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: Can someone post this Insider article?
I'll go get it.
[hr]
ESPN.com - NBA - Ford: Eastern Conference preseason preview
By Chad Ford
NBA Insider
Stop calling the Eastern Conference the Leastern. The Pistons are the reigning
NBA champions, and this year, the Eastern Conference's top two teams – Detroit
and Indiana – may be the best two teams in the NBA, period.
Remember when we used to claim that the Western Conference Finals was the real
NBA Finals? This season, the Eastern Conference Finals will be the series to
watch. The West has gotten weaker, while the Pistons (the champs) and Pacers
(the league leaders in wins last year) both got better. Add Shaquille O'Neal to
the mix in Miami, and the East is as buff as it's been this century.
Let's not get carried away either. After the Pistons, Pacers and Heat, pick any
team in the East that could qualify for the playoffs in the West. The Knicks?
Celtics? 76ers? Nets? Please.
This year in the East, there's the very good, the so-so and the ugly. The gap
between the second-best team and the fifth-best team is stunning. Short of the
Pistons, Pacers and Heat, it's a stretch to guarantee any other team will make
the playoffs.
It's pretty safe to predict who will be the worst team in the league, however.
The Charlotte Bobcats' likely starting five has a combined 23 starts in their
NBA career. If they don't challenge the 76ers' record 73 losses … no one will.
NBA training camps start today. Over the course of the next few weeks, some of
our assumptions here will have to be changed, but if you want a sneak peak into
who looks good and who doesn't going into camp -- on paper at least -- Insider
provides a primer.
THE CONTENDERS
istons:
Key Additions: Antonio McDyess, Carlos Delfino, Derrick Coleman
Key Subtractions: Mehmet Okur, Corliss Williamson, Mike James
Skinny: The defending champs are bringing back virtually the entire team intact
– with one important addition. Pistons president Joe Dumars thinks that teams
may have slept a little on McDyess. His knee is reportedly 100 percent healthy,
and sources claim he's looked great in offseason workouts. If he can stay
healthy, McDyess gives the Pistons a proven low-post scorer, something they
really lacked last season. And don't forget about the team's two first-round
picks in 2003: Darko Milicic and Delfino. Word is that coach Larry Brown wants
to steepen Darko's learning curve, giving him 10-15 minutes a night this season.
Delfino, who played in the Euroleague Final Four last year and on the Olympic
gold-medal team, is experienced enough to step right in as Richard Hamilton's
replacement off the bench – another option the team sorely lacked this year. The
only question for the Pistons? With Brown coming off an emotional spring and a
brutal summer, will he stick around if the team gets off to a rocky start?
acers:
Key Additions: Stephen Jackson, David Harrison
Key Subtractions: Al Harrington
Skinny: The Pacers took a calculated risk this summer by swapping Harrington for
Jackson. Larry Bird realizes Reggie Miller is on the downside of his career and
wanted a big, athletic two guard whom Rick Carlisle could groom into the role.
Bird also believes that Jonathan Bender is ready to take over Harrington's sixth
man duties. Bender has more size, talent and versatility – but can he stay
healthy for 82 games? If Bender delivers, the Pacers will be tougher than they
were last year. And don't overlook the rookie Harrison, like 28 other NBA teams
did. The Pacers were so impressed with Harrison's play this summer that they
believe he'll see real minutes backing up Jeff Foster and Scot Pollard at center
this year.
Key Additions: Shaquille O'Neal, Christian Laettner
Key Subtractions: Lamar Odom, Brian Grant, Caron Butler, Rafer Alston
Skinny: Shaq changes everything. He's the most dominant big man in the East by a
mile. Dwyane Wade is coming off a heroic rookie playoff performance, and rookie
high-school phenom Dorell Wright turned heads in the summer. But realistically?
If Shaq and Kobe couldn't get it done with Karl Malone and Gary Payton, how are
Shaq and Wade supposed to run the gamut with their supporting cast? It looks
like a lot of '90s stars have decided to retire in Florida; Laettner, Eddie
Jones and Wesley Person will try their best just to stay in front of somebody.
But the truth is that the Heat are so thin they're one Shaq or Wade serious
injury away from the lottery.
Key Additions: Jamal Crawford, Jerome Williams
Key Subtractions: Dikembe Mutombo, Othella Harrington, Frank Williams
Skinny: The Knicks paid good money to get this high up in the rankings. For
$100-plus million, you better be able to win some games in the East. Had they
landed Erick Dampier, they would've been a force. Without him, they're all
perimeter with a super-soft core. To top things off, there are some in New York
that suggest Allan Houston's days as a superstar are over after last year's
serious injury. Still, a starting five of Stephon Marbury, Crawford, Tim Thomas,
Kurt Thomas and Nazr Mohammed – along with Penny Hardaway, Vin Baker and Jerome
Williams – should have enough cash to bribe somebody into laying down for them.
ON THE RISE
Key Additions: Steve Francis, Cuttino Mobley, Dwight Howard, Jameer Nelson,
Kelvin Cato, Tony Battie, Hedo Turkoglu
Key Subtractions: Tracy McGrady, Juwan Howard, Tyronn Lue, Drew Gooden
Skinny: No team has changed their roster or image more in the course of a
summer. Last year, the Magic had the league's worst record despite being the
home of one of the league's top-five stars. With T-Mac out and the Franchise in,
GM John Weisbrod is trying desperately to change the way the Magic play
basketball. Weisbrod has jettisoned off the softies and brought in players he
believes will play the right way. We'll see if it works. Francis, Cato,
Turkoglu, Battie and even rookie Dwight Howard have a history of underperforming
when the going gets tough. The Magic hope that a new team, different philosophy
and hungry head coach will get the team going in the right direction. But if
things start off rocky, watch out. Stevie can pout with the best of them. The
X-factor this year, like every year this decade, is Grant Hill. He's reportedly
healthy and playing his best basketball since he hurt his ankle. If it's true,
and he stays that way, the Magic have a great shot of making the playoffs. If
Hill is on crutches by November, it could be another long year in Orlando.
Key Additions: Eric Snow, Drew Gooden, Luke Jackson, Aleksandar Pavlovic
Key Subtractions: Carlos Boozer, Tony Battie, Eric Williams
Skinny: GM Jim Paxson made the dumbest move of the summer when he let Carlos
Boozer out of the last year of his deal with a wink-wink, below market value
contract extension promise that he knew he couldn't enforce. When Boozer bolted
for Utah, the sky looked like it was falling in Cleveland. But Paxson has
rebounded nicely. The team played much better when they traded for a real point
guard, Jeff McInnis, before the trade deadline. Snow's an upgrade from there and
a perfect mentor for LeBron James. Gooden is an adequate replacement for Boozer
if he can keep his head in the game. Both Jackson and Pavlovic have a shot at
being nice wing men for LeBron. But let's not kid ourselves. The Cavs' season
hinges on one guy. If LeBron continues to improve, he's going to carry the Cavs
to the playoffs on his back. He looked like the best player in the world when he
was on the floor for Team USA this summer. Paul Silas won't make the same
mistake Larry Brown did and leave LeBron on the bench waving towels.
Key Additions: Antawn Jamison
Key Subtractions: Jerry Stackhouse, Christian Laettner
Skinny: Injuries and new offense were too much for the Wizards to overcome last
season. But there's hope that former Nets offensive guru Eddie Jordan has the
tools he now needs to make the Wizards one of the hottest offenses in the league
this year. Jamison is a scoring machine who can play both inside and out. The
Wizards have longed for a guy who can score in the paint. Put him on the floor
with a healthy Gilbert Arenas, Larry Hughes in a contract year, and a reportedly
buffed-up Kwame Brown, and the Wizards may have just enough juice to get out and
run this year. There aren't many guarantees in the East this year, but with two
of the worst teams in the league in the Southeast Division with them, they
should be able to run up enough wins to have a good shot at a playoff seed.
Key Additions: Ben Gordon, Luol Deng, Andres Nocioni, Frank Williams, Eric
Piatkowski
Key Subtractions: Jamal Crawford, Jerome Willams, Scottie Pippen (retirement)
Skinny: Why is GM John Paxson smiling after a disastrous rookie season heading
the Chicago Terri-bulls? One, Eddy Curry is off his Big Mac and Kool-Aid diet
and reported to camp in shape for the first time in his career. Two, both Curry
and Tyson Chandler – who were drafted straight out of high school together in
2001 – are in contract years, meaning that for the first time in four seasons,
their future isn't guaranteed in the millions. Third, he dumped several
perceived problems this summer and swapped them for two rookies, Ben Gordon and
Luol Deng, who have the requisite toughness and winning pedigree he's been
looking for on his team. Finally, he made himself a nice free-agent coup,
getting the best and toughest international player not in the NBA, Nocioni, to
agree to leave the Euroleague for the Bulls. What he has now is perhaps the most
talented, albeit youngest, squad the Bulls have had since MJ hung up his
sneakers. Of course, we've said that before with little to no results (we picked
the Bulls to finish sixth in the East last year). Why will this year be
different? A tougher coach, fewer egos, more winners and plenty of incentive to
play the right way. Forty wins this year and Paxson can finally sleep easy
knowing that his team still has plenty of room to grow. Anything less and either
Curry or Chandler will be wearing a new uniform next season – if not sooner.
SLIPPING?
Key Additions: Nenad Krstic, Eric Williams, Ron Mercer, Jacque Vaughn
Key Subtractions: Kenyon Martin, Kerry Kittles, Rodney Rogers
Skinny: Don't blame GM Rod Thorn for the literal dismantling of a team that
played in the Finals two of the past three seasons. New owner Bruce Ratner,
focused only on the bottom line, shipped Martin to Denver when his asking price
became too high and then shipped Kittles to the Clippers to get even further
under the cap. Their replacements, Williams and Mercer, don't really inspire
confidence. Factor in that Jason Kidd will miss training camp and the start of
the regular season rehabbing from offseason knee surgery; Richard Jefferson, the
one guy Ratner was willing to pay, looked awful in the Olympics; and Alonzo
Mourning's comeback has serious questions, and the Nets could be in for one of
the biggest free falls of the season. If Kidd demands a trade (it's probably
only a matter of time) … it will only get uglier. As much as we love Jefferson,
he isn't MJ and can't challenge the NBA to a 1-on-5 contest.
Key Additions: Mike James, Maurice Williams, Zaza Pachulia
Key Subtractions: Brian Skinner, Damon Jones
Skinny: The Bucks were the East's Cinderella team last season, so why are they
stuck all the way down here without any significant changes to their roster? Two
things stand out. One, the future of T.J. Ford is very much in doubt. Ford was
the motor in the Bucks' upbeat offense last season. When he went down with a
serious back injury, the Bucks stumbled. GM Larry Harris's two major free agent
additions, James and Williams, are the best indication yet that the Bucks aren't
confident that Ford will return this season. James and Williams are decent
replacements, but neither player gives the Bucks what Ford did. Second, the
Bucks lost some toughness up front when they let Skinner go. They'll try to
replace that with second-year international big man Pachulia, who showed a lot
of promise this summer but doesn't have the experience or grittiness that
Skinner had. The bottom line is that the Bucks are stuck in the toughest
division, by far, in the East. Detroit and Indiana are elite teams. Cleveland
and Chicago continue to improve. The playoffs are still a good possibility in
Milwaukee, but it's going to be a difficult feat to recreate.
:sixers:
Key Additions: Corliss Williamson, Andre Iguodala, Brian Skinner, Kevin Ollie
Key Subtractions: Eric Snow, Derrick Coleman, Greg Buckner
Skinny: The Sixers have a new head coach, Jim O'Brien, a new offensive and
defensive philosophy and a happy Allen Iverson. So what's wrong? O'Brien is
really going to be relying heavily on four young players to produce this year.
Whenever we hear that, the red flags start popping up. GM Billy King traded away
Snow after O'Brien said he'd prefer to play Iverson at the point and young
players like Willie Green, John Salmons and the rookie Iguodala at the two. All
three are talented, all three have looked good in the summer league, but they're
also very unproven. Snow was the rock that counterbalanced Iverson's huge mood
swings. As much as we like these guys, I'm not sure they're ready for that just
yet. The one young player we do have more confidence in is big man Samuel
Dalembert. Toward the end of last season, he looked like he was ready to turn
himself into a big-time center. If he does, the Sixers front line will be very
strong, especially with the addition of Williamson and Skinner. If he struggles,
as young players sometimes do after coming off breakout years, the Sixers could
be in trouble. The Sixers are the toughest team in the league to get a handle
on. They've got the coaching and the talent to be very good. But there are huge
question marks. And if Iverson's body breaks down after taking a pretty good
pounding in the Olympics (there's a definite trend here pointing in that
direction), things will go downhill very fast.
Key Additions: Gary Payton, Tom Gugliotta, Al Jefferson, Tony Allen, Delonte
West
Key Subtractions: Chucky Atkins, Chris Mihm, Jumaine Jones
Skinny: Danny Ainge has burned Jim O'Brien's Celtics to the ground and within a
span of less than 18 months, turned the Celtics into an unusual mix of veterans
(Paul Pierce, Mark Blount and Payton) combined with a plethora of young players
(Jiri Welsch, Marcus Banks, Kendrick Perkins, Jefferson, Allen and West). How a
team like that will mesh under new head coach Doc Rivers is really anyone's
guess. They probably don't belong in either the "On the Rise" or "Slipping"
category. If we had a "Who Knows", they'd be at the top of the list. The
potential problems seem to outweigh the upside . . this year at least. . . which
is why the Celtics ended up here. Five players on the roster have one or less
years of experience in the league. Two of the big guys they'll rely on (Perkins
and Jefferson) never played a game of college basketball. Pierce, Welsch, Blount
and Raef LaFrentz (if he can ever stay healthy) are all capable of putting
together a nice run. But several of the veterans on the roster, read Payton and
Ricky Davis, have a history of causing problems if things don't go their way.
The Celtics are the wild card in the East. If things come together for Doc, they
could be a surprise contender. If they go poorly, it could get very, very ugly.
LOTTERY BOUND
Key Additions: Rafer Alston, Rafael Araujo, Loren Woods
Key Subtractions: None
Skinny: Want to know why Vince Carter wants out of Toronto and a slew of higher
profile GMs turned down the job in Toronto before ownership finally settled on
Rob Babcock? The Raptors are capped out and have few assets to make the enormous
changes this team really needs to make. Babcock did the best he could this
summer: drafting a center that could step in and play immediately and adding a
point guard coming off a successful playoff run. But everything depends on
Carter. At this point, that's scary. Nowithstanding his history of injuries when
the going gets tough, is his heart really in it this year? (Has it really ever
been?) The future in Toronto is power forward Chris Bosh, who reportedly has
bulked up this summer in an effort to help the Raptors out in the middle. If
everything goes right in Toronto – Carter stays healthy, Bosh can play center,
Alston plays well at the point, Marshall has a repeat of last season – the
Raptors have the talent and depth to be a playoff team. But since when has
everything went right in Toronto?
Key Additions: Antoine Walker, Al Harrington, Josh Childress, Peja Drobnjak
Key Subtractions: Jason Terry, Stephen Jackson, Bob Sura, Alan Henderson
Skinny: The Hawks blew up their roster last February when they traded two
staples, Theo Ratliff and Shareef Abdur-Rahim, for what ended up to be a load of
expiring contracts. They finished the process this summer: swapping Terry for
Walker, who just happens to have an expiring contract of his own, and refusing
to spend their money in free agency. If fiscal responsibility won you basketball
games, the Hawks would be atop the East right now. As it stands, they should be
decent. Walker and Harrington will give them a nice one-two scoring punch on the
front line. Walker is highly motivated. He's coming off the worst season of his
career into a contract year. Harrington is finally getting his first chance to
be a full-time starter and has much to prove. But center and the backcourt are
huge question marks. Tony Delk and Kenny Anderson are manning the point, a
position neither has played well in years. Rookie Josh Childress has a promising
future, but he'll be drinking from a fire hydrant in Year One. Drobnjak was the
starting center for the Clippers last season. We all know how that went. The
Hawks are heading in the right direction, but it's going to be a slow slog.
Key Additions: Emeka Okafor, Melvin Ely, Gerald Wallace, Jason Kapono
Key Subtractions: None
Skinny: GM and head coach Bernie Bickerstaff used to coach the Harlem
Globetrotters. But after seeing the roster he put together for the Bobcats'
inaugural season, you wonder if it wasn't the Washington Generals that he's
trying to invoke. Okafor was a great pickup in the draft – a solid, respectable
big man to build the team around. The expansion draft yielded several young,
promising but highly unproven players, and the trade for Ely will help shore up
the front line. But without a solid starting point guard (Jason Hart and Brevin
Knight will share the responsibility) and only one solid perimeter shooter
(Kapono), where will the points come from? Bickerstaff has put together a young
athletic team that will play hard every night, turn in some highlight reel plays
and be capable of playing sound defense. However, if they win more than 10 games
this season, it will be a miracle.
Chad Ford covers the NBA for ESPN Insider.
[edit=72=1096927481][/edit]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
-
Re: Can someone post this Insider article?
Wow, I actually think this is right on...Here, everyone have a
: on meComment
-
Re: Can someone post this Insider article?
I've been saying this all along.But the truth is that the Heat are so thin they're one Shaq or Wade serious
injury away from the lottery.
That's all it takes...they are certainly taking a risk.Comment
-
Re: Can someone post this Insider article?
......and Indiana can somehow more afford to lose JO?
It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.
Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004Comment
-
Re: Can someone post this Insider article?
In general, no, but compared to Miami losing Shaq? ...Comment
-
Re: Can someone post this Insider article?
Compared to the Heat losing Shaq or Wade? Yup.Originally posted by Kstat......and Indiana can somehow more afford to lose JO?
Be a bit tougher without Harrington but they can spread the floor and slash. Even without JO the Pacers are a 40-45 win team. I wouldn't say that about Miami without Shaq (not so sure about missing Wade).
The poster formerly known as RimfireComment
Tweet
Comment