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

Insider 2.5.04

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

  • Insider 2.5.04

    10 teams on the hunt for the missing piece

    By Chad Ford
    NBA Insider
    Send an Email to Chad Ford Thursday, February 5
    Updated: February 5
    10:38 AM ET

    Chat with NBA Insider Chad Ford at 1 p.m. EDT today!

    On Tuesday, Insider broke down five teams contemplating a fire sale as the Feb. 19 trade deadline approaches.

    Who will be the buyers? It depends on the objective.

    Several teams feel they may be just a piece or two away from making a serious run in the playoffs. With so much parity and so many teams stumbling through the first half of the season, several GMs recognize a perfect opportunity to make a run while they have the chance.

    Another group of teams isn't looking for a playoff boost. Instead, they're hoping to clear some extra cap space to make a run at a top free agent like Kobe Bryant this summer. Or, they're trying to get below the luxury-tax threshold that owners hate to pay.

    Who are they? We thought you'd never ask ...

    Hunting for the last piece of the puzzle

    # New York Knicks: Isiah Thomas not only wants to make the playoffs this year, he wants to win ... now. An extended playoff run is the perfect tonic for what ails the long suffering fans at MSG, and Thomas knows it. He's been as active as any GM in the league ... though his task is getting pretty tough. Keith Van Horn, Shandon Anderson and now Frank Williams have been the trade bait. Williams will be easy to move, but Van Horn and Anderson are both major challenges.

    Isiah would love to add another young, athletic frontcourt player who can run the floor and score in the post. That sure sounds a lot like Rasheed Wallace, Shareef Abdur-Rahim or Antawn Jamison. Do the Knicks have the pieces to get anything like that done? It doesn't look like it at the moment. Kurt Thomas is the Knicks' last valuable trade chip, but Isiah wants to keep him.

    # Dallas Mavericks: Every year about this time, Mark Cuban and Don Nelson begin preaching the virtues of sticking with the roster they have. And just about every year around this time, the Mavericks end up making a huge trade.


    Mark Cuban would like to add a big man before the trade deadline.
    The Mavericks need a tough big man, and everyone knows it. They tried to land Rasheed Wallace last month, but talks went nowhere. Attempts to land Zydrunas Ilgauskas also have fallen short. What they'd really love to have is the package Golden State is offering right now -- Nick Van Exel and Erick Dampier. Problem is, the Mavericks don't have any expiring contracts to give up unless ... Antoine Walker decides to opt out if traded to the Warriors.

    Another trade that could make some sense for Dallas? Sending Walker to the Sonics for Brent Barry, Jerome James and Calvin Booth. Barry could give the Mavericks the backcourt depth they've been seeking, and James and Booth are both big bodies who could do really well in Dallas. Booth had the best year of his career playing in Dallas for half a season, and James has the strength and athleticism the Mavs are looking for.

    Would a change of scenery change his attitude? In Seattle, Walker would be a perfect fit in the Sonics' offense and give them some much-needed help at the four. He's also low risk. Even if he doesn't opt out of his contract this summer, he only has one more year left on his deal. The long-term savings the Sonics could receive, if Walker didn't pan out, could be substantial.

    # Toronto Raptors: The early December trade of Antonio Davis and Jerome Williams for Jalen Rose and Donyell Marshall gave the team a huge spark. But it also shipped away the one and only center in Toronto. Chris Bosh has done an admirable job in the middle, but various injuries and the inevitable rookie wall are starting to slow him down.

    If the Raptors want to make a deep playoff run, they need a veteran patrolling the middle. They've pursued Dale Davis in Portland, Theo Ratliff in Atlanta, Zeljko Rebraca in Detroit and Michael Doleac in New York, but so far they've yet to strike gold. The Raptors do have enough assets with expiring contracts (Michael Curry, Michael Bradley, and Morris Peterson) to get something done ... so why haven't they?

    If none of those players is available, what about Elden Campbell in Detroit, Jahidi White in Phoenix, Derrick Coleman in Philly or Jerome James in Seattle? All four players can be had for the right price ... which just so happens to be an expiring contract or two. Another deal worth considering? Peterson, Curry and Bradley for Brendan Haywood and Christian Laettner. If the Raptors can swallow one more year of Laettner's deal, Haywood is a pretty decent prize.

    # Memphis Grizzlies: Jerry West has done an amazing job of turning the Grizzlies from the laughingstock of the league into a serious contender for the playoffs in just a season and a half as team president. With Hubie Brown considering retirement at the end of the season, West wants to give his players a positive playoff experience under Brown before it's too late.

    The Grizzlies' biggest weakness is in the middle -- a problem West has been trying to solve since July 1. He's probably wishing he had Wesley Person and Brevin Knight back right about now. A combination of those two expiring contracts along with Stromile Swift's expiring deal could have landed him Dampier and Van Exel.

    The guy they have their eye on now is Eddy Curry. Would a combo of Swift and Shane Battier get it done if the Grizzlies took back one of the Bulls' bad contracts (Eddie Robinson) in return? There's also some mild interest in Jerome James, but the Grizzlies won't swap Swift for James straight up.

    # Boston Celtics: Now that the Celtics are in official rebuilding mode, Danny Ainge might as well wipe out the last remnants of the Rick Pitino-Chris Wallace era while everyone is already hurting. If you're going to rip the band-aid off -- do it quickly.

    Ainge has one last bullet in his gun. Chris Mills' $6.6 million deal comes off the books this summer and insurance is picking up 80 percent of his salary this season. Pair him with Chris Mihm (who won't be eligible to be traded until Feb. 15) and Walter McCarty, and the Celtics could get back something nice in return. Word is they've already pursued Brent Barry. A player like Juwan Howard also could make some sense.

    Cutting the cap

    # Detroit Pistons: Joe Dumars knows he has to get more than $6 million under the cap if he's going to have any chance to re-sign Mehmet Okur. Corliss Williamson and Chucky Atkins are the trade bait. Both players are talented with slightly bloated contracts. Neither, however, is untradeable. Dumars needs an expiring contract back in return and will be working the phones right up until the deadline in an attempt to get $8-10 million under the cap for this summer.

    # Phoenix Suns: They cleared a ton of cap space when they shipped Stephon Marbury and Penny Hardaway to New York. But if they're going to be a big-time player in free agency, they need to get one more contract off the books. Their efforts have centered on moving Jahidi White who, ironically, they swapped Brevin Knight and his expiring contract for earlier this year when they still believed they'd be a playoff contender. With teams like the Raptors desperate for a big man, can Bryan Colangelo get something done? If he does, the Suns could be looking at $12-14 million in cap room this summer. Otherwise, $6.5 million is a more accurate assessment.

    # Los Angeles Clippers: The Clips already are looking at roughly $12 million in cap space this summer. If they choose to not pick up Marko Jaric's option, that number goes to $14 million. However, that still may not be enough to get Kobe Bryant. That's why there's so much talk about them trading away Melvin Ely. He doesn't get playing time right now anyway, and getting that $1.75 million off the books for next season could make all the difference in the world.

    # Washington Wizards: If Ernie Grunfeld can find a way to get Christian Laettner (one year, $6.6 million left) off the books, the Wizards could also be big players in this summer's free-agent market. With Laettner gone, they'd be looking at around $8 million in cap space. Even better, if they can package him with Larry Hughes (who becomes expendable with Jerry Stackhouse back) the savings could increase to $13 million.

    # Milwaukee Bucks: Larry Harris has done an unbelievable job of cutting payroll while still putting a very competitive team on the floor. If he could find someone willing to take the last two years of Tim Thomas' contract off his hands, the Bucks could be $10 million under the cap next year as well.

    Around the League

    # Sonics, Bulls should make a deal: Not on the list above, but just as popular, are the Sonics, a team that still doesn't know exactly where it stands. The team has been a solid success story this season and, with Ray Allen now in all-star form, the playoffs certainly don't seem out of the question. In the last few month the team has discovered one young potential star, Ronald Murray, and found out that Antonio Daniels, with his tough defense and top assist-to-turnover ratio, can make Nate McMillan a very happy man.


    Brent Barry
    Guard
    Seattle SuperSonics
    Profile


    2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
    GM PPG RPG APG FG% FT%
    40 10.6 3.5 5.5 .497 .838

    So what now? GM Rick Sund has been preaching patience since last summer. He knows that the Sonics are in the throes of rebuilding and doesn't want to act too rashly or give up on any young player too quickly. With that said, teams are knocking down his door right now trying to get at three or four players who everyone believes should be available -- Brent Barry, Vladimir Radmanovic, Jerome James and, to a lesser extent, Murray. With the Sonics clearly in need of a low-post scorer and rebounder, is it time to pull the trigger and make a deal?

    Everyone from the Celtics, Bulls and Pacers have been after Barry -- even though he's out the next four weeks with a broken finger on his shooting hand. Several teams, in desperate need of a center for a playoff run, think they can rehabilitate James. Radmanovic and Murray are seen as talented prospects who just don't fit what Seattle is doing right now.

    Still, Sund has been reluctant to pull the trigger on a trade. Can someone make the Sonics an offer they can't refuse? If the Bulls offered Jamal Crawford, Eddy Curry and, say, Jerome Williams for Barry, Radmanovic, James and Murray -- wouldn't the Sonics have to consider? Curry, despite his struggles in Chicago, is still one of the most promising centers in the league. He just needs a change of scenery. Crawford, a home town guy, would love to play in Seattle and would be great in the backcourt with Ray Allen. Williams is the type of high energy, rebounding force that McMillian would love to have -- at least until Nick Collison is ready to contribute.

    The Bulls would be set in the backcourt with Barry, Murray and Kirk Hinrich. Radmanovic gives them the perimeter shooting and versatility they crave and James, for what's it's worth, is a big body with only one year left on his contract. The fact that all players come off the books soon, and that they can move Williams' long-term deal, has to be a big plus to the Bulls. Bulls fans won't like this trade, but this is what it's coming to in Chicago.

    # Blazers pushing Stoudamire? Talks of Nick Van Exel and Erick Dampier to Portland for Rasheed Wallace is on the back burner at the moment. It's the best deal the Blazers have been offered, but no one is sure whether it's good enough. The Warriors are desperately trying to move Van Exel and it's pretty hard to see how they'll find any other team willing to take his contract and be willing to give up an expiring contract in return.


    Damon Stoudamire
    Point Guard
    Portland Trail Blazers
    Profile


    2003-2004 SEASON STATISTICS
    GM PPG RPG APG FG% FT%
    47 12.5 3.4 6.1 .407 .900

    That's spawned speculation that the Blazers also want the Warriors to take on the last year of Damon Stoudamire's contract to make the deal more palatable for Portland. That's much more problematic for the Warriors. The Warriors are interested in moving Van Exel and Erick Dampier to get under the cap for this summer. Taking on Stoudamire would make that much tougher.

    The Blazers are said to want the expiring contracts of Avery Johnson and Adonal Foyle as part of the deal. That just doesn't work for Golden State. To stay far enough under the cap for the deal to make sense, the Blazers would have to be willing to take back Cliff Robinson, Evan Eschmeyer and Popeye Jones to make Stoudamire part of the trade. If the Blazers agreed to that, the Warriors would still be $17 million under the cap this summer. They could easily afford to work out a buyout with Stoudamire for his last season. Would the Blazers be willing to swallow one more year of Robinson's contract and three more years of Eschmeyer's to dump Sheed and Damon? That seems like a dream deal for the Blazers -- especially if they can also get Dale Davis out of town.

    # NBA age limit dealt a death blow? Ohio State running back Maurice Clarett was ruled eligible for the NFL draft today by a federal judge who concluded that the league's rule violates antitrust laws. The judge ordered the NFL to let Clarett enter April's draft. If the ruling holds up on appeal, it could be a death blow to the NBA, which is trying to establish a minimum age to enter the league. League lawyers and the Players Association have long worried that any age limit, even if collectively bargained, could lose a legal challenge. This ruling seems to confirm their worst fears.

    Peep Show

    By Chad Ford
    NBA Insider
    Send an Email to Chad Ford Thursday, February 5
    Updated: February 5
    10:14 AM ET

    New York Knicks: Jermaine O'Neal didn't appreciate the Knicks' response after their latest victory against his Pacers. "We just have to have a long memory," O'Neal said in the N.Y. Times. "They played very well. They celebrated like they won a championship, though. We'll remember that." But the Knicks didn't very well like that response either. "Jermaine O'Neal hasn't won any championships," Stephon Marbury said. "If that was Shaquille O'Neal saying that, it's one thing. But he hasn't won one championship. He hasn't won one playoff series playing in Indiana yet, so for us, we felt like we were making strides. I would rather us feel like how we felt last night than to act like we didn't do something. They're a really good team, and beating a really good team and going where we came from, you know, we're making really big steps."


    Francis
    Houston Rockets: Steve Francis will say that he's not feuding with head coach Jeff Van Gundy, but it sure does sound like it when he opens his mouth. "I don't feel like I let (the team) down," Francis said in the Houston Chronicle after being suspended for a game. "I missed the plane. That's it. That's what I was fined for. That's what I was suspended for. The plane left at 2 (p.m.), and I came at 2:15. So I was late, of course. I have my own (deal with a) charter service, and I was going to charter, and he told me, 'Don't come.' I could have been there way before everybody went to bed that night. So if he wanted to suspend me because that's what he felt, then hey, so be it." And Van Gundy wasn't about to back down, either. "I don't think you ever (just move on)," Van Gundy said. "Look, we totally disagree. I don't think there is any doubt about that. He's not backing down on what he thinks, and I'm not backing down on what I think. I'm not trying to minimize what Steve and I went through. The critical thing is ... what he told me on the phone, he has said that was not correct. He was trying to not let on about the personal problems. We both acknowledge that what he told me is what he told me, but now he's saying it was something else. The story changed a bit. Truly, I only know what he told me, and only he knows the truth."

    Boston Celtics: Vin Baker has been falling back on bad habits and now he's back with his old agent trying to salvage his career. "Yes, I've been working with him for about a month now," said agent Aaron Goodwin in the Boston Globe. "Vin is real close. Physically, he's ready. We're hopeful to get him back as soon as possible. That is what we would like, if possible. Vin is doing everything to stay in compliance. He's doing everything to make it back on the court. He's a great kid. He's working hard to beat his addiction. But he needs support from all parties."

    Philadelphia 76ers: You, I and the Detroit Pistons might be surprised that Larry Brown is hanging around the Sixers practice facility, but not the Sixers. "Not for us," said head coach Randy Ayers. "I knew he was coming in. Last week, he told me he may stop by. I've seen him a number of times in Philadelphia when he's been back in town . . . A lot of times we just talk strategy and personnel. The same old things we've talked with Coach about for six years, we talked about today. Coach has been a good friend, a mentor. Today was no different. It's not surprising to me. It's nothing out of the ordinary to be around Coach during the season."

    Los Angeles Lakers: You can fine Shaquille O'Neal. You can suspend Shaquille O'Neal. But you can't keep Shaquille O'Neal from being Shaquille O'Neal. "I said what I felt, and people try to control people," he said in the Los Angeles Times. "But you can never control me. I'm a 31-year-old juvenile delinquent. Nobody can control me. I regret not being there for the team, but it wasn't my decision. Things you can't control, you should never worry about." He also re-iterated that he wants his teammates to keep passing him the ball. "Guys are coming to me every time down, which means they want me to do something with it," he said. "It's good. I finally feel like the old Shaq."

    * O'Neal's Parting Shot Fails to Ruffle Knicks
    Steve Popper / New York Times
    * Francis, coach say relationship fine as differing accounts linge
    Jonathan Feigen / Houston Chronicle
    * Baker's agent hopeful
    Shira Springer / Boston Globe
    * Ayers: Brown's visiting Sixers is no big deal
    Joe Juliano / Philadelphia Inquirer
    * O'Neal Leaves a Post-Up Note
    Tim Brown / Los Angeles Times
Working...
X