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

2004-02-04

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

  • 2004-02-04

    LeBron, Carmelo aren't quite all-star worthy
    By Terry Brown
    NBA Insider
    Wednesday, February 4
    Updated: February 4
    9:50 AM ET

    It's close, but statistically speaking, LeBron James is better than Carmelo
    Anthony.

    But by going by the standings, and there are those who say those numbers are
    even more important, then, well, Anthony is far and away better than James.
    But, and this is a big but if we are to believe all the ensuing talk of all-star
    snubs, by combining the two criteria, both players are lacking in Feb. 15
    credentials because adding them to the team means taking someone else off of it.

    "I was like, 'Oh, man, I should have been on there,' " Anthony said in N.Y.
    Times after learning he had not made the Western Conference squad. "But it's my
    first year and I still have a long way ahead of me. Even though it's just the
    All-Star Game, it's much deeper than that. We'll take it as motivation. I
    probably deserved to make it, but things happen for a reason."

    Ditto for James.

    "I think I played well enough to make that team," LeBron said in Lorraine
    Morning Journal after learning that he had not made the Eastern Conference
    squad. "By not making it, that will make me work harder. It's just another thing
    I have to earn, to be part of that elite group. I don't have anything to prove."

    But instead of focusing on those two players who did not make it, perhaps it
    might be better if we looked at those players who beat them out.
    Anthony, a forward, lost out to Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Dirk Nowitzki, Andrei
    Kirilenko and Peja Stojakovic.

    James, a guard, lost out to Allen Iverson, Baron Davis, Jason Kidd, Paul Pierce
    and Michael Redd.

    "I'm old school," Cavs coach Paul Silas said in the Detroit News when he learned
    that his player had not made the All-Star team. "I always like players to pay
    their dues and to earn it, but it is what it is. He's earned it. It's just one
    of those things."

    Ditto for Anthony's representative.

    "I love our guys and I think they've played well enough (to be all-stars),"
    Nugget GM Kiki Vandeweghe said in the Rocky Mountain News when he learned his
    player had not made it. "But every year there are deserving players who don't
    get picked. Hopefully, this will inspire our guys."

    Both Silas and Vandeweghe were careful not point out any players they believed
    should not have made it and they were smart. They've both played in the league,
    made their own all-star teams and are now back in the league in different
    capacities. They not only understand the game but they also understand the NBA.
    And this is the simple truth. These are the facts. These are the numbers.

    James and the Cleveland Cavaliers have a 19-29 record.

    The players selected ahead of James with losing records were Iverson, McGrady
    and Pierce, and here's how they stack up individually.

    LeBron James
    2004 Stats: 20.8 ppg, 5.9 rpg, 5.9 apg, 1.4 spg, 0.7 bpg, 41.4 FG%, 27.3 3P%,
    75.7 FT%

    Allen Iverson
    2004 Stats: 27.5 ppg, 4.1 rpg, 6.2 apg, 2.5 spg, 0.09 bpg, 39.3 FG%, 29.4 3P%,
    74.9 FT%

    Tracy McGrady
    2004 Stats: 27 ppg, 6 rpg, 5.6 apg, 1.3 spg, 0.7 bpg, 42.2 FG%, 35.1 3P%, 81.4
    FT%

    Paul Pierce
    2004 Stats: 22.9 ppg, 6.8 rpg, 5.5 apg, 1.6 spg, 0.7 bpg, 40.2 FG%, 33.1 3P%,
    83.2 FT%

    As you can see, James is good, even great. Brilliant if you've only seen him
    through highlights. But these guys are, statistically speaking, better. They
    score more points and excel in other categories as well. And as far as the
    standings go, Kidd, Redd and Davis, as the leaders of their respective teams,
    are seven games better than James in the win column.

    Here's how Carmelo stacks up.

    Carmelo Anthony
    2004 Stats: 19 ppg, 6.1 rpg, 2.7 apg, 1.2 spg, 0.6 bpg, 41.7 FG%, 32.4 3P%, 74.8
    FT%

    But instead of listing the numbers for Duncan, Garnett, Nowitzki and Stojakovic
    and embarrassing the rookie, I'll put it in his own words . . . "but Kirilenko,
    man," he said in the Rocky Mountain News.

    So let's see.

    Andrei Kirilenko
    2004 Stats: 16.3 ppg, 7.9 rpg, 3.3 apg, 2 spg, 2.8 bpg, 46.9 FG%, 39.3 3P%, 79.2
    FT%

    Anthony scores a few more points than Kirilenko, but is outclassed in every
    other statistical category from rebounding to assists to shooting to being in a
    completely different league in terms of defensive prowess.

    Don't get me wrong. Anthony is having a great season. The simple fact that the
    Nuggets are 29-21 should make him the Rookie of the Year at this point ahead of
    James. But there isn't a coach in the league who would take a 41 percent shooter
    scoring 19 a game over what Kirilenko is doing night in and night out for the
    Jazz.

    To argue otherwise would be to include Shawn Marion, Rashard Lewis, Larry Hughes
    and Michael Finley in this argument of snubs. How about Corey Maggette,
    averaging 19.9 a game on 46 percent shooting?

    There are 27 players in the NBA averaging 18 or more points a game.
    Try to find another player who has 124 blocks at this point to go along with 42
    3-pointers while ranking third in his team in assists and fifth in the entire
    league in steals for a team with a winning record whose second-leading scorer on
    the court this month is Carlos Arroyo.

    Sure, James and Anthony sell more jerseys, sneakers and seats in the stadiums.
    And there is an argument to be made of this as columnist Bernie Lincicome writes
    in the Rocky Mountain News :

    "Either Anthony and James are what they are or they are not. They are the lead
    item on the nightly basketball news, whenever Kobe Bryant is not in Eagle
    County. They are forgiven flaws that veterans must apologize for.

    "If James and Anthony are all of this, then they should be authenticated as
    such, and Anthony certainly was, finishing in fan voting just behind Kevin
    Garnett and Tim Duncan and ahead of even perennial Karl Malone, not to mention
    Nowitzki and Peja Stojakovic.

    "We, the public, have been assured that, in Anthony and James, we are seeing the
    future and should be making notes for later.

    "What the coaches are saying is that the future is fine, but it is just not Feb.
    15 at the Staples Center in Los Angeles."

    But the fact is, to add Anthony or James means that you've to subtract one of
    these other players or simply base the game on Jersey sales and make room for
    Memphis point guard Jason Williams on the roster.

    And perhaps the biggest indictment comes from the two, themselves. After saying
    the right things and doing the right things under such extreme media scrutiny
    all year, they wait for this moment to put their foots in their mouths.

    "I wasn't part of their team they picked first," James said after being asked if
    he would be an injury replacement on the All-Star team. "I wouldn't like to be
    part of the team . . I'm an only child. I never want to be picked second. I
    don't come second. Don't even put me on that. That's how I feel."

    Ditto for his partner.

    "I'm not going to play if somebody gets hurt," Anthony said. "I don't want to be
    picked if somebody gets hurt."

    Which only proves, more than anything, that perhaps they are a bit too young,
    still, to be on the All-Star team in the first place.

    [hr]

    Spurs, Pistons give more bang for the buck
    By Chad Ford
    NBA Insider
    Send an Email to Chad Ford Tuesday, February 3
    Updated: February 3
    11:42 AM ET

    The fans have spoken. Quality players who are good citizens in the community
    mean more than stars with fat contracts and even fatter rap sheets. Value for
    the buck means more than deep pockets. An organization's ability to relate to
    the fans and the city means more, according to you, than winning championships.
    How is it possible, in an age of star over inflation, lavish spending and luxury
    taxes, that a team with one of the most conservative payrolls in the NBA, the
    San Antonio Spurs, and another team that doesn't have anyone making more than
    $6.5 million a year, the Detroit Pistons, rank in the top four of ESPN the
    Magazine's Fan Satisfaction Rankings while the two teams with the highest
    payrolls in the NBA -- the New York Knicks and Portland Trail Blazers -- rank
    27th and 28th respectively?

    Call it bang for your buck. Fans appreciate a good bargain when they see it, and
    no one does it better than the Spurs and Pistons.

    The Spurs are in a position to win another championship and are doing it with a
    committed payroll of just $46 million. They have just one star, Tim Duncan, but
    somehow ranked No. 1, out of 121 professional sports franchises, when fans were
    asked to rank players' effort on the court and their likability off it.

    The Pistons have the second-best record in the East, yet don't have a player
    making even close to a max contract. The fact that the team is looking at $5
    million in cap room next season without losing any key players is just
    astounding. Even more surprising, the Pistons ranked No. 3 out of 121 teams when
    fans ranked the likability of a team's players on and off the court.

    Bang for your buck isn't all that's important.

    The Mavericks and Kings were the only teams in the league to get high marks
    despite huge payrolls. The Mavs succeeded in the poll because of high ratings
    for owner Mark Cuban and his ability to relate to fans and make the team more
    accessible. They also ranked high on their new arena and general popularity of
    the players to whom the Mavs pay big money.

    The Spurs, Pistons, Kings and Grizzlies also get high marks in the fan relations
    category -- judged by readers to be the most important of the seven categories.
    Speaking from experience working with these teams as a member of the media --
    the fans are right on. All of these teams really know how to sell their product
    and they understand their audience. Not surprisingly the Hawks, Blazers, Knicks,
    Wizards and Bulls all took major hits in this department. Again, speaking from
    experience here, it's tough to argue with the fans. These teams have done a
    terrible job, in the past, of selling their product or making the team relevant
    to their fans.

    Championships and perceived closeness to championships matter. The Spurs rank
    No. 2 among all teams and No. 1 among NBA teams. The Lakers ranked 10th. In the
    weirdest stat of the entire poll, the Chicago Bulls ranked 20th overall and
    third in the NBA in this category. Please tell me that the poll was taken before
    the team self destructed at the start of the season. The Pistons, Rockets and
    Mavericks also get high marks in the category.

    Not surprisingly, the Blazers ranked dead last, out of 121 teams, when fans
    ranked the players' reputations on the court and in the community. What can
    Blazers GM John Nash learn from perusing the rankings? Fans care as much about a
    team's image and its ability to connect with fans as they do about consecutive
    playoff appearances.

    More surprisingly, the no-name Utah Jazz ranked 10th on player likability
    despite the fact that most fans outside of Utah would be hard pressed to name
    one player wearing a Jazz uniform this season. The Kings, Hornets, 76ers and
    Grizzlies also ranked in the Top 25. As far as bad rosters go, the Bulls, Magic,
    Hawks and Knicks all joined the Blazers at the bottom of the barrel.

    Speaking of the Jazz, long-time coach Jerry Sloan ranked No. 3 out of 121
    coaches -- tops among the NBA. Only the Cowboys' Bill Parcells and the Chiefs'
    Dick Vermeil ranked ahead of him. The next closest competition was the Lakers'
    Phil Jackson, who ranked No. 10. Second-year head coach Eric Musselman was, by
    far, the youngest coach to get his props. He ranked 27th ahead of such veterans
    as Jeff Van Gundy, Jim O'Brien, Paul Silas, Flip Saunders and Rick Adelman.

    Former Knicks Coach Don Chaney sits at the bottom.

    Why are the New Jersey Nets so intent on moving to Brooklyn? Their stadium came
    in dead last among NBA teams when fans ranked the friendliness of the
    environment in which their team plays. The Magic and Sonics also got
    surprisingly low ratings in this category.

    The survey ranked owners based on their honestly and loyalty to their home city.
    Surprisingly, the Maloof Brothers, who were the most popular NBA owners last
    season, have fallen from third to 10th despite the Kings strong surge this
    season. This year Spurs owner Peter Holt took the top spot, ranking No. 2 among
    all owners in the NBA, NFL, MLB and NHL. Cuban ranked fifth. The Pacers, Kings,
    Lakers, Pistons, Jazz and 76ers all ranked in the top 25. Despite finally
    opening his wallet last summer, Clips owner Donald Sterling, for the second
    straight year, sits at the bottom of the barrel.

    Discount the Knicks' rankings a bit. Only one team, the Hawks, ranked worse
    overall, but the survey was taken before Isiah Thomas took over and Stephon
    Marbury came to town. Our guess is that the Knicks would take a pretty big up
    tick in the rankings.

    Finally on to the movers and shakers. The Pistons rose from 13th to fourth in
    this year's rankings. Jerry West must be doing something right in Memphis as the
    Grizzlies went from 73rd to 38th in this year's poll. LeBron James had a more
    modest effect in Cleveland than one would think. Last year they ranked 106th.
    This year they're up to 83. Not sure that's worth the $100 million Nike is
    throwing his way.

    [hr]
    ESPN.com - Dallas' 'Big 3' has companyESPN.com: NBA

    Tuesday, February 3, 2004
    Dallas' 'Big 3' has company
    By Greg Anthony
    ESPN Insider

    Last year the Mavericks got everyone talking about their "Big 3" of Michael
    Finley, Dirk Nowitzki, and Steve Nash after their amazing start and amazing play
    offensively. They were as good as it gets (to borrow a term from a great movie).
    So in the offseason other teams went about improving their talent bases, either
    through experience and maturity or via trade and free agency. Let's look at some
    of the other "big threes" in the league, and you decide who is the best.

    First is the original trio in Dallas. They made a lot of changes in the
    offseason, bringing in Antawn Jamison and Antoine Walker as two other marquee
    players, and that has had an impact on the trio's individual numbers. In the
    long run, though, the Mavericks have improved in other areas, rebounding in
    particular.

    But it is still the same theme, with those three counted on heavily to score,
    score, score, with their opponents doing the same. Teams average -- get this --
    100 points per game against Dallas. While their play is improved of late, and
    the chemistry is getting better (I think this is a better team than last year's
    group), they still have the same issues as a year ago -- to defend or not to
    defend? I think you know which one they choose.

    Next up the Nets, with Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson and Jason Kidd. They
    don't shoot it as well as the Dallas trio, but they are every bit as effective
    at scoring, especially in transition. Plus they compete on the defensive end,
    and K-Mart (who should be an all-star this year) and RJ continue to improve.
    The only thing holding this trio back has been the tension among them since the
    departure of Byron Scott (that's another story for another time) and the
    questionable roster moves that have not bolstered the supporting cast.

    But for basketball skill and entertainment value, they are surely a must-see
    act. Nobody runs the break like Jason Kidd, and who better on the other end of
    that break than the high-flying act of Martin and Jefferson? (Kidd, Martin, and
    Jefferson sounds like a law firm -- you think they really had anything with the
    dismissal of Byron Scott?)

    When you think Sacramento and talk big three, how impressive must that team be
    to do so without putting C-Webb in their triangle? Chris Webber has yet to play
    a game, but the Kings have not skipped a beat with Mike Bibby, Brad Miller, and
    Peja Stojakovic. These guys have been simply amazing, scoring at will while also
    showing a deft passing touch.

    Brad Miller came over from the Pacers and has been just what the doctor ordered,
    providing scoring, rebounding and a bit of toughness on that front line. Bibby
    has bounced back from an injury-riddled season last year that saw him struggle
    in the playoffs.

    And what can you say about Peja that hasn't been said already? He continues to
    improve each and every game and has become Sacramento's go-to guy and an MVP
    candidate. His jumper is automatic, and what is even more impressive is his
    ability to move without the basketball. He is arguably the best shooter in the
    game, but you can't argue that no one moves better without the ball. And on the
    best passing team in basketball, that is a lethal combination.

    The Lakers version is the injured three, but it can be every bit as lethal
    offensively. Since The Mailman is still injured and expected to be out the
    longest, we'll go with GP, Shaq, and Kobe for the sake of this comparison. When
    healthy, they are as good as, if not better than, any trio, because they are
    equally as good on the defensive end.

    What Payton lacks in having lost a step, he more than makes up for in smarts on
    the defensive end, and both Shaq and Kobe can change a game defensively, as
    well. Their trio is the perfect scenario -- they can all shoot it (though I
    wouldn't want Shaq shooting jump shots), post it, defend it and pass it; all are
    used to taking a game over; and all three are winners (only Payton doesn't have
    that ring). And come playoff time, all have the ability to take their games up
    another level.

    Last is the trio that right now truly is the big three. I'm talking about the
    MVP of the first half in KG; the best point guard in the West over the first
    half in my homey from Baltimore, Sam Cassell; and arguably the best third option
    (with a first-option mentality) in Latrell Sprewell.

    This group has been special, and each has something to prove. Remember, this is
    a team that has been kicked out of the first round in each of the last seven
    years. But you wouldn't know it by their play, which has been inspiring for all
    those T-wolves fans out there. They continue to put up amazing numbers and win
    games.

    What's been most impressive is Minnesota's league-leading record on the road. To
    win away from home, you have to be able to defend it, and the T-Wolves have done
    a good job of that so far. Also, with the offensive impact Sam and Latrell have
    had, what really stands out for me is that KG's numbers across the board are all
    up. That's why, hands down, this guy is the MVP of the first half.

    But it's only the first half, and things should get a little warmer in the
    coming months. Every team will be jockeying for playoff seeding out West, where
    all but the Suns are still legit in terms of playoff aspirations.

    Greg Anthony, a veteran of 11 NBA seasons, is a regular contributor to ESPN
    Insider. Click here to send him an e-mail.
    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
    And life itself, rushing over me
    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

Working...
X