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

06-18

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

  • 06-18

    Friday, June 18, 2004

    What happened to the deep draft?

    By Chad Ford
    ESPN Insider


    # Mock draft (June 14): Standard version | Slideshow version

    Also see: NBA draft camp combine results | Who's In, Who's out?

    A month ago, the conventional wisdom on this year's NBA draft was that it lacked any real impact players but was among the deepest in years. That was thanks to a record 94 American and international underclassmen who had flooded the draft.

    After Thursday's mass exodus of underclassmen, has the draft suddenly lost all its depth?

    A record 38 international underclassmen declared for the draft in April, but just six prominent names -- Andris Biedrins, Ha Seung Jin, Sergey Monya, Pavel Podkolzine, Peter John Ramos and Sasha Vujacic -- actually stayed in the draft. Everyone else pulled out on Thursday.

    "I think the draft was looking a little bit deeper than it is now, with some of the Europeans and some other people pulling out," Magic GM John Weisbrod said. "It's moving the priority in the draft selections more and more forward."

    The NBA draft is on the Atkins diet, and the rapid talent loss is putting the squeeze on teams like the Celtics, Jazz, Hawks and Blazers, who were trying to package their multiple picks to move up.

    Both Boston and Utah had the opportunity Thursday to make draft promises to a number of international underclassmen with their late first-round picks but declined to do so, according to sources. Players like Peja Samardziski, Tiago Splitter, Johan Petro, and Roko Leni Ukic would have settled for a draft spot outside the lottery, but none of them got a satisfactory guarantee.

    Why not? It's the same story we've been writing for months. Teams outside the lottery are reluctant to make promises, because there's a good chance they'll be able to trade up on draft night. Most lottery teams are willing to move their picks for talented veterans, and several playoff teams would love to capitalize on the opportunity. If you don't know for sure you'll still be drafting in the 20s come draft night, it's awfully tough to promise someone that spot.

    It also has been nearly impossible to pin down the projected draft order, which also helped limit promises and ultimately sparked the withdrawls. Teams simply don't know who will be on the board when they pick. Players such as Josh Smith, Jameer Nelson, Rafael Araujo, Pavel Podkolzine, Luke Jackson, Sebastian Telfair and Peter John Ramos have draft stock that could land them in the lottery or in the mid to late first round. No one wants to be locked in to a promise only to see someone they like better fall to them.

    Those realities, along with the chilling reminder of what has happened in the past to several highly touted international players -- such as Maciej Lampe, who slipped from a lottery projection all the way to the second round -- sent folks running to the hills.

    "I just didn't feel that the commitment I had from a team in the lottery was firm enough," agent Herb Rudoy said Thursday evening after reversing course and pulling Splitter's name at the last minute. "On Wednesday we thought he was in for sure. As the day went on (Thursday), we began changing our mind. It is a tough decision to make, but I think it was the right one for Tiago."

    Top American underclassmen like Lawrence Roberts and Ryan Gomes told a similar story.

    "Too many unanswered questions," Roberts said during an appearance late Thursday afternoon on ESPNews. "Anytime you have a situation like that, the best remedy is to answer the questions people have in their heads. That's going back to school ... and proving I'm a higher pick than people might think."

    While the decisions might have been wise for the players, the exodus has wreaked havoc on the draft. Some GMs are feeling a little remorse after seeing the potential draft pool slashed.

    "We may have been too smart for our own good," one NBA GM who has a pick in the 20s told Insider late Thursday night. "We didn't want to commit, because we thought the chances of a great player falling to us were really high. Now that so many pulled out, the chances are really low. As it stands, I think we liked a few of the guys who pulled out a lot more than anyone who is going to fall to us. Last year, too many kids stayed in. This year, too many probably pulled out. This is how it goes."

    The good news for several prospects is things are opening up at the bottom of the draft. Underclassmen who opted to stay in -- such as Delonte West, Donta Smith, Dorell Wright and Kevin Martin -- along with a few 22-year-old internationals -- such as Viktor Khraypa, Anderson Varejao, Beno Udrih and Albert Miralles -- now have a realistic shot of getting picked late in the first round.

    Draft Rumors

    # Emeka Okafor is in Orlando today to work out for the Magic. According to various reports, Okafor's back checked out in the Chicago pre-draft physical and he was not medically red-flagged by the league. You can expect the Magic doctors to go over his results and his back carefully one more time, but from what we're hearing, it's not going to be a major issue.

    Much more pressing for Okafor and the Magic is owner Rich DeVos' meeting with Tracy McGrady, which is supposed to take place sometime this weekend. The meeting will be a two-way affair. While the Magic want to hear McGrady's plans concerning his right to opt out of his contract after next season, they have some issues of their own they want to address. McGrady reportedly had a so-so work ethic with the team last year and didn't participate in practices much. If T-Mac wants to stay, the Magic want him to commit to change his ways, too.

    "We want to know that Tracy will put his heart into it if he stays and will come to terms with the things we are asking him and all our players to do," DeVos told the Orlando Sentinel.

    While the Magic downplay the significance of the meeting to their eventual choice in the draft, the truth is T-Mac's plans will shape the team's direction. If T-Mac is on board, the Magic likely will either try to trade the pick for a veteran or select Okafor, the most NBA-ready player in the draft. If T-Mac wants out, the Magic likely will begin rebuilding and will have to decide whether Okafor or Dwight Howard holds the most promise.

    Howard will be in Orlando on Saturday. He also plans on making visits to the Clippers (though he won't work out) and to Charlotte (where he will likely workout). The Hawks are trying to swap picks (No. 2 for No. 6 & No. 17) with the Clippers, but need to be assured that Howard will be there when they pick. The Bobcats are trying to do the same thing (No. 4 plus a player or draft pick they pick up in the expansion draft), though they would be happy with either Okafor or Howard at No. 2.

    # The Bulls finally worked out Luol Deng on Thursday. Deng has long been thought to be Chicago's most likely pick at No. 3, but he had yet to work out for the club.

    "Luol was relentless in his work. And that's who he is," GM John Paxson told the Chicago Tribune. "We got a decent read on his quickness, and he's a better athlete than people give him credit for. He's going to be a very good shooter in this league. Right now, he has more of a mid-range game than a deep game. But he's 19 and has time to develop that. And he's a willing learner."

    The Bulls seem to be deciding between Deng, Josh Childress, Andre Iguodala and possibly Ben Gordon, who had a stellar workout with them earlier in the week. While Gordon, at 6-foot-2, isn't a great fit in the backcourt with Kirk Hinrich, the Bulls were blown away with his workout. That goes the same for the Hawks and Suns. Athletically, few have been able to match Gordon in workouts.

    # Where will Pavel Podkolzine land on draft night? Don't count out the Dallas Mavericks. Sources claim the Mavericks, who don't own a first round pick, have been talking to teams in the late lottery trying to move up to select Podkolzine, with whom Donnie Nelson fell in love with at the Reebok Eurocamp in Treviso. The Mavericks need a big, physical center in the worst way, and Podkolzine would be a perfect fit in Don Nelson's liberal offense.

    One potential scenario has them trading last year's No. 1 pick, Josh Howard, to the Cavs for the No. 10 pick. The Cavs are looking for a young, veteran swingman to put on the court with LeBron James, and Howard fits the bill. Not only did he have four years of college experience, he also started 29 games for the Mavericks last season and played a big role in their playoff run. The Cavs own a trade exception that could allow them to acquire Howard without having to send back a player in return.

    # Several NBA agents told Insider on Thursday that the Nets canceled workouts with draft candidates. As we first reported last week and again on Thursday, the Nets have been in serious discussions with the Blazers about a trade to acquire Shareef Abdur-Rahim for Kerry Kittles, Aaron Williams and New Jersey's No. 22 pick. Now that the Nets are canceling workouts, is the deal done? Nothing can become official until after the expansion draft, because Kittles was left unprotected. It's unlikely the Bobcats will select him, meaning the Nets could to trade him Wednesday, a day before the draft.

    What will the Blazers do with three picks? One of the later picks likely will be used for Sebastian Telfair. The other two? Don't be surprised if they package both to move up higher in the draft. Most of the players the Blazers like won't be on the board when their first pick comes up at No. 13.


    Quote:
    Thursday, June 17, 2004

    Who's pulling out of the draft?

    By Chad Ford
    ESPN Insider


    # Mock draft (June 14): Standard version | Slideshow version

    The deadline for underclassmen to withdraw from the draft is at 5 p.m. ET. Most of the top American underclassmen -- Emeka Okafor, Dwight Howard, Andre Iguodala, Josh Childress, Luol Deng, Josh Smith, Devin Harris, Shaun Livingston, Ben Gordon, Kirk Snyder, J.R. Smith, Kris Humphries, Robert Swift, Donta Smith, Sebastian Telfair, Trevor Ariza, Randy Orr and Jackie Butler -- already have hired agents, ending their college eligibility.

    A source close to Dorell Wright told Insider on Thursday afternoon that Wright is staying in the draft. Another source close to Kevin Martin said Thursday afternoon that Martin would also stay in the draft. Delonte West's college coach, Phil Martelli, told ESPN.com that he's staying in the draft. ESPN.com is also reporting that Al Jefferson will remain in the draft.

    A few prominent underclassmen -- including LaMarcus Aldridge, Ryan Gomes, Lawrence Roberts, Brandon Bass, Nate Robinson, Dijon Thompson, Odartey Blankson, Martin Iti, Roger Powell and Marco Kilingsworth -- will return to school.

    More difficult to project are the international underclassmen, who don't have the specter of NCAA eligibility hanging over them and can withdraw without penalty. Insider made a flurry of phone calls Wednesday and Thursday trying to track down the status of the top international underclassmen.

    Here is what we have confirmed as of 6 p.m. on Thursday.

    IN

    Andris Biedrins, PF, Latvia
    Ha Seung Jin, C, Korea
    Sergey Monya, SG, Russia
    Pavel Podkolzine, C, Russia
    Peter John Ramos, C, Puerto Rico
    Aleksandar Vujacic, Slovenia

    OUT

    Martynas Andriuskevicius, C, Lithuania
    Luka Bogdanovic, SF, Serbia
    Ivan Chiriaev, SF, Russia
    Marcin Gortat, C, Poland
    Marcelo Huertas, PG, Brazil
    Mile Ilic, C, Serbia
    Ivan Koljevic, PG, Serbia
    Erazem Lorbek, PF, Slovenia
    Miguel Marriaga, PF, Venezula
    Damir Omerhodzic, SF, Croatia
    Drago Pasalic, PF, Croatia
    Kosta Perovic, C, Serbia
    Johan Petro, C, France
    Dusan Sakota, SF, Greece
    Peja Samardziski, C, Macedonia
    Armands Skele, SG, Poland
    Uros Slokar, PF, Slovenia
    Tiago Splitter, PF, Brazil
    Marko Tomas, SG, Croatia
    Roko Ukic, PG, Croatia
    Marcus Viera de Souza, SF, Venezula

    A couple of things stand out here. Splitter's agent, Herb Rudoy, reversed course on Thursday and pulled him out of the draft just before the deadline. Rudoy told Insider on Wednesday night that Splitter was staying in the draft. What changed?

    "I just didn't feel that the commitment I had from a team in the lottery was firm enough," Rudoy told Insider on Thursday evening. "On Wednesday we thought he was in for sure. As the day went on today, we began changing our mind. It is a tough decision to make, but I think it was the right one for Tiago."

    There was a rumor running rampant late Wednesday night that Ramos might pull out. His agent, Andrew Vye, hasn't been able to secure a promise for the big man, and there was some thinking he might pull out with an eye toward being a top-10 pick next year. However, Vye confirmed early Thursday morning that Ramos will stay in the draft. He has a workout in Seattle today along with Podkolzine and Samardziski, then will work out almost every day leading up to the draft.

    # Samardziski's agent, Marc Cornstein said Thursday afternoon that Samardziski will withdraw his name. He worked out for Utah on Wednesday (against Podkolzine) and Seattle on Thursday (again against Podkolzine) but couldn't obtain a lottery promise from either team. According to Cornstein, Samardziski was hearing he'd be a lottery pick for sure next year with some playing time at Partizan next season. With Nenad Kristic leaving, his ability to get that time on the senior team will be greatly enhanced.

    SFX agent David Bauman told Insider on Thursday afternoon that Vujacic is in. Bauman's other clients, Ukic, Lorbek and Pasalic, all withdrew from the draft on Thursday.

    Four prominent international players pulled their names out of the draft on Wednesday. Andriuskevicius was expected for some time. His agent, Rudoy, was asking for a top-five promise and wanted Martynas to remain in Lithuania next year. That was a pretty big pill for any team to swallow. If he continues to develop, Andriuskevicius should be a lock for the top five next year.

    Perovic had a buyout issue with his team, Partizan, that clouded his picture. His agent, Bill Duffy, said Wednesday the feedback he was getting also factored in. "The feedback that we got from teams was that he could improve his stock by playing another year at Partizan without Nenad Kristic," Duffy told Insider. "There were a lot of teams that were interested, but the consensus was that if he played well next year, he had the chance to be a top-five pick."

    Petro got some buzz after a few impressive workouts with Denver and Utah. However, he was unable to secure a promise from either team, meaning he'll try again next year. If Petro gets some playing time in France next season, he could move himself into the lottery.

    Omerhodzic was another disappointment. His lack of playing experience combined with a series of lackluster workouts really hurt his stock. If he starts getting minutes in Croatia, his stock will go way up next year.

    Draft Rumors

    # Cavs GM Jim Paxson told Insider the Cavs are exploring trades for their pick, No. 10 overall. The team is trying to obtain a veteran wing who can help LeBron James and Carlos Boozer make the playoffs next season. However, so far the interest in the pick has been limited.

    The No. 10 spot is a tough one to gauge right now. There could be a talented guard like Ben Gordon, Devin Harris or Shaun Livingston who could slip that low, but all three easily could be off the board, too. It's a bit of a crapshoot. If the Cavs keep the pick, don't be surprised if they use it on an experienced college player like Luke Jackson or Kirk Snyder.

    # The Bulls and Wizards recently discussed a swap that would have sent Jarvis Hayes and the No. 5 pick to Chicago for the No. 3 pick and Chris Jefferies. The Wizards apparently like Luol Deng and are afraid that either Chicago or Charlotte will take him first. Giving up Hayes isn't a huge loss, considering he plays the same position as Deng. However, so far, nothing looks imminent.

    The Bulls also have explored trading down. They like both Luke Jackson and Donta Smith and could get them much later in the lottery or late teens.

    # One team the Bulls may want to talk to is the Sixers, who are desperately trying to move up.

    "There is a guy I love in the draft, and I don't know if he will be there [at No. 9]," Sixers GM Billy King said. "I have seen him work out a couple of times and have seen him play in college, and I think he will be a very good player."

    Who's that? Sources claim it's Deng.

    # The Bobcats are trying to move up to get the No. 1 or No. 2 pick, whichever one would land them Emeka Okafor. "I really think there's a good possibility that the Clippers would (trade). I think it's something that they want to do," Bobcats GM Bernie Bickerstaff told the Charlotte Observer. "... And I think Orlando is interested. I think if there was something that made sense with them, with veteran players, I think they would get it done."

    # A source close to high school center Robert Swift claims he won't slip past the Celtics at No. 15. We've been hearing that off and on for weeks, but this is the best confirmation we've heard that Boston will take Swift this high.

    # If you didn't believe Sebastian Telfair-to-the-Blazers was a done deal before, this should seal it. Trail Blazers coach Maurice Cheeks said only one player has jumped out at him during the team's workout sessions.

    "Sebastian Telfair," Cheeks told The Oregonian. "He's one guy who understands this game. Even though he is a high school player, I can see that he understands about how to play."

    "To me, (Telfair) was better than Jameer," Cheeks said. "Jameer probably can play, because I think he has a bigger body and can defend better, but that kid Telfair had something about him that I saw. It's there. Now, I don't know if he can step in and play this year ..."

  • #2
    Re: 06-18

    Found this on another site:

    Snyder, Humphries draft's top athletes

    By Chad Ford
    ESPN Insider

    Who really has a 40-inch vertical? Who's the strongest player in the draft? Who's the quickest? After months of conjecture, things finally were measured at the Chicago pre-draft camp last weekend.

    The NBA keeps the list confidential, but sources within the league leaked the results of the NBA combine to Insider late Thursday night. Some numbers were very surprising.

    Washington sophomore Nate Robinson tested as the best athlete at the camp, recording an amazing 43.5-inch vertical, bench pressing a 185-pound bar 13 times and recording a 10.75 time in the lane-agility test. Robinson, however, withdrew from the draft Thursday.

    Nevada's Kirk Snyder (2nd), Minnesota's Kris Humphries (4th), UConn's Emeka Okafor (8th) and St. Joseph's Jameer Nelson (10th) were the only potential lottery picks to finish in the top 10 overall.

    Oklahoma State's Tony Allen (3rd), Mississippi State's Tim Bowers (5th), Missouri's Rickey Paulding (6th), Seton Hall's Andre Barrett (7th) and Manhattan's Luis Flores (9th) filled out the top 10.

    Okafor and Humphries tied for the camp record in bench press this year with 22 reps each. Robinson and Bowers both recorded the highest vertical jumps at 43.5 inches. Duke's Chris Duhon had the fastest lane-agility time at 10.45 seconds.

    Here's an exclusive look at how the top prospects in the draft fared on the three most important measurements: bench press (reps of 185 pounds), maximum vertical jump (in inches), and lane-agility (in seconds).

    Pre-Draft Camp Combine Results Name Bench Press 185lbsMax. Vertical JumpLane Agility Test
    Josh Childress 11 reps 36" 11.95 sec.
    Luol Deng 5 reps 31.5" 11.46 sec.
    Ben Gordon 12 reps 37.5" 11.28 sec
    Devin Harris 5 reps 37" 11.03 sec.
    Dwight Howard 7 reps 35.5" 11.21 sec.
    Kris Humphries 22 reps 36" 11.33 sec.
    Andre Iguodala 4 reps 34.5" 11.17 sec.
    Luke Jackson 13 reps 36" 11.1 sec.
    Al Jefferson 3 reps 30" 13.08 sec.
    Shaun Livingston 0 reps 30" 10.72 sec.
    Jameer Nelson 15 reps 33.5" 10.95 sec.
    Emeka Okafor 22 reps 34" 12.32 sec.
    Peter John Ramos 2 reps 26.5" 12.61 sec.
    J.R. Smith 5 reps 35.5" 10.93 sec.
    Josh Smith 12 reps 39.5" 11.43 sec.
    Kirk Snyder 19 reps 35" 10.79 sec.


    Several other top prospects including Andris Biedrins, Pavel Podkolzine, Sergey Monya, Rafael Araujo, Robert Swift, Dorell Wright, Viktor Khryapa, Anderson Varejao and Sebastian Telfair were not tested.

    What does all of this mean? Here are some observations:

    Snyder and Humphries helped their stock with outstanding results. Both players showed strength, quickness and leaping ability few believed they had. Snyder already looks like a lock to go somewhere in the late lottery. These results could push Humphries there as well. Gordon's and Nelson's results were also very impressive overall, though scouts already had them pegged as good athletes.

    Deng and Jefferson took the biggest hits. Both showed an eye-popping lack of strength, jumping ability and quickness for guys their size. In his workouts, Deng appeared to be a better athlete than advertised. However, the results in Chicago could begin raising red flags again. Jefferson, at 265 pounds, couldn't bench press as much as 170-pound Devin Harris? Please. While Jefferson has proved to be an explosive jumper, he obviously doesn't get much lift.

    The tale of the tape between Okafor and Howard was a draw. Okafor obviously was much stronger. The vertical jump essentially was a draw, with Howard showing a slight edge. Howard was much quicker in the lane-agility test.

    The reports of J.R. Smith's 44-inch vertical were greatly exaggerated. Even Luke Jackson recorded a higher vertical in the Chicago testing. A 35.5-inch vertical isn't bad, but it's not off the charts, either.

    Speaking of Jackson, he measured out to be as good an athlete as advertised. His 11.1 second lane-agility speed was topped only by a handful of point and shooting guards.

    Josh Smith had the highest vertical of any lottery prospect at a whopping 39.5 inches. That's pretty amazing for a 6-foot-8 kid. He also showed above-average strength on the bench press.

    Iguodala's performance on the bench press and vertical jumps were disappointing. He looks stronger and more athletic than he showed here. He did, however, record a very fast lane-agility time.

    Livingston was the only guy who couldn't lift 185 pounds. It isn't surprising. He's still very thin, and his long arms make it difficult for him to get leverage in the bench press. His vertical jump also was a very pedestrian 30 inches. However, his lane-agility score was faster than any of the top prospects. Considering the position he plays and his height advantage, the lateral quickness measurement is much more important than his bench press.

    Childress measured out stronger than we expected, but what's up with that nasty lane-agility score? Ugh.
    "Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"

    Comment

    Working...
    X