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

2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

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

  • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

    Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
    Why do people, not directing this at you in particulaar, ask what can you get? My answer is, if the #23 pick is packaged with a player or 2 then something of possible greater value for the future. If your goal is another Plumlee at #23 to fill out a roster on a cheap rookie contract by all means keep the #23 pick. If your goal is to not improve the roster, then by all means keep the #23 pick.

    My good gracious, lets not try to improve by trading a #23 pick in a very weak draft for a player who can help the Pacers going forward. Lets just keep the status quo as it is and be losing to the freaking Cavs by 20! Why try to improve the roster when you can get a super dooper player at #23 in a weak draft who likely won't contribute for a # of years?

    Again, I'm not singling you out I just feel the Pacers need an up[grade and this is a way of doing it. Plus I'm flipp'n upset being beaten by the Cavs. grrr
    Because why trade something if you can't get something for it? Not all picks in the 20s are Miles Plumlees. My whole point was: What are you getting for the the 23rd or whatever we are slated to pick that is going to help us now?

    Comment


    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

      Originally posted by cdash View Post
      Because why trade something if you can't get something for it? Not all picks in the 20s are Miles Plumlees. My whole point was: What are you getting for the the 23rd or whatever we are slated to pick that is going to help us now?

      Who says you can't get something for the pick? What's wrong with upgrading next season with trading the pick? You make it sound like that's an impossibility. Why is it an impossibility? It's FO that take a positive pro-active view that get trades done. If this was the #23 pick in a really good draft, I agree take the pick and draft a player, but it's not. Walsh can take the pick and draft another Rautins, Fields, or whoever in a weak draft. Don't forget Walsh drafted Jordan Hill with the 8th pick in a good draft in 09 only to trade him later b/c he was a disappointment. Why do people think the #23 pick is going to be some jewel in this weak draft?

      Comment


      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

        Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
        This is why I've said this is a good year to trade out if at all possible.
        This draft seems fairly deep in the late teens / late first area. Several young bigs that can be hand at a discount price due to the rookie scale contracts.

        I don't see us trading out of the draft if we don't get a similar pick in next year's draft or a player that could help us with our immediate goals.
        Originally posted by IrishPacer
        Empty vessels make the most noise.

        Comment


        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

          Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
          My good gracious, lets not try to improve by trading a #23 pick in a very weak draft for a player who can help the Pacers going forward.
          This draft is only weak if you're picking in the top 5. Why? Because there is no sure fire All-Star. Noel was injured and no one else impressed.

          However, it is the perfect draft if you're drafting at late teens / late first area. There is a a lot of value to be had there. There have been several top prospects that have fallen and will enter this draft in hope that they will get higher since it's considered a weaker draft. Anthony Bennet is such an example. This is also a very good International class.

          In overall, the draft is consider weak because there is no sure fire All-Star but there are several guys that project to be quality role players for a long, long time and some other guys with top talent but several red flags.
          Originally posted by IrishPacer
          Empty vessels make the most noise.

          Comment


          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

            Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
            If this was the #23 pick in a really good draft, I agree take the pick and draft a player, but it's not. Why do people think the #23 pick is going to be some jewel in this weak draft?
            There are chances that the next draft is going to have worse players available at #23 than this year's draft.

            Everyone is saying that this draft is really weak. So, more players will declare in hopes of being drafted in the lottery. Next year's draft is projected to be top-heavy. So, why would a top prospect enter next year's draft instead of this one?

            There is no incentive for a player that hopes to go as high in the lottery as they can to come out in a projected strong draft. Unless, of course, they graduate or they are a one and done.
            Originally posted by IrishPacer
            Empty vessels make the most noise.

            Comment


            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

              Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
              1.Who says you can't get something for the pick? What's wrong with upgrading next season with trading the pick? 2.You make it sound like that's an impossibility. Why is it an impossibility? It's FO that take a positive pro-active view that get trades done. If this was the #23 pick in a really good draft, I agree take the pick and draft a player, but it's not. Walsh can take the pick and draft another Rautins, Fields, or whoever in a weak draft. 3.Don't forget Walsh drafted Jordan Hill with the 8th pick in a good draft in 09 only to trade him later b/c he was a disappointment. 4.Why do people think the #23 pick is going to be some jewel in this weak draft?
              1. It's a late first round pick in a perceived weak draft class. I'm just saying I don't think you could get an upgrade for next season by trading that pick without taking on extra money. We are a small market team who absolutely cannot afford to dip our toes in the luxury tax. Having guys on rookie contracts is a big deal.

              2. It's not impossible to do so, but my guess is it's harder than you are making it out to be.

              3. I'm not 100% certain that it will be Walsh calling the shots. I think he has the final say, but I believe Pritchard will have a loud say in what direction we go with that pick.

              4. No one is saying the pick will be a jewel. What I am saying (can't speak for others, of course) is that I'm not sure that trading that pick would automatically make us better while also keeping us flexible within the rules of the salary cap. Not only this year, but in coming years.

              It is just my preference to keep the pick, and most first round picks in general. Now, if we could package the pick with another player and move up in the draft to get someone significant who could help our team, I would not be opposed to that. Not sure what kind of value (if any) Granger has, but if we could package him and the pick and move up to target whoever it is that the FO likes not named "Plumlee" then you won't hear any grumbling out of me.

              Comment


              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                Glen Rice Jr. Sounds like a scorer to me. This team really needs a backup point. While the Pacers need a scorer today, I think PG, Lance and OJ all take another leap forward, so I really don't forsee this being an issue unless DWest signs elsewhere.

                I'd trade the first round pick for something next season honestly. Save the money and sign Jarrett Jack, DWest and backup PF. Also, Oden...just cause.
                First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                Comment


                • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                  His (Burke's) decision making is suspect not in relation to turnovers, but to shot selection/defensive decisions, positioning away from the ball etc.

                  Good decision making does not mean "Good assist/TO ratio", IMO. It's the whole package. He likes hero ball waaaayyyy too much, loves heaving terrible threes, going one on three etc. I consider all of that indicative of poor decision making.

                  Perfect example would be the Ohio State loss. Hardaway gets them back in the game with one of the more impressive long-range shooting displays I've seen...then Burke decides to dominate the ball both at the end of regulation and OT, taking multiple deep contested threes. As an Ohio State fan, I was terrified that Hardaway would get the shot, and quite content with Burke.

                  My $.02


                  BTW, I'm not one of those "bitter" fans, I love Trey at the college level, he's a great player with incredible toughness. I'm arguing against him being a top 5-10 pick...but, as has been said by others, this draft sucks, so he might be the "cream of the crappy crop" so to speak.

                  Comment


                  • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                    Originally posted by Kstat View Post
                    Smart? You mean the guy that can't shoot or pass? Sure.

                    I love how the guy with the top A/TO rate in the country makes bad decisions....
                    lol at saying Smart can't pass. That just isnt true. Shooting is something that can be improved upon with work ethic. Look at Lance Stephenson from the draft until now. If He could shoot like McLemore he would easily be the top pick.


                    I will take his defense and decision making + great frame over the other two. Smart just has more tools IMO better player in the long run than Burke and MCW.

                    Comment


                    • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                      Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                      This draft seems fairly deep in the late teens / late first area. Several young bigs that can be hand at a discount price due to the rookie scale contracts.

                      I don't see us trading out of the draft if we don't get a similar pick in next year's draft or a player that could help us with our immediate goals.
                      It only makes sense if possible to trade out of a weak draft. I'm not looking to get another Plumlee type pick, and Plumlee came out of a good draft.

                      Interesting fact: Dallas last year traded their #17 pick Todd Zeller to the Cavs for the #24,33, and 34 picks. Dallas needed a center since they lost Tyson Chandler so you would have thought they would just take Plumlee at #24. Nope, they took Jared Cummingham instead. Atlanta needed a center as well and drafted at #23 ahead of Cleveland and took John Jenkins. Then Memphis who needed a center too drafts at #25 after Dallas and takes Troy Wroten. Along comes Bird at #26 and drafts Plumlee. Either Dallas, Atlanta, and Memphis knew something about Plumlee they didn't like or they must have felt Cummingham, Jenkins, and Wroten were much better than Plumlee. Either way it doesn't say much for Plumlee.

                      Comment


                      • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                        Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                        It only makes sense if possible to trade out of a weak draft. I'm not looking to get another Plumlee type pick, and Plumlee came out of a good draft.

                        Interesting fact: Dallas last year traded their #17 pick Todd Zeller to the Cavs for the #24,33, and 34 picks. Dallas needed a center since they lost Tyson Chandler so you would have thought they would just take Plumlee at #24. Nope, they took Jared Cummingham instead. Atlanta needed a center as well and drafted at #23 ahead of Cleveland and took John Jenkins. Then Memphis who needed a center too drafts at #25 after Dallas and takes Troy Wroten. Along comes Bird at #26 and drafts Plumlee. Either Dallas, Atlanta, and Memphis knew something about Plumlee they didn't like or they must have felt Cummingham, Jenkins, and Wroten were much better than Plumlee. Either way it doesn't say much for Plumlee.
                        You are basing your entire argument off of one lousy pick, you do realize this, right?

                        Comment


                        • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                          Originally posted by Nuntius View Post
                          This draft is only weak if you're picking in the top 5. Why? Because there is no sure fire All-Star. Noel was injured and no one else impressed.

                          However, it is the perfect draft if you're drafting at late teens / late first area. There is a a lot of value to be had there. There have been several top prospects that have fallen and will enter this draft in hope that they will get higher since it's considered a weaker draft. Anthony Bennet is such an example. This is also a very good International class.

                          In overall, the draft is consider weak because there is no sure fire All-Star but there are several guys that project to be quality role players for a long, long time and some other guys with top talent but several red flags.
                          Yep, lets draft another Lorbek Stanko player who never comes to play for the Pacers. Many of those Int players will be drafted in the 2nd round so not to lose a 1st rd investment on a player who won't come for years if at all. I'd rather trade the pick than waste it.

                          Point out some great non-Euro picks who are going to be available at #23 who will be able to help the Pacers next year. The chances are extremely slim, so if possible you trade out of the draft by using the #23 pick as part of a trade for a player who can contribute next year and in the future.

                          If it's necessary to stay in the draft, then I'd rather trade back to Cleveland for their 2 early 2nd rd picks. That gives the Pacers 2 opportunities for a value on unguaranteed contracts.

                          Some feel getting rid of a 1st is sacriligous, but if you could add the 1st to Green as a sweetner in a trade how many would truly say no? Any product can be sold if it's packaged right.

                          Comment


                          • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                            Originally posted by Nuntius View Post

                            This draft seems fairly deep in the late teens / late first area. Several young bigs that can be hand at a discount price due to the rookie scale contracts.

                            I don't see us trading out of the draft if we don't get a player that could help us with our immediate goals.

                            If Withey can be gotten then fine.

                            Finally, someone has seen the light. This is exactly what I've been saying.

                            Comment


                            • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                              Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                              It only makes sense if possible to trade out of a weak draft. I'm not looking to get another Plumlee type pick, and Plumlee came out of a good draft.
                              Exactly. Plumlee came out of a good draft.

                              Drafts are usually characterized by their lottery. The 2012 draft had a clear cut lottery. Look at some mock drafts:

                              http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2012/

                              http://nbadraft.net/2012mock_draft

                              Davis, Beal, MKG, Barnes, Robinson, Lillard, Waiters, Drummond, Henson, Rivers, Zeller, Lamb, Ross and Leonard appear in both drafts at the lottery. That's 14 guys out of 15 possible lottery picks. Out of those 14 players the only one that didn't went in the lottery was Zeller.

                              Last year's draft also had guys that were considered to have lottery talent but fell due to various red flags. PJIII, Sullinger and Royce White were all expected to lurk around the lottery but fall due to different reasons.

                              It was considered to be a pretty deep draft. Therefore, several players that could declare last season opted not to do so. It wouldn't make sense for them to declare last season. And it doesn't make a lot of sense to declare next season either since it's considered a good draft again.

                              But this year's draft? This draft is considered weak. It isn't top heavy and you cannot find a sure-fire All-Star. That's why several talented players are going to declare. This is their best chance to go lottery.

                              I believe that we can find great value in this year's draft at our pick. I'd hate to draft in the top 10, though.
                              Originally posted by IrishPacer
                              Empty vessels make the most noise.

                              Comment


                              • Re: 2012-2013 NBA draft prospects thread

                                Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                                Point out some great non-Euro picks who are going to be available at #23 who will be able to help the Pacers next year. The chances are extremely slim, so if possible you trade out of the draft by using the #23 pick as part of a trade for a player who can contribute next year and in the future.
                                Let's see.

                                http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2013/

                                DX has us taking Tony Mitchell. The talent is there but he had a horrible year due to a coaching change and ensuing bad chemistry. He has lottery talent but he has fallen due to lack of production that has raised some red flags.

                                Adreian Payne and Mike Muscala are going to be there as well (projected to go early 2nd).

                                http://nbadraft.net/2013mock_draft

                                Draftnet.com has us taking Doug McDermott. He is a great scorer at the college level but will it translate in the NBA?

                                It's important to note that Draftnet.com has the following players being drafted after our pick:

                                Gorgui Dieng, Jeff Withey, Tony Mitchell, Tim Hardaway Jr, Isaiah Austin, Archie Goodwin. There is some real talent here.

                                http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...-nba-franchise

                                Bleacher report has us taking Tim Hardaway Jr.

                                Players after that pick:

                                Gorgui Dieng, Archie Goodwin, James Michael McAdoo, Tony Mitchell. They also have Withey at #22.

                                There is talent to be had at our pick in this particular draft.
                                Originally posted by IrishPacer
                                Empty vessels make the most noise.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X