over Augustin/Collison and I didn't last year either.

                              Trading the pick was dumb, but if you had to give it up then last year was the time to do it.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                                Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                                Trading the pick was dumb, but if you had to give it up then last year was the time to do it.
                                I agree with that. I think that was the dumbest move that the Pacers have done. They not only gave up the pick but a $7m exception. The Artest trade was a forced one. The Golden State trade is at worst a sideways move.

                                You spoke of the Pacers choking against Boston, the same could be said of the Warriors against Dallas. Jackson went 1-11, and Harrington went 1-9. I don't really think Jackson and Harrington choked though, they just played their normal game. I tend to agree the Pacers did some choking though. That's why they really need to make the playoffs, so they can get over their nerves before they are a contender.

                                Back on topic you keep writing 9-10 as the Pacers probable draft position, but I see it more likely as 11-12.

                                Actually the way our luck goes I see us having the worst lottery position of anyone in the east, that's not in the playoffs. And if we would happen to get lucky and move up in the draft, I would bet money we would have the third pick. In other words the worst possible good luck.

                                Who do you see right now as the top picks 1 though 14? No, make that players instead of picks. Picks depend on who's picking and who's in the draft.

                                Here's some interesting excerpts from Chad Ford's chat yesterday; http://proxy.espn.go.com/chat/chatESPN?event_id=19994

                                Mookie (Evansville, IN): What do you see the Pacers doing this summer? Will they keep O'Neal? His stock isnt too high right now. Draft a point guard? Trade Tinsley for a box of Cheerios and a dinner for two with Mickey Mouse?

                                Chad Ford: All of the above. Jermaine is playing right now to prove to teams that he can still play. He's 29 and still an important presence on the defensive end. I think they'll move Tinsley for just about anything ... and if they're drafting in the 10 spot ... I think Texas' DJ Augustin or UCLA's Russell Westbrook would be very good choices.

                                Andy (Denver): Historically speaking in terms of marquee talent and depth, how strong of a draft will this be?

                                Chad Ford: Good ... but not great. After Beasley and Rose ... you have a string of good prospects from about 3 to 8, then some promising but flawed ones from 9 to 15. After that, the difference between 16 and 35 isn't huge.

                                Paul (Redmond, WA) Age 16: Chad, after watching Rose tear up Augustin, how is he not rated higher than Beasley? It also seems like teams aren't taking the "character" issues seriously for Beasley. Sometimes it seems like Beasley just dozes off into another world.

                                Chad Ford: They are taking the character issues seriously and ... after the way Rose played last weekend, he's moving into the No. 1 conversation again. I think, all along, a few teams like New York and Indiana would've leaned toward Rose anyway. A few more may follow ... especially if he's great this weekend at the Final 4. He's a very unique player and ... in my mind ... the best NBA prospect in college basketball.

                                My EDIT; I agree, I think Rose will soon be included in the Paul-Williams, who's the best point guard debate.
                                Last edited by Will Galen; 04-04-2008, 06:45 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X