Tweet
Re: Drafting Game
I have a PM from Dipperdunk requesting Andrew Toney, so be it.
Pig Nash, back to you sir.
I have a PM from Dipperdunk requesting Andrew Toney, so be it.
Pig Nash, back to you sir.
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: Drafting Game
Jose and I have discussed this and hammered out all the details. Now that some of us are finishing up the drafting process, I wanted to float how the rest of this game is going to finish out.
[*]After the draft is complete, go to WhatIf Sports and make your team. You should name your team the same as your PDigest Screen name. the pools will be organized by salary to keep the talent even in both pools.
[*]The names will be plugged into a schedule that I have on paper sitting in front of me. Everyday, every team will play two games. One set of games at 4:30pm and the second set at 7pm Indiana time, so everyone has a chance to change their starters before games.
[*]At the end of Pool play, an MVP will be announced. The MVP will be determined by who has received the most player of the game recognitions. If their is a tie for the MVP, it will go to the player whose team has the best record.
[*]The top 4 teams in each pool will make a best of seven, 3 round play-off. All ties will be broken by a 3 game series to insure that the teams that were tied and didn't make it, get a fair shake.
[*]In the Play-offs, every team will play 4 times a day. Game times (TBD)! This will extend any series that will be more then a sweep to the next day, but not drag them out longer then the next day to build a bit of drama. The next round will not start until the previous round is complete.
[*]The Finals MVP will be decided the same as the pool play MVP.
I'd imagine the simulations will take about 7-12 days to complete.
[edit=29=1093575981][/edit]...Still "flying casual"
@roaminggnome74Comment
-
Re: Drafting Game
Are the games going to be run by the independent accounting firm of PriceWaterhouseCoopers?
PSN: MRat731 XBL: MRat0731Comment
-
-
Re: Drafting Game
We have hiring former Enron employees to moniter the games.Originally posted by MagicRat
Comment
-
Re: Drafting Game
I made my team on WhatIf. Unfortunately the I in PIg Nash is capitalized so we'll half to remember that.Comment
-
Re: Drafting Game
No problem. That was a great year by a guy noone remembers. Figured he deserved to be drafted.Originally posted by Pig
Comment
-
Re: Drafting Game
ROUND 10
Pick 117. Hoop - Calvin Murphy 75-76
"Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"Comment
-
Re: Drafting Game
Nope...More likeOriginally posted by MagicRat
Dewey Cheatem & Howe :devillaugh:...Still "flying casual"
@roaminggnome74Comment
-
Re: Drafting Game
Hicks and his lovely avatar are up.Comment
-
Re: Drafting Game
I created a team, tried to name it just Hoop but it changes it to 2002-03 Hoop"Just look at the flowers ........ BANG" - Carol "The Walking Dead"Comment
-
Re: Drafting Game
Gnome, Toney is 1983-1984
Jose thanks for making the pick for me.Comment
-
Re: The Drafting Game Selection Thread
I will add the new totals as we go... The new totals will have a round number after them to designate which round that total is for.
Player names in red are considered on waivers...just waiting for a new home. :freaked:
Roaming Gnome---- $79,102,842 rd. 9
C --- Shaquille O'Neal 93-94 $14,913,277 - Dikembe Mutombo 94-95 $6,816,370
F --- Jerry Lucas 64-65 $8,071,443 - Karl Malone 89-90 $11,790,341 - Dennis Rodman 91-92 $7,376,367 - Cedric Maxwell 78-79 $9,038,058
G ---Tim Hardaway 90-91 $7,817,339 - Jeff Hornacek 91-92 $7,293,020 - Don Buse 75-76 $5,986,627
Burnzone-----$82,182,317 Rd. 9
C --- Wilt Chamberline 61-62 $23,116,950 - George Mikan 51-52 $4,036,715
F ---Alex English 81-82 $9,914,730 - Marvin Barnes 74-75 $7,852,186
G --- Pete Maravich 76-77 $5,981,635- John Havlicek 70-71 $9,453,975 - Dave Bing 67-68 $6,335,312 - Gail Goodrich 68-69 $4,844,664 - Lenny Wilkens 68-69 $6,830,679
Louisville Lip----$77,897,796 rd. 9
C--- Bill Walton 76-77 $6,585,961 - Caldwell Jones 74-75 $6,828,064
F --- Dan Issel 70-71 $9,594,962 - Connie Hawkins 67-68 $13,363,553 -Jack Twyman 59-60 $6,338,995 - John Brisker 70-71 $6,966,309
G --- Oscar Robertson 61-62 $13,061,528 - Sleepy Floyd 86-87 $7,115,982 - Anfernee Hardaway 95-96 $8,042,442
Sycamore Ken-----$97,655,871 rd. 9
C --- Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 71-72 $19,513,116
F --- Charles Barkley 87-88 $13,815,178- Kevin McHale 86-87 $12,460,505 - Roger Brown 69-70 $8,476,170 - Larry Johnson 92-93 $8,746,836
G ---Jimmy Jones 68-69 $11,810,879 - Dale Ellis 88-89 $7,720,463 - Byron Scott 87-88 $7,444,813 - Dana Barros 94-95 $7,667,911
Jose Slaughter-----$72,004,879 rd. 9
C --- Zelmo Beaty $10,605,408- Mel Daniels $8,422,259
F --- Rick Berry 68-69 $5,585,264 - Kiki Vandeweghe 83-84 $9,285,219 Otis Thorpe 91-92 $8,084,133
G --- Magic Johnson 88-89 $9,356,604 - Tracy McGrady $8,195,328 - Mark Price 88-89 $6,828,518 - Drazen Petrovich 92-93 $5,642,146
Joel------$69,255,560 rd. 9
C --- Dave Cowens 72-73 $6,491,886 - Wes Unseld 69-70 $8,031,750
F --- Larry Bird 84-85 $11,209,940- Chris Webber 00-01 $7,217,832 - Bailey Howell 60-61 $7,183,844 - Terry Dischinger 62-63 $6,280,068
G --- Fat Lever 88-89 $6,213,231- George Gervin 79-80 $9,632,000 - Lou Hudson 72-73 $6,995,009
I love the Pacers-----$93,382,931 Rd. 9
C --- Artis Gilmore 71-72 $15,230,963 - Jeff Ruland 83-84 $9,491,125
F --- Adrian Dantley 81-82 $12,625,875 - Rudy Tomjanovich 73-74 $9,246,471 - Elton Brand 01-02 $7,951,980
G --- Michael Jordan 87-88 $14,218,797- David Thompson 77-78 $8,562,051 - Maurice Cheeks 85-86 $8,218,419 - Norm Nixon 78-79 $7,837,250
MSA2CF-----$71,891,420Done!
C --- David Robinson 93-94 $11,575,369 - Brad Daugherty 91-92 $8,293,739
F --- Spencer Haywood 69-70 $13,847,914 - Clark Kellogg 82-83 $5,413,484 - Ron Artest 03-04 $3,369,097 - Horace Grant 91-92 $8,130,139
G --- Mark Jackson 87-88 4,890,693 - Michael Ray Richardson 79-80 $5,914,268 - Jerry Sloan 70-71 $4,595,970 - Alvin Robertson 87-88 $5,860,747
Able-----$67,499,231 Rd. 9
C --- Hakeem Olajuwon 92-93 $11,125,244 - Rik Smits 89-90 $4,320,324
F --- Bob Pettit 61-62 $9,488,399 - Elvin Hayes 69-70 $8,946,688 - Jermaine O'neal 02-03 $5,699,815 - Marques Johnson 78-79
$8,842,385
G --- Jason Kidd 98-99 $6,495,516 - Allen Iverson 02-03 $5,970,524 Vince Carter 00-01 $6,610,336
Skipper Z-----$77,150,977Done!
C --- Bob Lanier 73-74 $8,807,372 - Alonzo Mourning 99-00 $7,582,626
F --- Kevin Garnett 03-04 $9,686,981 - Scottie Pippen 94-95 $6,917,158 - Glen Rice 96-97 $7,073,942 - Larry Nance 91-92 $7,530,445
G --- Kobe Bryant 02-03 $8,267,318- John Stockton 91-92 $7,249,451 - Ray Allen 00-01 $6,807,327 - Bill Melchioni 71-72 $7,228,357
Hicks-----$70,740,988 Done!
C --- Walt Bellamy 61-62 $12,972,587-
Maurice Stokes 57-58 $3,130,620
F --- George McGinnis 74-75 $8,351,353 - Dolph Schayes 57-58 $6,007,205 - Leonard 'Truck' Robinson 77-78 $6,049,147 - Willie Wise 71-72 $8,105,082
G --- Gary Payton 99-00 $7,624,493 - Charlie Scott 71-72 $7,022,792 - Kevin Porter 78-79 $5,797,265 - Hal Greer 63-64 $5,680,444
Hoop-----$73,280,963 DONE!
C --- Nate Thurmond 67-68 $4,720,296 - Robert Parish 88-89 $8,447,710
F --- Elgin Baylor 60-61 $9,362,540 - Grant Hill 96-97 $8,001,161 - Billy Knight 75-76 $7,122,946 - Buck Williams 86-87 $7,300,318
G --- Kevin Johnson 88-89 $8,520,038- Clyde Drexler 88-89 $9,139,542 - Micheal Adams 90-91 $4,440,302 - Calvin Murphy 75-76 $6,226,110
Pig Nash-----$76,677,171 DONE!
C --- Bob McAdoo 74-75 $13,109,260 - Rich Kelly 78-79 $5,875,630
F --- Dominique Wilkins 85-86 $7,545,437 - Mark Aguirre 83-84 $8,302,113 - Terry Cummings 82-83 $6,919,465 - Ralph Sampson 83-84 $6,168,988
G --- Isiah Thomas 84-85 $7,340,858- Walt Frazier 71-72 $8,433,820 - World B. Free 79-80 $6,325,538 - Micheal Finley 99-00 $6,656,062
Dipperdunk-----$77,398,808 DONE!
C --- Moses Malone 81-82 $12,303,838 - Willis Reed 69-70 $8,443,458
F --- Julius Erving 72-73 $9,732,814- Tim Duncan 01-02 $10,096,335 - James Worthy 89-90 $7,669,968 - Bobby Jones 75-76 $7,900,990
G --- Bob Cousey 56-57 $3,241,400 - Sidney Moncrief 82-83 $7,100,092 - Earl Monroe 67-68 $6,018,318 - Andrew Toney 83-84 $4,891,595
Magic Rat-----$73,283,065 DONE!
C --- Patrick Ewing 89-90 $11,667,517 - Sam Lacey 74-75 $4,665,219
F --- Bernard King 84-85 $6,699,700 - Shawn Kemp 95-96 $6,890,464 - Chris Mullin 90-91 $10,403,824 - Ben Wallace 01-02 $5,911,622
G --- Jerry West 69-70 $10,010,760- Reggie Miller 89-90 $8,226,718 - Terry Porter 87-88 $6,846,089 - Bobby "Slick" Leonard 61-62 $1,961,152
Rim Bender------$75,853,905 DONE!
C --- Bill Russell 61-62 $9,659,291 - Neil Johnston 54-55 $6,198,778
F --- Dirk Nowitzki 02-03 $7,319,581 - Billy Cunningham 69-70 $8,260,257 - Paul Pierce 00-01 $5,966,382 - Sidney Wicks 74-75 $7,037,736
G --- Nate "Tiny" Archibald 72-73 $12,337,789- Richie Guerin 61-62 $7,990,573 - Mugsey Bogues 93-94 $4,348,672 - Otis Birdsong 80-81 $6,734,846
[edit=29=1093642526][/edit]
[edit=29=1093649369][/edit]...Still "flying casual"
@roaminggnome74Comment
-
Re: Drafting Game
Originally posted by Hoop
Thats Fine...All Teams are named with 02-03 for some reason.
...Still "flying casual"
@roaminggnome74Comment
-
Re: Drafting Game
Willie Wise 71-72Comment
Comment