The Rules of Pacers Digest
Hello everyone,
Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.
A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.
Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.
Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.
Rule #1
Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:
"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"
"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"
"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"
"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"
"He/she is just delusional"
"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"
"I'm going to take a moment to point and
/ laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"
"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good?"
In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.
We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.
Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.
That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.
A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.
There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.
Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.
In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.
Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.
If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!
All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.
Rule #2
If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.
The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.
The right places to do so are:
A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.
B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.
If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.
Rule #3
If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.
When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:
A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.
B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.
To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!
Rule #4
Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.
Rule #5
When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.
An example:
If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:
http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star
Rule #6
We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.
The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.
Rule #7
Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.
It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).
We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).
However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.
Rule #8
We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.
Rule #9
Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.
Rule #10
We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.
Rule #11
Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.
A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.
Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.
Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.
Rule #1
Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:
"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"
"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"
"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"
"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"
"He/she is just delusional"
"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"
"I'm going to take a moment to point and
/ laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*""Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good?
"In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.
We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.
Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.
That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.
A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.
There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.
Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.
In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.
Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.
If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!
All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.
Rule #2
If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.
The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.
The right places to do so are:
A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.
B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.
If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.
Rule #3
If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.
When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:
A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.
B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.
To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!
Rule #4
Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.
Rule #5
When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.
An example:
If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:
http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star
Rule #6
We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.
The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.
Rule #7
Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.
It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).
We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).
However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.
Rule #8
We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.
Rule #9
Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.
Rule #10
We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.
Rule #11
Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less
-
@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!
-
I think this is an interesting scenario:
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-up-the-top-10
2022 NBA Mock Draft: How 3 Trades Can Shake Up the Top 10
GREG SWARTZJUNE 9, 2022
Robert Johnson/Getty Images
The 2022 NBA draft is roughly two weeks away and could feature a number of trades that would impact several teams near the top.
We could even see action in the top three picks, as the Orlando Magic, Oklahoma City Thunder and Houston Rockets try to navigate around and get the big man they want while also capitalizing on assets in a potential move back.
Other teams that have major positional needs (Charlotte Hornets at center, Washington Wizards at point guard) could lead to some trading in the top-10 picks as well.
Here's how three deals near the top of the 2022 draft could impact the rest of the first round.1. Orlando Magic: Jabari Smith, F, Auburn
1 OF 13
Todd Kirkland/Getty Images
While Chet Holgrem is the best defender and Paolo Banchero the most advanced isolation scorer of the draft's top big men, Smith is the safe choice here with his ability to do a little of everything.
Smith will have an impact in Orlando from Day 1 with his jump shooting and perimeter defense, and his versatility at 6'10" and 220 pounds will allow him to share the floor in two-big lineups, or he can play an undersized five if the Magic prefer a guard-heavy rotation.
Just 19 years old and coming off an impressive freshman season at Auburn, Smith will be the focal point that all of Orlando's other young talent will gravitate around.TRADE at 2. Houston Rockets (via Oklahoma City Thunder): Chet Holmgren, PF/C, Gonzaga
2 OF 13
Joe Buglewicz/Getty Images
Houston Rockets Receive: No. 2 overall pick, No. 34 overall pick
Oklahoma City Thunder Receive: No. 3 overall pick, No. 17 overall pick
While the Rockets could sit and wait for Paolo Banchero to fall to them at three, Holmgren would be a far more seamless fit with his roster as an elite defender next to offensive-minded bigs like Christian Wood and Alperen Sengun. Trading up ensures that Houston gets their guy, even if means falling back 17 spots for its next selection.
Holmgren shot 39.0 percent from three as a freshman at Gonzaga and could space the floor for Jalen Green and Kevin Porter Jr. far better than Banchero as well. He's the best big man for this roster and one the Rockets should try to trade up and get.TRADE at 3. Oklahoma City Thunder (via Houston Rockets): Paolo Banchero, PF, Duke
3 OF 13
Jamie Squire/Getty Images
If the Thunder really like Banchero as much as Chet Holmgren, then agreeing to trade down a spot still guarantees OKC one of the elite big men in the draft while also turning one of its second-round selections into the 17th overall pick.
Banchero would become an offensive hub in the Thunder frontcourt, something they simply don't have yet. It's easy to envision him playing a pick-and-roll game with Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and Josh Giddey or operating from the elbow while using both as cutters or spot-up shooters.4. Sacramento Kings: Jaden Ivey, SG, Purdue
4 OF 13
Ben Solomon/NCAA Photos via Getty Images
The Kings' pick is probably one of the most likely to get traded, as Sacramento has more pressure to return to the playoffs than most teams picking around here. However, staying put and selecting Ivey may be too good to pass up.
Pairing Ivey in a backcourt with De'Aaron Fox would be a nightmare for opponents to try and contain, especially with Domantas Sabonis on board as a playmaking big.
Ivey may not be enough to push the Kings into the 2023 playoff picture, but this is now the best young core Sacramento has had in a long time.5. Detroit Pistons: Shaedon Sharpe, SG, Kentucky
5 OF 13
Chris Schwegler/NBAE via Getty Images
If the Pistons are looking for a second star next to Cade Cunningham, Sharpe has the highest upside of anyone left on the board.
As a 6'6" guard who can pull up from anywhere, Sharpe also has the tools to become a lockdown defender at the NBA level.
He may get off to a slow start after electing not to play at Kentucky, but Detroit would be smart to play the long game here with Sharpe, who just turned 19. With he and Cunningham, the Pistons could have one of the best backcourts in the East in a few years.6. Indiana Pacers: Keegan Murray, PF, Iowa
6 OF 13
Mitchell Layton/Getty Images
After averaging 23.5 points per game as a sophomore, Murray should be able to play big minutes immediately for a Pacers team looking to get back to the playoffs.
Murray is a good three-point shooter (39.8 percent last season) and defender who pairs well with Myles Turner and could run the pick-and-roll with Tyrese Haliburton.
While he doesn't have the upside of some of the players taken above him, Murray is a cerebral player who can do a little bit of everything for Indiana.TRADE at 7. Charlotte Hornets (via Portland Trail Blazers): Jalen Duren, C, Memphis
7 OF 13
Joe Murphy/Getty Images
Charlotte Hornets Receive: No. 7 overall pick, No. 36 overall pick
Portland Trail Blazers Receive: No. 13 overall pick, No. 15 overall pick
It's no secret that the Hornets could use an upgrade at center, even after taking Kai Jones in the first round last year. For a team that came just short of a playoff appearance, Charlotte shouldn't be afraid to package their mid-first round picks together to snag the draft's best remaining center prospect.
Duren has a 7'5" wingspan that allows him to protect the paint at a high level while also switching out to the perimeter. For a Charlotte team that already possesses so much offensive talent, Duren would be the perfect prospect to build a defense around.
With teams like the San Antonio Spurs (No. 9), New York Knicks (No. 11) and Oklahoma City Thunder (No. 12) all potentially eyeing Duren as well, a trade up to No. 7 would make sure the Hornets get the guy they need.8. New Orleans Pelicans (via Los Angeles Lakers): AJ Griffin, F, Duke
8 OF 13
David Sherman/NBAE via Getty Images
The Pelicans ranked just 27th in three-point shooting this season (33.2 percent), so adding potentially the best shooter in the draft makes too much sense here.
Griffin nailed 44.7 percent of his threes and has the defensive potential to be a standout on that side of the ball as well. With Brandon Ingram, CJ McCollum and hopefully Zion Williamson drawing so much defensive attention, Griffin will get plenty of open looks from outside the arc.
While he's not much of a playmaker, Griffin wouldn't need to be on this roster.9. San Antonio Spurs: Dyson Daniels, G, G League Ignite
9 OF 13
KeShawn Ennis/NBAE via Getty Images
If the Spurs miss Derrick White after trading him to the Boston Celtics at the deadline, they could take the next closest player to him now—one with an even higher ceiling.
Daniels is a good pick-and-roll facilitator that can see over opponents with his near 6'8" frame. He's not a very good outside shooter but can be a high-level defender.
He'll take some of the ball-handling pressure off of Dejounte Murray and fill every role that the Spurs ask of him.TRADE at 10. Indiana Pacers (via Washington Wizards): Johnny Davis, G, Wisconsin
10 OF 13
Patrick McDermott/Getty Images
Indiana Pacers Receive: No. 10 overall pick, G/F Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, PG Ish Smith
Washington Wizards Receive: PG Malcolm Brogdon, No. 31 overall pick, 2023 second-round pick (via San Antonio Spurs)
The Wizards could stay put here and take Davis themselves, but this is a team that needs to win now to keep Bradley Beal happy as he enters free agency. Washington opts for a veteran point guard in Brogdon while moving back 21 spots and picking up an extra second next year.
For the Pacers, this is about building a young backcourt that can grow together, one that now features Davis and Tyrese Haliburton
Davis, the Big 10 Player of the Year, should be ready to play a big role immediately on a team that now features Keegan Murray, Haliburton, Myles Turner and Co. The Pacers don't pick in the top 10 often, and after this draft haul, it may be a while before they do so again.Late Lottery
11 OF 13
C. Morgan Engel/NCAA Photos via Getty Images
11. New York Knicks: Bennedict Mathurin, G/F, Arizona
The Knicks go with the best player available in Mathurin, who can play multiple positions at 6'6" and gives New York another perimeter scoring threat. While not a true point guard, Mathurin can handle the ball at times or hit threes as a spot-up threat.
12. Oklahoma City Thunder (via Clippers): Ousmane Dieng, SG/SF, New Zealand Breakers
The Thunder aren't afraid to go with high-ceiling prospects who could take a few years to develop (see Aleksej Pokusevski), which is the case with Dieng here. While the 6'10" forward can handle the ball, his outside shot is still very much a work in progress.
TRADE at 13. Portland Trail Blazers: Jeremy Sochan, F, Baylor
Portland gets two of the next three picks here after our hypothetical trade with the Charlotte Hornets, with the chance to get a pair of high-level prospects.
At 6'9" and 230 pounds, Sochan can defend all over the court, a must for a Blazers team that ranked 29th overall in total defense last year. He's also a talented playmaker who Portland can use to get Damian Lillard more spot-up looks from three.
14. Cleveland Cavaliers: Malaki Branham, SG, Ohio State
The Cavs needed more ball-handling down the stretch after injuries ultimately hurt their chance at the playoffs, and Branham has considerable offensive upside.
Branham—who was born in Columbus and played his high school basketball at St. Vincent-St. Mary High School in Akron—would be a good backcourt fit alongside Darius Garland.Nos. 15-20
12 OF 13
Mark Alberti/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images
TRADE at 15. Portland Trail Blazers: Ochai Agbaji, G/F, Kansas
If the Blazers feel they can re-sign center Jusuf Nurkic, adding more perimeter talent is the right move here. The 22-year-old Agbaji can contribute immediately as a three-and-D wing, a la what Dorian Finney-Smith is doing for the Dallas Mavericks.
16. Atlanta Hawks: Tari Eason, F, LSU
Finding wings who can shoot and defend around Trae Young will forever be a goal for Atlanta, and Eason fits the bill for both. He nailed 35.9 percent of his threes as a sophomore and can guard anyone from point guards to power forwards.
TRADE at 17. Oklahoma City Thunder (via Houston Rockets): Mark Williams, C, Duke
OKC gets to move up from No. 34 by swapping the second overall pick for the third, giving them three selections in the top 17. After taking a power Paolo Banchero with the third overall pick, the Thunder add his Duke teammate at center. The ACC Defensive Player of the Year should also catch plenty of lobs from Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and Josh Giddey on the other end.
18. Chicago Bulls: EJ Liddell, PF, Ohio State
With so much backcourt and perimeter talent (assuming Zach LaVine re-signs, that is), Chicago should be looking to add frontcourt help. Liddell averaged 19.4 points per game as a junior and made a significant leap as a three-point shooter, all the way up to 37.4 percent this past season from 30.2 percent over his first two years combined.
19. Minnesota Timberwolves: TyTy Washington Jr., G, Kentucky
With D'Angelo Russell and Patrick Beverley both on expiring deals next season, the Wolves should look at point guards in the draft to start developing. While he's not a true floor general, Washington can handle the ball and has a nice floater and mid-range game.
20. San Antonio Spurs (via Toronto Raptors): Nikola Jovic, F, Mega Mozzart
Jovic is a 6'10" forward who can handle the ball and gives the Spurs another big playmaker who can do a little bit of everything. Playing for San Antonio should help him develop as a defender as well.Nos. 21-30
13 OF 13
KeShawn Ennis/NBAE via Getty Images
21. Denver Nuggets: Jake LaRavia, F, Wake Forest
The Nuggets used 35-year-old Jeff Green as their starting power forward for 63 games last year. Even with the hopeful return of Michael Porter Jr., Denver could use some forward depth here with LaRavia. At 6'9", he can shoot from the outside (38.4 percent this year) and is a talented passer who would play well off of Nikola Jokic.
22. Memphis Grizzlies (via Utah Jazz): MarJon Beauchamp, SF, G League Ignite
Potentially losing Kyle Anderson in free agency opens up the need for a wing defender for Memphis, and Beauchamp can guard all over the floor with a 7'1" wingspan. He won't need to score much for a talented Grizzlies team, who will need Beauchamp to become a defensive-minded role player.
23. Philadelphia 76ers: Walker Kessler, C, Auburn
The Sixers desperately need center depth, and Kessler is the best available at this point. The Naismith Defensive Player of the Year blocked 4.6 shots in just 25.6 minutes per game and should become a solid backup behind Joel Embiid.
24. Milwaukee Bucks: Kennedy Chandler, PG, Tennessee
Milwaukee needs playmakers around Giannis Antetokoumpo, and Chandler would help keep starting point guard Jrue Holiday fresh for the postseason. The freshman guard averaged 13.9 points and 4.7 assists, knocking down 38.3 percent of his threes.
25. San Antonio Spurs (via Boston Celtics): Christian Koloko, C, Arizona
After adding some perimeter help in Dyson Daniels and Nikola Jovic, the Spurs spend their third first-rounder on paint protection. Koloko is a mobile big man who gets to learn behind Jakob Poeltl and could eventually earn the starting center job in San Antonio as early as next year.
26. Dallas Mavericks: Jalen Williams, SG, Santa Clara
A 6'6" wing who shot 39.6 percent from three as a junior, Williams gives the Mavs another outside threat next to Luka Doncic. A 7'2" wingspan and high energy level should help turn him into an NBA-ready defender soon as well.
27. Miami Heat: Jaden Hardy, SG, G League Ignite
This is a home-run pick for Miami, with Hardy representing the best star potential of anyone left on the board. If Tyler Herro joins the starting lineup next year, the Heat could use Hardy's scoring pop off the bench, even if his outside shooting needs work.
28. Golden State Warriors: Blake Wesley, SG, Notre Dame
Getting Wesley this late would be a terrific value for the Warriors, as he can become an athletic ball-handler off the bench. He's not a plug-and-play option yet at 19, but after seeing what Jordan Poole became with a few years of development in Golden State, Wesley could become a rotation member soon.
29. Memphis Grizzlies: Andrew Nembhard, PG, Gonzaga
With Tyus Jones becoming an unrestricted free agent this summer, Nembhard could fill his role as a backup to Ja Morant. The 6'5" point guard averaged 5.8 assists and 1.6 steals and, at 22, should be able to contribute right away.
30. Oklahoma City Thunder (via Phoenix Suns): Wendell Moore Jr., SG, Duke
OKC was the worst three-point shooting team in the NBA last season (32.3 percent) and could use Moore's outside prowess. The junior drilled 41.3 percent of his triples for Duke last season while also showing off an improved playmaking ability.Go Pacers!Comment
-
Imagine we end up with Daniels and Sochan... might set a NBA record for worst FT % by a team in a season.Comment
-
Latest NBAdraft.net mock draft got Ivey drafted 2nd and Chet falling to Sacramento
Hoping Chet doesn't fall all the way to Pacers because we know Pritchard is grabbing him.
NBA Mock Draft - NBADraft.net
@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!Comment
-
Called it already. If Presti is as smart as they say he is, he takes Ivey.Originally posted by vnzla81 View PostLatest NBAdraft.net mock draft got Ivey drafted 2nd and Chet falling to Sacramento
Hoping Chet doesn't fall all the way to Pacers because we know Pritchard is grabbing him.
NBA Mock Draft - NBADraft.netComment
-
But imagine the potential passing and defensive switchability. Not sure if I completely hate it. This is purely a "banking on potential" draft IMO.Originally posted by croz24 View Post
(Though missed free throws are the most frustratingly annoying thing to watch, along with giving up offensive rebounds)Comment
-
Daniels FT shooting is the weirdest thing ever. He basically played 2 seasons this year and during one he shot 74% and the other he shot 38%. I'm not going to pretend to know what the truth is in there.Originally posted by croz24 View Post
Oh I just want to point out again I'm driving the Diabate bus still and there are exactly zero people on planet Earth on it with me so come get a comfy seat while you can.Comment
-
My only problem with Tyson is that he looks too much like Curry's mom
@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!Comment
-
And when I said one of the "top three" could fall some basically laughed.....Originally posted by BornIndy View Post{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
-
Murray and Davis....sigh...so much for athleticism{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-Comment
-
So the Mathurin workout is a solo workout. Interesting. That's some serious interest by the Pacers.Danger ZoneComment
-
Presty "reached" for Westbrook years ago, wouldn't surprise me if he jumps all over Ivey and treats him as the next Westbrook.@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!Comment
-
He did same for Portland. Think it was a request by his team. They wouldn't even let media in.Originally posted by Rogco View PostComment
-
I've said it before...I think hes the guy we're taking at #6 - though I think that too early for him. In a perfect work, we draft Murray at #6, make a trade with Washington or NYK and draft Johnny Davies or Mathurin (if he is still available)Originally posted by Rogco View Post"So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.
Comment
-
Might make one wonder what they're trying to glaze over ??Originally posted by CJ Jones View PostComment
Tweet
Comment