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

2010 Pre-Draft Trade Rumors

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

  • 2010 Pre-Draft Trade Rumors

    EDIT; Since we don't have a thread about rumors I'm changing the name of this thread to 2010 Pre-Draft Trade Rumors.


    ------------------------
    Lots of Pacers stuff here.

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/blog?...aft&id=5260049

    Trade Winds starting to Swirl
    JUN 7, 10:45

    By Chad Ford
    Doing mock drafts this far ahead of the draft is always a challenge. Teams are still working out players, gathering info and for the most part, still a few weeks away from making a decision on who they'll draft. To complicate things, there has been an abundance of trade talk surrounding draft picks this year.

    Per sources in the league, the Philadelphia 76ers, Minnesota Timberwolves, Golden State Warriors, Detroit Pistons, Indiana Pacers, Toronto Raptors, Chicago Bulls, San Antonio Spurs and Oklahoma City Thunder have all had discussions about moving up, down or out of the draft.

    The Pistons, Spurs and Thunder have been the most aggressive about moving up.

    The Pistons have been searching for a big and would love to get their hands on either DeMarcus Cousins or Derrick Favors. The Spurs and Thunder are also in the hunt for a big and have targeted a number of teams in the lottery to move up a few spots. The Thunder have multiple picks to offer. The Spurs have Tony Parker or George Hill. While the Spurs aren't necessarily shopping either player, they're not untouchable either. If the Spurs can get another big man to help prolong Tim Duncan's career, they'll do it.


    Tony Parker may not saddle up for the Spurs next season.
    The Wolves continue to look in all directions. They have interest in moving up to the No. 2 spot to grab Evan Turner and have also shown interest in perhaps trading one or two of their first-round picks for a player like Anthony Randolph.

    The Pacers and Raptors are in the same boat as the Wolves. They would like to move up in the draft and have inquired about the Sixers' and Nets' picks. They also wouldn't mind moving out of the draft if they got the right pieces in return.

    A new twist with Turner
    I may have jumped the gun a bit when I put Favors at No. 2 in my latest mock draft. As I wrote last week, I had sources disagreeing on which direction the Sixers were leaning. Some suggested Favors, others Turner and one said Cousins. However, I decided to lean toward a source who said they had direct knowledge of Doug Collins' thinking and that Collins liked Favors.

    Since the mock draft I've gotten a number of strong signals from inside the Sixers organization that Turner is the guy they'll take at No. 2.

    While the signals certainly could be legit, I take some of those indications with a grain of salt. Since Turner is the consensus No. 2 pick in the draft, the Sixers want other teams trying to trade up for him (the Wolves and Pacers seem to be the hottest suitors) to believe that they're taking him. If teams think he's slipping, they'll begin dealing with New Jersey instead.

    For what it's worth, the Sixers are still asking teams to take basck Elton Brand's contract in a deal for the No. 2 pick. But virtually every GM I've spoken with believes the Sixers would soften their stance as we get closer to the draft.

    The Sixers are also exploring other trade possibilities. The team had Andre Iguodala on the trade block in February and may look to put him back on the market this summer. If Iguodala goes, suddenly Turner looks like a better fit in Philly.

    The Jazz and the Monroe Doctrine
    The Utah Jazz historically don't do a lot of workouts, often targeting a few players in their draft range and then selecting from that group. But when they do workouts, they do them right. Over the past few days they've examined some of the best prospects in the draft.

    Monroe's workout in Utah was a one-man show.
    On Friday they brought in Georgetown big man Greg Monroe for a solo workout. Monroe's agent, David Falk, will only let Monroe work out against Cousins or Favors. Since neither player is projected to be available at No. 9, Monroe went at it alone in Utah.

    On Sunday the Jazz brought in Gordon Hayward, Luke Babbitt, Xavier Henry and Al-Farouq Aminu for a head-to-head workout of the four best swingmen in Utah's draft range.

    The Jazz don't have any other high-profile workouts scheduled. Glean from that what you will, but I think it's safe to say that those are the five prospects the Jazz are considering at No. 9. Monroe fits a big need if Carlos Boozer leaves this summer. Henry, Babbitt, Hayward and Aminu all fit a void left by Kyle Korver hitting free agency.

    From the sound of things, Monroe is still atop the Jazz's list. But it seems like Babbitt is strongly in the running too. The Jazz have been higher on Babbitt than most all year. The rest of the league is playing catch-up to what Utah was saying in January.

    The interest in Indy
    Picking right behind the Jazz are the Pacers at No. 10. The Pacers also got to work early last week and had virtually every player they'll be considering in for workouts. On June 1 they brought in Daniel Orton, Ekpe Udoh, Hassan Whiteside, Lance Stephenson and Derrick Caracter. The next day, they watched Avery Bradley, Eric Bledsoe, Sherron Collins, Willie Warren and Jordan Crawford.

    Much like the Jazz, I think you're looking at the key players the Pacers will be considering at 10. If they go big, Orton, Udoh and Whiteside are the three guys they'll likely consider. Obviously Ed Davis or Monroe would be in the picture too if they were to fall, but neither player is expected to be there at No. 10.


    If the Pacers go with a guard, it most likely will be Bradley or Bledsoe. While 10 may be a bit high for both players, point guard is the Pacers' biggest need and both players have sufficient upside.

    Other prospects like Collins, Warren, Crawford, Stephenson and Caracter would be in the mix for the Pacers' pick at No. 40.

    It's too early to say which way the Pacers are leaning. Of the bigs, Udoh seems like the safest choice, but Orton and Whiteside have more upside. As far as point guards go, I think Bradley has the edge over Bledsoe at the moment.


    Knee knocks
    Last week I reported that there were no medical red flags coming out of the physicals at the draft combine. A week later, after each team's medical staff has had a chance to look at the results, it the top prospects still appear to be clear.

    However, a few teams have privately expressed some concerns about Orton's left knee. While the issue hasn't risen to the point that a team would seriously consider not drafting him, there are worries that his knee is still weak and may have some structural issues.

    Orton tore cartilage in his left knee in November of 2008 and ended up missing his senior year of high school. This past February, Kentucky head coach John Calipari noted to the media that he felt like Orton was still hobbled by the knee -- though Orton, at the time, claimed it was 100 percent.

    While the teams that had the information stressed that the concerns have not scared them away from drafting him, they do muddy the waters a bit when you factor Orton's sparse playing time last year and that he lacks the production of other big men in the draft.

    The other player with injury questions swirling around him is Memphis guard Elliot Williams. Williams suffered a minor knee injury after a workout with the Spurs and skipped the combine. He hasn't really been heard from since. Several NBA teams say that he has turned down multiple workouts.

    There are two possible interpretations. One is that Williams' injury is worse than he's letting on and he can't work out. The second is that a team somewhere in the first round has promised to pick him and he is sitting out the workout process. Of the two, the second scenario seems more likely. Williams has been working out in L.A. for the past few weeks and I'm told through sources that he's fine.

    So where is the promise? The Memphis Commercial Appeal speculates that San Antonio might be the culprit because he's worked out there. The Spurs do have a history of making such promises and the 20th pick isn't out of Williams' range. I'd also pay close attention to the Memphis Grizzlies. After passing on Memphis guard Tyreke Evans last year, they may have decided that they're better off taking a hometown kid with one of their three first-round picks this year.

    There's no place like home
    Finally, this year's international crop is looking weaker and weaker by the day. Forward Donatas Motiejunas withdrew from the draft on Friday. Motiejunas was the only international player in the draft that projected as a potential lottery pick.

    Last week we got more news that Kevin Seraphin (currently the only international player we have in the first round) had injured his knee and would be out the next few weeks. His agent, Bouna Ndiaye, insists that Seraphin hasn't withdrawn from the draft, but if the injury is serious enough, he may have no choice. Ndiaye told me he's looking for a first-round promise for Seraphin. If the right team commits, he'll stay. If no one does, he'll pull out of the draft.

    If Seraphin withdraws we could be facing the first year without an international player in the first round since 1995.

    If a player or two creeps in, keep an eye on two prospects -- Tibor Pleiss and Miroslav Raduljica. There are five teams with two or more first-round picks. Someone's going to want to stash one of these guys overseas.

    Pleiss is a 7-footer from Germany. He's a hustle player who gets things done on the defensive end, despite lacking strength and offensive polish at the moment. While he's still a year or two away from being an impact player in the NBA, he's a nice developmental pick.

    Raduljica is the other guy that could get some love. The Serbian big man posted solid numbers in the Adriatic league this year and he has the size and strength to make it in the NBA. Raduljica didn't endear himself to several NBA executives when he bailed at the last minute on a workout at the Eurocamp. However, I'm told by a source inside the camp that a team representative may have convinced Raduljica to shut down the workout. That could be a sign that a team already has him locked up late in the first.
    -------------------------

    First I heard about George Hill. Would/should we offer the 10th pick for him?
    Last edited by Will Galen; 06-11-2010, 11:20 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Chad Ford> Trade Winds starting to Swirl

    This doesn't say anything about the new Pacers. Chad Ford is a tool. He just listed every player the Pacers brought into work out as the possible 10th pick. I'm surprised he didn't end with "Larry Bird has his eyes fixed on Hayward at the draft combine, could be the 10th pick".
    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Chad Ford> Trade Winds starting to Swirl

      I think Chad is pretty connected to the NBA "sources"

      I think the Pacers finally realize they literally have to do something this year to make a splash, or risk attendance and interest will drop even lower than now.

      Bottom line I dont think they can selll us the same group of players, coaches etc.

      We just aren't buying it
      Sittin on top of the world!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Chad Ford> Trade Winds starting to Swirl

        I don't care how bad this draft is, if we waste a top-10 pick on a 3ppg/3rpg backup I will most definitely PFFL.
        Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Chad Ford> Trade Winds starting to Swirl

          I would take on Brand's contract if that meant we would get back Turner. If Bird was willing to take on Murphy and Dunleavy's contracts, I dont see why he wouldnt take on Brand's
          "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Chad Ford> Trade Winds starting to Swirl

            Evan Turner rumors....go away before you disappoint me.


            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Chad Ford> Trade Winds starting to Swirl

              Originally posted by MillerTime View Post
              I would take on Brand's contract if that meant we would get back Turner. If Bird was willing to take on Murphy and Dunleavy's contracts, I dont see why he wouldnt take on Brand's
              yea i think brand and turner are better than anything we can get in 2011
              Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Chad Ford> Trade Winds starting to Swirl

                I don't see how we could outbid the Wolves for #2.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Chad Ford> Trade Winds starting to Swirl

                  Would #10 and #57 to the Thunder for #21, #26, and #51 be worth it?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Chad Ford> Trade Winds starting to Swirl

                    The Collison and Okafor trade is the only thing i'm interested in anymore.
                    You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Chad Ford> Trade Winds starting to Swirl

                      Originally posted by CooperManning View Post
                      Would #10 and #57 to the Thunder for #21, #26, and #51 be worth it?
                      I don't think so, especially if we're potentially getting MN or Memphis's higher picks. The idea it seems is that we trade down so that we can still safely get either Bradley or Bledsoe, but also get more depth later in the draft. #10 seems high for Bradley or Bledsoe at this point in time.
                      Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Chad Ford> Trade Winds starting to Swirl

                        Originally posted by graphic-er View Post
                        This doesn't say anything about the new Pacers. Chad Ford is a tool. He just listed every player the Pacers brought into work out as the possible 10th pick. I'm surprised he didn't end with "Larry Bird has his eyes fixed on Hayward at the draft combine, could be the 10th pick".
                        Would you rather he publish a sensationalist article like "LARRY BIRDZ IS DRAFTING UDOOOOOHHH!!!1!!1!"

                        He gave us some decent info and didn't speculate on who we would draft since he doesn't know yet, probably because Larry Bird doesn't know yet either. The guy's a reporter, not omniscient.

                        PS Put me down for Brand and Turner as well, as long as we're only giving up expirings.
                        2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Chad Ford> Trade Winds starting to Swirl

                          Originally posted by bulldog View Post
                          Would you rather he publish a sensationalist article like "LARRY BIRDZ IS DRAFTING UDOOOOOHHH!!!1!!1!"

                          He gave us some decent info and didn't speculate on who we would draft since he doesn't know yet, probably because Larry Bird doesn't know yet either. The guy's a reporter, not omniscient.

                          PS Put me down for Brand and Turner as well, as long as we're only giving up expirings.
                          I understand your position but all Chad Ford did here was report exactly what Mike Wells wrote about last week. Thats not exactly reporting. I'd be surprised if he even spoke to anybody at the organization.
                          You can't get champagne from a garden hose.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Chad Ford> Trade Winds starting to Swirl

                            Originally posted by CooperManning View Post
                            Would #10 and #57 to the Thunder for #21, #26, and #51 be worth it?
                            Ya, I think so too. A big group of guys I like at 21 & 26, almost as much as #10, actually. Unless someone falls to #10 that has no business falling. I'd take guys like Dominique Jones and Lawal at 21 & 26 and never look back, even if Bledsoe or Bradley didn't fall there. If somehow you could get Paul George at 21, you're in business.

                            Plus you'd still have 40, there's a bunch of potential good picks there too. I love the depth of this draft in the 20s and 30s, the more I study it. Like Brackins or Armon Johnson or Booker.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Chad Ford> Trade Winds starting to Swirl

                              Originally posted by CooperManning View Post
                              I don't see how we could outbid the Wolves for #2.
                              We could offer the 76ers straight cap space with our expirers
                              "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X