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

Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

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

  • Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

    It's finally here! The NBA season starts tomorrow, so it's time for the first power rankings of the 2004-05 season! Like always, feel free to post comments or your own power rankings if you wish. I'll update every Monday.

    Let's get it started!

    1) istons: - As the world champions, Detroit gets this spot by default to start the season. Will they be able to repeat with a completely revamped bench?

    2) - The addition of Barry and the dismantling of the Lakers should be enough to push SA back to the NBA Finals. But they'll have to battle their likely WCF opponent first in...

    3) - Minnesota played the Lakers tougher than any other Western Conference team last season, so now they should only have to get past the Spurs to make their first NBA Finals ever. Chemistry could be an issue, though, with Sprewell wanting out and the aging Cassell a concern.

    4) - Shaq is baq in blaq...ahem...excuse me. Anyway, Shaq's move to Miami makes the East's top 3 legitimate title contenders this season. However, Miami will have to shore up some of the holes in their bench and hope for a lack of injuries to overlook their lack of depth. A loss of either Shaq or Wade would be devastating for this team.

    5) acers: - I was poised to rank them #2, but the abundant rush of preseason injuries means Indy will likely take some lumps over the first couple of months, but still be back in plenty of time for the playoffs.

    6) - Phoenix is poised to finally start living up to it's potential. This could be a darkhorse Finals candidate right here.

    7) - Why wouldn't Memphis be any better this year? Everyone important is back, and a couple nice FA pickups should make the Grizz even stronger.

    8) - Like Minnesota, this team's success will depend largely on it's chemistry. Denver will need Carmello to get his head on straight and keep it there if this team is going to make any noise this season.

    9) - What's this? A fourth East team in the top 10? That's right. Despite the loss of Boozer, Cleveland's crew could make a push at both Detroit and Indiana in the Central if they can stay healthy.

    10) - Despite some obvious deficiencies at the C and PG positions, the Kobe-Odom combo should be enough to tally 50 wins for the newly revamped Lakers this year.

    11)
    12)
    13) :sixers:
    14)
    15)
    16)
    17)
    18)
    19) :blazers:
    20)
    21)
    22)
    23)
    24)
    25) :sonics:
    26)
    27)
    28)
    29)
    30)
    [edit=15=1099334078][/edit]

  • #2
    Re: Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

    Uh, you're missing somebody.

    [edit] Looks like .
    ---
    Asked afterward if O'Neal's absence contributed to Charlotte's win, Knight bristled.

    "What about Primoz? They didn't have Shaq, but we didn't have Primoz," he said.


    [edit=67=1099324806][/edit]
    [edit=67=1099325051][/edit]
    Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

      Originally posted by Kegboy
      Uh, you're missing somebody.

      [edit] Looks like .
      ---
      Asked afterward if O'Neal's absence contributed to Charlotte's win, Knight bristled.

      "What about Primoz? They didn't have Shaq, but we didn't have Primoz," he said.



      Maybe he's trying to say something...
      Originally posted by Natston;n3510291
      I want the people to know that they still have 2 out of the 3 T.J.s working for them, and that ain't bad...

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

        The 76ers, Bucks, Blazers, Knicks all infront of the Kings????

        oh my
        AKA Sactolover05

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

          I'd swap Houston and Phoenix, if it were me...

          Otherwise, looks okay.

          It will be interesting to see what the so-called national experts do with the Pacers if our B-team starts off slow. We really shouldn't fall out of the top-six, even if our B-team starts 5-9, unless one of those injures takes longer to heal.
          [edit=72=1099333887][/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

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

            Originally posted by Kegboy
            Uh, you're missing somebody.

            [edit] Looks like .
            ---
            Asked afterward if O'Neal's absence contributed to Charlotte's win, Knight bristled.

            "What about Primoz? They didn't have Shaq, but we didn't have Primoz," he said.


            Yeah, tell me I'm the first person to make THAT mistake.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

              Originally posted by Sactolover05
              The 76ers, Bucks, Blazers, Knicks all infront of the Kings????

              oh my
              I kind of expect the to implode this year. Chemistry problems and the loss of Divac spell big trouble to me. We'll see.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

                wow, i don't know about the King's placement... other than that I think I can get behind most of your bold placements.
                Here, everyone have a : on me

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

                  My prediction:

                  , , and will all win division titles this year.

                  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, 2004

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

                    Wow I was almost scared to look at this thread , I would say you did a good job Shade , I know how you like to panic sometimes
                    Broadcasting Classic Rock Hits 24/7 SauceMaster Radio!!!!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

                      1- istons: improved bench, more cohesive starting 5, and oh yeah, they're the defending champs.

                      2- Speaking of improved, good luck doubling Duncan now, with Brent Barry out on the perimeter. If the Pistons don't win it all, I think the Spurs will.

                      3- acers: When healthy, this is probably the best offensive team in the East, after Milwaukee. However, I wonder how they'll compete up front, with only one legit NBA big man.

                      4- Surprised? You shouldn't be. This team has the defense to stop people, and all the offense you could want. Easily the most balanced team in the west.

                      5- This team will average 110ppg. They are that explosive. Best offensive team in the NBA, bar none. If they had any semblence of a center, they would be able to compete with San Antonio. They're just as explosive as the old Mavs, and they can rebound and defend.

                      6- Why did I drop them to 6th? Two words: Latrell Sprewell. He's going to play half-assed until he gets a new deal, and Minnesota isnt that dumb. Also, no team is going to win a title with a backcourt a combined 70 years old......they wont last a whole season.

                      7- This team had a VERY good season last year, and they'll only get better with time. This team is just unfortunate to be stuck in SA's division, since I think they could win the other 2 out west.

                      8:- I think they're the most underrated team in the NBA. They have MORE talent than they did last year, and its more evenly spread out. If Nelson gets them to gel, the Mavs have the talent to go as far as the conference finals. Dampier gives them a better center than %80 of the NBA.

                      9:- The SECOND-most underrated team in the NBA, in my opinion. People seem to miss the fact this team is HEALTHY for the first time in four years. They lost a lot of bench strength, but that starting 5 is still NAILS: Bibby, Christie, Peja, CWebb and Miller. Give them time to gel, they'll make another charge for the title.

                      10- People seem to be missing the fact that this team has Grant Hill and Steve Francis, and the #1 pick in the draft, along with a nice supporting cast. They should be eons better than last season, and I expect them to upsend Miami's 2-man show, and take the southeast division.

                      11- Yeah, Shaq remains the most dominant force, blah blah blah, but last time I checked, Christian Lattener and Eddie Jones weren't bonafide NBA stars. Teams will zone the crap out of miami, and I dont think they have the defense, rebounding, or the shooting to dominate even the eastern conference. A 45-win team, at best.

                      12- Are they a better all-around team than the Sixers? Probably not, but they have a better 1-2 combo in Marbury and Crawford, and I just cant pick any team with Iverson at PG and Glenn Robinson on the team PERIOD to go anywhere. I'm sorry, DD.

                      13- This team may actually wina couple playoff rounds, but, like Miami, they just aren't a legit threat, outside of two guys. When they get some help next season, they'll be a real title contender, because TMac and Yao are the BEST 1-2 combo in the NBA.

                      14- Lebron will get MVP consideration this year. His new team is taylor-made to get out and run with him, and I think he'll make the biggest push since the "Big O" to average a triple-double for a season. Too bad his team isnt much on the boards or defense, cause they're complete offensively.

                      15- I'm not super-convinced as everyone else that Utah is a great team. Why? This team, outside of AK47, may be the WORST collection of lazy defenders I've ever seen in my life. Arroyo? Giricek? Boozer? OKUR? All fine offensive players, no defense whatsoever. They'll come close, but they're not a playoff team out west.

                      16- Kobe will put up MVP stats, but he won't win it. I think he'll top Jordan's career-best 37ppg average, but nobody will care, because he'll lose almost half his games. Maybe this will convince Kobe to find some help in the post next year......

                      17- :sixers: The dark horse to win the east, if they ever get rid of their malcontents. Also, Allen Iverson can't play PG. Thats also an experiment destined to go wrong. However, they have a LOT more talent than previous years. Biran Skinner was the most underrated signing this offseason.

                      18- Your 8th seed in the east. The sad thing is, they could be a LOT higher if they had TJ Ford. Still a lot of great athletes and gunners, but no floor leader, and even LESS inside presense than last season. A clear step back for a team that was primed to move up.

                      19- :blazers: They actually DO have a lot of talent, but as usual, iits either A- all at one position, or B- all stuck in one jail cell. Zach Randolph is one of the NBA's premier post players, and Ratliff remains the best shotblocker out west, but they have way to little around them. Rahim is simply not suited for that club.

                      20- :sonics: They go here only because every team after them is pathetic. Ray Allen is a premier player, but the Sonics make the Kings look like the Pistons. They're a poor-man's version of today's Lakers.

                      21- so many people have lost faith in Eddy Curry. I still think he's going to become an all-star this year. The Bulls will finally make that big step that everyone had them making LAST year. Hinrich, Gordon and Curry are going to be a monster trio soon.

                      22- You replaced a legit NBA center with Adonal Foyle, and you wonder why nobody takes you seriously? 22 is actually GENEROUS, but I think Michael Pietrus is going to really be a player.

                      23- How does a team with all-stars at both PG AND center land this low? Well, they have NOTHING around them except fossils. That, and the west will have them for lunch.

                      24- Vinsanity will actually GO insane if he has to carry around this bunch of castoffs....Chris Bosh is a very nice piece, but there aren't enough of them. And SAM MITCHELL? Please.

                      25- I only place this group THIS high, because I respect Doc Rivers as a coach. Their best players outside of Pierce are all ROOKIES. Boston has a nice young core, but half of them should be in college right now. Give them 2 more years.

                      26- So let me get this straight: you dont sign Kobe, and then you dont keep Richardson, and you trade a young player for Kerry Kittles? Their committment to losing is amazing. Cory Magette and Elton Brand are stuck in NBA purgatory.

                      27- Antawn Jamison was a BIG improvement over Stackhouse, and I think this is finally Kwame Brown's year to bust out. Gilbert Arenas just needs to take Billup's cue and learn to get people involved. The Wizards aren't a really bad team.

                      28- Dear Nets, I've missed you so much over the last 3 years, and I'm glad things are back to the way they were, and it looks like we'll be seeing a lot of each other in the future.

                      sincerely, last place


                      29- Jon Barry and Kenny Anderson used to be an all-star backcourt, you know. But that was back in 1991. And that was on the Georgia Tech Yellowjackets.

                      30- Welcome to the NBA, Emeka Okafor. Perhaps your new mentor Primoz Breszic can teach you how to shoot in the post. The scary thing is, you're only a year away from moving 8-10 spots up this list.






                      [edit=64=1099356705][/edit]
                      [edit=64=1099357653][/edit]
                      [edit=64=1099357838][/edit]
                      [edit=64=1099358129][/edit]

                      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, 2004

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)


                        I agree with some of what Kstat said, except Denver won't win the division no matter how contractually challenged the Wolves are.

                        I just don't like their collection of talent right now, as they have no real shooters outside of Lenard, and Rodney White off the bench, and maybe Melo on a good night. I think at some point the Nugs are going to have to trade Nene for a guard player; someone like Kidd would be perfect.

                        Also I think the Wizards are going to fall anywhere from 8th-10th in the east by the end of the year.
                        "It's just unfortunate that we've been penalized so much this year and nothing has happened to the Pistons, the Palace or the city of Detroit," he said. "It's almost like it's always our fault. The league knows it. They should be ashamed of themselves to let the security be as lax as it is around here."

                        ----------------- Reggie Miller

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

                          Originally posted by Kstat
                          28- Dear Nets, I've missed you so much over the last 3 years, and I'm glad things are back to the way they were, and it looks like we'll be seeing a lot of each other in the future.

                          sincerely, last place

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

                            Originally posted by Sactolover05
                            The 76ers, Bucks, Blazers, Knicks all infront of the Kings????

                            oh my
                            Yea I was surprised by that.I think the Kings will do fine.I do think they will miss Vlade a lot though.
                            Super Bowl XLI Champions
                            2000 Eastern Conference Champions




                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Shade's Power Rankings (11-1-04)

                              I think Shade and KStat are overrating Denver's D and underrating Houston's. Denver used to be a great defensive team, back in the 02-03 season. But last year they slipped to 19th in the league in points against.

                              My sleeper pick is Houston. A Van Gundy coached team will always be sound defensively, and Houston was 5 in the league in points against last year. TMac and Yao are arguable the best 1-2 punch in the game, and Juwan Howard will be solid next to Yao. I was hoping they'd sign Derek Fisher in the offseason to man the point. But Sura should be adequate.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X